What were the specific German labor conditions?
New please find paragraph 9, "Free Time". The first line deals with the right to have free or spare time. It states that these Eastern female workers do not have any right to have any spare time.
A But please read it all. It says that just as with other German household staffs-
Q I wish to interrupt you. I shall read the whole paragraph right now, the whole ninth paragraph.
THE PRESIDENT: General, I don't think you should intrupt him when he is making a legitimate explanation. You should wait until he has made his explanation, and then draw attention to anything in the rest of the document that you wish to. Now, what did you wish to say, defendant?
THE WITNESS: I asked that a further part should be read. I was thinking of a sentence in which it is stated that, nevertheless weekly assistance could be granted. Perhaps I may read the sentence: "Household workers from the East may principally only move about outside the household when they are dealing with matters of the household, but they can, nevertheless, if they have proved themselves, be given the opportunity to go out once a week that is the same as German workers. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q It is written differently here. There was no leisure time allowed. It is stated that there may be a possibility, for the duration of three hours, once a week, to stay and not do any work, outside the confines of the household should the work be ended by the time darkness falls. In other words, we are not dealing with one full day, but only with three hours.
A But I didn't say that. This evening time, because of the blackout, applied to German household staffs as well during war.
Q Please find paragraph 10, "Leisure time leave and return to one's country."
That is the title of this particular part. Have you found that? It is written here: "No leave should be granted. Eastern female workers who are being used in households are being mobilized for an indefinite time."
THE PRESIDENT: Don't you think you can pass on from this? You know, this isn't a matter of very great importance.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: MR. President, I would like to have the defendant Sauckel explain to us the apparent contradiction between his testimony before his defense counsel in regard to document 668, and in connection with this particular construction as to how they utilized these Eastern female workers in German households. I would like to have an answer from him inorder to do away with this apparent contradiction.
THE WITNESS: I am in a position to give an exact answer to that. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Yes?
A This paper wasn't only written by me, but a large number of points had been inserted and demanded by the Reichsfuehrer SS. As early as spring of 1943 I succeeded in having these paragraphs altered, and the uncertain time of service for Eastern workers was limited to two years. Then, further, in a document -- which, in my opinion, my defense counsel should still submit to this Tribunal -- it states that I achieved the altering of too-limiting instructions regarding Eastern workers, and through my efforts they were, in fact, done away with. I made efforts from the beginning., as I stated in my first answer, and all these restrictions were taken away so that they were equal to other foreign and German workers. That wasmy aim, it was the meaning of the conception of my office. I wanted to see this done with reference to the Eastern workers because they were the best workers we had in Germany. Frank . I shall read to you what is written in regard to your conversation with the defendant Frank. This is document USSR-223, and your conversation is recorded there. This is the diary of Frank as to 1944, and I refer to page 918.
"Dr. Frank: I am very glad that I can officially inform you that up to now we sent to Germany over 300,000 workers.
Not so long ago you applied to us to send 140,000 more workers. Besides these 140,000, for the next year you may count on new shipments of workers from the Government General, because we shall use police force for the recruiting or drafting of workers."
Does thatcorrespond with the facts? Did such a conversation between you and Frank take place? Was it correctly written in his diary? fore, and the details of which I cannot possibly recollect. I cannot say, on the basis of the documents before me, that the use of polish civilian workers -
THE PRESIDENT: If you don't remember, why can't you say so and stop? BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: manpower, or did he not say anything about it? Do you remember this or do you not? in 1942. Conditions at that time were so utterly different. cerned, did the defendant Frank use police measures or police methods? D you know about that? the Governor General solved this problem with police forces. Please ask him yourself.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I am submitting to the Tribunal document USSR-469, which characterizes the methods of recruiting manpower which were used in the territory of Poland. This document is an official order printed by the Kreishauptmann in the Minsk or Warsaw District. It is dated the 2nd of February, 1943. This order is given to Kazimier Nowa, who was born on the 6th of May, 1926, and who lived in Dyzin, the village of Kotbiel, and it is stated:
"On the basis of an order as to the labor draft, dated 13 May 1942, page 255, I order you to work in the Reich." And here is what is written at the end of this order: "In the event that you disobey this order" -
THE PRESIDENT: Is this a document you are offering in evidence new for the first time?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: This document is being presented for the first time.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you got any copies of it?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Yes, I have, and naturally you should be given the document.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you Offering it now for the first time, or is it already in evidence?
Didn't you hear that?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Yes. This document is being presented for the first time.
