"Therefore I have to continue to go to France, Belgium, Helland, and Italy, and there will be a time again when I shall go to Poland and extract workers there as fit and as many of them as I can get." And then, at the bottom, the last sentence of the same paragraph: "How the labor is to be distributed will then have to be decided according to the needs of the whole of German industry, and I shall always be prepared to keep the closest contact with you all, gentlemen, and to charge the labor exchanges and the district labor exchanges with intimately collaborating with you. Everything is functioning if such collaboration exists."
Do you recall Herr Sauckel's speech at that meeting, witness?
A. I cannot recall those details today, of course. As you held the documents of that meeting, I assume that these statements were really made. But it becomes quite clear from these remarks by Sauckel that here he attempted to justify his point of view.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Denny, ask the witness what he means by that. BY MR. DENNY:
Q. What do you mean by your last statement, wetness, that here Sauckel attempted to justify his point of view?
A. I said already this morning that Speer was not in agreement with the whole method used by Sauckel and that was the reason why the relations between Sauckel said Speer often had elements of tension. As Speer had called this meeting together, even though it was presided ever by Milch, and Speer was unavailable at the time and had to do something more important, it was only done in order to convict Sauckel of the wrong methods which he used. If these statements read by you - these statements of Sauckel read by you - have been made, one can see from the way he produced them, one can see that he wanted to defend his method of doing work.
Q. By his method, you mean "shanghaiing", getting them drunk, standing Buergermesiters up against walls, con cluding agreements with Laval and his kind, extracting laborers from Poland, going to Holland, Italy, and Belgium; is that what you refer to, witness?
A I do not know whether Sauckel used these methods. If he did according to what you read, it was quite certain things were said only to have that he used any method to bring labor to Germany.
Q You say Speer had something more important to do on 12 March 1944? What was Speer doing on 12 March 1944 that was more important than finding out whether or not 4,050,000 workers that had been asked for by Hitler were going to be forth coming from the GBA?
A I cannot answer your question. You should ask Speer.
Q You're on the stand, witness. I am asking you -- you said he had something important to do. What was it?
A I said that perhaps he had something more important to do.
Q Perhaps? Don't you know that Speer was sick? He had been sick since January and was sick until April of '44?
A That is possible. I don't know that today.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Mr. Denney, I notice that the name Milch appears opposite Page 1798 in Sauckel's speech and presumably 1780. Do you submit that Milch was present at the time of the Sauckel speeck?
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honor please, in the opening statement, Sauckel starts, "Field Marshal, Gentlemen."
BY MR. DENNEY:
Q You were interrogated on the 12th of December 1946 by Mr. Myers and a Warrant Officer Carter of the British Wac. Do you recall that?
A Yes.
Q Were you asked those questions and did you make these answers: Question: But you know, for certain of course, that many foreigners worked in Germany?
"A Naturally; that is clear."
Q Could you estimate how many?
A I know the figures gradually which I have learned from all the reports, about five to six million.
"Question: How high do you estimate the number of people who came voluntarily?
"Answer: That goes into the millions, for certain.
"Question: One, two, three?
"Answer: That I would not like to fix. Certainly it runs into millions; whether it was 30 or 10 percent, I do not know. You must ask the people who are responsible. Until 1942, everyone was here on a voluntarybasis; and then, there were one and one-half million foreign workers in Germany."
Do you recall those questions and these answers, witness:
A. Yes, I recall these statements.
Q. You were at the fifth Meeting of the Central Planning Board held in Berlin on 27 April 1942 together with Speer, the defendant, and some others --two others --State Secretary Mr. Schulze-Fiolitz, Minister of Munitions, and Minister von Bermann of the Four-Year Plan. You received a copy of the results of that meeting. Paragraph One of the Results states --and I might add that there were only eight copies on the direction list -- Paragraph One states: "The Central Planning in the Four-Year Plan (Order of the Reich Marshal of the Greater German Reich of April 22, 1912 VP 6707 g) is a task of leadership. It is only concerned with principles and superior matters. It gives definite decisions and controls the execution of its orders. Central Planning is not concerned with anonymous institutions which are difficult to supervise, but with fully responsible individual persons who are free to choose their own methods and collaborators inasfar as there are no directives given by Control Planning."
