forced to dig trenches for your troops. as the minutes show. Conference Number 11 of the Central Planning Board, held on the 22nd of July 1942; German, page 3062; English translation, 38. appears that among those present were Speer, yourself, Koerner -- did Koerner represent the Reichsmarshal?
A Yes, for the Four Year plan. He was the representative for the Four Year plan. did he not?
A Yes. He represented him for the Four Year Plan. Association, the Coal Association, and the Ministry for Armaments and Munition requirements of those industries. On page 3062 I call your attention to this entry:
"General Fieldmarshal Milch will take measures to accelerate the procuring of the Russian prisoners of war from the camps." prisoners of war from the camps. to the OKW, in whose competence the prisoners of war were at that time.
Q You didn't personally deal with the prisoners of war, but you undert* to obtain them from the OKW? ment. The transfer took very long, the transport, and since we had to speak to the OKW about it I did that, and I told the OKW that they should increase the speed of these transports.
Q Now let us turn to Conference Number 36, dated 22nd of April 1943; the English Translation, page 13; German 2125. There again I call your attention to the fact that Speer, yourself, Sauckel, and Koerner were among those present. There again you discussed the labor problem, did you not?
Q And Koerner reported as follows, referring to Koerner:
"On the 1st of April, we had in agriculture a deficit of about 600,000 laborers. It had been planned to cover that by supplying labor from the East, mainly women. These laborers will first have to be supplied until other laborers are released from agriculture. We are justentering the season when the heaviest work in the fields has to be done", and considerably more, which I will not take the time to quote. which reads as follows:
"If one proceeds as I propose and Tim agreed to it, no damage can be done. This ought to be done in any case. For the rest I completely agree. We must now supply the mines with labor. The greatest part of labor which we can supply from the East will indeed be women, but the Eastern women are quite accustomed to agricultural work, and especially to the type of work which has to be done these coming weeks, the hoeing and transplanting of turnips, and so forth. The women are quite suitable for this. One thing has to be considered. First you must supply agriculture with the women. Then you can extract the men, laborer for laborer. It is not the right thing if first the men are taken away and the farmers are left without labor for four to six weeks. If the women arrive at such time they arrive too late." of this conference.
A On the basis of this conference none at all, but this conference was only a suggestion from our side to assure for industry and agriculture a certain balance of labor.
Without the labor in mining, work could not be continued. Therefore labor was urgently needed, and here a suggestion wasmade as to how an exchange could take place to take men out of agriculture and replace them by women, whom, of course, one could not put into the mines.
Q To whom did you make these suggestions? You say they were not decisions but just suggestions. Labor Ministry. I read the name Tim. That wasone of the higher officers of that ministry.
Q And Sauckel?
A I don't know whether Sauckel was present at that meeting. I only remember the name Tim. was or not you made suggestions, as the planning committee, to Sauckel as to the needs for labor, didn't you, and called upon him to supply them? New workers could not be found. Therefore it could only be done by an exchange.
Q I understand you. You will save a great deal of our time if you will just answer the questions.
Now I call your attention to Conference No. 54 of the Central Planning Board, held on 1 March 1944, English translation page 1, German page 1762. At this conference I remind you that it appears that Sauckel, Milch, Schreiber, and Turner were among those present. It was held at the Ministry of Air Transport and you discussed the desirability of draining off young male people from France so that they would not be available to act aspartisans in case there was an invasion by the Allies of French territory.
Do you recallsuch a meeting?
A I cannot remember in detail. I have already in other interroga tories here in Nurnberg and in England stated that it is impossible to remember all these things in detail, which issues we were confronted with in large numbers, particularly since my memory has suffered, because I have been hit over the head after I was captured.
name "Milch" and will read the entry, which reads as follows:
"Milch. In case the invasion of France begins and succeeds only to a certain degree, then we shall experience a rise by partisans such as we have never experienced either in the Balkans or in the East, not because this would have happened in any case but only because we made it possible by not dealing with them in the right manner. Four whole age groups have grown up in France, men between eighteen and twenty-three years of age, who are therefore at that age when young people, moved by patriotism or seduced by other people, are ready to do anything which satisfies their personal hatred against us, and of course they hate us These men ought to have been called up in age groups and dispatched to Germany, for they present the greatest danger which threatens us in case of invasion.
