Netherlands by a decree of February 18, 1941, promulgated in the Dutch Verordnungsblatt of 1941 under Number 42. I have already produced this decree in the course of my explanation under Number 58, which I ask the Tribunal to kindly take under judicial notice. in the interior of the occupied countries, but, just as in Belgium, it was soon extended in order to permit the deportation of workers to Germany. The extension was put into realization by a decree of SeyssInquart of March 23, 1942, which appeared in Number 26 of the Verordnungsblatt, 1942. to add this to the brief. defendant Sauckel was to proceed to action. Sauckel utilized, in a way, all the human potential of the Netherlands. New measures were soon necessary, measures which Seyss-Inquart adopted. ordered the mobilization of all men from 18 to 35 years of age. I produce this decree as Document 75. which permitted his services to take all measures in the utilization of labor considered to be opportune. 77, has been submitted to the Tribunal as Document Number 77. a letter of 16 May 1943 from the representative of Sauckel in the Netherlands. This letter, which bears the Number 74, is placed before the Tribunal under Number 77. I shall read it.
THE PRESIDENT: 77 or 74?
MR. HERZOG: 77.
"In conformity with the census decree of 7 May, the classes 1920 to 1924 have been registed on filing cards. Aside from this work and in spite of its very great importance, 22,986 workers have been sent to the Reich. It has been possible to send them to the Reich without counting the war prisoners that have been transferred.
"During the month of June the figure that had not been completely reached in the month of May will be compensated. These classes include, according to the statistical service of the Kingdom of Holland, 80,000 persons, and the transferring of these classes to the Reich has already begun.
"446,493 persons have been transferred to the Reich up to June 1, 1943, and some of them have once more returned from there. The figures on the indexes appear as follows:
"Class 1921, 43,331. Class 1922, 45,354. Class 1923, 47,593. Class 1924, 45,232.
"As there have been up to 18 percent of escapes from this labor recruiting it is indispensable to begin immediately to transport workers to the Reich in entire classes. The Kommissar of the Reich has given his agreement to this action. The other services of economy, of armament, of agriculture, and of the Army, pressed by necessity, have given their agreement." pressure on the Netherlands. At that time - this was the time when tens of thousands of persons were arrested within two days in Rotterdam systematic roundups took place in all the larger cities of Holland, sometimes improvised, sometimes after proclamations made to the population to appear in certain given places. I submit to the Tribunal various proclamations of this kind. They form Document 1162-PS. They have already been presented to the Tribunal by Mr. Dodd. I shall not read them again.
I use them in support of my argument and submit thorn as Document 78.
These documents do not report isolated facts; they show a systematic policy which the accused persued up to May 5, 1945, when the capitulation of Germany brought the liberation of the Netherlands.
I still owe to the Tribunal a supplementary explanation. The accused did not limit themselves to introduce the service of forced labor into the occupied territories. I have said that they took criminal measures of coercion to assure the execution of the mobilization of foreign workers. I shall bring evidence of this. the forced enlisting of foreign workers cannot be disasociated from the procedures they applied to assure the so-called voluntary enlistment. The pressure was stronger, but it originated from the same spirit. The method was to deceive, and, if this proved unsuccessful, to coerce. The accused very soon realized that no kind of propaganda would succeed in justifying in the mind of the victims the forced labor. If they did have any doubts in this regard, those would have been dissipated by the reports of the occupation authorities. The latter were unanimous in their reports of the political troubles and difficulties which were provoked by this forced enlistment and on the resistance against which it ran. Therefore, the accused had to use force in order to assure the execution of the civilian mobilization which they had decreed. quote the witholding of the ration cards of the obstinates. The Tribunal will recall the Fuehrer's decree of 8 September 1942, which I submitted under No. 55, in which it was ordered that this measure should be executed. According to this order, food and clothing ration cards were not to be handed to persons incapable of proving that they were working, nor to those who refused to do obligatory work. Hitler's order was carried into effect in all occupied territories. In France, circulars enforced by the occupation authorities prohibited the renewing of food and clothing cards of the French people who had eluded the census of the law of 16 February, 1943.
In Belgium, the cancelling of ration certificates was regulated by an order of the Military Commander. It is the order of 5 March 1943 which was published in the Verordnungsblatt for Belgium and Northern France in 1943, and which I present under No. 79. General von Falkenhausen, the signatory of this order, admitted the seriousness of it in an interrogation, which I have submitted to the Tribunal under No. 15, and to which I return.
decree and that he had refused to grant an amnesty which General von Falkenhausen had proposed. I quote, page 4 of the French translation, fifth paragraph:
"Does the witness remember a decree of 5 March 1943, in the course of which those refusing to submit to forced labor had their ration card withdrawn?
