DR. BERGOLD: Your Honor, I called the witness only for examination regarding his affidavit. I have no further questions once I have ascertained that his statement that Rascher certainly knew Milch was only a deduction on his part.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you wish to cross examine, Mr. Denney?
MR. DENNEY: No, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal may remove the witness.
DR. BERGOLD: I ask permission of the Court to call the witness Haertel?
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will bring the witness Haertel into the Courtroom.
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q. Witness, raise your right hand and repeat after me: I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
Please be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Witness, please speak slowly so that the interpreters may keep up with you. Also, please leave a short pause between my questions and your answers so that the question may be interpreted to its conclusion.
Witness, please state your first and last name.
A. Walter Hertel, H-e-r-t-e-l
Q. Witness, when were you born?
A. 26 February 1898.
Q. What rank and office did you last have in the German Wehrmacht?
A. I was General Engineer of the Luftwaffe in Fieldmarshall's Milch's staff.
Q. Witness, do you recall, that roughly on the 11th of September, 1942, you were in the Reich Air Ministry and you saw there a medical film?
A. I did see a medical film, but I believe it was later than that. I cannot remember the date precisely.
Q. Do you know who attended the presentation of this film?
A. No, I do not know. In general, on certain days, irregularly, films were shown in secret. They were technical films in which I was interested. I saw this film by accident without knowing what sort of film it was going to be.
Q. Can you toll us what this film was about?
A. The film portrayed an experiment, or tried to portray, a condition in which the fighter pilots might attain great altitude, and when, at these heights, they were told to bail out.
In the low-pressure chamber, a man was brought to the corresponding altitude, and at this altitude, he had to take off his mask. Then he was brought back to ground level and was removed from the low-pressure chamber. The experimental person became unconscious when he removed his mask at that altitude, and remained so until the end, when he was taken from 944a the low-pressure chamber.
He manifested certain convulsions and cramps which, however, ceased shortly after that. Roughly, after 30 or 40 minutes, the experimental person was again entirely normal.
Q. Witness, can you recall whether the experimental person wore a special suit from which it might be concluded what sort of person he was?
A. It was said that these experimental persons were prisoners. At any rate, that is the way I recall it. They committed serious crimes for which they were condemned to death. This person could, by volunteering for this experiment, save his life.
Q. Witness, was this told to you by the people who presented this film?
A. Yes. It was at the conclusion of the film.
Q. Did you have the impression that this was a cruel experiment which caused human beings considerable pain or suffering?
A. No, because such experiments are necessary in aviation. It is necessary that these experiments be carried out in order to draw the correct conclusions regarding equipment. At least that is the way I see it.
Q. So far as you know, were such experiments tried out by German physicians and German personnel?
A. Experiments in the low-pressure chambers were carried on continually, particularly in order to ascertain the correct equipment for pilots and gain new experiences. I was also in the low-pressure chambers, and made such experiments myself.
Q. Did you have considerable pain on this occasion?
A. No.
Q. Did you, too, become unconscious?
A. No. I did not become unconscious at that time.
Q. Yes.
A. This was several years before the war. At that time we did not as cend to those altitudes.
Q. It was perfectly clear from these films that these experimental persons became unconscious after the mask was removed?
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, can you recall whether after the film was over, anyone stated 945a that more precise information on the film should not be given out because Milch was not present, or because the Reichfuehrer-SS had not previously given his permission?
A I do not recall that remark. In general, these films which were concerned first in line with technical experiments, were secret.
Q Was there considerable interest in your office about these human experiments?
A We were simply interested in the technical and motor experiments at these heights. I never saw experiments of this sort again.
Q Can you recall whether Milch was present at this presentation of the film?
A Milch was not present at this presentation.
Q Thank you. Come now to the general sphere of armaments. Witness, do you know from what date on, Milch was concerned with war armaments? Was that before or after Udet's death?
A In November, 1941, Fieldmarshall Milch took over the office of G.L. General Udet was immediately subordinate to Goering.
Q Can you tell me, roughly, when Milch ceased his activities as G.L.?
A He withdrew in part on the first of March, 1944, when the Jaegerstab was founded. He left it completely in June of 1944 when the Jaegerstab was reorganized and the entire armament was transferred to Speer's Ministry.
Q Do you wish then to characterize the Jaegerstab period as a transition period?
A Yes.
Q Can you tell me the reason why, in your opinion, this was a period of transition or a necessary period of transition?
