Since Speer was much more cautions and much more courteous, never having been a soldier, I could allow myself the exhibition of freedom, and unfortunately I did.
Q. Yes, unfortunately. So that statements of that kind of yours were either razed or they were altered?
A. They were only razed, or shall we say that opinion of Speer's only came into force if I stated my criticism of the higher leaders too severely. If, for instance, somewhere Hitler had given assignments or orders which, to my view, were wrong, or even coming from Goering or other people, the minister of the Interior or the minister of the Police or some other person, then I even here would state my frank criticism amongst these people. Usually I didn't have any other possibility to state my deviating opinion, and I had the inner urge, when I was deviating, to say it out aloud. Speer, in my interests, had this struck out, and he told me a few times afterward, "For heaven's sake, do be careful. They will hang you one day." But of course he was referring to the German source. Sometimes when I myself became aware of the fact that in my criticism of these high ranking gentlemen I had gone too far, I would say to this man, "Leave that out." And on one or two or three occasions I said, "Change it. Put some one else in there as having been referred to," because I myself discovered -- mind you, I wasn't always aware that I criticized too severely, but since Speer told me so a few times, I controlled myself a little more. I discovered that I had said too much and that was a mistake, and so I intervened myself.
Q. That is enough. Witness, I shall now put before you with reference to the Central Planning Board one other decree from Document book 2-A, No. 150, Exh. 58. Document Book 2-A, Document No. 150, Exh. No. 58.
MR. DENNEY: It is on page 32 of Book 2-A.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Witness, this document is listed in the index by the Prosecution as the founding decree for the Central Planning Board, is that correct, or what does this document represent?
A. That has nothing to do with the Central Planning Board.
MR. DENNEY: At the time that exhibit was offered we made a correction on the record and said that it referred to the Central Planning Office, not to the Central Planning Board, and if Your Honors wish, I can bring in the page in the record and show where it appears. We called it to Dr. Bergold's attention at the time.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold didn't hear your comment, Mr. Denney.
MR. DENNEY: That is in the record, and you know it. I spoke to you about it prior to the time I made the correction, and there is no sense in misleading the Court.
THE WITNESS: So we are concerned with the Planning Department of the Armament Ministry. The word "Planning" crops up everywhere and might be the cause of such misunderstanding. I should never the less like to draw your attention to one matter in this connection on Page 6. We are here concerned with Speer's entire ministry and its organization, not only the Planning Department. And on Page 6 under "Technical Department" it says the head of Army Defense Districts. And under the following number the reference is to the Armament Supply Department, and the leaders of the armament trustees. Therefore witnesses, including Gen. Vorwald, have drawn your attention to the fact that the entire leadership of the armament industry out in the country -- of the armament business out in the country right from the beginning was in Speer's hands, and that includes the sphere of air armament. Later on in this same document there is a reference to the tasks which those armament commissioner and armament trustees had. That shows clearly that the entire organization of the armament business, both in the military as well the civilian field -- and I mean in this connection military organizations such as the Armament inspectorate as well as civilian March-13-M-4-3-HD-Feldt (Frank-JP sources -- that all that was entirely under Speer.
The organizations in the industrial firms, too, namely, the so-called rings and chief committees, even the chief committees and rings for the production of aircraft, aircraft engines, and instruments were under Speer, so that the final equipment of the airforce which has always been mentioned up to then to the effect that it was in the hands of tne air ministry had, right from the beginning, been subject to that restriction.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. But something appears in this document with reference to this Planning Bureau -- Planning Department. Speer has given testimony to the effect that this Planning Office under President Kohl did have some dealings with the Central Planning Board.
A. Yes.
Q. To what extent did this happen, and were these connections to the Central Planning Board the only sphere of work of this Planning Office under President Kehl?
A. May I perhaps add in connection with this that Speer had a planning office in his Armament Ministry; the GL had the same in his Air ministry. The Central Planning Board, however, had no personnel of its own. And Speer had said, as far as I am concerned, the chief of my planning office Kehl will also become my representative on the Central Planning Board. I had the corresponding man in my planning office and I, too, detailed him to be my representative. Now then, Speer had suggested that the meetings, since they would have to be prepared, would entail the sending out of invitations. There would have to be an order or a program for the meetings, and for these purposes all these gentlemen jointly were to have President Kehl make such preparations. That means that apart from his assignment in the Armament Ministry, President Kehl would also have a small auxilliary assignment on behalf of the Central Planning Board.
