THE PRESIDENT: And citizenship in the United States was a prerequisite to such credentials?
MR. DENNEY: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: We are all familiar with what the prisoners of war in the United States did during the war but we can't take that as a part of the record here. Couldn't we get an affidavit from the War Department immediately sent here for this record, showing exactly what prisoners of war were required to do in the United States during the war? That would then eliminate all of this and be a matter which is part of the record.
MR. DENNEY: I shall be very glad to include that in this week's teletype to the War Department, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps there is a high-ranking American officer in Germany who could furnish that without it having to come from Washington.
MR. DENNEY: Well, we can perhaps get it from Washington. If we can't, perhaps we can get it from the Office of the Chief of Military Government, or some comparable high-ranking officer here who has knowledge of the facts.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I think this Tribunal is authorized by the Control Council and by the Ordinance to take judicial notice of established facts. These facts which we have inquired into certainly are public knowledge. I only asked you to sum up, from your own experience, what you knew only to highlight these facts, and I doubt that it is necessary to have any affidavit or any sworn testimony to what is so obviously a fact. However, any testimony which can be submitted for elucidation certainly would be in order.
MR. DENNEY: It might also interest Your Honors to know that the rate of exchange for the mark, for purposes of paying these prisoners of war, was fixed at, I believe, approximately 30 cents.
THE PRESIDENT: We were about to call a witness on that question, Mr. Denney. Thank you. On behalf of the Tribunal, and under the provisions of the Ordinance, the Tribunal will ask Mr. Walter Lichtenstein to be sworn.
ALTER LICHTENSTEIN, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
EXAMINATION BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q Will you raise your right hand and solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this Tribunal will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
A I so swear.
THE PRESIDENT: You may be seated.
Q Mr. Lichtenstein, the Tribunal is interested in knowing and having on the record the plan by which German prisoners of war were paid for any work performed by them as prisoners of war. Will you state whether or not you knew these facts, and if so, how it is that you come to know?
A I think I am familiar with the facts. I was, until the 5th of February, Chief of the Financial Institutions Branch of the Finance Division in Berlin, which had charge of the negotiations relating to the payment of the former or resent prisoners of war. I, therefore, in that capacity, saw most of the cables, probably all - I am not certain of that - that passed between OMGUS and Washington in reference to that question.
As Your Honors are aware, the payment of prisoners of war, if I am not mistaken, was 80¢ per day. Certificates were issued to the prisoners for the work they did at that rate per day. There were two types of certificates issued, the certificate of payment, and then there was also -- it was called a certificate of credit. The distinction between the two is the following; the certificates of payment were issued by offices of the United States Army who were duly authorized to issue documents authorizing direct payment to prisoners of war. The certificates of credit were given to prisoners who were working or living in places whore there were no such offices of the United States Army authorized to issue actual certificates of payment. These certificates of credit had to be investigated and examined later on. The prisoners of war, when they came back to Germany, had these certificates of payment, or in a few cases, certificates of credit. There were quite long negotiations. The Geneva Convention fixes somewhat hazily that the rate of exchange that should be paid should be the official rate at the time of the breaking out of war between the two countries in question. The difficulty of fixing that rate in the case of Germany was that there were varying rates of exchange. I am not able to state definitely how many different types of marks there actually were, but there were a great number. There were the ordinary casual marks which were very little used, which officially had a rate of exchange of 40¢ per mark. There was a mark that was used for exchange purposes, which ran into about 20¢ as I recall. There was a tourist mark which was rated at 25¢. So it was extremely difficult to say what, exactly, was the official rate. As Your Honors are also aware, for purposes purely of our own forces, we exchanged marks at 10¢ -- that is, ten marks to the dollar. That, however, was by no means an international exchange, and it was always insisted on that that was not to be regarded at all as anything more than arrangement for the sake of our forces, merely for internal purposes and not for purposes of international exchange whatsoever.
