THE PRESIDENT: We have heard all this before from the defendant Goering and the defendant Ribbentrop, and we said that we did not want to go into it again. In any event, it has nothing to do with the SS, nothing directly to do with the SS. BY DR. HAENSEL:
Q Just one more Question. Do you know that the SS, as far as the Jews were concerned, followed secret aims and objectives, others than those that were declared officially?
Q You do not know that from your own knowledge?
BY DR. STEINBAUER (Counsel for defendant Dr. Seyss-Inquart):
Q. Witness, I have one single question to put to you. The prosecution under PS-91 submitted and read a letter which you, as the chief of the Rosenberg All Purpose Staff, sent to Dr. Seyss-Inquart in his capacity as Reichskommissar for the Netherlands, and in which letter you mentioned the library at Amsterdam and demanded that library. I do not know whether you recall this library. It is rather voluminous of Socialist, Marxist contents. The Prosecution did not submit the answer given by my client. Therefore, I have to ask you: Do you remember this matter and what answer did Seyss-Inquart give you?
A. I remember this library very well for I have been told about it. To my knowledge, we were concerned with the establishment of a spiritual central point, and Amsterdam, in which the history of all social movements in various countries was to be summarized and centralized in a library, so that on the basis of this historical and scientific material -
Q. Please try to be more brief. You know what I am talking about?
A. Yes.
Q. And what answer did you receive? Did Seyss-Inquart agree that this library would go to Germany or that it would remain in Germany?
A. It was agreed that this library would remain in Holland and that the cataloguing of these treasures, which were not in an orderly manner, was to take place in Amsterdam. In the course of years this took place at Amsterdam, In the year 1944, when the invasion had already begun or when it was imminent, when bombing attacks increased in this area, part of this library was taken to Silesia and another part, to my knowledge, remained in Emden; and the third part, I believe, was not transported.
Q. Is it correct that Seyss-Inquart prevented the taking away of this library?
A. Yes, that is correct. BY MR. DODD:
Q. Before we begin our discussion of some matters that we would like to go over, I wonder if you would be good enough to write your name a few times on these pieces of paper, both in pen and in pencil.
(Witness was handed paper, pen, and pencil.)
Q. (Continuing.) Would you write "A. Rosenberg", please, with the pen, and "Alfred Rosenberg" with the pen; and would you handwrite the first initial of your last name with a capital? "A. Rosenberg" in pencil, "Alfred Rosenberg", and the first initial of your last name? initial of your last name? your own counsel, you stated before the Tribunal that you did have a discussion with Heinrich Himmler, the Reichsfuehrer SS, about concentration camps and, if I remember correctly, you said that that was some time in 1939; is that so?
A. Yes. I testified that I had this discussion with him; I discussed th concentration camps, but I cannot fix the exact date. It was in '38.
Q. Very good. He offered to have you go through one or the other of these camps, Dachau or some other camp; is that so?
A. Yes, he suggested that I look over the camps.
Q. And you refused or declined the invitation?
A. Yes.
Q. And I understood you, if I recollect correctly, you said, because you were quite sure that he would not show you the unfavorable things that wer in that camp?
A. I assumed more or less that if there were unfavorable things, I perha would not seen them anyway.
Q. You mean that you simply assumed that there were unfavorable things; that you didn't know there were unfavorable things?
A. I heard this through the foreign press.
Q. When did you first hear that through the foreign press?
A. That was in the first months of 1933.
Q. And did you continuously read the foreign press about the concentrate camps in Germany from 1933 to 1938?
A. I did not follow the foreign press at all for I do not speak English. On occasion I received some excerpts from time to time, and even in the foreign press there were certain references with the strict explanation that these allegations were not true. I remember a statement by Goering in which he said that it was beyond his comprehension.
Q But you thought they were true to the extent that there were unfavorable were taking place, that in some Gaus or districts on occasion there might be conflicts, and that the fact of murders of National Socialists in the months subsequent to the taking over of the power most probably would call forth sharp counter measures.
National Socialists in the concentration camps?
A No. The chief reports upon the continuance of murders of members of the Hitler Youth, of the police, and members of the Party, took place especially in 1943 and 1944, but I do not remember that many -
THE PRESIDENT: Did you say 1943 and 1944 or 1933 and 1934? Which is it?
