DR. BERGOLD: Yes, I see.
THE PRESIDENT: But at any rate the Tribunal wants to assure you that we will do anything that is physically possible to assist you in the presentation of your proof.
DR. BERGOLD: Thank you, Your Honor.
MR. DENNEY: In view of the short time remaining, I wonder if we could adjourn now, and take up the cross examination of the witness in the afternoon session?
THE PRESIDENT: Would you prefer that?
MR. DENNEY: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the Court will recess until 1:30 PM
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until 1:30 PM.
( a recess was taken until 1330 hours).
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1335 hours, 3 February 1947.)
PAUL KOERNER - Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DENNEY:
Q If Your Honors pleas,witness, from what date until what date were you State Secretary in the Prussian Ministry of State?
A From April 1933 until April 1945 I was Undersecretary of State in the Prussian Ministry of the Interior.
Q When did you become State Secretary in the four year plan?
A When the four year plan was created in October 1936.
Q How long did you hold this position?
A I was in that position until the end.
Q Which was approximately May 1945?
A Certainly up to April 1945.
Q Yes, things were a little tense in Berlin after that.
A I left Berlin on 20 April 1945.
q Where was your office?
A My office was on Leipzigerstrasse.
Q What were your duties in connection with Goering?
A My duties were those of an Undersecretary of State - in those two fields of work.
Q Did you see Goering every day?
A I saw Goering formerly in the earlier years almost daily and later less frequently, and during the war only occasionally when he came to Berlin or when I went to the Fuehrer's headquarters.
Q How many times a month did you see him from 1939 on, the beginning of the war?
A There were times when I didn't see Goering for months on end.
Q When did he tell you that he wanted you to become a member of the Central planning Board?
A That was in the Spring of 1942.
Q. Did he speak with you personally about it?
A. Yes. I came back from sick leave and when I reported back to Goering on that occasion Goering told me that at the suggestion of Speer the Central Planning Board had been created, and I, at Goering's wish, should become a member.
Q. How long did the conversation last?
A. That, of course, I can't say now, bat that question was discussed among other questions by Goering.
Q. You stated on direct examination that there was no decree in connection with the formation of the Central Planning Board.
A. No decree, no.
Q. You're sure of that?
A. It is quite certain that it has not been created and a decree certainly not been published.
Q. Then you believe that the Central Planning Board came into existence by reason of Goering consenting to the establishment of the Board and the Board thereafter came as a matter of course?
A. Yes, the Central Planning Board was created by --
Q. Just answer the question witness.
A. Yes.
Q. Did you ever go to a concentration camp?
A. I went to a concentration camp once.
Q. When?
A. Either in 1942 or '43.
Q. Where was it?
A. That was in Auschwitz.
Q. Did you ever go to Dachau?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever go to Dachau?
A. No.
Q. Buchenwald?
A. No. Otherwise I know of no concentration camp. I do not know any concentration camp.
Q. What was the occasion of your visit to Auschwitz?
A. I made that trip in order to see the work being done in that area. I wanted to inspect the construction.
Q. Did you inspect the camp?
A. I went to the camp very briefly at the end of the inspection of Auschwitz.
Q. I am sorry I did not get the end of the answer.
A. I went briefly to that camp at the end of my inspection tour.
Q. You have stated that the sole task of the Central Planning Board was the distribution of raw material?
A. It was the agency to distribute raw materials.
Q. You said it was not in any way connected with labor?
A. It had no right to give orders and the distribution of labor was not among its tasks.
Q. You have also said that the Central Planning Board was solely an information agency.
A. I said that the Central Planning Board distributed raw materials. In that field it also had the right to make decisions. In other fields it did not. If the question of distribution was dealt with by the Central Planning Board, this happened as I said once before, from a purely informative point of view.