Do you recall that statement, witness:
A. I cannot recall it from the reading of this. I should read through it again.
(Witness is handed the document)
Q. If Your Honor please, I have indicated that that was the Fifth Meeting. It should have been the First Meeting. I am advised it was repeated in the Fifth as well.
DR. BERGOLD: The recital is attached to the record of the Fifth Meeting. That might have started the confusion.
MR. DENNY: In any event, the witness was present in both meetings.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY MR. DENNY:
Q. Do you remember seeing that, witness?
A. I cannot quite recall the things, but as I am reading now, I assume, and it becomes quite clear to me, that this was a statement made by Speer during the first meeting of the Central Planning Board.
Q. Excuse me, Your Honors, for just a minute.
I hand the witness the German copy of the Defense Document Book in the trial before the International Military Tribunal; it being a copy of the defendant Speer's document Book. I am sorry, Dr. Bergold, I don't have the English copy and the German copy. However, I am sure that the witness will correct me if I read improperly.
Q I hand you a copy of tho Defense Document Book in the trial before the International Military Tribunal. It is a copy of Defendant Speer's Document Book. I am sorry I do not have more copies. I have only one English copy and one German copy. I am sure the Witness will correct me if I read improperly. This is dated Berlin, 1942, 22 April, and is an excerpt from a newspaper. It is the decree signed by Goering establishing the Central planning Board. The newspaper excerpt bears the date 25 April 1942.
"With a view of assuring priority of armaments as ordered by Hitler and to summarize all the demands which are thus made on the total economy during the war as well as to bring about a balance by safeguarding the food and raw materials and production opportunities of the economy, I order:
"1. A 'Central Planning' shall be set up within a framework of the Four Year Plan. It is to be directly subordinated to me.
"2. The direction of the 'Central Planning' is undertaken jointly by the Reich Minister Speer, and Field Marshal General Milch and State Secretary Koerner.
"3. The 'Central Planning' encompasses the sphere of the entire economy and has among others, the following tasks:
"a) the decision about the necessity of execution or new plans or continuation of already existent plans "b) the decision about creating new or developing existing places of production of raw materials "c) the distribution of the existent raw materials, especially of iron and metals among all places requiring them "d) the inclusion of coal of energy in production "e) the voting on demands of the total economy and of the transportation system.
"4. Insofar as I have not reserved for myself the decision in particular cases, the 'Central Planning' decides finally in its own competence by virtue of the power invested in me.
"5. The 'Central Planning' issues the necessary executory regulations.
"6. The powers given to the General Plenipotentiary for Armament tasks in the Four Year Plan as per my decree of 1 March 1942 are not affected by this order."
This is signed "Hermann Goering."
A In the copy which I have, the Distribution of labor as not mentioned at all. The five points mentioned here show clearly what tasks the Central Planning Board had which were all tasks concerned with the distribution of raw materials. It was obvious that if those who needed iron or coal and could not be supplied, now planning could not be undertaken, and existing planning could not be carried on. It all comes to the definite task of distributing raw materials. All five points show clearly and definitely how measures are decided toward that end.
DR. BERGOLD: I would like to see the copy which the witness has, so that, if necessary, I can raise an objection to the reading by who Prosecution.
This information appeared in a newspaper, but it was not a public newspaper. I object to the manner in which Dr. Denney has read this document. In the German original there is no reference to the Distribution of labor.
DR. DENNEY: If your Honor please, I never used the words "distribution of labor" in my reading of the document.
DR. BERGOLD: That is how it was translated for us.
THE PRESIDENT: If it is a question of discrepency between the original and the translated version, that can easily be resolved.
DR. DENNEY: If your Honor pleas, it is our contention that the powers given in this are broad enough to include labor, but I probably did get some help from the interpreters. "Distribution of labor" does not appear any place in the translation which I read.