"I am firmly convinced, and I have said so several times, if invasion starts, sabotage of all railways , works, and supply bases will be a daily occurrence, and then it will really be the case that our forces are no longer available to survey the execution of our orders within the country, but they will have to fight at the front, thereby leaving in their rear a much more dangerous enemy who destroys their communications, and so forth. If one is shown the mailed fist and a clear-cut executive intention, a churchyard peace will reign in the rear of the front at the moment the uproar starts. This I have emphasized so frequently, but still nothing is happening, I am afraid, for if one intends to start to shoot at this moment, it will be too late for it. Then we have no longer men at our disposal to kill off the partisans," and you then go on to state that you think the army should handle the executive action required in rounding up these people.
Does that refresh your recollection?
A Yes, it is correct in this sense, but whether it is correct word for word I cannot say.
It dealt with the fight of our country for life and death and one had to take care that there would not be a knife in our backs by a secret army. Their resistance would flare up and our resistance would break down, as it really happened later. in so far as they might constitute a menace to your operations in this invasion? Government, have been sent for work in Germany. That was my opinion. That was the necessary thing, that these people should come to work in Germany, as the French Government had promised in their treaty with the German government, instead of letting these people go into the Marquis and commit sabotage, and as a means against sabotage make necessary the shooting of them later.
Q You did not confine your use of forced labor to your enemies; it was also applied aganst your own allies, was it not , (page 1814) and did you not contribute to this discussion?
"Milch. Would not the following method be better? We could take under German administration the entire food supply for the Italians and tell them only he gets any food who either works in a protected factory or goes to Germany." with Italian soldiers who had declared themselves against Mussolini, and these people were sitting around behind the front and did not want to work, and committed sabotage against the German Army. Consequently, this proposal was made that it should be said to these people, "You can get your food and everything, but you have to work some place, and that is either in Italy or in Germany." in your cross-examination, that you did not know about any forced labor from occupied territory, that you had no knowledge of that. Is that still your statement?
A I have not quite understood that. Forced labor?
Q You didn't know about it? Italians, which were at our disposal for work after an agreement with that Italian Government, which we recognized. Mussolini had put these men at our disposal for thatpurpose.
Q Let us not bother with Mussolini here. I ask you whether you still stand by the statement you made earlier, as I recall it, that you did not know of any forced labor brought in from the occupied countries to Germany. Is that your statement, or isn't it?
A So far as free people are concerned, I still assert that. In this case they were people who were put at our disposal, and, Mr. Justice, at that time this Italian government still existed even if today we do not speak about it. But at that time it still existed. of this meeting at which you were present, and where the discussion you just admitted took place, and I call your attention to the line opposite the name "Sauckel," from which it appears that Sauckel then reported: "Out of the five million foreign workers who arrived in Germany not even two hundred thousand came voluntarily."
Q You don't have any recollection of that; all right.
Q Well, we will go on then to Conference No. 23 of the Central Plans Board, stillthe 3rd of November 1942.
It is the English translation, page 27. The German text is on page 1024, in which it appears that you were present at and participated in the discussion, and I call your attention to page 1024, line 10, to these entires of the stenographic minutes:
"SPEER: Well, through the industry we could deceive the French by telling them that we would release for their use, all prisoners of war who are rolling mill workers and smelters if they would only give us the names.
"ROLAND: We have established our own office in Paris. I see, you mean the French should report the smelters who are prisoners of war in Germany?
"MILCH: I simply say, you get two men in exchange for one of these.
"SPEER: The French firms know exactly which prisoners of war are smelters. Unofficially, you should create the impression that they would be released. They give us the names and then we get a hold of them. Do that.
"ROLAND: That is an idea." Now, your contribution was to want two men in place of one; is that right?
A Yes; that is to say, two people from another profession to be released for one of these experts. That was the Government proposal and how they were needed, you can see.