THE PRESIDENT: We do not seem to have it, anyhow. I mean, I do not have a copy of it.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: The original document was given to the defendant, and the copies in German were given to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: I have it now in German. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q It is stated:
"In case you disobey this order relating to forced labor, the members of your family (parents, wife, close relations) will be placed in the police camp and will be liberated only after your appearance. Moreover, I reserve to myself the right to confiscate your real and personal property and also the real and personal property of the members of your family.
"Moreover, in accordance with Paragraph 5 of the above mentioned order, you shall be punished with confinement in jail or confinement in a concentration camp." manpower in the territory of Poland were used? penalties was completely unknown to me in this particular form, and that I would never have approved of them if I had heard of them. I would have stopped it at once. appendix at the end of this document, from my office's point of view, is incorrect, and it was not approved by me.
What is correct is the first paragraph of this document, which I would like to have permission to read. That is in keeping with the German Workers' law. It says:
"Based on the law of the 30th of May, 1942, I will call you up to work in the Reich. Your employment in the Reich will take place in keeping with properly regulated working conditions, and the payment will be in keeping with the scale of pay. Savings can transferred to your home by you. Close relations to whose support you have up to now made important contributions can apply to the labor office for special allowances from the labor office."
THE PRESIDENT: We need not have the details. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: regard to manpower, directives which were issued by the higher government authorities in Germany, and also personally by you in your own program. The document is USSR 365, and you wrote the following. the record now?
Q It is written there:
"In connection with this, it is necessary to utilize fully all the manpower resources present in the occupied territory. If it is not possible to obtain the desirable manpower by volunteer methods, then it will be necessary to use the methods of forced recruiting."
Did you give such directions?
A No, I have not found the passage. It has not been pointed out to me properly.
Q All right. You will be shown again at once; page 8 of the Russian text.
Did you ever give such directions? calling up of labor. That would have to be done by the local authorities. But I did not understand that there were such threats of penalties as have been obtained in this document signed by Bittrich.
I was thinking about the example of German ruling, and that was very different, indeed. was it not written? order.
Q Let us go further. In the letter of the 3rd of October, 1942, addressed to Gauleiter Meyer-- this is Document No. 017 PS -- you wrote the following. Now this document is going to be presented to you. Will you please follow my reading? Did they show you the place?
Q It is written there:
"I do not ignore the difficulties which exist for the execution of this new requirement, but I am convinced that with the ruthless commitment of all resources and withthe full cooperation of allthese interested, the execution of the now demands can be accomplished for the fixed date."
Did you write that?
A yes, I wrote that. But I want you to let me explain it in detail. In all these instructions whichI gave, I demanded considerate treatment for human beings. That has already been proved in the trial. If I had known of the ruthless use of means -- and by that I mean the ruthless use of all tecnhical and propaganda arrangements -- I would have stopped then. There had been reports to me that recruiting measures were not sufficiently employed on the spot. That is for explanation and "pre-history" of this letter. That is Document No. U.S.S.R. 127. This will be presented to you in a moment. You wrote in this document the following:
"Recruiting for which I have been responsible must be enforced or speeded up by all acceptable measures, including a very severe application of principles of forced labor, so that in the shortest possible time it will be possible to treble the number of recruited people."
Did you give such directions?
A They were instructions of mine, and I gave them. I did not mean criminal or bad methods when talking about the "duty to work". I was more thinking of fulfilling the figures.
Q Now I shall cite a few excerpts from documents of other people. I shall now read an excerpt from a speech by Defendant Rosenberg. This is Document No. U.S.S.R. 170. The document is a transcript of Rosenberg's speech, which was delivered at the gathering of the German Labor Front in November, 1942. I shall read a short excerpt from this speech:
"Millions of wretches trembling with fright react the same way -
A (Interposing) I have not found it.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps we had better recess now.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1400 hours 31 May 1946.)
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, I should like to draw the Tribunal's attention to the following fact: General Alexandrov this morning referred to Document 744-PS. First of all, a document was given to me which was described as the German translation. That translation contains obvious impossibilities.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, you said 744-PS?
DR. NELTE: 744-PS.
THE PRESIDENT: I haven't got any note that he referred to that document. I don't know whether he -- did you refer to 744-PS this morning General Alexandrov?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Yes, I did refer to that document. It was a telegram of Defendant Keitel dated July 1943, and referring to the utilization of prisoners of war in the mining industry.