If you were to subdivide this work approximately according to its volume, then Kehl would work for the Armament Ministry 99% of his time and just loss than 1% of his time would be devoted to the Central Planning Board.
Q. Thank you. Witness, this document No. 1510PS contains, at the end of the document, a decree dated September 16, 1943, which deals exclusively with this planning office. Five main points are referred to. The first begins with the statement that the Planning Office would prepare the decisions to be made by the Central Planning Board, and under this large heading I there follow seven further subparagraphs numbered 1 to 7. Let me put this before you once again and will you tell me whether the reference made under 1 deals exclusively with tasks of the Central Manning Board such as this Central Planning Office was meant to prepare.
A We are here concerned with tasks of the Armament Ministry and the Central Planning Board having got mixed up.
Q Would you concern yourself with paragraphs 1 to 7? In these paragraphs the Arabic figures 1 to 7--a number of tasks are dealt with.
A Yes; figure 1, the preparation of meetings, of decisions of the Central Planning Board. That is all right; that had been arranged. And this, most of all, the distribution of basic war materials: coal, mineral oils, and such materials. That is all right. But it says, of course, "preparation" because the actual distribution was carried out by the Central Planning Board.
Then, under Figure 3, there is the Planning Office, and it states, 'for the entire war economy, production, and distribution a plan was to be made." This had nothing to do with the Central Planning Board, nor did it ever take place in the Central Planning Board. It was sent entirely a task for the Armament Industry.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold, I think we are wasting time here. Mr. Denney has conceded that this has no reference to the Central Planning Board, but only to the Central Planning Office of the Armament Industry.
MR. DENNEY: No, Your Honor; I said that the index where it says "decree establishing the Central Planning Board" should change to read, "decree establishing the Central Planning Office." Now, as this office is concerned with the Central Planning Board, we certainly maintain that it has a bearing. The only point that I wish to make at the time the document was offered was the fact that it was improperly listed in the index, as is obvious from the date, 1943. It was carried as a decree establishing the Central Planning Board. The Board was founded several months prior to this time, and we don't for a moment withdraw out contention that the Planning Office was concerned with the Central Planning Board.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you do concede however that this is not a decree establishing the Central Planning Board? That is obvious.
MR. DENNEY: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: But you do claim it has some reference to the Central Planning Board.
MR. DENNEY: Certainly, your Honor.
BY DR. BERGOLD (Counsel for the defendant, Erhard Milch):
Q Witness, please, will you continue? This is a technical, a legal discussion.
A Well, I would like to say that this entire publication is only concerned with Speer's task in his capacity of general plenipotentiary of armament problems in the Four Year Plan. This assignment of the general plenipotentiary shares work on Speer's part in his capacity as Armament Minister, has nothing whatever to do with the Central Planning Board. It was a special affair which he had Goering give him the order for. And he says in fact in the document that the Reichmarshal had come to him, Speer, as a man of the Four Year Plan, and had created a planning office. In other words, this plan ning office has now got a third task:
One, it is the Armament Ministry.
Secondly, it had to deal with the preparations for the meetings of the Central Planning Board. That is, when Speer created his working staff for this task. And then, in September 1943, it received an additional task on behalf of the general plenipotentiary of the Four Year Plan for armament questions.
Q Will you go on, please.
A. Consequently, there are three tasks here which seem to get mixed up. If any staff had put a thing like this before me, then the gentleman--including his piece of paper--would have sailed through the door. It is the climax of lack of clarity of the bureaucrat and everything being muddled up. So, I would like to repeat:
Point 1 is okay.
Point 2 is all right, also.
Point 3 has nothing whatever to do with the Central Planning Board but deals with tasks of the Four Year Plan, the plenipotentiary for armament tasks. And I, of course, never had much to do with such armament work.