The result was that the negotiation went on between the finance division at OMGUS and the War Department and the Treasury and State Departments in Washington as to what rate of exchange should be fixed, and at first there was general disagreement. I suppose I need not go into the details of those negotiations. The ultimate settlement was a 33-1/3¢ a mark, and we began paying these certificates of payment on the 13th of January through the newly established Laenderzentralbanken in our zone, which are the successors, in a sense, though not the legal successors, of the old Reichsbank branches in our zone, and they had up to the 15th of February of this year, that is, between the 15th of January '47 and 15th of February, '47 we have paid out approximately 100,000 of those certificates of payment, the total amount of which is in the neighborhood of 7 million marks. In addition we have handled, about 85,000 so-called certificates of credit which, as I explained, we are unable to pay on immediately, but which we examine and return to the States for proper authentication, so that they will ultimately also be paid.
So if you add the two together, we have handled about up to the l3th February, about 185,000 of these cases, and where we have paid out, we have paid out at the rate of 33-1/3¢ a mark which is approximately a fair average of what the mark was before the war. We arrived at the figure of 33-1/3¢ on the basis of the present purchasing power of the mark on the legal market. We did not, of course, take into account the purchasing power of the mark on the black market, but purely on the basis of what the legal price rate in general is as compared with an OPA legal price rate in the United States.
Q Then to summarize, all prisoners of war were paid at the rate prescribed by the Geneva Convention?
A That is correct, sir, as far as my information goes.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Mr. Witness, do you know that the United States of America, or through the United States of America, a large number of prisoners of war were in the hands of the American Army and that they were given to the French Government?
A I do not know that from personal knowledge, but purely from what I have read in the newspapers.
Q Do you know from your conversations and conferences in Berlin if the work of these prisoners of war who were with the French Government is being paid?
A I do not know that from any personal knowledge.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please Your Honors, you will be interested to know I have a son who is 22. He had been a prisoner of war with the Americans. He had been captured at St. Nazaire and he was then captured by the French. He had to work, but he did not receive any payment, because the French could not or did not pay anything to all those prisoners of war, and that applies to all German prisoners of who were returned to the United States zone -- from France, that is.
THE PRESIDENT: That applies to what?
DR. BERGOLD: That applies to all the prisoners of war who were given to the French Government by the American forces after the end of the war.
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, May I say that that, of course would not -- we naturally, if I may be allowed to say this, would not be likely to give our certificates of payment for work rendered to the French Government.
THE PRESIDENT: Obviously. We are attempting to find out the truth about the point which you have raised, not what did the French do with prisoners of war, but what did the United States do with prisoners of war.
DR. BERGOLD: May I add one thing, Your Honor? I did not submit the report by Gen. Marshall with respect to this payment. It does not play an important part in this trial. It plays not a important part, but I submitted it because it says in that report that the value of the work in military installations amounted to so and so much, so that I can deduce from that that these prisoners of war actually were at the military installations. That is the point which I am trying to prove, and not as to the payment.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: You heard the explanation given by Mr. Denney, that when they worked on military installations that they were employed as waiter and as cooks and housekeepers.
MR. PENNEY: If Your Honor please --
DR. BERGOlD: I don't think that this is a sufficient explanation. This does not refer to work in the house or as waiters.
MR. DENNEY: Obviously, if Dr. Bergold isn't willing to take the statement, I will certainly get a statement from the War Department about it. Having some vague familiarity with the United States Army regulations and War Department circulars, having spent six years in it -- the term "military installation" as used in that connection in Gen. Marshall's report is to cover the standard phrase in tho Army, "posts, camps, garrisons, and stations, and I shall get a statement from the War Department to that effect. I will be very glad to submit it, I thought perhaps we could save some time this way.
DR. BERGOLD: Very well, Your Honors; thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, will somebody take bearings now and see where we are on the sea of litigation? We are waiting for the witness Jorwald?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Let's start waiting, then. We will reassemble tomorrow at 9:30 and see what happens.