THE WITNESS: 1933 and 1934.
BY MR. DODD: made you think that it would not be profitable for you to inspect these camps because some things were going on there that would not be shown to you. Now, that is so, isn't it?
A No. I said very frankly that under some circumstances excesses might be taking place. I talked to Hitler about this matter, and I told him so that he knew that we knew about such things through the foreign press and that he should take care. that when you wrote your book, "The Myth of the Twentieth Century," you expressed your personal opinion and you did not intend it to have any great effect upon state affairs. Is that a fair statement of your testimony of yesterday with respect to your book?
A I did not quite follow the conclusion, but I must say yes. I wrote "The Myth of the Twentieth Century" in those years according to certain historical investigations, 1927 and 1928. It was published in 1938, and there was an introduction that this was a purely personal opinion, and that the political organization of which I was a member was not responsible for it.
Q Very good. I will ask that you be shown document 3553-PS. That is also, if Your Honor please, USA Exhibit 352.
It is already in evidence. book. It is right there before you. You said in it "To the 150th Thousand Copy: The Myth has today drawn deep, ineffaceable furrows into the emotional life of the German nation. Ever new editions are a clear indication that a decisive turning over of the spritual soil is growing into a historical event. Many things which in my book seemed to be a peculiar idea have already become a reality of state policy. Many other things will yet, I hope materialize as a further result of this new vigor."
You wrote that?
A That is entirely correct. This book of 700 pages does not apply to every point of which I am accused here. This book dealt with a large number of problems the problem of the peasants, of the world states, of the cocept of socialism, of the relation between leadership of industry and of labor, a present -
Q (Interposing) Now, just a minute. I don't think it is necessary for you to give us a list of the table of contents of the book. I simply asked you if you wrote that introduction.
A Yes. of course.
Q Now, with respect to the well-known forced labor program. I think it is perfectly clear to everyone who has been in attendance at these sessions before this Tribuanl, and of course to yourself, that there was a forced labor program in effect, or a so-called slave labor program, both in the East and in the Western occupied countries. Isn't that a fact? occupied countries were to be taken to Germany. In Germany there was a compulsory labor law. can by any stretch of the imagination be held responsible either in part or altogether for that forced or slave labor program. Isn't that so? Two pricipal offices, at least.
Q And they were your ministry and the office of the defendant Sauckel. That is pretty simple. Is that true or not?
the same right, and all other high Reich authorities. I had the duty to carry through this directive according to all my powers in the Eastern territories.
Q Compulsory labor directives. Did you carry that out? Was that exercised under your ministry, the forcing of people to leave their homes and their communities to go to Germany to do work for the German State? workers in the East would be put on a voluntary basis, and I have a record of a discussion with Gauleiter Sauckel in the year 1943, and you may see very unequivocally that at all times I made efforts to do this. I sent many leaflets. How many millions of brochures and pamphlets I distributed in these countries so that this principle would be carried through. When I heard that the number of Germans which had to go to the front could not be replaced and the German workers were at an end, then I could not protest any longer, and that a call should be made to certain age classes and that the local authorities would help. they wouldn't go, so then you forced them to go. Isn't that so?
A That coercion took place is true and is not disputed. Where excesses took place--and some terrible excesses took place--I did my utmost to mitigate those conditions and to alleviate conditions.
Q All right. You of course had promulgated an order in your own ministry concerning compulsory labor, had you not?
A Yes. In the beginning a general law -
Q (Interposing) That's right, on the 19th of December 1941. your decree concerning compulsory labor, the compulsory labor, significantly-I want to make this very clear to you--in the occupied Eastern territories. Eastern Territories.
Q I ask that you be shown Document 1975. It is USA Exhibit 820, already in evidence--not in evidence, I8m sorry. I am now offering it.
I don't care to stress this document too much except to have you verify the fact that this is the order which you promulagated, and in the first paragraph with the small figure 1, you stated:
"All inhabitants of the occupied Eastern Territories are subject to the public liability for compulsory work according to their capbility for work." number 3, where you say:
"A special ruling is drawn up for Jews." Kommissar for the Ukraine and is concerned with a special law of the Reich Minister for the Eastern Territories. I ask that I be shown the complete law in order that I may judge the directive given out by the Reich Kommissar.
