Court No. 2. Interrogation
DR. BERGOLD: Yes.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well.
DR. BERGOLD: I myself do not wish to ask Speer any questions but Mr. Denney probably has some, so therefore I hand it over to Mr. Donney right away.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Yes.
ALBERG SPEER, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Will you please raise your right hand? Do you swear by Almighty God to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth and for which yon will answer on the last great day?
THE WITNESS: I swear that I shall speak the pure truth and nothing but the truth and answer for that on Judgment Day.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well. You may be seated.
EXAMINATION BY MR. DENNEY:
Q. I just have one or two questions to ask. Do you recall that we had session similar to this in this court a matter of a week or ten days ago
A. Yes.
Q. And do you remember we had one u stairs in a room two or three days before that?
Yes.
Q. I would like to direct your attention to the first session in point of time, the one which was held before his Honor and Dr. Bergold, end myself, with you present in one of the interrogation rooms. Do you recall that?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Do you recall Dr. Bergold asking you these questions and you making these answers? He said: "'Question: How did the Air Force Industry got its workers?" It was at the beginning of the session. And you said, "The Air Force Industry requested its workers from the Generalluftzeugmeister. Simultaneously the firms made their requests to the labor offices. From 1942 on the requests of the different forces of the Air Force were collected and presented to me. There is a decree between Sauckel and me which was drawn up in 1942".
Court No. 2. Interrogation.
Do you recall that question and that answer?
A. Yes I do.
Q. Then you were asked by Dr. Bergold: "Therefore, from 1942 on the Air Force Industry's requests for workers for the armament inspection were directly announced to you?" And then I said, "He is again assuming the answer in his question" -- speaking to Dr. Bergold through his Honor -- "I suggest that the question he is posing is contrary to the answer the witness has just given. He" ... the witness ... "Said the channel was through the Generalluftzougmeister. And then Dr. Bergold said, "I am trying to prove whether the witness might have made an error before."
And then his Honor said, "Then you should ask him directly," Do you recall that.?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. And then Dr. Bergold said -- Dr. Bergold now -- "Did you mean that the requests from 1942 on were not given by way of the Generalluftzeugmeister but directly to you?" And then you said, "I am sorry, but that is not so. The requests of the Air Armament Industries for laborers were presented to Milch and he did not permit anyone to take this right away from him till March 1944" Do you remember all that?
A. Yes.
Court No. 2. Interrogation.
Q. And those statements are correct?
A. Those are correct. I would like to add that our organization was very involved and complicated, and it was very difficult on the basis of the decrees available to reconstruct the precise picture. Moreover, it should be taken into consideration that from time to time the system of request for labor was changed and that after that it was found that the new system did not lead to the desired results of a more precise request for labor, and a new system was needed, but, on the whole, what I said, is correct.
MR. DENNEY: No further questions.
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q. Her Speer, I would like to understand the machinery by which labor was brought into Germany beginning with the request by any particular department for any particular number of workers. Let us suppose that someone appeared before the Central Planning Board and said, "I will need fifty thousand men for a factory that I am about to construct." How please tell us just what happened. Would you issue an order to somebody? Would he then in turn order someone else, and how did these workers finally then arrive in Germany?
A. If somebody on the Central planning Board requested labor, the Central Planning Board did not issue an order that these workers must be supplied, but the Central Planning Board agreed that those workers can be supplied. An order by the Central planning Board, Sauckel would not have accepted. That is a definite fact. A large area of workers -- in many cases of labor request, my Mini cry collected the requests after the decree with Sauckel of September, 1942.
It is quite clear that the requests for labor did not occur in those long intervals between the meetings of the Central Planning Board, but this had to happen in much shorter intervals and in a constant collaboration with the people concerned, for the enemy air raids and changes in programs which became necessary because of the military situation made these changes very often necessary. Therefore, for the whole of our armament industry and also for certain branches of production outside armament that there were in my ministry, we decided on so-called framework contingents, and priority lists were drawn up. I do not know whether you are interested in that part.
Court No. 2. Interrogation.
Q. Well, not particularly. I want very succinctly a statement as to the steps which ensure after the declaration of someone before the Central Planning Board that he needed a certain number of workers. Who was informed of this request? Who authorized the call for the workers? Who submitted the demand? Who then at the other and gathered the workers? Not in detail -- I just want the steps in movement from the Central Planning Board until the men actually arrived.