Point 4. No connection with the Central Planning Board, and deals with questions handled by the Armament Ministry.
Point 5 has no connections with the Central Planning Board.
Point 6. No connections with the Central Planning Board. These are questions of exports and imports, and the Central Planning Board had only one contact with export and import questions; namely, that certain raw materials were partly being exported. For instance, Sweden received coal from us; and Switzerland received coal and steel, and if we were making distributions, then these requirements for exports of raw materials had also to be taken into consideration. Therefore, otherwise apart from that, we had nothing to do with exports, etc. The question, for instance: Which imports were important for war economy was something that only interested the Central Planning Board to the extent that ores and bauxite were being imported from foreign countries. And, even there it only touched us, since it was mostly a matter for the Armament Ministry, and all we wanted to know was whether enough bauxite and enough ore was being imported since a certain number of months afterwards we had to distribute steel and aluminum.
The way we saw our tasks in the Central Planning Board was that we weren't going to meet every three months like newly born babes, and then would have the permission given to us how much raw material there was available and then would say, "Well, too bad we haven't got any more. Let's dish this stuff out." We were always making efforts to apply pressure to it that raw materials, too, such as were to be distributed under our program, would really be in existence. If we hadn't carried out that part of our work, then we would certainly only have had seventy per cent of the amount of the steel which we would actually have managed to distribute.
Point 7 has no connections with the Central Planning Board. It is purely a matter for the Armament Ministry and the armament tasks of the Four Year Plan. This thing was never brought to the knowledge of the Central Planning Board either, to the best of my knowledge. It was only here in the room that I saw this document for the first time; namely, when the prosecution presented it.
Q But under (Point) 4, with reference to which you just said that it had no connections with the Central Planning Board, this document states as follows: "The Planning Office is responsible for the allocation of all labor in the Greater Germany and its sphere of jurisdiction to the individual large main sectors of civilian war economy traffic; food, supplies, and so on and so forth, and will submit this to the Central Planning Board for its decision and it will also statistically deal with its carrying out."
A The only thing that is correct in connection with this is that I know that Speer's Planning Office also kept statistics or had a certain amount of statistics dealing with workers--if I am properly informed. And, of course, I don't know the details of Speer's organization.
Then these statistics in Speer's office were being compiled by the Armament Department, the highest department in the Armament Inspectorate. And Mr. Kehl used to have them supply him with the statistics documents. On one occasion or another, this question was discussed by the Central Planning Board; and, particularly if the question was to be ascertained whether the raw-material-producing industries did have the workers as Sauckel asserted, or whether they did not have them, as was stated by the industry themselves. Apart from this, everything which is contained in this paragraph was never carried through because the only occasion when tables about workers were submitted to the meeting of the Central Planning Board were concerned, we were concerned with tables which Sauckel had filled with his figures. And there we were concerned with utterly different purposes than those mentioned here; namely, this being the 53rd meeting of the Central Planning Board on the 16th of February, 1944, and about that, of course, we shall probably talk at the proper point, and it will be then that I shall explain to you what that meeting on that date was aiming at. It had nothing whatever to do with the task that is being laid down here. And, apart from that, Speer's Planning Office never brought this task to the knowledge of the Central Planning Board.
Q. Witness, you are saying that you didn't notice it. This would mean that you never approved this.
A. No, because it never had anything to do with me. It is a purely internal instruction in the Armament Ministry, and I am convinced that Speer did not read it either, even if he did sign it, because Speer would not have affixed his name to such a muddle.
Q. Witness, was Speer in his capacity as Reich Minister for Armament and War Production at all in the position to create a decree for the Central Planning Board, anything which would have been binding upon the Central Planning Beard.
A. He, he could not have done that. Occasionally - and I know of several instances; sometimes he would tell me and sometimes he would forget it -- Speer did issue some decrees. I knew that his ministry was particularly keen on publishing decrees. There were too many clever men there, and they had to issue many decrees. Maybe there were too many exports there, too and the lot of them always wanted to publish some decree each -- something which I never was interested in my sphere. I think I have never issued a decree. At any rate, insofar as these decrees touched upon the sphere of influence of the Central Planning Board, Speer alone used to sign these decrees, and he did not consider it necessary to inform us on the subject. You must consider that he too was terribly overburdened with work. Occasionally he said also to write Milch's and Koerner's name at the bottom, and this applies to the work regarding the Central Planning Board. It was put neither before me nor Koerner, as far as we know. Speer was a little generous in that respect, I would not have had any objections if he had told me, "I put your name at the bottom too, "but it is all right" because alter all, he had to know that."