Q. In other words, they could make no decisions at all with reference to labor?
A. No. The Central Planning Board had no right to make decisions.
Q. Do you believe that the workers who came into Germany from foreign countries came voluntarily?
A. I know that the workers who were brought to Germany from foreign countries were recruited on a voluntary basis.
Q. All of them?
A. I beg your pardon?
A. All of the laborers who came from foreign countries came on a voluntary basis?
A. I certainly remember clearly that up to 1943 all workers --
Q. Witness, that is not my question. Answer it. I am not talking about 1943. I am talking, about workers who came from foreign countries. I will repeat the question. The workers we came from foreign countries, you believe, came voluntarily?
A. I think that the biggest part of them came on a voluntary basis.
Q. The biggest part? How many came involuntarily?
A. I do not know. I do not know the figures.
Q. But you had no reason to believe that any of them did come involuntarily, any substantial number?
A. I am convinced of that.
Q. And you have never heard anything about the use of force in the procurement of foreign labor?
A. No. I have not heard anything about that.
Q. From whom did the Central Planning Board receive its orders?
A. The Central Planning Board did not need any orders, because its tasks were quite clearly defined.
Q. So, to your knowledge, the Board or any of its members never did get any orders.
A. Not that I know of. I maintain Central Planning Board was never given any orders.
Q. You spoke this morning of the labor contract which was negotiated between GBA and the French Labor ministry?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall that?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember the name of the French Labor Minister?
680a
A No. As I said this morning, I do not know this German-French agreement except from the press.
Q Do you know who was head of the French state?
AAs far as I know that was Monsieur Laval who was Prime Minister, and head of the state was Petain.
Q Did you know Field Marshal von Flieder?
A Yes.
Q Did yon ever talk to him?
A I may have spoken to him.
Q Did you ever talk to him about any orders he issued in connection with workers being obtained by the German Army in the eastern front?
A No. I did not do this.
Q Not having done that, you would not know the basis for any such order that he issued, would you?
A No. I could not tell you this.
Q When did you first hear the defendant say the war was lost?
A If I remember correctly, that must have been in the year 1943.
Q Were you present when he told Hitler the war was lost?
A No. I knew this conversation between Hitler and Milch purely from reports.
Q Reports from Milch?
A I believe it was Milch, and also, I believe Speer talked to me about this conversation.
Q This occurred in 1943?
A I believe so. I cannot commit myself to a definite date, but I am almost certain it was in 1943.
Q Shortly after Stalingrad?
A I believe it was after Stalingrad.
Q Witness, you have a very bad memory . I will show you Document NOKW 307. This is a document headed "The Reichsmarshal of Greater Germany, Delegate for the Four Year Plan, Berlin, W9, 27 June 1943.
The State Secretary, Z. P. 170 g. Rs." Underneath that is written "Special Delivery, Immediate Delivery, Top 681-a Secret, Two Copies."
The Second Copy bears the Defendant Milch's initials on the left hand side. On the right hand side is the word "Speer" written in red pencil.
"I have just received the inclosed urgent telegram from the Reich Marshal, I enclose a copy and ask you to fix a date for a discussion of the question." It is signed "Koerner."
The first copy went to Speer and the second copy went to Milch.
The enclosure reads "To the 'Central Planning' for attention Staatssekretaer Koerher, Berlin, Loipziger Platz 11.
"Secret, urgent, immediate delivery.
"In a report made in connection with the air raid on the Muels Chemical Werks, the General Plenipotentiary for Special Matters connected with chemical production, has requested the following measures in order to guarantee the production of Buna.
"a) For partial reconstruction of Muels:
"l) 1000 men from the Todt organization are to be made available or the spot. The central offices and the local offices of the Todt organization are informed as to the types of skilled labor required.
"2) Further, the assignment of approximately 250 specialized mechanics is necessary.
"3) About 4000 tons of iron must be provided for the reconstruction.
"b) It must be immediately guaranteed, by the assignment of 40 specialists namely mechanics and electricians, that the work still necessary in connection with the completion of the Buna Factory in Ludwigshafen will be finished. All the offers made to obtain the above-mentioned manpower from labor sources have led to very little success. Continual delays arise in finishing the job the result of which is that the full capacity originally planned for the middle of 1943 will now only be reached at the end of 1943 at the earliest "c) This request holds good to an even greater extent of the Auschwitz works which are under Construction in Upper Silesia.