A. The Central Planning Board did not deal with that matter anymore afterwards. Let us say the request of labor, say, of the coal mining industry -
Q. Yes.
Q. -- was reported to Sauckel by the coal mining industry itself. Therefore, one could call a meeting of the Central Planning Board as a statement for Sauckel that such labor is very important for the coal mining industry, and that as far as possible he has to supply them. That is necessary within the framework of economic planning, but beyond that the Central Planning Board did not pursue the matter any further or was not in a position to do so even.
Q. Well, did you know there at the fountain head of labor -- because if you made the request originally, that is what started the machinery in motion -did you not know that bringing in workers forcibly from occupied territories to work in the war operation constituted a violation of international convention? Weren't you aware of that right at the very source?
A. What I say now is not meant to be an excuse. I really did not know it. Up to the beginning of my trial here, the regulations of international law were unknown to me, and nobody ever drew my attention to it that such regulations exist; but I want to say once more I don't say this in order to excuse myself, here, but it is a fact that it was like this.
Q. Well, you were certainly quite aware from the decision of the International Military Tribunal just how illegal and improper that was.
A. I took note of it there, and, after all, I received my punishment for it now.
Q. Well, could you not have followed the same line of reasoning adopted by the Tribunal, which, after all, was based upon International convention?
Court No. 2. Interrogation.
You were a man of education, a man of great cultural attainments and of great technical ability, and it was because of those attributes that you were chosen by Hitler to become the Minister of Armaments. Could you not have reasoned that out by yourself? Wasn't it very clear and obvious?
A. I believe that the general knowledge of the principles of international law can only be brought to the knowledge of a wider circle of legal laymen if after a war legal offenses committed during the war will be revealed by a public trial, and thereby a more general knowledge of offenses against international law becomes known. You know that I was an architect and that such knowledge as I had in the field of law I merely received from newspapers, and I know, for instance, all about various legal commitments of architects which on the building side are fairly extensive.
I would say that a groat mistake has been committed hero by omitting after tho first World War to establish international legal conditions by trials, and at the same time to adjust it to the developments of technical warfare instead of which after the first World War the whole question of the deportation of labor, for instance, was decided by the highest German courts, and as far as I know, this decision of that court was not particularly clear. This is how the basis of ignorance is laid in the field of international law, and I believe that many a mistake and many a violation in this war could have been avoided or at least mitigated if a general knowledge of international law had prevailed.
Court No. 2 Interrogation.
Q. Would you say that had there been, following the first world war, trials such as these we are now conducting, that you then would have been aware of the illegality of the practices in which you were engaged; or rather, you would have been aware of the illegality of such practices and that then you would not have participated in them?
A. I am of the opinion that trials against the main responsibility after the first world war would have enlightened public opinion and myself on the basis of international law. I do not wish to go as far as to say that I would not have committed those breaches of law for it is very difficult to excuse one's self after the event by saying one had acted only through ignorance of international law. Nevertheless, I should say that observing international law would have been possible without, while I myself, that without me, less time in my armament drive. Of course only that fact of international law is concerned which deals with the recruiting of labor, whereas the other factor, the so-called legal looting of occupied territories as it is called, there is no doubt that that would have been necessary for an increased output of armament violations of international law as far as the assignment of labor was concerned were in my opinion not only not necessary, but unreasonable, he would have achieved more if we had observed the international law. This is a very complicated topic; I do not know whether you are interested why this should he so.
Q. Well, I merely want you to enlighten me, if you care to, on this specific angle. You are considered a specialist. Now, had there been an international trial following the first world war, and the decision in that trial had been very clear and specific -- as was the decision in this trial -- you would have then known the limitations very specifically on the conduct of war; and having then known Court No. 2 Interrogation.
that you couldn't do certain things, would you then have refused to participate as you did in this world war as a specialist? Having been put on notice that you cannot take labor from other countries forcibly and throw them into the armement industries -- knowing all that, would you then have refused to give your services to Hitler in the prosecution ff the war?