In my opinion Speer's ministry withdrew one after the other consciously, one branch or another from the Luftwaffe, so that finally at the beginning of the year of 1944 the Luftwaffe was no longer in a position to fulfill its task, without considerable participation an the part of Speer's ministry. The main factor in the armament or the basis of it in the sphere of the manufacturers lay in the hands of the Speer ministry. In this way at the beginning of 1944, on the 1st of March 1944, the GL was obliged to surrender first his fighter production, and. since the fighter production was about eighty percent of the entire Luftwaffe armament at that time, finally in June 1944 the remaining twenty percent had to be turned over to Speer. This was regulated in June 1944 by an order of Hitler.
Q. Witness, with what you have just said, the facts apparently do not correspond; mainly, the fact that Milch was one of the chiefs of the Fighter Staffs; or was there another man who was practically the chief of the Fighter Staff?
A. According to the regulations Sauer and Milch were chairmen of the Fighter Staff. In practice, however, the chairmanship was carried out by Sauer.
Q. Is it correct when I assume that Sauer was at the leadership of the Fighter Staff?
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, what did Milch have to do with the Four Year plan?
A. I am not in a position to give detailed information on this question because I an not so familiar with the organization of the Four Year Plan as to enable me to deliver judgment on that. It is my opinion that Milch had nothing to do with the Four Year Plan.
Q. Were Sauckel and his officers subordinated to Milch?
A. No, Sauckel was immediate subordinate to Hitler and received from Hitler personally his orders.
Q. Is it true that perhaps Milch could exercise some influence on the execution of Sauckel's work. For instance, the recruitment, or transport, the recruitment or transport of foreign workers?
A. No, so far as I can see, there was no possibility of giving Sauckel any instructions. There was no influence to be exercised on him.
Q. Did Sauckel have instructions to report personally to Milch every month on his, namely, Sauckel's activities?
A. No, I know of no such reports.
Q. Could Milch give orders to the military or civilian authorities in the occupied territories?
A. In my opinion, no.
Q. Can you tell me in what way the aircraft industry recruited or received its workers?
A. The request of the aircraft factories or firms went on one hand to the work offices and on the other hand to armament inspectorate. The labor offices were completely under Sauckel and armament factories were completely under Speer.
Q. Did the GL, that is to say, Milch, have anything to do with the recruitment of concentration camp inmates for the aircraft armament or, who then did recruit them?
A. The GL had nothing to do with the request for concentration camp inmates as workers of the armament industry. Those workers were provided by Sauckel, or the labor offices, Whether those were Germans or foreigners, the concentration camp inmates were not within the power of the position which he held. He had nothing to do with that.
Q. Then at the time it was not within Milch's work of what decision to pass on all the individual firms?
A. No.
Q. Can you tell me what the functions of the Central. Planning were?
A. When in the course of our discussions at the GL there was mentioned the Central Planning. These discussions concerned themselves almost exclusively with raw materials. Workers questions were taken care of by Sauckel, who in his own sphere of activity did not want to be interfered with in any way.
Q. Within the framework of the GL there were technical conferences, were there not?
A. Yes.
Q. Within this framework was the request for workers discussed, or were only technical natters discussed?
A. In these conferences numerable requests for workers were discussed because on the basis of the requests of the General Staff which the GL received it was calculated how many workers were necessary in order to carry out a certain plan, or any specific plan. These questions were, of course, brought up in these conferences. The requests for workers went through normal channels. That is to say, when a firm received an order, it turned to the labor office or to the armament inspectorate and from there the request went along the above mentioned channels.
Q. In these meetings of GL were requests made for five workers, or did it only simply state one's needs in terns of how great it was?
A. The conferences were held as only to the number of workers needed. It was important, of course, to the GL to get as responsible German workers as possible, but how the work group was composed, with the different importances, so far as I know, was never discussed.
Q. Can you tell me whether during these conferences there was discussed the bringing in as many fine workers as possible so far as the slave labor was concerned?
A. The main direction taken in the work of the GL, according to Milch's orders, was that "finers" were to be used at home. No German worker was to be out of the country. In other words, in view of the fact that a man works best where he lives, the GL wanted to confine the work in foreign countries where there was a possibility of determining the place of work of the worker where they lived. For instance, in France there were plants with German orders and the plan was to employ the workers living near there. That their work as such was done in France in order to make use -- in order to keep the air fleet at top potential. That is to say, that this directive existed for the reason that, if possible, no foreign worker should be brought to Germany but to use them at home in their own country.
Q. Witness, what was the position of labor in the aircraft industry? Was it sufficient?
A. The work situation in the aircraft industry was always poor. The numbers of requests were never met.
Q. Now witness, Sauckel always mentioned very large numbers which he said he had put at the disposal of German industry. What can you say of this statement of Sauckel?
A. Sauckel's numbers were, in my opinion, and according to my observation, never correct. They were never reached. Those numbers that were announced were never obtained.