So far as Dr. Bergold's objection to the document is concerned, I call the Court's attention to the fact that it is an exhibit in the case "United States against Hermann Goering, et al," and as such the Court will take judicial notice of it.
DR. BERGOLD: I withdraw my objection. The German word for labor is "arbeit" and I had to rely on what was translated for me.
THE PRESIDENT: Much ado about nothing. No one claims it refers to the distribution of labor.
DR. BERGOLD: Only the interpreters.
Q Witness, you were at the 56th meeting of the Central Manning Board which took place on 4 April 1944. The results of that meeting appear in Prosecution's English Document Book Number 4 as Exhibit 48-D. It is Page 94 and Page 95 of the English Document Book. It is the paragraph starting off "Fighting Staff" or "Jaegerstab." It is about the biggest paragraph on that page. It is the second or third page of the results of the 56th meeting.
"The Fighting Staff to got a quota of 550 million, including 15O million definitely pledged from the reserve and the air administration is to have a quota of 200 million. Both are to be checked against each other.
Do you remember that reference to the Fighting Staff at the 56th meeting of the Central Planning Board which mas held early in April?
A That, of course, I cannot recall.
DR. BERGOLD: May I help you?
MR. DENNEY: No thank you. Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDENT: It is almost recess time. Would you like to take a recess at this time?
MR. DENNEY: If your Honor please.
THE PRESIDENT: The court will take a short recess.
(A recess was taken).
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. DENNEY: Your Honors please. Witness, I ask you how many meetings of the Central Planning Board you attended and you said you couldn't remember.
A I can't remember the exact number. An any case, I was present in most of the sessions.
Q Well, there were sixty meetings and you attended all by the 44th, 46th, 48th and the 55th.
A Yes, indeed.
Q What was your attitude on the exploitation of occupied territory?
A I already mentioned that before the International military Tribunal No. 1 and I answered these questions during cross examination.
MR. DENNEY: If your Honor please, I have the right to test the witness's power of recollection.
DR. BERGOLD: I would like to object. As far as I know during the meeting of the International Military Tribunal, should a cross examiner refer exclusively to questions which are put by either the defense counsel or the prosecution in this trial against Milch on the question of the exploitation of occupied territory in regard to foodstuffs, etc., this question is not material to the trial. I would appreciate therefore if Mr. Denney could tell me how this matter is connected with the defendant Milch?
MR. DENNEY: If your Honor please, I have already stated that I have a right to test the witness's power to recollect.
DR. BERGOLD: With this particular possibility one could introduce any kind of material into a cross-examination. I am of the opinion that the test of memory could be carried out in a different way, that is, particularly by reference to the material and the minutes or the Court.
MR. DENNY: Well, if your honors please, I will withdraw the question.
BY DR. DENNEY:
Q Did you see a decree of Speer signed 16 September 1943 which had to do with the functions of the Central Planning Office within the Central Planning Board?
A No, I can't remember that. If I could be presented with the letter, then of course I might remember.
MR. DENNEY: We will get to that. English Document Book 2-A, Page 38 Document number 1510. Do you have a German copy, Dr. Bergold, that can be shown to the witness?
Dr. BERGOLD: Yes. sir.
MR. DENNEY: I believe it as on page -- if four Honors please, in the German document book it appears that the document is not complete and with the Court's permission, if Dr. Bergold had no objection -- we did the same thing with him this morning -- I will read this and then we will furnish him with the page.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, I agree.
MR. DENNEY: This is dated 16 September 1943, and I will read it only in part. It is signed by Speer.
"The Planning Office will have to submit to central Planning for decision the proposed assignment for manpower to the individual big sectors of employment, trade economy on war work, traffic, foodstuff , etc. It also has to evaluate statistically the carrying through of the assignment."
Now one last question.
Q You worked very closely with Georing in the early years and less closely during the war years?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q You stated at the first trial that your opinion of Georing was that he was the last big man of the Renaissance, the last great example of a man from the Renaissance period. Is that still your opinion of him?
A If I ever make a statement and that as my opinion, I stick to it.
MR. DENNEY: Yea may inquire.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Tribunal, I take the liberty now to inquire.