Q That was your entire objection? others in exchange. the 16th of February 1944; English translation, page 26, and the German from 1651. You will find yourself included among those who were present and it was at the Reich Air Ministry that it was held. I first call your attention to the entry on page 1863, the words opposite "MILCH": "The armament industry employs foreign workers to a large extent; according to the latest figures, 40%. The new directions by the Plenipotentiary General for Manpower refer mostly to foreigners and we lost a lot of German personnel which was called up -- especially the air industry,, being a young industry, employs a great many young people who should be called up.
This will be very difficult, as is easily seen, if one deducts those working for experimental stations. In mass production, the foreign workers by far prevail. It is about 95% and higher. Out best new engine is made 88% by Russian prisoners of war and the other 12% by German men and women. 50-60 JU-52 which we now regard only as transport planes are made for us, only six to eight German men are working on this machine; the rest are Ukrainian women who have beaten all the records of trained workers."
Do you recall that?
Q And on 1873, you come forward with this suggestion:
"MILCH: The list of the shirkers should be entrusted to Himmler's trustworthy hands, who will make them work all right.
to shirk." this morning.
Q Among foreign workers, wasn't it?
Q Englishmen are foreigners in Germany, aren't they? I don't know what you mean, they were not foreigners. They were Englishmen.
A No, English prisoners of war have never worked with us. No, it could not be Englishmen.
Q What were they? You say they were entirely German.
A It was "inlaenders", what we understood as "Bumulantens" (shirkers) who were the group of people who only workd during the waraand normally did not belong to our labor manpower but were forcibly taken during war time for that purpose.
Q We will get to that in a minute. First, I want to ask you how Himmler was goingto make them work. What did Himmler do, what methods did Himmler possess? Why were you proposing Himmler in this thing?
A Because Himmler reported in a discussion about the fact that there are different rations for the workers above the basic rations they had considerable additional rations, depending upon the type of work; for heavy work, several times the normal daily ration.
Each ration for normal work was given by the nutrition office independent of the question of how and why the man worked. give out the additional rations only then and to the extent that they deserved it for their work. Since Himmler had some people who were from concentration camps, and so forth, it was possible for these workers, he could use this method, and could introduce it, and, therefore, the proposal to send people who committed work sabotage against their own country, to send them--by giving these additional rations only if they did that work. camps, don't you? kept inthe main in the work camps, were they not, in which their rations were controlled without Himmler's hands being in it at all?
A No, the German workers were not in work camps, generally. They lived at home, and rec eived through the nutrition offices their additional rations. I want to point out a ain that the wish to take stronger measures came from the workers and executives, who at first complained, why the people who did not do anything, did not do their work, at a time of danger, should get additional rations and be better off then the other people, the population. of war and never foreign workers. Now, be clear about that?
A Well, I mean, about shirkers, I refer to German workers; in my opinion, it can only be these.
Q I ask that your attention be called to page 1913: "MILCH: This is your contribution at that point: "It is therefore not possible to exploit fully all the foreigners unless we compel thm by piecework or we have the possibility of taking measures against foreigners who are not doing their bit."
Did you find that entry?
Q And then you proceeded to complain that "if a foreman lays his hands on a prisoner of war or smashes him, there would be a terrible row and the man is put into prison. There are sufficient officials in Germany who think "it their most important duty to stand up for human rights instead of war production.
I also an for human rights, but if a Frenchman says 'You fellows will all be hanged and the chief of the factory will be beheaded first' and if then the chief says 'I am going to hit him', then he is in a mess. He is not protected but the poor fellow who said that to him is protected." Did you report that to the meeting?
Q What did you suggest? workers threatened their German foreman and in the factory, and if that man fought against him then something was done against him, and I didn't think that was correct.
Q Now, you provided your own remedy. Didn't you in the next line say: "I have told my engineers' I am going to punish you if you don't hit such a man. The more you do in this respect, the more I shall praise you. I shall see to it that nothing happens to you.' This is not yet sufficiently known. I cannot talk with all factory leaders. I should like to see the man who stays my arm because I can settle accounts with anybody who stays my arm." Did you find that?
A I have seen it just now, yes. I cannot remember the words in detail but my point is that it was an impossibility that a prisoner or foreign worker could say to his German foreman "We will out your threat." threatened to out his threat, that German officers would stand up for him as against the employer? You don't mean that, do you?