"A. I do not remember. At the time when the ordinance was issued for men from 18 to 20 years old, the implementing orders were not given by myself but by my offices, and I am not conversant with the details regarding the application of penalties. I was not the executive head of the administration. I was above it.
"Q. But at that time you were informed of the means of pressure and manner of treatment which the authorities reserved the right to employ?
"A. I do not wish to deny my responsibility, especially as, after all, I was aware of many things. I remember in particular the regulation regarding ration cards, because I proposed on repeated occasions that an amnesty be declared for persons who were obliged to live without legal status and who were without a ration card.
"Q. To whom was this proposal made?
"A. To Sauckel, with the consent of the President, Revert.
"Q. What was the position taken by Sauckel at that time?
"A. He refused to permit this amnesty." The end of the quotation. bear the stamp of the employment office was prohibited. than the cancellation of ration cards. I want to speak of the persecutions which were directed against the families of those who were rebellious to compulsory labot. I say this method is criminal, because it is based on a conception of family responsibility which is contrary to the fundamental principles of the penal code of all civilized nations. It was, nevertheless, sanctioned in several legislative texts ordered or enforced by the National Socialists.
before the Tribunal and ask it to take judicial notice of it under No. 70. 1943, and particularly to paragraphs 8 and 9. I place this decree before the Tribunal under No. 80, and ask it to take judicial notice thereof. employers and against the officials of the employment offices in France. In France, the action was initiated by two laws of 1 February 1944. I emphasize that these laws were issued on the same day as the law on compulsory labor, and I assert that they were enforced at the same time as this latter. In support of my statement, I have the confirmation of the Defendant Sauckel, in his letter of 25 January 1944, which I read a while ago to the Tribunal under No. 60 -- law of February 1944, No. 82, and I ask the Tribunal to accept this document and to take judicial notice of it.
There were other pressure measures. One of these, for instance, was the closing of the faculties and schools to defaulting students. It was decreed in Belgium on 28 June, 1943; in France, on 15 July 1943. In Holland the students were victims of a systematic deportation from February on. I quote in this connection a letter of May 4, 1943, from the Supreme Chief of the SS, the Police Chief. This is Document 665, which I produce under No. 83 in the French documentation.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps this is a good time to break off.
(A recess was taken from 1115 to 1130 hours.)
M. HERZOG: Mr. President, Your Honors. At the resumption of the session I shall read to the Tribunal the letter of the 4th of May 1943, which proves the action which was taking place in Holland considering the deportation of Hollanders. I read Document 83 from my document book.
"Purpose: Action Against Students.
"The action will be executed beginning on Thursday morning. It is now too late today to have this published. The proclamation of the Supreme Chief of the SS and of the Police will be given by radio beginning tomorrow morning at seven o'clock; and moreover, in the morning and in the evening in tomorrow's press. Moreover, we will carry out the directive expressed in the telegram yesterday."
Following is the text of the proclamation:
"Ordinance on the census of students." numeral.
"All persons of masculine sex who have attended during the years 1942-43 a Dutch high school and have not yet finished their studies should present themselves between ten o'clock and fifteen hours to the commander of the sector of the SS and the Security Police competent for the locality in which they reside with the view of employing them for forced labor."
"One. He who violates this ordinance or tries to avoid it, and particularly who does not consider himself to be obligated by this order, and whether intentionally or through neglect makes false declarations or false statements will be pubished through imprisonment or through five without limitation of either one of these two penalties considering the other decrees, unless, the other decrees provide for a greater penalty. Those who exercise the paternal authority over the students are co-responsible for the obligatory appearance of the students. They are threatened with the same penalties as the students themselves. This ordinance enters into force with the proclamation. Signed, Supreme Chief of the SS and Chief of the Police connected with the Reich Commissar for the Occupied. Territories." occupied territories. insure the arrest of workers whom they had destined for deportation to Germany.