Q. Was that also Milch's opinion?
A. Yes.
Q. So far as you know, did he have any discussion with Sauckel on this subject?
A. I have to think about that a moment. I believe I recall that there were discussions on this matter, but I cannot give details on the subject.
Q. Thank you. How good was the work of the foreign civilian workers in the aircraft industry? Were they good workers or poor workers?
A. In my previous capacity as chief for recruitment, I concerned myself in great detail with the effectiveness of foreign workers and I ascertained - and this has also been proved by what the firms said that the efficiency of foreign workers Was good.
Q. What conclusion can one draw, in your opinion, from this? Can one conclude that they felt themselves to be slaves or that they were contented with their treatment?
A. In my official trips to the firms I looked into the treatment, care and housing of foreign workers and in a few cases I also partook of the food that the workers ate. I can state that the care, housing and treatment of foreign workers were good.
Q. That, of course, is true only in the field of the air armament industry?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you receive complaints on the part of foreign workers regarding poor treatment, or how did the foreign workers express themselves to you on these official trips?
A. I heard of no complaints about poor treatment. I had talks with these workers. If they had had complaints, nothing was heard of it.
Q. Do you know that the defendant also Carried out such visits and got information for himself in this way?
A. Yes, I took part in a few trips with Field Marshal Milch and I saw and heard that Field Marshal Milch also talked with the foreign workers and inquired into their welfare.
Q Was he given any complaints?
A. I know of none.
Q. Did Milch have any punitive power over the workers in the aircraft industry?
A. No, not over the industry workers, aircraft industry workers.
Q. Not over the foreign workers either?
A. No.
Q. Could Milch condemn foreign workers to death, have them shot or hanged?
A. No.
Q. Could he put them in concentration camps?
A. No.
Q. Regarding prisoners of war, did he have any punitive power over them?
A. No.
Q. Could he shoot or hang prisoners of war?
A. No.
Q. Could he put them in concentration camps?
A. No.
Q. Witness, do you know of Himmler's regulations regarding foreign workers which he issued to police offices and the SD?
A. No, I don't.
Q. Do you know of Rosenberg's complaints to Sauckel about foreign workers?
A. No.
Q. Do you know of the reports concerning the treatment of Polish workers in Poland?
A. No.
Q. Were reports such as I have just mentioned in the last three questions submitted to the GL?
A. Not that I know of.
Q. Did you work closely and confidentially with Milch?
A. Yes.
Q. Did he tell you about his misgivings, doubts, and needs openly?
A. Individual conversations he also let it be seen that there were considerable difficulties.
Q. When he spoke to you so openly, did he let you know that he considered the war lost?
A. It was difficult and dangerous to make such statements. Openly, of course, such statements were not made but I personally believe from several statements of an indirect nature that I heard him make that he was of that opinion.
Q. You just said, witness, that your work with Milch was carried out well and in confidence, that the relations between you were good.
A. Yes.
Q. But you know that Milch very often had sudden fits of anger and threatened with killing, hanging, or shooting?
A. Yes, That, of course, took place, but in this one must know Field Marshal Milch to understand. If something did not work out quite well, then very often Field Marshal Milch became excited and spoke most strongly, and he spoke very often of shooting and hanging. If everything that he threatened to do were carried out, I would not be sitting here myself.
Q. He threatened you with shooting and hanging.
A. Yes.
Q. Although your relations were good?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that generally known in Milch's circles?
A. Among the closer workers that, of course, was known and it was interpreted as it was intended -- that such and such a matter must be carried on at high pressure and that business had to be attended to.
Q. After he had quieted down again, did Milch confess that he was sorry for having so expressed, himself? Did he more or less excuse himself or apologize?
A. Yes, later he said that he had not really meant it that way.
953 a
Q. In the year 1941 were you already employed in the office of the GL?
A. I came to the office of the GL on 1 November 1941.
Q. Then you know the order of Goering regarding the exchange of 100,000 French prisoners of war from agriculture to the armament industry, or do you know this order?
A. No, I know nothing of it.
Q. Do you know that Sauckel and Ley had an agreement that the DAF, which was in charge of camps, should take over the direction of camps for foreign workers - the DAF, German Work Front?
A. I recall that the DAF was in charge of the camps. When this agree ment was reached I do not know.
Q. Was this measure to the advantage or disadvantage of the foreign workers?
A. The foreign workers, so far as I could observe, were well treated and well taken care of.
Q. Do you know that Goering frequently criticized Milch because reduction was too low; also that Goering had provided the workers necessary to achieve the required production?
A. Yes. I remember particularly a trip of mine to Berchtesgaden with Milch. In this discussion Goering accused Filch most strongly of this.