A (No answer).
Q Well, we will go on: "If the little factory leader" -- I am still quoting from you -- "does that, he is put into a concentration camp..." Do you want to find that?
Q "...and runs the risk of losing prisoners of war." Now, I am still quoting you and I want you to find the entry, "In one case, two Russian officers took off with an airplane but crashed. I ordered that these two men be hanged at once. They were hanged or shot yesterday. I left that to the SS. I expressed the wish to have them hanged in the factory for the others to see."
Did you find that? nor can I give the order. I said I consider it quite impossible that I said that. I had nothing to do with this question. I do not know of any case where two Russian officers fled with the plane. entry?
A No, I have nothing to say. I do not know anything about it and I don't believe it has ever been said.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That is all that I have at the present time. BY MR. ROBERTS: My first point is this: You said on Friday that beginning in 1935; an air-force was built up in Germany for defensive purposes. Do you remember that? December 1939? your chief, the Defendant Goering. I am quoting from the shorthand notes of the 8th of January, in the afternoon, on page 2306. In May of 1935, Goering said: "I intend to create a luftwaffe which, if the hour should strike, shall burst upon the foe like a course of revenge. The enemy must have the feeling of being lost already before even having fought." Does that sound like a defensive airforce? from the deeds.
THE PRESIDENT: If there is any more of this laughter, the court will have to be cleared.
BY MR. ROBERTS: aircraft manufacturers, said that "War with Czechoslovakia was imminent; that the German airforce is already superior to the English airforce. If Germany wins the war, she will be the greatest power in the world, dominating the world market, and Germany will be a rich nation. To this goal risks must be taken." Does that sound like a defensive German airforce? Does it? say something in answer to that.
in answering any question, which is very short. Now may I read you "Hitler has instructed me to organize a gigantic armament program, which would make insignificant all creative achievements.
I have as large."
Does that sound like a speech for defensive purposes?
I now want to come to my second point. You were present at the 1939?
A What was the date please, if I may ask?
Q I would like you to see the document, which is L-79. You
A On the 27 May, wasn't it?
Q Yes, that is right. I just want to remind you to ask who else was present.
There were the Fuehrer, Goering, Raeder, Warlimont--was Warlimont deputy of Jodl?
Q Very well--and others; I don't mention the names. Now, Mr. Witness, those names were leaders of the German armed forces?
was not present. I cannot remember.
Q He is down there as being present. You think he was not there?
A Yes. I cannot remember any more. I have my recollection others were mostly leaders of the Germany army force, is that right?
A Yes. It was the Commander in Chief of the Army and the of honor?
his word?
and Luxembourg?
A I assume so. I did not know the agreement, but I assume so.
countries, including the three I have mentioned? Did you not know that as a matter of history?
A I have not seen the film. I do not know the film.
Q Yes. It is a German newsreel. Do you remember that at Tribunal:
"The Dutch and the Belgian air bases must be occupied by the armed forces.
Hitler's notions of neutrality must be ignored.
decisive blow right at the start. Considerations of right and wrong, or treaties do not enter into the matter."
Do you remember those words being said?
A I cannot remember exactly what the words were. I know that breach of Germany's pledge of her word?
speak at all. Hitler sat behind his desk, and in front he made the speech, and after the speech he walked away.
The discussion did not honor, Mr. Witness?
Q Can you give the Tribunal your opinion of it?
upon ourselves. That I cannot remember.
Q Will you now say that those minutes are wrong?
A No, I cannot say that. I can only say I have no recollection of any detail as to the words.
Whether the minutes are correct I do not know.
As much as I know they have been edited later by one of Luxembourg, and brought miser and death to millions.
You know that now, don't you?
the political question. We were not asked about them.
DR. RUDOLPH DIX: I speak not for the Defendant Schacht, but for the entire Defense.
I ask the Tribunal and say that the witness may
THE PRESIDENT: He is being asked about facts.
DR. DIX: Sir?