This police intervention had been required by the Defendant Sauckel. As evidence I submit two documents. The first is of the minutes of a conference which took place on January 4, 1944, at the headquarters of the Fuehrer. I submit this document under number 68. I have already submitted this document under the number 68, and I read, French translation, page two, next to last paragraph; German original page four, in the middle of the page. Document 68:
"The Plenipotentiary for the Distriubtion of Labor, Sauckel, declared that he would try with his fanatical determination to obtain workers. Up to now he had always kept those promises as far as the number of workers to be furnished. With the best will in the world, nevertheless, it was impossible for him to make a definite promise for 1944. The success will depend in the first place on the number of German police which can be put at his disposal. This project can not be carried out without German police forces." Central Office for the Four Years Plan on March 1, 1944, Document No. 30, to which I several times drew the attention of the Tribunal. The passage which I am now about to read has not yet been commented to the Tribunal. Page three of the French text, fifteenth line from the bottom.
"The term 'protective custody' of a factory in France means simply that the factory is protected against Sauckel. We pity the French, and the French can not be blamed. In their eyes the Germans are not in agreement either with their opinions or with their actions. It is not up to me to decide up to what point the creation of protective enterprise is useful and necessary. I can only state that their creation affected the work which is expected of me. On the other hand, I have reason to hope I will beable to succeed. First, in utilizing my former group of agents and those responsible for labor employment; afterwards, by trusting to the measures which I have been fortunate enought to obtain from the French government.
"In the course of a discussion which lasted five or six hours I obtained from Mr. Laval the concession that officials would be threatened with penalty of death who tried to sabotage the enrollment of workers and certain other measures. Believe me, this was very difficult. A severe struggle was necessary to succeed, but I succeeded. And now in France the Germans must truly take severe measures in the event that the French Government does not do so. Do not be offended if I and my assistants in fact have sometimes seemed to do things in France that I am forced to ask, is there no longer any respect in France for the German Lieutenant and his ten men?
For months everything that I said finds this reply, what do you mean, Your Honor, the Gauleiter? Do you know that we have no means of execution at our disposal? We cannot act in France. They gave me this reply I do not know how many times. How then can I regulate the enrollment of labor so far as France is concerned? There is only one solution. The German Authorities must cooperate with each other if the French despite all their promises, do not act. We then, we Germans, we must make an example of one case, and after that law hang, if that is necessary, the prefect or the mayor if he does'nt submit to the rules. Otherwise there will not be one Frenchman sent to Germany." assured by their systematic arrest. It was in accordance with the logic of the National Socialist system that the recruiting policy of foreign workers be carried out through terroristic police methods. and by the workers of the occupied territories against the activities, both insidous and violent, of the Defendant caused the failure of the plan for the recruitment of foreign workers. The Defendant Sauckel had the greatest difficulty in carrying out the program which he had accepted by Hitler and the Defendant's Goering, Speer, and Funk. huge deportations of foreign workers. The number of workers coming from the occupied territories and from the Western Europe who had been deported into Germany is very high. More numerous still were the workers compelled to work on the spot in factories and workyards under the control of the occupational authorities. to be checked. These statistics are fragmentary. They are extracts from reports which the governments of the occupied countries drew up after their liberation and from reports sent during the war by the Arbeitseinsatz office to the authorities to which it was subordinate.
These statistics of Allied origin are incomplete. The records from which they are drawn up have been partly destroyed.
On the other hand, the governments of the occupied territories are only in possesion of second hand information whenever the requistion of workers was made directly by the occupation authorities. As for the German statistics, they are also incomplete since the Allied authorities have not yet discovered all the enemy records. the extent of the deportations effected by Germany. law commited by the Defendant's did not remain in the state of tentative endeavours characterised by the first stages of execution and reprehensible in themselves. They brought about the social disorder which, from the standpoint of penal legislation, determines the seriousness of the offense. official reports of the French Government. The French government's record comes from the Institute of Economic Market Analysis.
It consists of numerous detailed statistical tables. I quote from it in round numbers. to serve the National Socialist war effort. that 150,000 persons were compelled to compulsory labor; and from the report of the official Dutch government 431,000 persons were affected. round-ups undertaken during November 1944, nor the deportations carried out in 1945. policy of German recruiting of foreign workers. These statistics are cited from the report of the Defendant Sauckel or his administration which were concerned with the deportation of labor. The extent of labor utilized in the occupied territories is demonstrated by statistics concerning workers used in constructing fortifications of the Atlantic Wall as part of the Organization Todt, which I recall was directed by the Defendant Speer after the death of its founder. The following statistics are found in a teletype message sent to Hitler by the Defendant Sauckel on 17 May 1943. It is from Sauckel to Hitler. It is Document 556-PS 33. I submit it to the Tribunal under the No. 84. I read:
"To those responsible for the Execution of the Four Year Plan. The Chief for the Use of Labor:
"Regarding the employment of labor for the Todt Organization, I will be very much obliged if you will permit me to give you the following statistics:
"Since the time that I am responsible for all the labor forces for all German industry, a new labor force has been given to the Todt Organization. The total figure of the workers in the Todt Organization is as follows:
"The end of March 1942 -- 270,969 persons.