DR. NELTE: Then the Russian prosecution supplied the original, that is to say the photostat copy of a letter dated 6 July 1943; signed by Keitel. I now have two German versions before me which, not only as far as the contents are concerned, differ a great deal, but the translation even contains an addition which is not contained in the original. That is to say, the heading of the letter, Chief of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces, has an addition, Armed Forces General Staff. I do not want to delay you, sir, by referring to the other incorrect translations, but I must assume that you have the texts in the foreign languages before you which, from the re-translation, appeared to me to be incorrect. Since this document, the original I mean, is the exhibit and is not being objected to, I should like to ask you to make an order that the translations in the foreign languages which you have before you should be checked to establish how far they differ from the original document.
THE PRESIDENT: Had the document been put in evidence before: Had it been offered in evidence as an exhibit?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV:PS-744.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that doesn't mean that it has been put in evidence.
That only means that it is identified in that way. Had it been offered in evidence before?
GENERAL ALEXANDDROV: I do not know the U.S. number of this document, but as far as I knew, this document was submitted in evidence to the Tribunal. On the German copy of this document there is a reference which states that the German translation was made on the 26th of November 1945, by 20 Lt. Niebergall. Inasmuch as Dr. Nelte finds some deficiencies in this translation, I believe that we should ask the translation division to check it.
THE PRESIDENT: I think that is the best thing to do, to have it checked by the translation division. We will order that that shall be done at once.
Q Now, the transcript of defendant Rosenberg's statement will be handed over to you. I will limit myself to very short excerpts from this transcript. Please read after me. "A section of these mobilized workers believe that the read to Germany is somewhat similar to the read to imprisonment and the read to Siberia." And further, I quote: "I know that if one halfmillion came here, we cannot create brilliant conditions for them. The fact that thousands of people who are here live in bad conditions or are submitted to bad treatment is quite natural. It is not worth while to be too preoccupied because of that: however, this is a very grave question. I believe that Gauleiter Sauckel has already discussed it or will do so, for these people from the East have been brought to Germany in order to work and to work as much as possible. It is a very earnest matter to get this work out of them. It is not right to bring them over three-quarters frozen and to make them stay standing during their voyage hours on end. We must give them food in order that they should have sufficient strength in them." Is this correct? Does defendant Rosenberg correctly describe the conditions in which the workers brought by you from the Occupied territories were handled or do you consider this statement of defendant Rosenberg not correct?
A I cannot say or recognize when Rosenberg made this speech. I myself didn't hear it or receive the notes of it but I can definitely state that as soon as I came into office, I did make considerable preparations so that conditions as they are being discussed by Rosenberg in this connection -- which did not in any way have any connection with my term of office -- were to be avoided under any circumstances, because it was for that purpose that I issued these individual instructions of mine just to prevent such conditions; and for every nation working in Germany, I published hundreds of valid and standing instructions of a legal nature which I brought about, which made that sort of thing impossible. That is all I say to that in so far as conditions are concerned during my term of office.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: MR. President, I will limit myselfto this single excerpt from defendant Rosenberg's speech and will not utilize time when numerous documents have already been submitted to the Tribunal and which ascertain without any possibility of doubt, the criminal methods of the organization of manpower in the Occupied Territories adopted by Sauckel in view of deportation of slaves to Germany.
I will only submit to the Tribunal one single new document which is USSR Exhibit 458. This document is a certificate of a worker issued by the German authorities in Breslau to the Polish working woman, because there is a stamp on the reverse, and the worker woman has testified under oath that these certificates were issued by the German authorities in 1944 in the town of Breslau to all foreign workers. I find together with this original document, a certificate of the polish State Commission which quotes the testimony of the witness Maria Adler. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Defendant Sauckel, have you looked at that worker's certificate? Have you found this picture of a pig on that care? pig, which are insulting to pride and human dignity?
A Such a card and such knowledge, I did not have. I can't recognize this speech, at any rate. I can't recognize what it is meant to be. I had nothing at all to do with this and I don't the meaning of such a card and I don't know what I could do with it. It is impossible and it wasn't the task of the labor administration to fix such a thing. utilization?
A No. This card and such stories, I had no idea. I had neither any interest nor any reason offending anyone working in Germany. I cannot guess and I don't know what this was meant to be.
Q Now, I will quote a brief excerpt from USSR Exhibit 139. This is a transcript of the conference of Reichsmarshal Goering,dated 1942. I will quote that part of this statement in which defendant Goering gave an evaluation or an opinion of your activities. Reichsmarshal Goering said: "To that I must say that I do not wish to laud Gauleiter Sauckel, he does not need it but what he has done in such a brief time in order to collect the workers from all over Europe and to bring them to our factories, is an unique feat. I must say to everybody that if everybody, each one in his sphere of action, could apply a tenth of the energy which has been applied by Gauleiter Sauckel, then indeed, the tasks which have been assigned to you would be easily fulfilled.