THE PRESIDENT: I said he was being asked about facts. BY MR. ROBERTS: months later Germany violated the neutrality of Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. whatever the Government of the country has taken up was not a job of the soldiers to judge that. break his country's word. he has not anything to say whatever. I agree and say that on foreign territory where the soldier could not overlook, and about which a soldier does not know anything, he cannot be held responsible for such a question.
Q You can only speak of your own knowledge. Are you saying that you do not know that your country was pledged to observe the neutrality of these three small countries?
how the other side had reacted to that promise at the time known to me. It could be quite possible that the other side to use this guarantee, did not want this guarantee at all for a protection. The soldier can not see that clearly. Only the political leadership could know about that. command, who are now in the Dock, when they get in the witness box. But I put it to you that it must have been common knowledge in Germany that Hitler was giving guarantees and assurances to all these smaller countries?
A Hitler has proposed and offered to make many things. He offered for all countries limitation of armaments. He offered not to use any bombing planes, but his proposals in these cases, they were not accepted, therefore, any political leadership had to know what they should demand from their soldiers, and get response from their soldiers. The soldiers of the line have only to judge and to obey.
Q Answer my question. That was not an answer to my question. I take the facts now Mr. Witness from the documents, from your own German documents. I want just your knowledge and your idea of honor. Did you not think it grossly dishonorable to give the pledge on 28 April, and to make a secret resolution to break it on the 23 of May? conditions have not changed in any way, and that is my judgment. vice.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't think so. BY MRE. ROBERTS:
Very well, I will not acquire an answer to that. Very well. THE WITNESS; I do not even understand his question
Q You know, of course, that the neutrality anyway was violated? twice. in his diary, "The Fuehrer is still looking for excuse to give to the world for invasion of Norway." Do you know that?
A I do not know of that diary and that entry.
Q You took part actually in the invasion of Norway, did you not? force there for a short time.
Q You had actually a command in Norway?
DR. HERMANN JAHREISS: Dr. Jahrreiss, for the defendant Jodl. I consider it necessary to make a clarification, which may be made from the misinterpretation or mistranslation. I have just heard about the entry by Jodl in his diary, and a re-translation from the German as coming from the Fuehrer, "Is still looking for an excuse," and in the German text it shows "A reason for justification." I also believe that justification is in the English translation, and that it should not be translated by outrage pretext or excuse. That is an entirely different thing.
MR. ROBERTS: Whatever it is, why that reads as the translation of his witness. Would you agree that according to the entry in the diary, the Fuehrer was still looking for it, whether it was a reason or an excuse. Nov I only want to ask you one more question on this side of the case.
Q You know that Belgrade was bombed in I think April 1941? lation at all, you heard that?
Q Have not you discussed it with Goering?
AAbout the attack on Belgrade? No, I can not remember. bombing to a large capital without even one hour warning to the civilian population?
Q That is murder, isn't it?
A (No answer)
Q You would rather not answer that question? which lead to the attack. I do not know whether the war was declared. I do not know whether the warning took place.
Neither do I know whether Belgrade was a fortress.
Neither do I know what part was attacked in Belgrade. I know of so many bombing attacks of which it could be said the same thing, that could be said.
Q The question, Mr. Witness, that unless we had the use of the document in front of us, it was Hitler's order that Belgrade was to be suddenly destroyed by waves of bombers, without any ultimatum, or any diplomatic movement, or negotiations at all; would I put that question if I had not known of the document. Let me turn to something else. this document. Stalag Luft 3 at Sagan. Do you know about what I am talking? British, Dominian, and other escaped from that Stalag Luft 3 camp? where the entire case was displayed on the wall,
Q I may say, we cannot but help know it in a moment. Did you know that officers, eight or sixty, were shot? from Danzig to Saarbruecken; you heard of that?
A I have heard that about fifty were killed. I do not know where. but that urns said to contain their ashes were brought back to the camp, you heard of that?
A That could be seen from the speech of Mr. Eden, who was in the Lower House, and I found that out in the camp whore I was, Government as having been shot while offering resistance, or trying to escape, yet, not one was wounded, and all sixty were shot dead. officers while they were trying to resist, or trying to escape, had been shot. We did not believe it in that form, and about this point there was much dis cussion among ourselves without knowing any of their facts.