"The end of March 1943 -- 696,003 persons.
"In this regard it must be pointed out that labor, and particularly the labor of the Todt Organization, was especially charged with the execution of the work on the Atlantic Wall. This is all the more to be noticed in France, in Belgium, and in Holland."
I skip a few lines. I read page two:
"Despite these innumerable difficulties, the number of workers of the Todt Organization of the West was increased. The end of March 1942 from 66,701 workers to 248,200 workers to the end of March 1943." is included in a report which was found in the Archives ofthe German Armed Forces High Command, It is Document 1323-PS, which I submit under the number 85. According to this document, 1,228,686 workers were employed in Germany to the 30th of September 1941. Of that figure 483,84.2 came from the occupied Western territories. I shall read from the document which lists the number of deportees according to country origin. I shall confine myself to reading the items regarding the Western states, since the statistics of workers deported from the East of Europe come within the province of my Soviet colleague.
"End of March, in Holland, 134,093.
"In Belgium, 212,903.
"In France, 77,247.
"In Italy, 23,844." formed the National Socialist Government of the results of his campaign for the first half of 1944. I quote the document, which is No. 208-PS, which I submit to the Tribunal under the number 90. I read from the second page-Coming from Foreign Countries:
"In the north, 33,000.
"In Belgium, with the north of France, 16,000.
"In the Low Countries, 15,000.
"In Italy, 37,000." January 1943. I submit to the Tribunal that that is proof. The Tribunal will remember elsewhere Sauckel's acknowledgement at the 58th conference of the Four Years Plan, which I formerly read.
Sauckel admitted that there were 5,000,000 foreign workers in Germany, of whom 200,000 were real volunteers. the circumstances of its execution and by the multitude of the victims whom it affected. To prove the seriousness of its effect, it only remains for me to recall the illtreatment which foreign workers received in Germany. Germany were treated the same as German workers,--the same living conditions, same working agreements, and the same discipline. The theory is not in itself conclusive. My American colleagues have furnished proof of the wrong which the the life of the German worker. The reality was even worse. Foreign workers did not have in Germany the treatment to which, as men, they had the right. I affirm this and I shall try to prove it to the Tribunal.
crime which I am denouncing. It does not only domplement the crime of deportation itself, it gives it its true meaning. I said that the policy of the defendants in the occupied territories could be summed up in the following proposition: Utilization of the living forces and extermination of the unproductive forces. One must ignore this idea, which is one of the ruling conceptions of National Socialism, in order to judge of the treatment which the defendants imposed upon foreign workers. One must not ignore this idea. The Germans used the human potential of the occupied countries up to the extreme limit of its individual strength. They had some consideration for foreign workers to the extent that they wished to increase output. To them was applied working conditions, living conditions, and discipline which were imposed upon foreign workers deported to Germany.
which I am going to denounce. The working conditions of the foreign workers were placed under his control by an agreement with which he was fully in accord. The text of this agreement, concluded with the Chief of the German Labor Front, Ley, on the 2nd of June, 1943, appeared in the Reichsarbeitsblatt, 1943, Part I, page 588. I submitted this to the Tribunal at the beginning of my presentation. subject to the control of an inspection department of the Arbeitseinsatz. The Defendant Sauckel could, therefore, not have beer, unaware of the cruelties of which foreign workers were the victims. He permitted those which he had not prescribed. first evidence of the desire of the defendants to utilize the human potential of the occupied territories up to the utmost limit of its strength which were imposed upon the foreign workers. The legal working hours were at a minimum of hours a week by the decree of Sauckel dated August 22, 1942. In reality, most foreign workers were subjected to much longer working hours. Special work, which compelled workers to work overtime, was mostly given to foreign workers. It was not unusual for the latter to be forced to work 11 hours a day - that is, 66 hours a week - if they benefited from the weekly rest. Refugees, Document UK 78, which I submit as Document 87:
"Length of Work or Duration of Work.