(A recces was taken until 0930 hours 4 March 1947)
Official transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Erhard Milch, defendant, sitting at Nuernberg, Germany, on 4 March 1947, 1350-1650 hours, Justice Toms presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats. The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal 2. Military Tribunal 2 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: You may proceed, Dr. Bergold.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Court, I now submit as Exhibit 52 the record of the interrogation of the witnesses Neurath and Speer of 19 February 1947. I world ask you to make it a part of the record of this case.
THE PRESIDENT: This transcript -- this exhibit -- will be incorporated in the regular transcript of testimony taken in the case and the pages will be consecutively numbered, or rather, be re-numbered to conform to the current paging of the testimony taken.
DR. BERGOLD: I shall now ask Mr. Denney to submit what he has to submit. I have nothing to submit myself. I have a few supplements but they are not at my disposal yet in English.
THE PRESIDENT: The transcript just introduced in evidence contains the interrogation of the witnesses Neurath, Speer, and also Raeder?
DR. BERGOLD: No, it does not.
THE PRESIDENT: Just Neurath and Speer?
DR. BERGOLD : Yes. I have now been given by Mr. Denney the record of the Raeder interrogation. I would also ask that be incorporated if I could obtain the English translation.
I submit to the Court this Protocol and ask to handle this in the same manner as the Protocol Speer and Neurath.
THE PRESIDENT: This will be incorporated in the same exhibit as the testimony of Neurath and Speer.
1433(a) INTERROGATION OF A D M I R A L R A E D E R 1 February 1947 Dr. Bergold:
"Were you present at the conference of the 23rd of May the new Reich Chancellery when the famous Schmund records were established?
Mr. Denney: Can we have the year?
Raeder: Five days later there were records taken on this conference.
Judge Musmanno: Mr. Denney asked a question. Let's have everything.
Raeder: 1939.
Judge Musmanno: What month?
Raeder: 23 May. All these dates are in my interrogation and known to my lawyer. Dr. Bergold is cognizant of that fact.
Dr. Borgold: I have only a few questions to this protocol, the record of Schmund. It has been noted that Field Marshal Goering was present. Was he actually present?
Raeder: I cannot say that today. It is very probable that he was there but in the protocol Schmund prepared the list of people present. Whether he was actually there, I think it is very likely, but I cannot say for sure.
Dr. Bergold: Did you hear the end of the meeting? Hilch went up to the Fuehrer and asked him whether he would not be allowed to make a report to Goering because he was a substitute for Goering.
Raeder: I cannot recollect that Milch was there at all. Whether he was there or not is entirely unknown to me.
Dr. Bergold: In this protocol at the end there is laid down as a matter of principle and this basic principle reads as follows: first, nobody shall participate or nobody must participate who is not to be in the know. Nobody has to learn more than he has to know. At what time has the person concerned to know at the latest.
Nobody must learn anything any sooner than he has to know it. Do you know that those principles are contained in the so-called basic Fuehrer order?
Raeder: I only know that on this occasion those principles were laid down. They were mentioned and I know that Hitler, as well as people like Himmler himself, has followed those principles strictly. It is clear from those facts that so many people knew nothing of facts which did not concern them directly. Hitler and Himmler were masters in this art and they demanded from all other persons that they on their part adhere to this principle closely.
Dr. Bergold: Isn't this a fault of your memory? Milch thinks that the Fuehrer only said nobody must say anything about this meeting. The gentlemen present must not even discuss it amongst themselves.
Mr. Denney: If your Honor please, I certainly want to allow Dr. Bergold every latitude but now he is putting to the witness what Milch says today. He first asked the witness concerning the meeting and concerning his recollection. Now the witness has given his answer and I submit that the witness' answer should stand, and not that Dr. Bergold should state what Filch tells him today. It is his recollection what happened almost 8 years ago.
Dr. Bergold: The witness was mistaken in his first answer. I must have the possibility to ask him whether he is not mistaken, whether there was not another utterance made at . that time. I am prepared to drop the word Milch.