Q. Well, maybe you did not quite understand my question. Was Speer in a position to publish decrees which would give tasks to the Central Planning Board which it did not originally have?
A. He, he could not.
Q. So he did not have authority to give instructions dealing with the type of work of the Central Planning Board?
A. No, he could not. For, if the Central Planning Beard had been properly formed 1829 A organically speaking, then a Hitler decree would have been necessary.
I might remind you that we have such a decree for the Four Year Plan, for the Plenipotentiary for Labor, and for similar institutions. As far as the Central Flaming Board was concerned, something like that was never planned. It was merely a matter that was passed on by hearsay.
Speer sometimes interpreted such things the way it happened to suit him in other words, in his capacity as Armament Minister. As is understandable that Speer often struggled to extend his powers. I said yesterday that maybe it is easier to work if you make all the decisions then if you have to ask too many other people, and possibly Speer, as I have now seen--certainly he had not tell me so earlier--had once again in connection with the Central Planning Board put out feelers looking for the possibility to expand.
Q. From what points of view were raw materials distributed?
A. I can answer briefly by stating that Hitler had laid down the order of priority and at the some time had given orders dealing with individual points. For instance, it was very often said in that in this month the Navy would get 20,000 tons of steel of a certain type in addition to their allocation. Those were the rules which applied to us in the Central planning Board.
Apart from that, we were in touch with all the large priority holders, that is why there are these passages on material in the minutes of the meetings. We had them give us the justification for their requirements. It was our very difficult task to deny everybody a little of everything, because total demands were always much higher than the amounts we had. We could not just simply say, "We are going to deprive everybody of 20 per cent." We had to introduce the finer touch. We could not take as much array from the army industry as we could take away from others, but, on the other hand, we could not leave the agriculturalists without steel. We also had to set assignments of certain number of nails or screws for the civilian population. To subdivide this was a matter which was impossible to carry out without knowing the interests of the parties, and when we had their views we would then carry through our tasks and distribute.
Q. Witness -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold, we will take a recess at this time
THE MARSHALL: This Tribunal is in recess for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
1830 A
THE MARSHAL: Tribunal No. 2 is again in session.
Q. (By Dr. Bergold) Witness, after having discussed, rather, in connection with the decree concerning the Central Planning Board, while we have discussed the labor situation, I want you to answer my question now, this and what powers the Central Planning Board had with reference to the plenipotentiary general for labor, Sauckel?
A. The Central Planning Board had no power of issuing orders to Sauckel.
Q. Who was it that gave Sauckel's orders?
A. Sauckel's office had been formed by Hitler's decree. However, after that it was taken into the four-year plan so that formally speaking Sauckel was under Goering immediately. However, he received his orders from Hitler himself.
Q. As you said, the Central Planning, had no powers toward Sauckel?
A. None whatsoever.
Q. However, don't you know that Speer tried to win influence over Sauckel. Did that occur in his capacity as a member of the Central Planning Board, or did that occur in his capacity as Armament Minister?
A. It only occurred in his capacity as Armament Minister.
Q. Can you tell us something about the struggle between Speer and Sauckel, or Sauckel's struggle with Speer? Can you give me some more details about that matter?
A. I only know very little about these questions. I know that Speer himself took himself or reserved himself the right, with respect to the laborers brought by Sauckel, to distribute these laborers, that meant to distribute them to the central industry branches. Sauckel with respect to that stated, and it was his power to do so, that he was the one who had the right to distribute these single laborers to these single factories or branches of industry. Speer also brought his wishes to the Fuehrer's attention, and conferences took place between Speer and Sauckel and Hitler. However, Speer did not got through with his ideas because Hitler's view of Sauckel's position was that he should support it.