There is a shortage of mechanics and electricians here too, just now, to carry out the installations rapidly in order that the production of carbides and acetaldehyde can be 682 (a) started by the end of 1943.
It is equally urgent that the following steps of the Buna synthesis be corrected by an immediate increase in staff, which can he done by February or March 1944.
"d) As, on principle the chemical industry has too little iron at its disposal, it was decided about 2 months ago, that, owing to the situation with regard to iron the annual Buna output of the Buna-Works in Upper Silesia must be reduced from 30,000 to 20,000 tons that is to say by one third.
"In view of the coming situation, the works in Auschwitz should be run to the full extent envisaged in the old planning and treated as 'Grade I Prierit.
"Only in this way does it seem possible that German rubber production will not collapse entirely owing to increase air-raids.
"Besides, the general plenipotentiary for special matters regarding chemical production considers it necessary to establish in the East a new unit with a production capacity of about 20,000 tons of Buna yearly.
"The Reich Marshal has ordered the Central Planning to examine without delay the requests listed here and providing they are necessary, to take all measures required to carry them out immediately. The Reich Marshal awaits a report that steps have been taken.
"The Personal Advisor of the Reich Marshal of greater Germany Dr. Ing.
Goernnert "Ministerialrat."
MR. DENNEY: We offer this in evidence as Exhibit 126, if your Honor please, and will furnish the necessary copy to the Defense.
Q. Do you recall receiving that message?
A. After hearing it read here in Court, yes, I remember it now.
Q. Your memory has been refreshed?
A. Yes, it has been refreshed.
MR. DENNEY: I hand the witness document No. 268, and ask that a copy be handed to the Defense and the Interpreter.
(Reading) (letter to Milch read in error)
DR. BERGOLD: One minute! I have received a much different copy.
MR. DENNEY: "The Reich Marshal of Greater Germany Plemipotentiary for the Four Year Plan the State Secretary, Berlin, 9 June 1943.
Dear Reichsminister Speer, It has been suggested in the Central Planning (Zentral Planning) to grant cards for additional and extra rations for workers doing heavy and heaviest work to new laborers of a firm only if the labor office (Arbeitsamt) approves the employment. The cards for additional and extra rations should be witheld during the first four weeks from all new laborers - who are otherwise entitled to get the extra rations - if the laborers are hired by individual firms in an illegal way. This should be done in order to decrease undesirable fluctuation. After thorough examination of the suggestion by the Reich Ministry of Food and the Plenipotentiary for the Allocation of Labor it is clear that it is absolutely forbidden to employ new workers without reference to the Labor Offices. In cases in the heads of a firm disregard this prohibition, the order to withhold the two ration cards (which are of course issued by the firm) will also be ignored.
It does not pay, therefore, to issue a new decree.
I have had an investigation as to how the distribution of the cards, extra rations is practically handled in the firm Rheinmetall-Borsig in Tegel. This firm makes us to a large extent of the decree of the Reich Mimister of Food on 7 April 1942 which decree stipulates the possibility to withhold cards for additional rations from malingers. I enclose a report about the findings. In principle, the additional food ration is not granted to new 684a personnel before at least two weeks have expired.
The firm regards the decree as an essential expedient for the struggle against the various disturbances in the allocation of labor.
On basis of these findings I believe that we can attain the end at what we aim (as far as this is possible by a decree) by referring the execution of the firm connected to the existing decree of the Reich Minister of Food.
I have transmitted a copy of this letter to General Feldmarschall Milch. Heil Hitler! Yours (Signed) Koerner, Copy to Reichsminister Speer."
MR. DENNEY: We offer this as Exhibit No. 127.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Court, with respect to the admission the letter of the Reich Marshall in evidence, I object to this. It says at the end of the letter "Not official." I therefore make the suggestion to the counsel for the Office of the Chief of War Crimes, that this is not an official copy. It is not apparent that what the letter says is true. If the document is sought to be used I ask that only an official copy be used so that I can be certain that the contents are correct.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold's objection seems to go to the authenticity of the document.
MR. DENNEY: Yes, I believe so.
