DR. BERGOLD: Thank you. I have no further questions to the witness.
MR. DENNEY: If your Honor please, I have just one question DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. DENNEY:
Q Did anyone while you were a prisoner of war ever show you a copy of the German statues?
A What kind of statutes?
Q German penal law.
A No, I never knew anything about it whatever. I knew about the German statutes, German penal law I knew, because I had studied some comparative law when I was studying law.
MR. DENNEY: No more questions.
THE WITNESS: May I add something concerning the document which has been handed to the Tribunal. The OKW answered to the Scapini Mission, who had written that letter, that if the Article 31 had been strictly applied, prisoners of war would have had to put up with a very hard situation, that is, they could have been sent into salt mines, into coal mines, into the factories for synthetic gasoline, and near to stoves with very high temperatures, and I have to add that the Germans have not deprived themselves of this privilege of putting prisoners of war into the factories producing synthetic oil and synthetic gasoline, and, also to put them near high temperature furnaces; and, I can even remember one of my comrades who had left the Arado factory, and who worked at the Mittel Deutsche, at the Central German Metal Works, which was at Brandenburg, who had to work very close to one of those high temperature furnaces, and I even remember of an Italian worker who had committed suicide by throwing himself into the melting stove. That, of course, is not an excuse here, because if these facts do not constitute a violation of Article 31, then they are a violation of article 32 of the Geneva Convention.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: What effect did your work and your living conditions have on your health and the health of your comrades while you were working there in this foundry or factory?
THE WITNESS: I must say that there were numerous cases of tuberculosis, and there were not many of my comrades who died, but many workers, French workers, did come home to France with tuberculosis. But in order to clarify that I have to say that for a certain time we received food parcels from home, and as soon as these food parcels stopped, we were saved by the fact that the American Red Cross would send us other parcels, after an agreement was reached with General De G**lle at Algiers.
DR. BERGOLD: May I ask one more question, your Honor.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, do you know that at the present moment in France German prisoners of war -- that is, Germans who were prisoners of war in France also worked in mines?
A I know that, but I think it is all a question of whether the German POW's in France are treated the same way as the French POW's used to be treated in Germany. It is all a question of humanity, and I think that we Frenchmen have a reputation of being more humane than the Germans.
DR. BERGOLD: That might be arguable.
MR. DENNEY: The witness may be excused if there is no further examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, you may be excused.
(Witness excuse)
MR. DENNEY: I don't know whether or not Dr. Bergold has General Vorwald here.
THE PRESIDENT: This, I think, terminates the testimony of the French witnesses in the proceedings of the trial.
MR. DENNEY: Yes, your Honor, please.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr: Bergold, will you look carefully and see whether you have General Vorwald.
DR. BERGOLD: General Vorwald is not here as yet, as I learned from Mr. Jackson. However, I have a request, your Honor, I would appreciate if there would be no session tomorrow. You know what is worrying me now. Here I all day long in this court, and I have no possibility whatsoever to take care of my own personal affairs, particularly with regard to this thing that occurred today. Your Honor will understand that owing to my great concern with regard to family affairs, I would appreciate if there will be no session tomorrow, in order to cope with the difficulties which have befallen me at the present time.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, if General Vorwald is not here tomorrow there would be nothing we could do anyway, and furthermore, you would have no time to talk to him. What do you think, Mr. Denney?
MR. DENNEY: I find no reason to disagree with Dr. Bergold's request, your Honor, please.
THE PRESIDENT: It is a little difficult to make any plans because we do not know what happened to your last witness.
I think if he is not here by Monday, you will have to proceed with the defendant's testimony, or some ether testimony, as we can not be delayed any longer waiting for this witness. Now on Monday morning we are to have the arraignment in another case which has been assigned to this Tribunal, and that will take perhaps an hour or an hour and a half. There are fifteen defendant but after that is over we will go ahead with this case at eleven o'clock and we shall go ahead whether Vorwald is here, or not. If he is not here you will have to be prepared to go ahead with whatever further testimony you propose to offer.
This Tribunal will now recess, and this case will recess until Monday morning at eleven o'clock. The Court will recess until Monday morning at 9:30 A.M.
DR. BERGOLD: Thank you.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 0930 hours, 10 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 10 March 1947, 1330, Judge Toms presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Military Tribunal No. 2 is in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the court.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Tribunal, before I ask you to call the witness which we have waited for, the witness Vorwald, I would like to thank the Tribunal personally for having helped me and for having given me two days off in order to get rid of the difficulties I was in. I now ask to be allowed to call the witness Vorwald.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will bring the witness Vorwald into the courtroom.