Q Witness, I take it that Exhibit 126 is still in your possession, 699 a that is the copy which was presented to you by the Prosecution?
A May I ask if this is a telegram sent by Georing?
Q Yes, that is correct. That is the telegram by Goering of 24 June 1943 - correction, 27 June 1943, and which you for warded to Milch.
A Yes, that is correct. And I wanted to come back to that particular telegram anyway, referring to one of the statements made by the Prosecution,-
Q May I ask you first the questions?
A Yes, please.
Q Witness, in number one in this telegram on the last page it says "The Reich Marshall has asked that the Central Planning examine this request", according to your knowledge of the Central Planning Board, was Goering in a position to give orders to the Central Planning Board and particularly to Reichminister Speer?
A Yes, in his position as Plenipotentiary for the Four Your Plan he was definitely in a position to issue orders to the Reichsminister for Armament and also as plenipotentiary for Armament in the Four Year Plan.
Q. Even to the Central Planning Board?
AAs far as I know, no. Therefore, as can be clearly soon from this telegram, he did not send an order to the Central Planning Board - yes, to the Central Planning Board indeed, but to my attention but as I can see this matter, the whole measure was necessary duo to the heavy air raids on Huelz. In other words, it was a special emergency measure and had to be taken immediately. If the Prosecutor says that it can be clearly soon from this telegram that this is a labor assignment, then I can only refer to the fact that this is a closed stop which was taken by Georing as Plenipotentiary General for the Four Year Plan because the Plenipotentiary General for special chemical questions was his subordinate and this plenipotentiary, in his great distress had referred to Goering.
Goering, on the basis of this call for help by the Plenipotentiary General and his requests could have gone to the GBA with his labor requirements. He didn't do that, however, because he know exactly that what was required by the chemical industry, was special labor, special workers, who at that time on the open market were no longer available.
700 a Since Speer as Armament Minister was in charge of the most important industries, where such special workers were available, Goering thought he would get better results if he channelled these appeals through the Central Planning Board to me So that Speer in realization of the importance of the complex might try to shift the required workers from his own factories.
This was not a matter of labor assignment, as such, but rather a special emergency measure, which could only be taken care of if he who had possibility to fill such a request for special labor also gave it to the Central Planning.
Q Did the Central Planning have a possibility of putting an organization there?
A No, not at all. This point (l) which is mentioned in Goering's telegram, that one thousand men should be placed in the organization Todt also shows clearly that he referred to Speer through this channel in order to induce him to do everything in his power here, too.
Q Don't you think it is possible that a similar letter was sent to Sauckel?
Q No, I don't believe that, because I am convinced that Searing at the time, which was in the summer of 1943, was absolutely aware of the fact that Sauckel did not have any more such people available and therefore could not place them at his disposal.
Q Then I understand that you want to say that his letter was addressed to Minister Speer not so much because he was a member of the Central Planning board, but rather as the Armament Minister?
A Well, that is quite correct. I also suppose that Goer ing addressed his teletype to me for that particular reason that Speer would not consider it a pronounced order, but that I should act as intermediary with Speer and obtain his coopera tion for this extraordinary measure.
Q Do you know whether the Central Planning Board gave any orders as to that natter and called a meeting about it?
A I believe that a meeting would not have been called due to such 701-A a special case, but rather what was necessary to do in the interest of the manufacture of Buna was taken care of through regular channels.
Q The letter is from Mr. Turner. It was not signed by Goering was it?
A No. Turner was special sub-department chief for the Reichsmarshall, and then acting upon orders of Goering wrotethis teletype and sent it to me.
Q Is it true that Turner used stronger terms than Goering actually wanted to use?
A That, of course, I can not judge. It could be possible In any case I think it can be clearly seen from what I just said that this was an extraordinary measure which could only be solved by Speer's doing everything he could to solve the problem.
Q I shall not proceed to Exhibit No. 127, that is the last document that the Prosecution submitted to you, a letter from you to Milch, or that letter from Goering to Speer?
A Yes, that is correct. I remember that. One thing should be clarified, whether this letter was true. I shall now support the truth of my letter to Speer.