I know that from what Speer told me.
Q Witness, do you know the decree of Hitler of the 30th September 1942, concerning the Plenipotentiary General for Labor assignment?
DR. BERGOLD: Your Honors. This is Document No. 1903, Exhibit No. 17, from Document Book No. 1-A of the prosecution.
A Yes, I know the contents of this decree. However, at the time I did not receive a copy, at least in my office didn't. However, I knew his tasks, and I knew that he was his own boss in this field.
Q Witness, how did you explain to yourself this decree at that time? It says here for the execution of this task, in order to carry out the task they are entitled to issue directives to competent military authorities in charge of the labor mobilization and wage policy.
A I considered this a far-going measure, too far-going measure which was contradictional with the administration of the German policy at the time, because prior to that it was absolutely impossible that a civilian organization could issue orders to a military organization.
Q. What power was given to Sauckel by such a decree, was he depending on someone apart from Hitler?
A No, he was his own boss, but he depended only on Hitler and on Goering pro forma, but only pro forma. At the time that he wanted to relieve the Field Marshal in this position, one should not have the impression that someone was going over Goering's head, but Goering had the impression already that something was going over his head, and he took care not to speak in those questions because otherwise he would have had a struggle or a fight with Hitler. This also applies especially to Sauckel's case.
Q If here the chief of the OKW signed, namely Keitel, would that mean that this power, Sauckel's powers to military positions, applied to all other divisions, also to the Luftwaffe?
A Of course, it was, otherwise Keitel's signature as OKW would not have been affixed underneath this document. Hitler was he only one, generally speaking, who signed these things, but only in special cases where he wanted to stress the point for a special field as in this per ticular case with the military field, the higher man also had to sign with him.
It is a sign that in this order by Hitler, Hitler wanted to put a special stress on the point that the military organization offices were under Sauckel's orders in this particular case. It was something entirely now, and so new that Hitler wanted Keitel's signature underneath his.
Q. Thank you.
Q. Witness,I shall come now to the documents which the prosecution has introduced, namely, in the document books I-A, 2-B, 2-A and B. Prosecution has introduced Document Number 1375-PS, Exhibit Number 4-A, in Document Book Number I-4. This is a telephone call of Frank who was the Governor General for Poland; namely, a phone call from Frank to Goering on 25 January 1940. This is a letter of 25 January 1940 and concerns the directives concerning the exploitation of the polish workers; namely, for the preparation and transportation of at least one million Polish workers for the Reich. Do you know this decree and this pact between Frank and Goering? Do you know anything about them?
4. This is the first time I heard about it. At this trial.
Q. I shall proceed now to Document Number 2233-PS, Exhibit Number 4-A. At the same time I can take care of Exhibit Number 4-B, which is Document Number 2233-PS-B. Witness, those are extracts from Frank's diary or a record of the meeting of department chiefs. Do you know anything about these discussions or anything about this diary?
4. Not until these trials started.
Q. I shall go over to Document Number 1352-PS, Exhibit Number 5 of 16 May and 29 May 1940. This is a report concerning the confiscation of Polish agricultural enterprises, signed by Kusche. Do you know anything about that?
A. Not until I came to these trials.
Q. The next document Number is EC-68, Exhibit Number 6, on Page. 19, your Honors, from 6 March 1941. This is a confidential letter of the Minister for Finance and Economy of Baden and it contains directives on the treatment of Polish farm workers of Polish nationality. Do you know anything about this decree or these directives?
A. Not until I came to these trials.
Q. The next document, 3044-PS-B, Exhibit Number 6-A. Those are directives and instructions concerning the treatment of Eastern househole workers. Did you ever know anything about that?
A No.
Q. Did you ever have any servants, any Eastern servants, at home?
A. No.
Q. Document 3005-PS, Exhibit Number 7, from 26 August 1941. This concerns a letter of the Reich Minister of Labor to the Presidents of Regional Labor Offices concerning the use of Russian PW's. Do you know anything about this directive of the Reich Minister of Labor?