Q Well, we can make that available to you. This is taken from the official Gazette of the Reich Ministry for the occupied Eastern Territories. You are not disputing, are you, the fact that you promulagated this order and that those two paragraphs I read to you were in it?
Q All right. If you care to look at all of the other paragraphs and at other parts, I will see that they are made available to you, but for the present purposes I can assure you there is no trick in connection with this. I want to move on to another document.
according to their capability for work. isn't that so?
A I do not find anything regarding the laws about Jews. There must have been a directive on this. a minute ago, two paragraphs below it. There is a figure 3 in parentheses and then this statement:
"A special ruling is drawn up for Jews."
Don't you find that there?
A No, I'm sorry I can't find that point in my copy. Yes, I have it now. But that refers to another law.
Q That's all right. I just asked you if it was there, and it is. Let's go on. Meyer, Alfred Meyer, M-e-y-e-r. Now, this is an order from your Ministry for the Occupied Eastern Territories, and it is signed by your permanent staff secretary, Alfred Meyer, and it is addressed to the Reich Commissioner for the Ostland, a man by the name of Lohse, L-o-h-s-e, and also to the Reich Commissioner for the Ukraine, a man by the name of Koch about whom we have heard a good deal in this trial. 247,000 industrial workers and 380,000 agricultural workers. lation and to page 2, as well, of the German translation, and line 14 of the English text and line 22 of the German text. The paragraph has before it the figure 6, and it says:
"The workers are to be recruited. Forced enlistment should be avoided;
basis. In case the enlistment should not bring the required results and occupied Eastern territories."
A Yes. Mr. Prosecutor, you read the introduction, and from that we who could neither work nor study.
I would like to read the end of the paragraph, and that says:
"Promises which cannot be kept may not be given neither in writing nor verbally.
Therefore, the proclamations or posters and appeals in the press against future recruiting in the occupied Eastern territories."
Q Very good. All I am trying to indicate here, and to see if you basis of your own decree.
That is the point I am trying to make with you.
Ukraine. This labor for the Reich was not taken until later, and labor
THE PRESIDENT: You are not answering the question. You are giving a long paraphrase for the one word "yes", which is the answer you ought to have made.
A (Continuing): When compulsory labor service was instituted in the Reich, I said that I was in favor of voluntary enlistment.
That could not carry on through, and of course I agreed that compulsory labor laws would have to be instituted, and I repeated that three times yesterday and admitted it. again this morning. In year own defense document -- R-011, I think it is -- which is the letter that you wrote to Koch on the 14th of December 1942 -- I don't think it will be necessary to show it to you again; I think you saw it yesterday -- you specifically mentioned to Koch the matter of picking up people from lines in front of theaters and off the streets, those people who were attending movies and matters of that sort. You knew that was going on under your decree of compulsory labor, didn't you? You were objecting to it, but you knew it was going on.
A Yes. It always happens that these excesses are connected with each and every law, and when excesses occurred, I did protest against them and try to take steps.
Q Very good. Now, finally, with respect to this forced labor matter, would you say as a matter of fairness and honesty that your Ministry was not very largely responsible for this terrible program of forcing people from their homes into Germany, or do you say that you must accept a very considerable responsibility for what happened to these hundreds of thousands of people out of the Eastern occupied areas? laws which I issued, and for any framework of directives which were issued by my Ministry for the carrying out of these measures. The territorial governments were responsible according to law. Where they went beyond these measures, I paid attention to matters which were called to my attention. Exaggerations took place, but I must admit that some terrible things did occur, and in that connection I tried to intervene, and a series of German officials were taken to court and were sentenced. people, assuming that no great violence took place, the very fact of forcing them against their wills to leave is some thing else that you will accept responsibility for, I assume.
A (Interposing): I will take the responsibility upon myself as far as state laws are concerned which instructed Gauleiter Sauckel to put these demands to me. subject, that you acknowledged yesterday that you did consent to the taking of children as young as 10 and 12 and 14 years old and removing them to Germany, and I think you told us that at first it disturbed you, but when you found out there were unhappy recreational circumstances, your mind was eased. Is that a fair statement of your position on forcing these children from the East?