"2. The average number of working hours was 11 and sometimes 13 a day in certain establishments. At the Maschinenfabrik, Berlin, the Berlin Spandau, the Alkett factory, imposed work of ten hours and a quarter a day, up to 12 hours for the night. At Koenigsberg, the factory for caterpillar treads, Krupp, imposed 12 hours a day."
with that of the German workers. this equality. The policy of freezing wages was a permanent element of the price policy followed by the National Socialist Government, which resulted that the wagesof the workers employed in Germany remained circumscribed. They were, moreover, heavily burdened with taxes. Finally, they were affected by the fines which the German undertakings had the right to impose upon their workers. These fines might reach the sum of the weekly wage for the slightest breach of discipline.
I furnish proof of this in Document D-182. These are two drafts of speeches to foreign civilian workers. One of them is intended for Russian and Polish workers. I leave this for my Soviet colleagues. I submit the other to the Tribunal under the number 88, and I cite:
"The Project of Compensation of Foreign Civilian Workers, Maintenance of Labor Discipline, January 1944.
"I must inform you of the following:
"The increases in the lack of punctuality, and negiligences, have brought the competent authorities to issue new and stronger instructions to insure the discipline of labor. The lack of discipline in labor, such as repeated failure of punctuality, absences without excuse, the abandonment of labor on its own authority, will in the future be punished by fines which may attain the average daily salary. In serious cases for instance, in absences without excuse - repeated absences of those guilty will be punished by fines which may reach the average weekly salary. Moreover, in such cases, the supplementary ration cards may be taken away for a period which may reach four weeks." actually received by the foreign workers, did not allow them to raise the standard of their existence in the places where they had been deported. I say that this standard was insufficiently high and that the attitude of the Arbeitseinsatz in this matter constitutes a characteristic violation of the elementary principles of the rights of man.
I will demonstrate it in submitting to the Tribunal, proof of the inadequacy of the food supply, the insufficiency of food, and the insufficiency of medical care to which the foreign workers could lay claim. phlets in which the accommodations reserved for the reception of foreign workers were represented as being extremely comfortable. It was quite different in reality.
I will not stress this point. My American colleague, Mr. Dodd, has already submitted and commented upon Document D-288, a statement concerning Dr. Sager, the doctor in charge of the working camps attached to the Krupp factories. I will not read this document anew to the Tribunal, but I would like to recall that in this document Dr. Sager said that French workers in the Krupp factories, war prisoners, had been billeted for more than a half year in ovens, in places of public convenience, and that the men slept there, five in each small spot. This document will be desposed as number 80.
To this insanitary accommodation was added an insufficient diet. I do not claim that the foreign workers deported to Germany were systematically reduced to starvation; I claim the leading principle of National Socialism is expressed in the rules for the feeding of foreign workers. They were decently fed to the extent that the manpower service was to maintain or increase its capacity for work. They were reduced to short rations the moment that, for any reason whatsoever, their industrial output diminished. They then entered into that category of dead forces, which National Socialism sought to destroy. Congress of the Labor Administration of Greater Germany: "The feeding and remuneration of foreign workers should be in proportion to their output and their good will." He developed this theme in documents which I am offering in evidence to the Tribunal. which is Document 016-PS, which I shall not read since it has already been read to the Tribunal by my American colleagues. But I wish, even so, to draw your attention to the second paragraph, age 1, of this document, which concerns the work of war prisoners and foreign workers and civilians:
"All these men must be fed, lodged, and treated in such a way that they may be exploited to the maximum with a minimum of expense."
I ask the Tribunal to remember this formula. This is the question of exploiting to the maximum foreign labor with a minimum of expense. It is the same conception which I find in a letter of Sauckel addressed, *---* 14 March 1943, to the Gauleiters. It is Document 633-PS, which I submit to the Tribunal under the number 90:
"Purpose, treatment, and care to be given to foreign labor.
"Not only does it honor or consider our National Socialist conception of the world opposed to the plutocratic and Bolshevistic methods, but it is, before anything else, good sence which demands proper treatment of foreign labor, even Russians of the USSR. Slaves undernourished, ill, discontented, despairing, full of hate, will never submit to the possibility of exploiting entirely their output, which they might do under normal conditions."
I skip now to the paragraph before the end:
"But given that, we will need foreign labor for long years, and their replacement is very limited. I cannot, then, exploit them on a short-range policy and I cannot waste their power of labor." brought out by the establishment of food sanctions which were inflicted on the deported workers. I refer to Document D-182, which I have just offered in evidence as number 88, and I remind you that it forces the possibility of inflicting on recalcitrant workers the sanction of a partial suppression of food rations. Moreover, those who were exposed to diseases and epidemics, since they were poorly lodged and poorly fed--the foreign workers--did not benefit in any way from suitable medical attention.