A. The first part of the question I wish to say if a trial and a clear 1450 a Court No. 2 Interrogation.
decision had happened after the first world war, then certainly somebody would have put the international law and regulations on my desk; that is to say he would have informed me of it. The second question, it is not possible to answer the second part of the question so simply, for when I started my office in 1942 the war in all directions had already left all given international regulations. Please don't misunderstand me if I point out hero that economic warfare was waged by the British and Americans with extreme concentrations by bombing warfare which was not a matter of national reprisal because it had industries in occupied territories. On the other hand the war with Russia had gone beyond the normal limits, if I can call it that. It is difficult for me to say who was the guilty party.
Q. I do not refer to that period after the war had reached such a limit that there were no restrictions. I am speaking of before the war started -- whether a man of your education could have been enlisted in a practice which you know and would then have known was entirely illegal and contrary to international law as well as the precepts and dictates of humanity.
A. I would not have participated if I had known the whole material which became known in our first big trial as far as documents were concerned. If I had known that Hitler since 1938 had prepared for war and tied his own fate to that of his people to such an extent that his end was tho end of his own nation -
Q. I didn't intend to enter into such a long discussion on this. All I had in mind was this --- that if those in your classification as specialists would have observed international law, and would have known clearly what international law was -- the restrictions, the limitations and so on -
Court No. 2 Interrogation.
and if we assume that these specialists were men of character; that 1451(a) Court No. 2 Interrogation even though Germany had at the helm a navigator who had become mad, that he could not have run his ship on to the rocks without the crew of specialists who assisted him in the shipwreck--because you would have refused to ship on a venture which was so obviously bound for the rocks, internationally speaking.
Is that true or not?
1451 b Court No. 2 - Interrogation
A. That is so without a doubt.
Q. And would you go so far as to say that had there been an international trial of the proportions of the one we have just had, and these which are now following, after the first world war, that the knowledge which resulted from the decisions which would have been handed down after the first world war would have become so well known because of the punishment which would have been inflicted, that might have served as a bar against a second world war?
A. I do not wish to say that it would have been stopped and Hitler -
Q. If Hitler could not have had specialists -- Hitler could not have done this himself. Hitler had to have a Speer and had to have the others who were condemned in the first International Military Tribunal. He could not have done it alone.
A. That's quite clear but these specialists were taken into their part of the war without realizing what the connections were and an International Trial is not a wholly sure method to prevent a new war but I think it's a very essential contribution for that purpose. I am unable to answer your question by saying if Hitler would have been unable to find collaborators if after the first World War these trials had been held, but I do wish to say it would have been much more difficult for him and for further reasons that our specialists were not very intimately connected with the party circles.
Q. Well, I think that's a point I wanted to find out; that if the specialists had refused to collaborate, knowing that the contribution of their services meant completely an illegal undertaking then Hitler could not have conducted a war by himself and therefore there could not have been a war?
A. In technical warfare the specialists are decisive factors to wage war but the specialists are not to be regarded as being principally responsible parties. They do not have the knowledge of the background, the political background, which is necessary in consideration of Hitler's untruthfulness, for them to see where he is taking the ship.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Do you have any questions, Dr. Bergold?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, sir, I have. Witness; your Honor. The Judge has asked you how it would be if a factory, for instance, would need and would request 50,000 workers which way and in which channel which would have been done up to the point in foreign territories when 50,000 foreigners would have been gathered and taken to Germany for that purpose, isn't it correct that such a request -- that such a pro posal of bringing 50,000 workers to this factory did not mean that 50,000 foreign workers but meant only that 50,000 1453 a Court No. 2 - INTERROGATION workers altogether were brought into the Reich?
That meant German workers as well as foreign workers and which were actually over in Germany and employed there and also new recruits? That included all that, did it not?
A. I was deflected from my answer in that particular case and I bid not really give an answer to the question. If 50,000 workers were requested for a certain branch in our industry the oldest request, a figure which did not show how many of them were Germans and how many of them were foreign workers. The bigger part of the workers which were supplied came from what was called fluctuation. Fluctation meant the transfer of workers from one plant to another. It's quite clear that production is in a constant development. One always follows the other and in some cases one orders particular workers and then it loses that importance for military reasons. The plan is that some workers available are constantly released and sent on to different plants or industries. A second force, where the newly mobilized German workers mean the women workers and a third force, was the sending of foreign workers already in Germany and a fourth force, the prisoners-of-war who were also sent on from one branch to the next and the fifth force was such that some that came in abroad newly from foreign countries. How these various workers from these various forces were distributed among branches, my offices nor the factories who had requested workers could find out about. That was a matter purely which had to be decided by the labor exchanges because it took an enormous amount of work to find the proper workers for the proper branches. Therefore, labor assignments always had a basic conduct for it's right -- the demand that this right must not be interfered with. The whole force of workers, both in agricultural industry, coal mining always wore uniforms under the directions of the labor office in the lower regions and neither the factors nor ourselves had any influence on how many foreign workers came into various factories.
Q Thank you. Witness, do you know that when the French Government, which at that time existed in Paris, had issued in order for the calling up of Labor -- compulsory labor?
A These details became known to me during the trial. It was my task and very enormous and at that time I did not bother much about details.
I cannot say anything about this on my knowledge.
Q Witness, you must know this fact; at the time when you had discussions with Mr. Bichelonne, French Minister, I should think that the existence of compulsory labor service in France should have been discussed at that time.
A Perhaps I misunderstood you. I said quite clearly last time that I knew about the fact that occupied territory workers were taken to Germany against their free-will. The various districts, etc. are not known to me.
Q No. I mean if such a decree had been issued at all. That's what I am speaking of.
A I had to assume that but I wasn't actually informed about it.
Q Did you consider the French Government, which at that time was in Paris, France -- did you consider it a regular government?
Court No. 2 - INTERROGATION
A This is the same sort of question which His Honor put to me too. I had no basis to find out whether the French Government was legal or not, because these are problems of International law which are beyond me as a laymen.
Q Witness, do you not know that the Government Petain had been recognized , and was recognized by the American Government, and that the American Government had an Ambassador, if I recall correctly -- and I am net sure I can pronounce his name -- at that time, Mr. Leahy, Admiral Leahy?
A I know that, but I must say frankly that I did not spend my time thinking about whether the French Government was legal or not.
DR. BERGOLD: Thank you. I have no further questions.
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q Herr Speer, what I was endeavoring to elucidate, or have you elucidate for us, was not whether you knew if a government was legal or not, if it was recognized internationally or not. I wanted to draw your attention to something quite more fundamental, and that was the employment against its will of a population in a war activity, all of which was prohibited by international law. And if you and all the specialists in the Hitler regime knew of the limitations and were thoroughly aware, and the knowledge was so widespread that you couldn't help but know that it was illegal and that you would be punished if you did it that is, to bring in workers from another country and put them into war operations -- if that were a matter of such general knowledge that every college man and every person that was well read would know of it, would Hitler not have had difficulty in obtaining such a crew to run a ship, regardless of what he may have had in mind as to the illegal port which he hoped to attain by that voyage?
A I can only speak about the time from which I worked, that is to say, from 1942 onwards. In that time, I am sure that if these legal matters had been made quite clear a large number of technicians or industrial leaders would not have collaborated to the extent they did if they had realized the illegality and the possible punishment.
I would like to stress this particularly for the period from 1943 onwards. From that time onwards, many intelligent people realized that the war had been Court No. 2 - INTERROGATION lost, and from that time onwards it would have made a great impression if in former trials heavy punishment was meted out.
Not everybody would have been impressed; certain people would have followed the old line, out the majority of so-called specialists, certainly -
Q -- would have recognized the illegality of what they were asked to do? I understand you to say that the majority of the specialists would have recognized the illegality of what they were asked to do and would have refused.
That is what I understand you to say.
A Yes, that is what I wanted to say.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well. Thank you very much.
MR. DENNEY: To keep the record straight, I assume that Dr. Bergold doesn't maintain that the United States, after the capitulation of France, maintained an ambassador in Paris, but rather it was to the Vichy Government.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Yes. Dr. Bergold, you are aware of what Mr. Denney has said?
MR. DENNEY: To the Vichy Government.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes; it was an ambassador or a minister, admiral Leahy or somebody.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Yes, Well, it certainly wasn't in Paris.
DR. BERGOLD: No, no, no. Yes, I mean the Vichy Government; I mean the Vichy Government, yes.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: That is all. Thank you.
(Witness excused.)
DR. BERGOLD: I am just told, may it please the Court, that Herr Raeder is suffering from Hernia and that the doctor has misgivings for him to make statements today. He must be examined first, and perhaps he will be ready in a few days. It is clear, Your Honor, that under these circumstances I shall do without his interrogation today, because Raeder is over 70 years old and it would not be humane to force him to appear while he is ill. I assume that Your Honor will approve, and also that Mr. Denney will approve.
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honor pleases, I have a suggestion. The testimony which was just elicited from the witness Neurath is in substantial agreement Court No. 2 - INTERROGATION with what he testified to before Your Honor at the first session which we had in the interrogation room.
Now I have a complete record of the testimony which was taken before Your Honor with reference to the witness Raeder. I will be glad to submit this to Dr. Bergold in German for his examination, and if it is agreeable to him we can stipulate it into the record that this witness, if called, would have testified to these things; and perhaps that will dispense with the, necessity cf having to hold another one of these sessions.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Well, we will leave it this way, that you will give to Dr. Bergold your record of what transpired that day, and he will examine it. If he finds that the information he would like to obtain from admiral Raeder is contained in this report and that suffices for his needs, naturally, by stipulation, that can be introduced into the record. If, however, after he reads this, he finds that he still wants to question Admiral Raeder, then we see no reason why admiral Raeder should not be called and required to answer.
It is very obvious that the questioning will be a very short one; and whatever Admiral Raeder is now suffering from is not of such a serious nature that he cannot be taken away for a half hour to go anywhere in the Court House to answer a few simple questions put to him.
So we will leave it that way, and then you will inform the Court -- and I am addressing myself to you now, Dr. Bergold -- whether, after reading what Mr. Denney gives you, you want to call Admiral Raeder. If you do, you so notify the Court and he will be called.
DR. BERGOLD: Very good.
MR. DENNEY: I didn't mean to imply that this was to foreclose him; I As just trying to be helpful.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I am entirely aware of that, and we are very grateful to you, Mr. Denney.
MR. DENNEY: Yes, Your Honor.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: But I just wanted to have on the record that we are not influenced at all by what transpired here this morning as to the desires or the feelings cf this recalcitrant witness. If he is needed he will he called, and he will answer. He can't control proceedings by any particular aversions or Court No. 2 - INTERROGATION revulsions which he may feel with regard to what is now legally here for adjudication.
DR. BERGOLD: I agree completely, and I am very grateful to Mr. Denney for his proposition.
There is one point which I do not feel very happy about. Perhaps the Court can help me here. Raeder's statement has not been put under oath, but if Mr. Denney is agreed with me that he will submit it as a document to the Court, then that will probably not make any difficulties.
MR. DENNEY: I will be very glad to have it translated and furnish it to Dr. Bergold, and, provided he wants it, get such additional copies as may be necessary to properly incorporate it into the record.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: As it stands now, Dr. Bergold, it is entirely up to you. After you read this document, you determine whether it suffices or not. If it does, then we will see that it gets into the record. If it does not, you notify the Court and Raeder will be brought into Court.
DR. BERGOLD: Thank you very much.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I am now informed that he is now on the way up.
MR. DENNEY: Perhaps we could take a recess.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: All right, we will take a recess for ten minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
Court No. 2 - INTERROGATION
RUDOLF EMIL HERMANN BRANDT, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO: You will raise your right hand. Do you swear by Almighty God to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth for which you will answer on the last Great Day.
THE WITNESS: I swear.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well, you may be seated.
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, May I state -- Your Honor, may I say that for reasons of health I do not feel up to being interrogated now.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Well, will counsel please come up to the Bench.
(Discussion ensued outside the record.)
JUDGE MUSMANNO: We will allow counsel for the witness to enter the court room.
DR. BERGOLD: Your Honor, shall we wait until counsel comes in?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Yes, where is he. Where is defense counsel?
OFFICER OF THE GUARD: He was in court number one.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Colonel Turner said he was going after him.
DR. BERGOLD: The witness said that counsel is not present, not only here nor upstairs. Perhaps inquiry could be made at the defense counsel room. If I were given the opportunity to telephone I could find out for you, Sir.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Well, Colonel Turner has gone for him. In the meantime I think it is advisable to tell you, witness -- you are advised that you are not obliged to answer any questions, or make answers which may incriminate or degrade you.
THE WITNESS: Yes, I know that, but at the moment I have no control over what I say. I should like for that reason to refrain from answering any questions, because at the moment I am really not in a condition to do so.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: How long have you been ill?
THE WITNESS: For several weeks. It has been true that I have been losing weight constantly, and have been exhausted, and correspondingly my mental strength is not available in a sufficient measure. In my own case during the last few days I have not been able to do anything with my own.