A. Not until I came to the trials.
Q. The Document Number EC-104, Exhibit Number 8, of 31 October 1941. This is a secret memorandum of Keitel concerning the use of prisoners of war in war industry. Did you ever hear anything about that decree? It came from the Chief of the OKW, of the Command of the Armed Forces of the Wehrmacht.
A. Until these trials, no.
Q. Don't you think, such a decree should have been sent to you?
A. I know nothing about the context for the time being.
Q. I shall submit this decree to you, and I want you to read the distribution on the back of the document, and I want you to tell me if any office which was under your control is mentioned there.
A. No, no agency under my command is mentioned here. It only went to the Quartermaster General, because it is also here the question of work concerning the Wehrmacht; that is, clearing up work in the East. It is also clear that the GL has nothing to do with it because it says here that for the Arbeitseinsatz the following may be considered: For example, the Wehrmacht as one and number two, the Reich Minister for Armament and Ammunition. He is a man who came before the Armament Minister. The name was mixed up. And as third is mentioned the Reich Minister of Labor. The GL even in his industry had nothing to do with labor assignment questions.
Q. Was the Quartermaster General of the Luftwaffe under your orders?
A. No. He was directly under the Chief of the General Staff. Quartermaster General is not G. L.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold, on the distribution list at the end of this document, the fourth line, what does that report refer to, L/General?
DR. BERGOLD: That means Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe, Quartermaster General.
Gen. Qu. means Quartermaster General.
THE PRESIDENT: Who was that?
Q. (By Dr. Bergold) Who was that?
A. The Quartermaster at the time was General von Seidel. He was immediately under the Chief of the General Staff, and he again was under Goering's orders.
Q. In other words, the GL had nothing to do with that?
A. No, nothing whatsoever.
Q. Did the Inspector General - because you were Inspector General at the time, weren't you?
A. Yes.
Q. Did the Inspector General have anything to do with that?
A. No, nothing whatsoever.
Q. In other words, they were two entirely different offices?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. What you said yesterday applies to these offices; namely, that they ran parallel to each other but had nothing to do with each other?
A. Yes, that is quite correct. They were entirely different fields of task. The Inspector General was, as can be clearly seen from his name, the Inspector General for the troops. He had no power of issuing orders to the troops because the Commander in Chief was in charge of that. He just inspected the troops and wanted to investigate their general situation; namely, with regard to everything concerning the troops.
EXAMINATION BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. What official position did you hold on October 31, 1941, witness?
A. I was Inspector General.
Q. At that time you had no connection with the Luftwaffe?
A. The Inspector General - I was the Inspector General of the Luftwaffe; that is, I inspected the troops of the Luftwaffe, and only of the Luftwaffe.
Q. But you had not yet taken up your task as deputy to Goering?
A. I was never a full deputy of Goering since 1937.
Q. Was Inspector General the only post that you held on October 31, 1941?
A. Yes, indeed. Only toward the end of November I became GL. I can add one things. I was State Secretary on top of that.
Q. (By Dr. Bergold) Did the State Secretary, however, have anything to do with the Luftwaffe?
TEE PRESIDENT: No, we understand that.
Q. (By the President) You became GL at the end of November 1941?
A. Yes.
Q. (By Dr. Bergold) Witness, from all these documents which are up to the 7th of November, 1941, did your office of Inspector General have anything to do with the labor assignment?
A. No, nothing whatsoever.
Q. Witness, you visited troops very often and inspected them. Did you see their general situation in Poland, the situation which prevailed there with respect to laborers?
A. I was in Poland just during the Polish campaign. That is all because during the war I carried out the inspections only at the front, and only with a very few exceptions at home; namely, in German itself. Therefore, I knew nothing about the situation concerning the workers, and I saw nothing, and apart from that, this field of task did not belong to the field of task of the Inspector General.
Q. Witness, I shall now come to Document Number 3040-PS, Exhibit Number 10. This is a secret decree and secret orders of Himmler concerning the commitment of manpower from the East. Do you know this secret decree or these secret orders of Himmler and were they brought to your attention?
A. Not until these trials.
Q. Document Number 1435-PS, Exhibit Number 11. This document contains a speech by Speer which he held on 24 February 1942 to the Gau leiters, concerning the legacy of the party member Todt.