I submit, finally, a report given on June 15, 1944, by Dr. Fevrier, head of the Health Service of the French Delegation with the German Labor Front. It is Document 536, which I quote, at page 15. I submit it, first, under the number 91, and I quote at page 15 of the French text, and page 13 of the German text--the last paragraph at page 15:
"At Auschwitz, in a very fine camp of 2,000 workers, we find tubercular people who were recognized as such by the local German doctor of the Arbeitsamt, but this doctor neglects to repatriate them out of hostile indifference. I have now taken steps to obtain their repatriation.
"At Berlin, in a clean hospital, well lighted and well ventilated, where the chief doctor, a German, only comes every three weeks, or a female doctor, who is a Russian, distributes uniformly every morning the same calming drops to all the patients, I have seen a dozen tuberculars, three of them transformed prisoners. They have all, except one, gone beyond the extreme limit at which this treatment might still have had some chance of being efficacious." tation. Professor Henri Dessaille, Medical Inspector General of the Labor Ministry, estimates that 25,000 French workers died in Germany during their deportation. But not all died of diseases. To slow extermination was added swift extermination in concentration camps.
severity contrary to the law of nations. I have already given some examples of the sanctions to which the deported workers were exposed. There was something additional. The workers who were deemed recalcitrant by their guards were sent to special reprisal camps, the Straflager; some disappeared in political concentration camps. Tribunal proof of this fact. In the course of my presentation I submitted to the Tribunal this document under number 44, the ordinance of Sauckel of 29 March 1943, which extends the term of the work contracts by the length of time which the workers spent in prison or in internment camps.
I will not dwell on this point. My American colleague, Mr. Dodd, has placed before the Tribunal the documents which prove the shipment of deportees from labor to concentration camps. I permit myself merely to refer the Tribunal to the presentation which Mr. DuBost will furnish the Tribunal within a few days. workers. It constitutes the culmination of the crime of deportation of workers, and the proof of the coherence of the German policy of extermination. civilian mobilization of foreign workers for the service of National Socialism in Germany. I have shown how the establishment of compulsory labor was inserted into the general framework of the policy of German domination. I have denounced the methods which the Defendants employed for the forcible recruitment of foreign manpower. I have emphasized the importance of the deportations undertaken by the Arbeitseinsatz, and I have recalled how the deported workers were treated and mistreated. jurisdiction of the Tribunal: Violation of international conventions, attack on the law of nations, common-law crime. for these infractions. It was the Reich Cabinet which set up the principles of the policy of compulsory recruitment; the High Command of the German Armed Forces effected its execution in the workyards of the Wehrmacht, the Kriegsmarine, and the Luftwaffe; the civilian administrations made it the support of the German war economy.
I recall more particularly the guilt of certain of the defendants: Goering, General Delegate for the Four-Year Plan, coordinated the planning and the execution of the plans for the recruitment of foreign laborers. Keitel, Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, counter-signatory of Hitler's decrees, integrated compulsory labor with his manpower policy. Funk, Reich Minister of Economics, and Speer, Minister of Armament, based their programs of war production on compulsory labor. Sauckel, finally, Delegate General for the Manpower Service, showed himself a resolute, fanatical--as he himself has said--agent of the policy of compulsory enrollment. And Seyss-Inquart, in Holland, was his agent. the Tribunal to condemn the crime of the civilian mobilization of foreign workers. I ask the Tribunal to restore the dignity of human labor which the Defendants attempted to degrade.
M. GERTHOFER: Mr. President, Your Honors. I am the French Prosecutor in charge of that part of the Indictment concerning the facts of which the accused axe reproached in the countries of Western Europe, which are provided for in Article 6-B of the Charter of 8 August 1945. concern, on the one hand, persons, and, on the other hand, private or public property. ment inflicted on war prisoners, on civilians, torturings, murders, deportations, as well as devastations not fustified by military exigencies--were presented to you and will be presented to you by my colleagues. We will have the honor, M. Delpech and myself, to present to you the pillage of private and public property. of the French Prosecution. We shall strive to present it as briefly as possible, to shorten the reading of numerous documents submitted to the Tribunal, and to avoid, whenever possible, dry figures.