Judge Husmanno: Dr. Bergold will be permitted to ask the witness to search his memory but he may not indicate to the witness what Milch is saying today. Dr. Bergold may direct the witness' attention to any pertinent incident or episode because we understand that when eight years have passed, it is possible for the witness to overlook something. Dr. Bergold may be him to recall by referring to some specific episode, but he may not tell him what Milch is saying today.
Dr. Bergold: I understand. I want to change my question now. Are you not mistaken that this order for silence that it was made in this form? Wasn't it that Hitler only said nobody must divulge the contents of this meeting to third parties? Gentlemen must not discuss it amongst themselves either.
Raeder: Of course, I cannot remember details today after so long a time. It is very likely that Hitler in the beginning of the meeting, perhaps at the end again, said that no other person must learn about this meeting, but I think and I am positive about it - that this was one of the main points of his speech. Those principles as they have been read hero, they were mentioned here, I am quite sure it was another occasion when they laid down those principles and he acted accordingly.
Dr. Bergold: Is it not a fact that this order of silence was only issued in January 1940 when an airplane that carried secret orders mistakenly made a landing in Belgium?
Raeder: I cannot say anything about this. I cannot recollect anything about this.
Dr. Bergold: In this protocol of Schmund, Japan is mentioned. Can you recollect that in this meeting Japan was mentioned at all Raeder:
No, I cannot recollect anything about Japan.
Dr. Bergold: Is Japan mentioned at all in this?
Raeder: No, I cannot recollect - Japan? I cannot remember at this time.
Dr. Bergold This protocol, and. the Fuehrer also mentions that he doesn't want to have any colonies? Die he actually say that?
Raeder I cannot say that - Hitler in this case sometimes changes his point of view.
Dr. Bergold: In this protocol, Hitler further says the following: "If the Army, in collaboration with the Air Force and the Navy, has only taken the most important position, then the industry production will cease to flow into the bottomless pit of the army's battles, The air Forces and the army first will benefit from it". Do you remember a thought like this after the first important successes that industry should only work for the Air Force and for the Navy and no longer for the Army?
Raeder: At this meeting? No I cannot recollect.
Dr. Bergold: Correct. The thought originally was Hitler's only after the collapse of France.
Mr. Denney: Your Honor, I submit that he can't ask him when a thought originated with Hitler. Good Heavens, you certainly can ask him when he first thought about it, but as to what went on in Hitler's mind!
Interpreter: Dr. Bergold wants to drop the question.
Dr. Bergold: Hitler says further that it would mean a better production for cruisers. Can you remember that this was said in 1939?
Raeder: No, I cannot remember.
Dr. Bergold: Furthermore, Hitler mentioned the fact that the Italians should break through the Maginot Line. Can you remember whether military action of that nature was mentioned at that time?
Raeder: No, I cannot recollect. I don't think it is probable that he discussed military questions of that nature at that time.
Dr. Bergold: That concludes my questions.
Raeder: But I cannot remember the presence of Herr Milch. But the protocol in regard to Goering - this would prove that Goering was present.
Dr. Bergold: That is your opinion? Milch - -
Judge Musmanno: You have asked your questions, Doctor. Certainly anything that the witness wants to add by way of bat clarification so as Dr, of Bergold what he telling said him I think what is Milch perfectly said, proper that has, no place.
Dr. Bergold: He only said he could not recollect -that he only wanted to say that Milch was present.
*1437* Mr. Denney:
Well he says he doesn't know.
Dr. Bergold: That will be all.
Mr. Denney: How long did the meeting last?
Raeder: I cannot say. I can only guess at it from the length of the protocol.
Mr. Denney: Do you know whether it was in the morning, afternoon or evening.
Raeder: I couldn't say that either.
Mr. Denney: Do you remember the names of the people who were there?
Raeder: According to the protocol which I read here it is probable that the people listed were there.
Mr. Denney: But you have no present recollection of the peoplo who were at the meeting?
Raeder: No, it was always the first in command and the General Staff.
Mr. Denney: How many such meetings did he (Raeder) attend between the years of 1935 and 1942?