DR. BERGOLD: I om objecting because it is not official. It is definitely called "Not official."
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honor please, the document I have of course bears no such notation. I will examine the original (Examines document). I certainly concede that it appears on Dr. Bergold's copy. I am referring now to the letter from Koerner to Speer. I did not know what. Dr. Bergold referred to, until I saw it on the copy, printed in German.
May we have the copy that the Secretary-General has, please?
THE PRESIDENT: Are you ready to proceed, Mr. Denney?
MR. DENNEY: I am just endeavoring to get the numbers straightened out just getting the numbers so it will be clear, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. DENNEY: We have here the photostatic original which I will show witness. Show that to the witness.
(Document shown to witness.)
685 a
Q Witness, you have been handed the original of the letter of June 9, 1943, from you to Milch, together with the letter of the same date, from you to Speer?
A Yes.
Q Do you recognize those?
A Yes, I do.
Q Those are your documents?
A Yes. The signature under the letter to Milch is my signature.
Q And please examine the pages one and two in your hand; is that a copy of the letter which you received?
A That appears to be a copy of the letter, in any case, as it is attached to my letter to Milch, it would appear to be in order. As to the signature confirmation, I can not find the signature confirmation on this copy.
Q No, there was no signature on the copy which we captured, they were captured in that fashion.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness, however, admits the genuineness of the document, so that seems to negate your objection, Dr. Bergold.
DR. BERGOLD: I admit that the document -- I did not hear the witness call the enclosure. My objection goes only to the enclosure, not to the first page. And the reason is, because my copy says "Not an official copy." The witness should be able to tell me whether he declared the enclosure correct and authentic.
THE WITNESS: I car describe the letter to Milch, as completely correct. The enclosure not. I can only assume that it is the correct enclosure to this.
MR. DENNEY: The witness says that he assumes it is a correct enclosure. That is the way the documents were captured.
DR. BERGOLD: It is only an assumption of the witness. I ask the right to examine into the fact as to whether this assumption is correct.
MR. DENNEY: I submit counsel can question the witness on it whenever he wishes to.
THE WITNESS: May I say something, briefly, on the first document, which I was handed.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, go ahead.
THE WITNESS: This is a teletype copy of a letter by the Reichsmarshal on the basis of a subordinate, to the Reichsminister, with reference to the Plan for Chemical Production with reference to taking official measures in the field of Buna Production. This teletype letter says quite clearly that a measure was taken -- was as much to do as necessary-by Goering, as the letter of the Four Year Plan, on the basis -- in regard to the Chemical Works which had been bombed very heavily in several air raids. The document shows clearly, as a special matter -- that a special contingent of iron should be supplied, so that an adjustment for the loss could be created. That Goering, as the head of the Four Year Plan, should address himself to the Central Planning Board, which was looking after the Production of raw materials; and also, in such exceptional cases to dispose of a threat, as a matter of course.
MR. DENNEY: I submit that the document speaks for itself, and it is not, therefore, necessary for me to direct your Honor's attention to the part of the document which also speaks of Labor. It is also not necessary to call your Honor's attention to the fact that all of these papers were captured in the files, in the papers, of the Defendant Milch.
Q. Witness, how many meetings of the Central Planning Board were held
Q. How many meetings of the Central Planning Board were held?
A. I cannot say this - how many.
Q. Well, were there a hundred?
A. I don't think so.
Q. Were there fifty?
A. I do not want to commit myself to a figure. In any case I was always told in these interrogations that all documents of all meetings were in the hands of the prosecution.
Q. You answer the questions, witness. How often did the Central Planning Board meet, starting with its creation in 1942?
A. In figures my memory is letting me down. One thing is certain, that every three months one meeting was held, of the Central Planning Board, which dealt with the distribution of all materials. Apart from those regular meetings there were other meetings on the questions of raw materials and the figure of those meetings I no longer recall. Apart from that, as is well known and as was said often before today, there were other meetings which had a purely informative character.