That is my standing opinion and not at all beautiful words." Did you hear such an evaluation of your activities from Reichsmarshal Goering?
A It is possible that the Reichsmarshal said that. I cannot remember the details of a meeting that took place so long ago. What is correct is that I, as a man, as a member of my nation, had the duty of doing my duty. My documents prove that I tried to do my duty decently and humanely and that, I think, was enough.
GENERAL AIEXANDROV: I will submit to the Tribunal now document USSR Exhibit 462. It is an article by Dr. Friedrich Giegler, which appeared in the Reichsarbeitsblatt, in 1944 and 1945. This is an official publication of the Reich Labor Ministry and of the General Plenipotentiary for Manpower. The article is entitled "Fritz Sauckel, to his 50th anniversary." BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV: article but I would like to ask you, defendant Sauckel, are you acquainted with this article?
A I do not know this article. I can't say what is in it. I didn't always read the Reich Labor Magazine. The periodical wasn't issued by me and it is an old institution of the Labor Ministry which contains all the decrees published by that Ministry and also thedecrees of Weimar in the Reich Labor Pamphlet all testify to my concern for the foreign and German workers. contents of this article. It will be handed to you.
THE PRESIDENT: What document is this that he is reading?
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: It is an article in the Reichsarbeitsblatt, entitled "Fritz Sauckel, to his 50th anniversary." We are submitting this document for the first time as USSR Exhibit 462. BY GENERAL ALEXANDROV:
Q Are you conversant with it? Tell us, does this article correctly characterize your political activity?
A The author of this article is an expert and I can't give any comments on the birthday article. It is a generally correct representation of my career and my sphere of work.
Q And one last question. In a speech which you made at the first meeting of the staffs for the utilization of manpower, in January of 1943; at Weimar, you stated, and I quote according to the third book of documents of your defense counsel, document 82. I read: "Now, as far as the foundations of our work is concerned...." I skip one first point. "We are true to the Fuehrer and to the people. It gives a justification for the execution of the severest measures." I repeat: "Now as far as the foundations of our work is concerned..." I skip the first point and read point two: "We are true to the Fuehrer and to our people. This loyalty gives us a justification for the execution of the most cruel measures." And then, the end of this document: "In this respect, I will assume another major responsibility." Now, tell me, as to this forced deportation to slave labor, do you consider yourself responsible for this and for the misery of the millions who were sent into slave labor? Do you consider that you are also responsible that you have selected the dismal period of slavery? at this very moment. I should be grateful to you if you could put this document before me so that I can give the correct representations of my views. necessary, you can ask your defense counsel to examine you again.
GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I have terminated the examination of the defendant Sauckel, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, do you want to re-examine again?
RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. THOMA (Counsel for Defendant Rosenberg):
Q Witness what was Rosenberg's part as Minister for Eastern Affairs in carrying out the employment program? was that the departments under his direction in theEastern Ministry should receive my wishes and directives. That is to say, of course, Where they were connected with my task. I was not, of course, in any way connected with any other departments in the Eastern Ministry. Commissioner Koch directions to use his supreme powers?
A That is correct. It was within Rosenberg's task that he should give orders to Reich Commissioner Koch, who was under his command in every sector of the administration there. instructions. In whatway? instructions to Koch to stop an unpermissible methods which were against my instructions, and that Rosenberg did. wanted to say that your recruiting methods were to be prohibited, and that it was no longer to be permitted that your Action Groups, Einsatzgruppe, should take Eastern workers away?
A That Rosenberg never said before me, no. These commissions during the time they were there in the Ukraine came under the Einsatzgruppe department under Koch, and he was the supervising authority, and he had the administrative authority for such matters. That is quite clear.
DR. THOMA: May I point out to this High Tribunal that a document, Rosenberg 10, shows that Sauckel didn't understand Rosenberg's statement in this connection.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you refer to some document there, Dr. Thoma?
DR. THOMA: RO-10.
DR. SERVATIUS ( Counsel for Defendant Sauckel): Mr. President, the re-examination of the witness through the Defense Counsel for defendant Rosenberg, must be limited, for the Defense, to such matters which have now been newly mentioned and which are up for argument.
Every opportunity existed when his client took the witness stand to clarify these questions. I intended to clearup this question on my own initiative, but it was indicated to me that I ought to ask Sauckel. Sauckel made a clear statement and, in my opinion, there is no cause once more to come back to documents in this connection which belong to a previous period of the Defense, and I object to such questioning.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Dr. Thoma, I think you had better go on and ask your next question. I have not got the document before me yet that you are putting to the witness, or referring to. What is your next question?