Raeder: At all meetings, the protocols of which have been submitted during the trials, that means November 1937 May 1938 and then there was August 1939 - -
(Mr. Denney: And I think November 1939) Judge Musmanno:
Where was this meeting held? In the Reich Chancellery where?
Raeder: In 1937 and 1938 in the Reich Chancellery.
Judge Musmanno: In 1937 the Reich Chancellery wasn't yet set up, was it?
Raeder: Yes it was.
Judge Musmanno: Well of course there was one. I mean the present one. There is a difference between ---But I understand the May 1939 meeting was in the new Reich Chancellery.
Raeder: If Hitler lived there, then it would have been there. In August 1939 it was at the Berghof.
Mr. Denney: Obersalzburg. But he doesn't know where the meeting of May 1939 was held?
**1438* Raeder:
Yes, I said it was in the Reich Chancellery.
Judge Musmanno: The 1937 meeting was held in his chalet?
Raeder: No I don't say that.
Mr. Denney: That was August 1939. The 1937 one was hold in the old Reich Chancellery.
Judge Musmanno: Were these meetings usually in the daytime or at night?
Raeder: In the daytime - mostly in the afternoon. The Berghof, meeting was in the morning.
Judge Musmanno: Were they strictly formal?
Raeder: Yes, very formal.
Judge Musmanno: Was there any social angle connected with them?
Raeder: Yes, there was a luncheon given at the Berghof, otherwise not.
Judge Musmanno: Which meeting was that?
Raeder: That was August 1939. All had to travel and that's why the luncheon was given - because they all had to journey to Obersalzburg.
Dr. Bergold: Was there a certain uniform prescribed or certain dress prescribed for these meetings?
Raeder: No. We were our civilian suits.
Judge Musmanno: Oh, civilian suits! That's all.
**1439** INTERROGATION Official Transcript of the proceedings of an INTERROGATION duly had and taken, before the AMERICAN MiLITARY TRIBUNAL No. 2, in the matter of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA versus ERHARD MILCH, Defendant, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, commencing at the hour of 0930, on the 19th day of February, 1947, the HONORABLE MUSMANNO, Judge, Presiding.
THE MARSHAL: You will all rise.
(All stand up)
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judge of Court No. 2. You may be seated.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: The other time we took interrogatories, Dr. Bergold and Mr. Denney, we proceeded as one would in taking interrogatories in a formal way, yet we are permitting both sides all the latitude that would be permitted in regular proceedings in Court.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Tribunal, may I call the witness Constantin von Neurath:
JUDGE MUSFANNO: The witness will be brought in.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: You will please raise your right hand (The witness does, as directed.)
JUDGE HUSMANNO: Do you swear by God, to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, all of which you will answer to on the Last Great Day?
THE WITNESS: Yes, I do.
CONSTANTIN von NEURATH, thereupon testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Will you please proceed to state your first name and your second name?
A Constantin von Neurath.
Q When were you born?
A 2nd of February, 1871.
Q What was your last position in the German Reich?
A I was a Reich Minister Court No. 2. - Interrogation.
BY DR. BERGOLD: Witness, I have only a few questions to put to you:
Q. In what position were you, as of May 1918 until about 1925?
A. In 1919 (pause) in February of 1919. I rejoined the Diplomatic Services. and was at first in that position in Copenhagen; after that, from 1921 on, I was Ambassador in Rome.
Q. Witness, do you know that the Soviet Government did not recognize the treaties which the Czarist Government had concluded with European and other countries?
A. I know that in 1918 or early in 1919, the then soviet representative in Berlin called at the German Foreign Office and said that the Soviet Government would not recognize any treaties concluded by the Czarist government.
Q. Was there also among these treaties, also the one known as the Hague Convention on Land Warfare?
A. Oh yes. The Hague Convention for Land Warfare was also signed by the Czarist government, but the Soviet Government repudiated it.
Q. Was the Geneva, the revised Geneva Convention of 1929, also one of the conventions mentioned?
A. That was the Convention passed before the -- the Geneva Convention of 1929.
BY DR. BERG0LD: Yes, please, continue along. (Pause) Just a minute. One more question, sir.