Q. Now did Milch defend himself?
A. At that time I was commissioned to report telephonically to the offices of the GL and to ascertain the correct date on the situation. These data were available within ten minutes and were submitted to Goering but Goering did not accept them as valid. He said that our statis tics were false and incorrect.
Q. Were those Sauckel's figures on which he based his contentions?
A. Yes.
Q. Was filch interested in the use of foreign workers? Die he give orders, for instance, that their wages should be lowered or anything of that sort?
A. No. The GL could issue no such regulations regarding the amount of wages.
954a
Q You stated previously that Milch made efforts to get German workers; can you tell me more about that?
A German workers were supported or were given bonuses for particular efficiency. Additional payments were made.
Q Witness, you are not answering my question; what efforts did Milch make to get German workers?
A We fought for every single German worker and, when the supply of German workers became smaller and smaller, we made efforts to find workers in the Luftwaffe itself, for instance, the Luftwaffe Intelligence Service supplied six or seven thousand men for the industry, and further, workers who were about to be inducted into the armed forces were formally inducted, and then immediately put again at the disposal of the industry.
Q Witness, were these measure of Milch's carried out in order to protect the German workers or in order to employ as few foreign workers as possible?
A It was important to us to have as many German workers as possible and to keep them.
Q When, at the end of 1941 - autumn, 1941 - you took over office, were there foreign workers and prisoners of war working in the aircraft industry?
A Yes.
Q Was this true when Milch became GL?
A Yes; that was somewhat later.
Q What was the situation in armaments at the end of 1941? German conditions and enemy conditions in air armaments?
AAt the end of 1941, the situation in armaments was such that General Udet had a lot of work to do. He based himself on the development of new models and for a time production itself was neglected and, for all practical purposes, did not rise since the beginning of the war.
Q What was the relation between German and enemy armaments production?
A Enemy production was greatly superior to German.
Q The sharp conduct of the GL was directed toward getting more workers to increase the production, or did it work out in a further sharpening of the enslavement of the workers? 955
A Field Marshal Milch, after taking over office as GL, undertook far reaching measures in order to increase armaments production. Thus, the production in 1942 rose by 47 percent, so far as I recall, as compared with 1941, and in 1943 it rose another 35 to 37 percent as compared with 1942. This increase in production came about as the result of technical measures in the plants from early -- the increase in parts of production, and in making available the necessary technical means to the individual firms. The workers were not overworked in order to bring about this increase in production.
Q Witness, several witnesses have here stated that Milch wanted to build, primarily, fighters. Is it not true that he wanted to build, rather, bombers?
A No; Field Marshal Milch, shortly after taking over office, ordered the fighter production program. We had at that time the plan of building 6,000 fighters a month, and had to work out that plan. This plan was turned down by Hitler, who said, on the contrary, more large bombers should be produced because he intended another aggressive war against England.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will take its customary afternoon recess.
THE MARSHAL: This Tribunal is in recess for 15 minutes.
THE MARSHAL: Tribunal No. 2 is again in session.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Witness, the last thing you reported was that Milch thought there should be more fighters produced in the industrial plants than bombers. Was that due to his desire to defend the homeland, or for fighting purposes, offensive warfare.
A. The reason for this program was that the homeland should be protected; and the evidence which we had was that the air armament of the former enemy countries was so strong that offensive warfare in the air was no longer possible; with those six thousand fighters which the factories were to produce,the homeland should be protected from air raids.
Q. Witness, when Milch became Generalluftzeugmeister, GL, did he have to create a new organization; and what was the reason for this?
A. The organization when he took over the office of the GL was a very difficult one Major General Udet was combined personally the chief of the technical office and at the same time the RCL. The consequence was that twenty-four offices,I believe there were twentyfour, were directly dependent upon General Udet personally, but it is impossible to supervise twenty-four offices by one person. In addition to that there was the fact mentioned by me before that Milch changed the organization according to his point of view. He coordinated several offices, that is to say, the planning board which was the basic condition for the organization, the technical office, which was in charge of technical developments and production, the Marshal's office and the industrial offices and the chief of those offices were dependent only to the person of Field Marshal Milch, and thus Milch had a much better survey of the work done.
Q. Do you know that -- do you know when this organization was change -- when the Luftwaffe Research Institute was released and was put free at the disposal of the RCL?
A The research council was founded for them, and this research council in its work was quite free and was subordinated directly to Goering.
Q That was different from Udets?
A Yes, it was.
Q Were these institutes directly subordinated to Baeumker under Udet?
A Yes, they were.
Q Is it true that Goering was the man at the time who was in charge for Udet?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Is it correct that in the reorganization Baeumker was released and he went to Munich where he started an institute of his own?
A Yes.