A No, that is not correct. Of course, I do not know just what the interpretation of the reading of the document was, but the opposite was true. I tried to avoid anything happening in my operational territory which would result in circumstances that would be detrimental to the children. The Heeresgruppe Mitte was acting independently, and I put the condition of taking care of the children through their own mothers, so they could have contact with their parents, and, as it says later, that they might be returned to their homeland. From that you can see that it is the exact opposite of that which the Prosecution has submitted here.
Q Well, I don't want to dwell much longer on it except to remind you that that document which you have seen and which you discussed yesterday, states, among other things, that by removing these children out of the East you will be doing more than one thing; you will be destroying the biological potentiality of those people in the East. That is what you approved among other things, isn't it?
A Yes. That is contained in the first point of the Pro-
secution and it was read. But I took this stand regarding the whole document, that it was not decisive as to my position, that when I heard this for the first time I rejected it, that later, when I had heard other reports, I found a form for which women thanked me, although it was not my merit that these people were taken care of in such a nice manner. exception of the little while of which we have been talking, you have been very benign and humane towards these people under your jurisdiction in the occupied Eastern territories. You wanted to be very kind to them.
A Yes. As far as these sentimental terms are concerned, I do not put my special claims on them for myself. However, in the terrible war in the East, which brought with it the continuous murder of German officials, I tried to carry on a mitigating policy.
Q Yes. Now I ask that you be shown document 1058-PS, which is USA 147.
(The document was submitted to the witness.)
Q(Continuing) You now have that before you. It is an extract from a speech which you made with your closest collaborators, and it has been referred to before. It is a speech that you made on the 20th of June 1941, the day before the attack was launched against Soviet Russia. I want to refer to the very first paragraph, and the only one on the paper. It says:
"The job of feeding the German people stands, this year without a doubt"-
A What page is that?
Q It is the first page; there is only one page. Oh, you have the whole document. You referred to it yesterday; I think you will be able to find it. It is at page 8, line 54. You may recall it; you talked about it yesterday. As a matter of fact, you said it was an impromptu speed. Do you find it on page 8? call it to your attention for a specific purpose--you say that the job of feeding the German people is at the top of the list, and that the Southern territories and the Northern Caucasus will have to serve as a balance for the feeding of the German people. And you go on to say that you see no reason why there is any obligation to feed the Russian people with the products of the surplus territory. Then you says "We know that this is a harsh necessity, bare of any feelings." ly be necessary and that the future will hold very hard years in store for the Russians.
to think were quite to your credit. Were all parts of the speech impromptu, or are you suggesting that only the parts that seem damaging to you now were impromptu? This paragraph has been read by the prosecution three or four times, and yesterday when we discussed this speech I myself referred to this paragraph. Beyond that, I added that from the Four Year Plan, I was told, it was not certain whether the conquest of the Moscow industrial region could be maintained. For instance, there was a wagon factory mentioned. Some key industries would have to be curtailed, and through that a large problem in the supply of this area would result. time, or at that point, these unemployed would have to be evacuated, and I expressly referred to this document by the Eastern Ministry on this question where, under point 7, the feeding of the civilian population, point 3, is emphasized, and also later in the document where it says that famines are to be avoided in any event, and that the population was to receive special rations. do more than that. And my entire political and spiritual position is to be concluded from what I said yesterday about the keeping up of cultural contacts in the Ukraine, about independence there, about Russia.
Q All right. I don't want you to go into all that. I understand you thoroughly, and I think everyone else does. I merely wanted to point out to you that on that early date you did say there would be harsh necessities and that there would be very many hard years for the Russians. That is all. And if you don't want to acknowledge that you were serious in saying that, as you were in saying the other things, then I won't press you on it.
A Mr. Prosecutor, I believe that not much more could have been done towards this problem.
(The (document was submitted to the witness) passage. It was translated to me that these measures were to be carried through without any feeling, but in the original it says "beyond feeling," or "above feeling".
Q All right; we won't have any trouble about that.
Now, will you please look at this document? This is a memorandum found in your files, for your information. aim of German politics, notably in the Ukraine, as having been laid down by the Fuehrer.
They are, you say, exploitation and mobilization of raw materials, a German settlement in certain regions, no artificial education of the population towards intellectualism, but the preservation of their labor strength; apart from that, an extensive unconcern with the interior affairs.
Then, moving down a little bit -- because I don't think it is necessary to read all of it, much of it has been referred to in another document -- we come down to the 12th line from the bottom of that paragraph, beginning at the 14th line:
"After continuous observation of the state of affairs in the occupied territories of the East, I am of the opinion that German politics may have their own, possibly derogatory attitude regarding the qualities of the conquered peoples, but that it is not the mission of German political representative to broadcast measures and opinions which could eventually bring about the sheer desperation of the conquered peoples, instead of promoting the desired productive labor mobilization."
Then, in the next paragraph, you way:
"In home politics we had to announce our aims to the whole nation in the most candid form of aggression by way of contrast to the others. Yet, the political leadership in the East must remain silent where necessary harshness is dictated by German policy. They must remain silent about their possibly derogatory judgment of the conquered peoples. Yes, a clever German policy might be able to do more in the German interest through politically immaterial alleviations and certain human concessions than through open, thoughtless brutality." on the 16th of March, 1942?
A. This document is correct. It was submitted to me for a moment in a preliminary interrogation. What we gather from this document is the following. We may gather from it that although I knew that the Fuehrer had not accepted my rather broad proposals, I continued to fight for these proposals. And we may further see from it that I saw the Fuehrer personally, so that certain petty citizens in the East would not make derogatory remarks about other nations, that, so far as the thousands who came in were concerned, I could not expect sympathy and I could not expect antipathy either, but I could demand one thing of them in case they had a derogatory attitude, which was to keep quiet and to act decently.
extraordinarily decisive, because it says in the last paragraph, "I ask that the Fuehrer rule on this memorandum." This instruction was not contained in the document; I believe that much would have resulted from it.
Q. All right. Now let's turn to R-36, USA 699.
(The document was submitted to the witness.)
Q. (Continuing) You have seen this document before, haven't you?
A. Yes, I have seen it before.
Q. Yes. Now, this is a memorandum submitted to you by one of your subordinates, Dr. Markull, and directly submitted to you by Leibbrandt, also one of your subordinates, one of your top men, on the 19th day of August 1942. I want you to follow along with me while I read you certain passages from it.
The first few lines are dated the 5th of September, 1942, and it says: "The Minister, on the premises." It states that there is enclosed a memorandum containing the opinion of Dr. Markull on the matter of the Bormann letter of the 23rd July. to me, you told us yesterday that you were in disagreement with Bormann about some matters. Is that so?
Just answer the question. Did you tell us that yesterday?
A. As I said, on decisive matters I did not agree with Bormann, and I testified that in the course of years, on occasion, I gave him an appeasing answer.
My whole policy was to -
Q All right. Let's look at this document, which is, as I say, a memorandum about a Bormann letter to you, dated the 23rd of July, I assume 1942.
"On the 23rd of July, 1942, Party Director Bormann sent the Minister a letter which enumerates, in eight paragraphs, the principles the Minister is to follow in administering the occupied areas in the East." August, 1942, explained in detail to what extent these principles were already being put into practice or used as a basis of policy.
The next paragraph says that "any person reading this correspondence is struck, first of all, by the complete agreement of concepts. The Minister -that is you -- apparently was particularly concerned about two points; The first relates to the protection of German rule against the pressure of the S Slav race; the second to the absolute necessity of simplifying the administration. These are indeed decisive problems, of which more will have to be said."
Then there is this statement: "For the rest, the Minister -- referring to you -- not only raises no objections against Bormann's principles or even his phraseology; on the contrary, he uses them as a basis of his reply and endeavors to sow that they are already being put into practice. When, however, Bormann's letter was read out by Captain Zimmermann in a conference of the department chiefs, gave concern was shown at once, both on account of the phraseology of the letter and the future conduct of our policy."
Then it goes on to say: "In order to find out whether this concern is justified, it is best to start from a fiction."
Then, under the number I, Markull writes:
"Let us suppose Bormann's letter were issued to the Reich Commissioners as a ministerial decree. This supposition is by no means unrealistic since the Minister -- and that again refers to you -- appears to hold identical views. Since the Ostland, or the Baltic Area, presents a special case, and since the Ukraine is, or will become, probably, the most important region politically the following discussion will be based on that region."
Then, going on: "The consequences of a decree of this kind will be judged best by its effect on those men whose duty it is to put it into practice."