BY DR. THOMA:
Q Mr. Witness, did you not have in your program all responsibility for the employment scheme, and did you not assume all such responsibility? of my powers. I can not do more than that, and for what I have ordered and for what I have caused -- this collection of decrees -
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, the defendant has been ever all this before. He has been all through this before -- about his responsibility.
DR. THOMA: Mr. President, may I point out to you that regarding the question of responsibility, there is a certain paragraph which has not yet been read. It is Document 016-PS, referring to the workers' program, and it says under page 17 of the document:
"All technical and administrative procedure of employment are matters exclusively for the jurisdiction and responsibility of the General Plenipotentiary for Labor, as well as the Labor Offices --"
A In Germany, Dr. Thoma. Outside Germany they were, of course, tied to the chiefs of the districts in question. That is quite obvious.
DR. THOMA: I draw the attention of the Tribunal to page 15 of this labor program, in reply to that answer, and Figure (1), which I have just read, comes under the heading "Prisoners of War and Foreign Workers". BY DR. THOMA:
Q May I point out that it states clearly under (1):
"All technical and administrative procedure connected with The employment program --" to interfere with Koch's powers. He expressly said that he would resent that. especially provided you with powers, referring to all departments, and in my opinion, it is not right that you should now den y methods of recruitment and pass responsibility for them on to the Eastern Ministry.
DR. THOMA: I have no further questions.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, the Defense Counsel for Rosenberg may put questions, but it does not appear to me to be the right moment for him to make a prosecution speech against my defendant.
MR. DODD: Mr. President, I am well aware of the facts that there have been two cross-examinations, and I have no desire to go on with another one. However, we do have one document that we think is of some importance and which was turned over to General Alexandrov, but I think there must have been some language difficulty in it. The translation was not presented. I would like the permission of the Tribunal to ask one or two questions of this defendant about it and to present it, I think it is rather important that it be presented.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Dodd, the Tribunal does not think that this ought to create a precedent, but in view of your statement that the document was supplied to General Alexandrov and that, for some reason, he did not deal with it, we will allow you to cross examine upon it.
MR. DODD: Very well, sir.
BY MR. DODD:
Q. Mr. Witness, do you remember an occasion in 1942, just after your appointment, when you met with some officials of the Ministry of Labor and you discussed with them the program which you were about to institute and over which you were about to take, for which you were about to take responsibility? Do you recall it?
A. I can not, of course, remember details of that discussion. Several points were discussed, and it may be I can also refer in this connection to the attitude of the Defense Counsel for Defendant Rosenberg, and say that what he has been quoting -
Q. I simply asked you if you remembered this meeting, and you said you did not, and now there is the documents.
A. Details of that conference I do not remember.
Q. Take a look at the minutes of the meeting.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the document?
MR. DODD: This is FC 318.
THE PRESIDENT: Has it been offered or not?
MR. DODD: I am now offering it. I was waiting to get the number from the Secretary.
I will have to get the number a little later, Mr. President.
I haven't made preparations to submit this document, so I didn't have the number in advance. BY MR. DODD:
Q. Now, I want to call your attention particularly to a few passages. You start out by telling the officials who were gathered there that you want to closely cooperate with them, and then, moving along, you give some idea of the number of workers whom you intend to recruit. You say there is an estimated requirement of one million, and you also made perfectly clear that day that you were to get most of these workers from the east, and particularly from Soviet Russia. with the Reichsmarshal, and that you were all agreed that the most important problem was the exploitation of the manpower in the east.
You further stated -- do you see that in there?
A. Where does it say "exploitation"? I don't find that word.
Q. Well, do you find where you say you had discussed your task with the Fuehrer in a conversation that had lasted for several hours? Do you find that?
A. I can't find it.
Q. You have the German there before you, don't you?
A. Yes, but please will you be kind enough to tell me the page?
Q. Have you found it?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, I want to point out to you the difference between the Words "exploitation" and "use of". "Exploitation" has a connotation which, in workers' language, is somewhat smelly, but "use of" is quite an ordinary word, and to make use of a matter means that you make available the use of it, and there is quite a difference in the German language.
Q. Well, we'll stand by ours and you may stand by yours, and the Tribunal will ascertain between the two of us who has the correct trails lation.
In any event, whether you said "use of" or "exploit" you did say that the most important solution was either the use of or the exploitation.