MR. DENNEY: Is comes through a letter from Goering to Speer. It was a letter from Koerner to Speer.
THE PRESIDENT: It was just a mis-statement.
MR. DENNEY: I want to clear it up in the record.
THE WITNESS: Yes, it was a letter from me, I take it for granted that this letter is in order. It can be clearly seen that the Central Planning Board did not have anything to do with this matter, but the tasks in this matter were given to me because I as Deputy for the Four Year Plan was also in charge of the food situation in Germany. Here the Central Plan ning Board should have been referred directly to the Reich Food Ministry which the Control Planning did not do, but they referred the matter to me, and as can be seen clearly from this letter, this question was solved by me with every precaution taken.
I had investigations made 702-A 702-A as to how the question of additional food ration cards was carried out in practice and, after the examination of the happenings I wrote this report to Speer, and I also suggested that no new decree be released but to leave it go at the decree issued by tho Reichsministry of Food.
Q Witness, were the words beginning with "It has been suggested in the Central Planning Board --" was this a resolution or decree or just a suggestion of some way to solve this problem?
A The word "suggested" shows clearly there was no decree from the Central Planning Board, but that I personally, as a member of the Central Planning because I happened to be at the Central Planning Board referred this question of the German Food situation to the Reichsministry of Food, and at the some time of course mentioned the situation plans through a strong fluctuation due to lax treatment of the ration coupons.
Q When it has been said here, "All the workers who have been recruited by the plants illegally", Are you talking about the bad conditions, which resulted during the war, namely, that factories would recruit workers from another factory by offering them higher wages?
A Generally speaking that such possibility was later limited by the decrees which had been issued, and particularly by Sauckel long before the war. Of course, here and there once in awhile there was a possibility that one or the other factory did not quite stick to the laws. Particularly there were possibilities to break the law, especially where concerns and factories could among each other shift workers from one factory to tho other.
Q Witness, I shall now proceed to tho 54th Meeting, excerpts of which were read to you by the Prosecution, namely, statements made by Sauckel.
I want you to remember that this morning I also asked you about this 54th Session. This is the session, which I submitted to you, where Sauckel made those particular statements: that only 200,000 laborers out of a total of 5,000,000 came voluntarily, and where he said that in France no program was in existence for the recruiting of voluntary workers. This morning you testified 703-A that these two last statements made by Sauckel were not made by him and that they were exaggerations.
Do you think that the statements made by Sauckel, which were shown to you by the Prosecution, do you think they are exaggerates, too, or so you think they are correct?
A No, I think they are also exaggerated.
A. No, I think they are also exaggerated.
Q. On page 1780 of the transcript that was shown to you by the Prosecution--and I am talking particularly about the last sentence that was shown to you--there is the following sentence in there. That is on page 14 of the German document book: "The way in which the distribution took place, that of course must take place according to the necessities, first, of the German armament, and second, of the German economy." That is where the word "economy" occurs. Did the Central Planning Board have anything to do with the German economy?
A. I said before that the Central Planning Board handled the distribution for all these with labor requirements.
Q. Talking about the economy, this includes the traffic, food, etc. did the Central Planning Board have anything to do with the traffic or the tradesmen, or hospitals and similar institutions? And did they have to distribute workers?
A. No, of course not. The Central Planning Board did not have anything to do with labor assignments, only with the distribution of raw materials.
Q. Yes, but I am here talking about labor distribution.
A. No, the Central Planning Board did not have that under its super vision.
Q. Witness, you have been shown the data concerning the first conference and the fifth conference respectively, of the Central Planning Board, where there is a record concerning the working sphere of the Central Planning Board. Does your statement of this morning that the minutes were not reviewed refer also to the first session?
A. Yes. That is correct, of course.
Q Should one take it, though, Witness, that at such an important session, where they discussed the limits of the Central Planning Board Do you think that they were regarded as official without having been reviewed?
A. Of course, I can't remember at this moment, and I don't know if the minutes were reviewed. In any case, the members of the Central Planning Board were present at that meeting, and they heard everything that was said there.