The witness will raise his right hand and repeat after me. Will you please raise your right hand?
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.)
You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Witness, I ask you to speak slowly, and after each question I put to you, I ask you to make a little, short pause before you answer, because it is necessary in order to enable the translators to finish the English translating of my questions.
A. Yes.
Q. Will you please state your full name.
A. Wolfgang Vorwald.
Q. When were you born, witness.
A. 6 May 1899.
Q. Where were you born?
A. Beeskow in Der Mark.
Q. Witness, what was your last position in the German Wehrmacht?
A. Commander of the Luftgau VII, Munich.
Q. Do you know the defendant Milch?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you spot him in the Tribunal - in the courtroom? In that case, I ask you to point to him in order to show you recognized him.
(The witness pointed out defendant.)
DR. BERGOLD: I ask that it be stated in the record that the witness has recognized the defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will so state.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Since when Aid you know the defendant Milch?
A. Since 1937 and not since 1941.
Q. What position did you hold in 1937?
A. In 1937 I was on duty in Wiesbaden and I met Field Marshal Milch there.
Q. Witness, at that time did you especially notice Milch?
A. Yes.
Q. Will you please always make a short interval before you answer. Now, Please give us some more detailed information.
A. During a conference Field Marshal Milch was present, and for about an hour I sat opposite him, and during this evening, during this time, Field Marshal Milch developed his plans for France. This I remember especially then, at that time.
Q. What position, witness, did you hold in the year 1941?
A. On the 3rd of November I was Chief of the Technical Office under Generaloberst Udet.
Q. When did Milch succeed to the office of the GL?
A. After Udet died, about 20 November 1941.
Q. Please, witness, explain to the Tribunal what activities the Office C had at that tine in the framework of the Office of the GL.
A. The Technical Office at that time was responsible for the development and supply and proving of apparatus of the Luftwaffe.
Q. Was there a difference in the sphere of work which the former office - that is, most of the time it was directed by Udet - did?
A. The sphere of the work was the same, only the organization fundamentally had been changed; various sections responsible for proving, but now these sections were separated into development sections on the one hand and supply sections on the other hand. The testing was immediately subordinated to the Chief of the Technical Office.
Q. And this chief of the Technical Office, so-called Office C, you were his chief, weren't you?
A. Yes.
Q On this occasion I would also like to talk of the DVL. Do you know of the DVL, Witness?
A Yes.
Q Was the German experimentation station for navigation subordinate to the C office?
A No.
Q Was the DVL an independent office or from what office did it depend otherwise?
A It was a registered association.
Q But before that industry office there was an agency that was presided over by a certain Mr. Baeumker, an agency which had a certain supervision over the DVL?
A. That was the former Section LC-1. Its task was the research. That is, they issued directives to the research department. At night time this department was despoiled and did not exist anymore.
Q But at that time there was a so-called research council. Was that the agency which succeeded the LC-1, or was that something quite different?
A That was a new classification where the research council of the Luftwaffe was subordinate to the Reichsmarshall Goering immediately.
Q That means that it was not subordinate to the GL?
A No.
Q What was the importance and the field of tasks which this research council had? Did it receive directives from Goering or how do you conceive and describe its field of tasks?
A Yes, it became subordinate to Goering; and we also approached him with the request to take care of the research in special fields. That research department at the important developments of the GL mostly had sent one representative.
Q During these conferences did this man repeat directives and listen to what problems were of interest for the GL, and did he then on his own initiative start research?
A He did not receive any evidence but was requested to take interest in special fields in the Luftwaffe research which were important for the GL.
Q Witness, you see a chart here upon the wall, and on this chart this DVL is shewn at the left side under the name of Dr. Baeumker. Can you see that right on the edge of it? The left one is Ruff.
A Yes.
Q And there is a direct channel of orders. Do you see that? Was this draft the correct draft?
A No, it is completely wrong.
Q I think you have already shown why it is wrong; or do you have anything to add?
A Baeumker was not in Berlin at all since 1941 but in Munich and was in one research institute. Beckmann and Christensen, who are on the top of this draft, were chiefs of the section on the master position.
Q Did you have any connection with the DVL in your capacity as a superior officer?
A No, nothing at all.
Q Witness, since when was Milch concerned directly with the armament during the war?
A From the 20th of November, 1941.
Q In his capacity as GL, had he any connection with the Four Year Plan?
A No.
Q Your agency, Sauckel and his offices, the different labor offices of the district, were they directly subordinate to Milch or to your own office?
A No.
Q Did Milch or the GL have any connections with the execution of Sauckel's tasks, that is, the recruiting, the drafting, the transportation, the labor and everything else concerning the foreign workers? Did he have anything to do with that?
A No.
Q Witness, now, referring to the fact that during the war there were several locations at which labor was needed, could you tell me now in what manner the air industry received its workers?
A Yes, After a plan on the recruitment, on the supply of aircraft and motors had been drafted and had been given to the aircraft industry, it was the task of the various plants which had to supply the workers necessary for this plan.
They had to supply them to these labor offices. When they were unable to recruit these workers, they had in the course of their duty to send reports to the superior agencies and organizations in the GBA Sauckel. In the various Wehrkreise there were inspections of armaments which were immediately subordinate to the armament ministry; and their task was in proportion to the urgency of the plans of the Wehrmacht to bring about an adjustment of workers in their work and plans through a tour of inspection.
Q. Witness, in what manner did the GL have anything to do with this question of labor?
A. The GL was informed of the labor question as well as the raw material question by the aviation industry. These plans were given their requirements of raw material and workers to the GL. In the second draft when they were at the GL, that is, in the planning office, the GL, there was an office which took note of these affairs specifically for the various contracts with the aviation industry referring to payment; and it had to be tested in that sense with prices. It was also necessary that the number of the necessary workers had to be determined. This agency also chiefly took tasks which the office of labor supplied; and it served to the GL in that way. At discussions of Goering and Hitler over these workers, this question of workers was supported by them.
Q. Why and in what manner did these supports come through?
A. I remember that very often from the higher instances; that is, from Goering and Hitler we received instructions that Sauckel had brought in all the workers, saying, "Why can't you carry out your program?" Then in our information we said there was a possibility of trying it out to see whether Sauckel had actually supplied us workers or not. In most of the cases the labor had not been supplier. The figures which Sauckel gave were very doubtful to us from the very beginning.
Q Why and in what manner did that support for labor come through?
A I remember that very often from higher instances, that is, from Goering and Hitler, we received instructions that Sauckel had brought in all the workers, so why can not you carry out your program, and then we called the information center when we had the possibility to try out and see whether Sauckel had actually supplied all the workers, or not. In most cases labor had not been supplied, and the figures which Sauckel rave were very doubtful there.
Q Witness, did you check these figures on raw material and workers, that is, the figures which came to you in from Sauckel. Did you check the necessity for the requirement of these laborers?
A That was not my task but the task of the plannint office, that is, Office A, and on this requirement of raw material I can not show it, because it does not exist there. It was this office's part to take care where the counting of raw material needs were necessary for the program, and also were the statistics of workers.
Q And these requirements, did the office check the requirements, and diminish it?
A Yes. That is, these raw material figures were counted very closely, and also the figures of labor were cheeked, because we had certain experiences, and know what the production of certain number of planes, or motors, would need; that is, how many laborers would be necessary, and this planning office, therefore, generally deducted some workers, and the figures which after wards were checked were figures of justified requirements of the industry, and we supported these figures in the higher instances, that is, in the ministry -- the armament Ministry.
Q You speak of Armament Industry, that is Speer, isn't it?
A Yes.
Q Therefore, Speer had the last decision in these matters, that is of the raw material quantities, and of what members of labor would be granted for production. Did he have this last decision?
A The Armament Ministry granted the raw materials, and it distributed this for the GL, that is, it gave the total amount to the GL, and the distribution in particular was carried out by the Planning Office.
So far as Labor is concerned, Speer -- that is the Armament Ministry had no authority, but it was the General Plenipotentiary of Labor, Sauckel, who had the authority.
Q We already often have spoken here of the Armament Industry, and the GL, we have heard about it very often. Could you tell me in order to clarify this matter once and for all, what is the difference so far as you know where the authority is concerned, what is the difference between Speer's and Milch's?
A Speer was the Armament and War Production Minister, and he was responsible for the total armament of the Navy, or the Army, and also for the ammunition production, of all the parts of the armed forces. The GL on the contrary was only responsible for the final armament for airplanes motors, airplane equipment, and also for a few special ammunitions for the aircraft. The Armament Ministry decreed that he had quite a great organization of many branches; on the one hand he had the authority in the civilian section, over all main councils and divisions, and, in every army district he had a plenipotentiary for armament which was under his direct supervision - - - who was under his direct supervision. The military sector of the Armament Ministry had the Armament Inspectorate, which was under its supervision. That machinery was not at the disposal at all of the GL.
Q Did Speer not have also, concerning the Luftwaffe, the authority in the Armament in sofar as he had the raw materials for semi-finished products?
A Yes, this was one of the main tasks, that is, the raw materials and the semi-finished products, because of the allotment of these two sectors always was important for the program - - decisive for the program.
Q Isn't it correct also that Speer's armament task also included the construction sector?
A Yes, Speer had his own construction sector, or construction offices, and also the whole organization -- the Todt Organization was subordinated to him.
Q As far as the direction of the armament tasks were concerned, from whom did Speer receive his orders and directives?
A Directly from Hitler, sofar as I know, he went every week, at least once or twice, to Hitler in order to make an orderly report. We were very sorry to see that Goering did not take such an interest there, and Fieldmarshall Milch did not have permission of Goering to go to the Fuehrer directly.
Q Could you know, or point out to me the difference between Speer and Milch sofar as the armament tasks are concerned?
A The Armament Minister Speer in contradiction with the GL had an official influence on the question of labor insofar as the Armament Industry had the Armament Inspectorate, which was subordinated to him; therefore, the armament Ministry could give orders to this Inspectorate, and that therefore, it was possible if the program was especially urgent, to give orders to the Armament Inspectorate that it should ship workers from one plant to another. For instance, to withdraw from the Navy factory workers and send them into the Army factory, and to withdraw workers from the Air Armament and send them into the Navy Armament. This authority was not the authority which the GL held.
Q Witness, it is not only a belief but actually occurred also that Speer took workers from you without having his permission confirmed previously?
A Yes, that had been done. It had been even often.
Q Was Milch connected in any way with prisoners of war?
A No.
Q What were the channels of the orders, and who disposed of the prisoners of war?
AAll prisoners of war, that is, prisoners of war in our part of the army force were subordinated to the OKW, and from the local viewpoint existing in Germany, they were subordinated to the deputy commander of the district.
Of these army commands, each of them had a special general who was in charge of the POW matters.
Q If prisoners cf war were assigned its workers, on whose orders was that done, by the GL for the Army Air Armament, or by whom?
A No, the GL had no authority to do it, but the workers were distributed by the General Plenipotentiary for labor) and the POW's were assigned by and were acquired by a plan for certain tasks and had to be accepted.
Q Was the GBA Command that caused that, or was it the Armament Command
A I'll have to think it over, this organization. Insofar as I remember the assignment, the POW's in the industry was caused by Hitler himself, and the industry was forced to accept these POW's, but who actually procured the POW's I can not tell you. Anyhow, the GL and its organs had nothing to do with all those questions of laborers and of the POW's.
Q Witness, we just heard from you the difference between Speer and Milch in reference to the labor questions. Now Speer as a witness testified that Milch did not participate to present the recruitment of labor for the aircraft industry, is that correct? Is that correct?
A That is not correct. Can only be a question of supporting the requirement of labor by the industry during these programs, that is, at the armament Industry and the GBA.
MR. DENNEY: Your Honor, I object to Dr. Bergold impeaching his own witness by calling another one. It so happens that the prisoner Speer gave some testimony which he did not like , so now he is trying to impeach Speer by asking this man whether or not what Speer said is true, which he can not do. He can ask what he knows, and tell him what Speer said and if that is right, and if it is proper.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Tribunal. I have to say that in Germany it belongs to the basic right of a lawyer to put to the witness the testimony of another witness, and to have him take his position as to that testimony. If it should not be the customary law in America, then I ask the Tribunal again -
MR. DENNEY: I appreciate Dr. Bergold's lecture on German law -
THE PRESIDENT: Say it again.
MR. DENNEY: I appreciate Dr. Bergold's lecture on the German law, but my impression would be the flag behind Your Honor is the one to govern, and not the one with the Swastika on it.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute.
DR. BERGOLD: It was also customary in the times of the Kaiser.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I am afraid that it is customary in the United States. I know of no rule which forces a defendant to be bound entirely by the testimony of one witness so that the witness can not be contradicted by another. The form of Mr. Denney's objection is that one witness may not be confronted by the testimony of another and be asked whether or not it is un true. He can be asked however, "Is that a fact?" It is a rather nice distinction, sometimes without a difference. It is perfectly proper to state to a witness that another witness has stated certain facts, given certain testimony, and then to inquire of the second witness, "Are those the facts?" You may not say, "Is he telling the truth?" That is not permitted.
DR. BERGOLD: I shall take notice of this difference in the future.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, do you know whether Speer knew of the organization of the GL and knew it well?
AAt the time we rather gained the impression that he did not know exactly the organization of the GL.
Q Witness, just before you said that the GL had no direct connection with Sauckel. Do you know that Sauckel was obliged to make monthly reports on his work to the GL?
A No, I have no knowledge of that.
Q Did you have personal, connections in your office with Sauckel?
A No, I had not.
Q Can you tell us how the labor entered into the aircraft industry?
AAs far as I remember from my conferences with my colleagues of the Planning Office and also from the conferences with Field Marshal Milch at the GL, the labor situation during our activity -- that is, from 1941 to 1944-did not deteriorate. That is, the number of laborers did not increase. On the contrary, in cases of illnesses, the GBA had to cover these requirements, but the number of laborers was not improved or increased.
Q How was this sphere of workmen in the armament industry?
A Well, about 500,000.
Q Witness, we once talked about 2,000,000 workers in the aircraft industry.
A That figure can not be correct. If you speak of 2,000,000 you have to count all the other sectors which were not directly connected with the air industry; that is, ammunition, for instance.
Q Do you know that in the time before the war there was a statistical plan in which armament industries which were only part of the aircraft industry but also of the army, were incorporated in the aircraft industry?
A Yes, we always objected to this method of counting.
Q In your opinion, what actually comprises the air craft industry?
A First of all, the aircraft frameworks and the aircraft motor works; navigation instruments and radio instruments and other equipment of the aircraft, navigation instruments, and also small parts of the aircraft ammunition. That is, especially secret ammunition which could be produced only in special plants.
Q This conception makes you think that the number of workers employed was 500,000?
A Yes.
Q And these workers also included foreign civilian workers; do you have knowledge of that?
A Yes, during my visits to the plants I have seen Russians and Frenchmen
Q What was the out-put of these foreign workers?
AAs far as the work of the female Ukrainian workers especially, was concerned, the industry was full of eulogy.
Q During your visits did you speak to those people, asking them about their situation, their difficulties and complaints?
A Yes, I always did that, as an officer should do with his troops.
Q And what knowledge did you gain from these questions?
A These people were satisfied with their fate. After all, our aim was, above all, to increase the output, and, therefore, the Field Marshal and I always insisted on fulfilling the justified requirements of the industrial plants with respect to food and clothing and lodging for these workers.
In the beginning there were probably some difficulties, but later on we never had complaints insofar as this question was concerned.
Q Did you hear any complaints from those people concerning the manner in which they had been recruited abroad or the manner in which they had been brought to Germany?
A No, I never heard any complaints.
Q During these visits at the plants, did Milch attend these visits, too?
A Very often I was with him and went to these visits.
Q What conclusions did you draw from the fact that the output of these foreign workers was so satisfactory, as far as the conduct of foreign workers was concerned?
A If the output was so good as the plants told us, then the treatment of these foreign workers-- food and so on-- must have been good.
Q During these visits, did you see that foreign workers wore kept behind barbed wire?
A No, that can not be correct either. I can recollect that in 1944 when we in Berlin had a Russian maid, that this girl could go into her camp every evening. At that camp she knew some people from her home place, and she met them there, and she often visited them.
Q Did you have knowledge that in the air armament there were POW's who were employed?
A Yes, we took them ever when we took over the office in 1941, and we found them at the time. They were already in the air armament.
Q Can you give an example of where you saw Russian prisoners of war?
A In the air factory Obertraubling near Regensburg.
Q What kind of airplanes were constructed there?
A Big transport planes, ME 323's, gliders which later on became a motor plane with six motors.
Q Was that a fighter plane?
A No, I said that it was a mere transport for freight.
Q Did you hear anything about the output of these POW's? Did you receive reports?
A Yes, on the spot I talked to foremen and production managers, and they confirmed that these Russian workers were very good at their work. They had difficulties in the beginning, especially with translations of the technical terms, but afterwards they got along pretty well.
Q Did you hear anything of bad treatment of prisoners of war?
A No, in our area we heard nothing like that.
Q But, outside of the GL office, what did you hear about it?
A Only in 1941, after the first big battles in Russia, there were some talks in the headquarters in which I was at that time, that there was not enough food supply for the large number of POW's
Q Was that on purpose at that time?
A I could not tell that.
Q Witness, you always talk of Russian prisoners of war. What do you know of Frenchmen?
A The French prisoners of war, we also had them.
Q Did you hear anything about mistreatment of these prisoners of war? Did you hear any complaints?
A No.
Q Did you have anything to do with French civilian workers? You always talk of smaller groups.
A. Yes. I know that, for instance, in the precision work of the metal works on air armament industries, which was a part of the Siemens plant in Berlin, Spandau, there wore French women workers.