Q Is it known to you that the revised Geneva Convention of 1929 was not signed by Russia?
A. Yes, that is known to me.
DR. BERGOID: May it please the Tribunal, I hove no further questions to the witness.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DENNEY:Witness, you said it was in 1918 or 1919 that a representative of the then Russian Government called at the Foreign Office in Berlin and stated that the Russian Government as it existed at that time did not recognize any treaties which had been entered into by the Government under the Romanoffs?
A Yes.
Q Were you there at the tine he made this statement?
A No. I wasn't present at the time but it was told to me afterwards in my official capacity of a diplomatic representative of the Reich.
Q You were in Denmark at that time, weren't you?
A Yes.
Q And from there you went to England?
A Yes, hut only in 1930.
Q. Was this announcement by the Russian representative of which you have spoken made in other capitals at that time?
A. As far as I know, yes.
Q. He made it all over the world?
A. Yes. In any case it was generally known.
Q. I asked you before whether or not you knew about the treaties of non-aggression and the amendments to these treaties which were concluded between Ribbentrop and Molotov prior to the time that Germany declared war on Russia in 1941?
A. It was known to me that in August 1939 a treaty had been concluded; that is, the non-aggression pact.
Q. Did you know the contents of the treaty?
A. No.
Q. Did you know about any subsequent amendments to the treaty?
A. No.
Q. Where did you first learn the contents of the non-aggression pact?
A. Only here in the trial, here in this trial.
Q. That is, during the first trial before the -
A. Yes, in that trial in which I was sentenced.
Q. The trial before the International Military Tribunal here in Nurnberg?
A. Yes, quite.
Q. Did you ever know that the question of treatment of Soviet prisoners of war was passed on by the legal authorities in the Wehrmacht?
A. No, I had no connection with that and I haven't heard anything about it.
Q. So you don't know whether or not an opinion was ever asked of them as to what would be proper and what would be improper so far as the conduct of the German military forces was concerned with reference to Russian prisoners of war.
A. No, I cannot give you any information on that point.
Q. So far as you know the question was never raised?
A. No, not as far as I am concerned.
MR. DENNEY: No further questions.
DR. BERGOLD: I have no further questions either.
1443 a Court No. 2. Interrogation.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: The witness may be excused. I suggest that he not be returned directly to the prison, but be held outside the courtroom.
(Witness excused)
DR. BERGOLD: May I call the next witness, Erich Raeder.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: The witness Raeder will be brought into the courtroom.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Tribunal, I have just heard that Raeder isn't here yet, only Speer.
May it please the Court, I am just told that Raeder does not wish to make statements for Milch. There is a certain animosity between those two men as far as Raeder is concerned, not as far as Milch is concerned. He is angry with Milch, why I do not know. They didn't get on to ether, but I an of the opinion if the Court orders his interrogation he should appear. Surely the witness could not decide himself whether we could -
MR. DENNEY: May it please the Court, I move that the remarks just made by Dr. Bergold be stricken. They have no place in this proceeding. He has called the witness, and for him to get into the record a statement about Raeder doesn't like Milch, but Milch doesn't hold anything against anybody -- it's really absurd. He knows better than to make statements like that on the record. I an sure that the Court isn't interested in the feelings between Raeder and Milch, if any, and I am certain that it has no place in this record. I respectfully submit that they should be stricken. I don't mind his saying anything to your Honor that he wants to, but to come here and make long speeches about how Milch and Raeder feel about one another is fantastic.
DR. BERGOLD: Your Honor, for the record, I only wished to explain to the Court why Raeder didn't wish to turn up, and I therefore would ask the Court to order Raeder to appear.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: And you are willing to withdraw your remarks about Milch not being at odds with the world?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, yes.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well. The prisoner Raeder will be ordered to appear before the Court. Dr. Bergold, will you be willing to proceed with Mr. Speer awaiting the arrival of Admiral Raeder?