Q. Well, do you remember the Jaegerstab?
A. No, I had nothing to do with Jaegerstab.
Q. You never attended their meetings?
A. No, not one meeting.
Q. Did you ever hear of the Jaegerstab mentioned in Central Planning?
A. I could not say this off-hand. The term "Jaegerstab" was used so often in 1944 that I no longer know where it was used.
Q. Well, the Jaegerstab only existed from March 1944 until August 1944?
A. As far as I can recall, yes.
Q. You were at the 55th meeting of the Central Planning Board on March 1, 1944. Do you remember who presided at that meeting?
A. I cannot say that precisely. It was either Milch or Speer; one of the two.
Q. Well, for your information, Milch presided.
A. That may well be so.
Q. I tell you. it's so. We have the minutes.
A. Yes.
Q. In Document Book 3-A, page 1, about the last eight lines in the first paragraph, appearing on page 1768 of the German original. Sauckel spoke at that meeting. Were yea present?
A. Yes, I was.
Q. "In the previous years I was able to satisfy the demands, at least with regard to the number of laborers, but this year I am no longer able to guarantee them in advance. Increase I can deliver only a small number, I should be glad if those arriving would be distributed by percentage, within the framework of your program. Of course, I shall readily agree if I am now told by the Board, 'Now we have to change the program. Now this or that is more urgent.' It goes without saying that we will satisfy the demands, whatever they may be, to the best of our ability, with due regard to the war situation. So much about figures."
Then, on page 1969 of the original - it's on Page of the English Document Book - it's the beginning of the full paragraph, to the left of which appear the figures 1770: "At that time I was very much concerned: We discovered a decrease in the amount of labor employed. Today I am able to report that we stooped that decrease. According to most accurate statistics, which I had ordered, we have today again including foreign workers and prisoners of war the same number of 29.1 millions which we had in September. But we have added nothing since that time. Thus we dispatched to the Reich in these two months no more than 4,500 Frenchmen which amounts to nothing. From Italy only 7,000 civilians arrived. This, although from 1.12 until today I have had no hour, no Sunday, and no night for myself."
Then, continuing to the last full paragraph on the same page, the paragraph to the left of which appear the figures 1771: "The most abominable point made by my adversaries is their claim that no executive had been provided within these areas in order to recruit in a sensible manner the Frenchmen, Belgians, and Italians and to dispatch them to work. Thereupon I even proceeded to employ and train a whole batch of French male and female agents who for good pay, just as was done in olden times for "shanghaiing", went hunting for men and made them drunk by using liquor as well as words, in order to dispatch them to Germany.
Moreover I changed some able men with founding a special labor supply executive of our own, and this they did by training and arming with the help of the higher SS and Police Fuehrer a number of natives, but I still have to ask the Munitions Ministry for arms for the use of these men."
Turning now to page 5 of the English document Book, about eight lines from the top of the paragraph, to the left of which appears the figure 1776, and it starts out in the middle of the page, both ways: "On the other hand". It's the beginning of a sentence. It's one full sentence above the sentence where the period -- the figures 5 and 6 appear, and the name "Laval".
"On the other hand, I have grounds for hoping that I shall be just able to wiggle through, first by using my old corps of agent and my labor executive, and secondly by relying upon the measures which I was lucky enough to succeed in obtaining from the French Government. In a discussion lasting 5-6 hours I have exerted from M. Laval the concession that the death penalty will be threatened for officials endeavoring to sabotage the flow of labor supply and certain other measures. Believe me, this was very difficult. It required a hard struggle to get this through. But I succeeded, and now in France, Germans ought to take really severe measures, in case the French Government does not do so."
And then, down a few lines, there's a sentence that ends with the word "France" and the next sentence starts "There is only one solution". the words "Buergermeister" and "Prefect" appear in this. "There is only one solution: the German authorities have to cooperate with each other, and if the Frenchmen despite all their premises do not act, then we Germans must make an example of one case and by reason of this law, if necessary, put the Prefect or Buergermeister against the wall, if he does not comply with the rules. Otherwise no Frenchman at all will be dispatched to Germany."
And then, turning over to page 7, Sauckel still speaking, there is a sentence that appears just before the notation to the left in the middle of the paragraph, 1780: