Q. Did those sessions often result in single discussions?
A. That always happened once in a while, particularly when technical questions were discussed where very few experts could say something.
Q. I shall now proceed to the labor assignment within the Fighter Staff. How did the Jaegerstab deal with the questions of labor assignment?
A. As with all the production discussions of other programs, labor assignment questions were discussed at the sessions of the Fighter Staff. I had the task, concerning these labor assignment questions, to pass it through my office chief and so far the tasks which I had with the Jaegerstab overlapped my other duties and tasks with other organizations; in other words, if you want to know exactly or if you want to have a detailed description of what my tasks were which I had to do in general -
Q. I want to know what you had to do with the labor assignment of the Jaegerstab and what was your main task there; otherwise, we will be here about an hour or so.
A. Amongst other things, we had the task, on the basis of the reports of the various factories which came over the armament inspectorates to me, to write a proposition how those red slips were to be distributed on the individual production. In the Fighter Staff, I also had the task to distribute those red slips in such a way that the most important factories would get the necessary number of red slips. The red slips were orders to the labor assignment offices or agencies of Speer; in other words, to the armament inspectorates and to the armament commandos, and were given from Sauckel to his labor assignment agencies which were to provide preferentially the necessary amount of workers on the basis of those red slips. I furthermore had the task to take care of transfers of laborers who already were in the armament industry by giving respective orders to my agency and requesting Sauckel to carry out these things; since regarding the Fighter production, the question was, in the first place, concerning experts only transfers of this kind were carried out.
Skilled workers were no longer assigned to us by Sauckel in 1944. My main activity, therefore, concerned transfers from one of the industries to the other, 728 A and as regards the Fighter Staff, in transfers from the destroyed bomber factories or from other obsolete aircraft types to the Fighter factories which were working full.
I finally had the task to deal with the transfer of the armament workers to the Wehrmacht as soldiers and I had to take care of those. In 1944, through several actions, many laborers were withdrawn from the armament industry and transferred to the Army. That concerned particularly skilled workers. It was my task now, together with those responsible for the production to take care of the distribution in such a manner that the armament industry be hampered as little as possible in their production.
Q. Is it known to you that Milch tried to see to it that as a friend of the Fighter factories, no people had to go to the Wehrmacht?
A. Yes, from all the factories and particularly from the Fighter factories they tried to send as few laborers as possible to the Army. At the beginning of the early days of the Jaegerstab--in other words, in the month of March and April approximately, we tried to relieve the Fighter program concerning deliverying laborers to the Wehrmacht. Later on, this was very difficult to be carried out. I knew, however, that Milch tried his very best to give as few people as possible to the Wehrmacht from the Jaegerstab production, that is of the Jaegerstab factories.
Q. Witness, you just said that concerning the request for assignment of workers, you suggested to Sauckel during these meetings, there is a word by Sauer that says, "We take care of labor assignment." What is correct now? Did you just request them or did the Jaegerstab actually take care of the assignment?
A. The Fighter Staff was not able to give orders to offices which did not belong to the Speer Ministry or to the Aviation Ministry. The Jaegerstab, very often by Sauer and perhaps by Milch, gave directions. I can't remember, concerning Milch, whether exactly such words were used there. In reality, however, it was quite different. I appeared at Sauckel's and I was ordered to tell him about the creation of the Jaegerstab and its importance concerning the Fighter production, with the request that when laborers be distributed, the Fighter Staff production should be considered in the first place.
An order to 729A Sauckel was never given by me and I am sure that Sauckel would certainly not have followed my request, particularly as he always repeatedly stressed the point that he was independent and was responsible only to the leader of the Four-Year Plan and Hitler.
Q When Saur made such a statement, "We will take care of the labor assignment, "why do you think he said that?
A Well, once in a while such strong words were used. I never considered this statement very seriously and I didn't react to it because I knew exactly that nothing would happen afterwards, and nothing really happened. I was sure that in the presence of Sauckel, the labor assignment should have been taken care of by the Fighter Staff, but it was impossible to take care of that for one single production. Everyone who had something to do with the labor assignment could understand that.
Q Witness, you just spoke concerning boasting remarks. Is it known to you that Milch often used such strong exaggerated boasting remarks during these meetings?
A I don't remember single statements made by Milch, but I am sure that they occurred. What I am to say now is that it appeared to me that Milch very often, particularly concerning the industry and his own generals, wanted to boast in order to play the strong man, I believe, however, that these statements did not always achieve the desired impression he wished to create.
Q Do you mean to say that they were not taken seriously?
A Well, not quite seriously, anyway.
Q Were you present during the conference of the Fighter Staff where Milch had made a long speech to the Air Force engineers and the quartermaster chiefs?
A I was there partly. I remember now that the session which took place in the Air Aviation Ministry -- there were 100 people there at the time, and I have to remind you of the fact that I wasn't present during all those conferences.
Q However, can you remember that Milch used boasting expressions in that conference?
A No, I can't remember the speech itself.
Q Do you remember the way Milch spoke about someone with whom he had difficulties? (Dr. Bergold uses a German slang expression.)
INTERPRETER: The statement made by the defense counsel cannot be translated.
A I cannot remember this statement of his. I cannot remember Milch's statement.
Q Witness, the prosecution introduced a document during the trial where Goering gives Himmler a Fighter Group in exchange for the use of concentration camp inmates which were put at the disposal of the Air Force Armament. Do you know anything about that?
A What Fighter Group do you mean?
Q I mean a squadron -- a whole squadron was placed at the disposal of the SS and Goering wanted to have concentration camp inmates from the SS. Do you remember anything about that? It was on the 15th of February 1944.
A I can't remember that exactly. The way it was: Goering, that is the Luftwaffe, put a great number of soldiers at his disposal for immediate production. They got their leave. But if they ever exchanged laborers for concentration camp inmates, I do not know today anymore. It could be possible; however, I can't tell for sure.
Q Witness, is it known to you that, in the Fighter Staff, they were often transferred from the construction sector to the plenipotentiary for chemistry?
A No. In any case, I don't know that this was done to a considerable extent. It is possible that it also was said during my presence that the plenipotentiary for the chemical industry had too many workers in the construction sector and a few of them had to be transferred back to the chemical industry, lots of complaints were made. However, I can't remember anything concrete.
Q Witness, can you remember that Milch tried to be able to get certain engineers from Hitler who were working in Berchtesgaden?
A I believe I can remember that. The question of the engineers was discussed very often because in the construction sector this was a big bottle neck. I remember also that concerning the construction works in Berchtesgaden it was discussed in this connection and that one hoped to be able to get not only engineers but other skilled workers from the construction works carried out in Berchtesgaden for Hitler.
Q Witness, I shall now read to you from the Exhibit NOKW-337. That is Document Book No. 4 of the Prosecution Exhibit No. 75. I shall now read to you a statement made by Milch: "We spoke to the Fuehrer--" NOKW-337.
MR. DENNEY: Page 133 of Document Book No. 4.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q That is on Page 18 of the original document.
"We further appeal to the Fuehrer that we should get the 64 engineers who are in Berchtesgaden as the work there will probably soon be finished. He made a suggestion that we, like the SS, should also train engineers in a greater extent and mentioned the figure of 10,000 that would have to be trained one after another because they could not all be trained at once."
Q Witness, I shall now ask you to make some sort of statement concerning this statement made by Milch, and I would like to know if these engineers who were trained by the SS were concentration camp inmates and if the figure, 10,000 could be possible?
A I don't know what sort of engineers the SS trained. I take it that the engineers were concentration camp inmates because the SS, in their construction works, preferred to work with concentration camp inmate I also know the statement concerning those 10,000 engineers which was made by Milch, and I believe that the number of 10,000 is somewhat exaggerated because, according to my knowledge of the construction, only a very few miners are used in the construction program, but never such a large number.
Q Witness, is it known to you that the use of concentration camp inmates was carried out in small closed groups?
A Yes, as far as the SS used concentration camp inmates, outside of their own factories, this was obviously only carried out in larger groups of about 500 to 1,000.
Q Is it possible that during constructions, a few engineers or engineers were concentration camp inmates?
A When the rest of the workers were not concentration camp inmates, then, according to the regulations of the SS, I personally don't believe that there were 50 or 100 concentration camp inmates there also and I don't know of any such cases. I know that the SS always required that the concentration camp inmates be taken in large numbers and that they should be used in groups and billeted in groups.
Q In other words, is it a possibility that the SS also used people of their own as engineers, apart from those concentration camp inmates?
A I couldn't tell you because I did not know the situation with the SS. However, that is possible.
Q We're not talking about SS construction only, but construction in general.
A I didn't understand the question.
Q The question was: If the SS ever used engineers from their own ranks and if they trained them?
A No; I don't know anything about that either.
Q Do you know if the SS had a school for building workers.
A No, I don't know that either. I never heard of any building workers' school. The workers learned that during their experience.
DR. BERGOLD: I shall prove later on that there was a miners' school with the SS. I shall now proceed to NOKW-388. This is, in the English index, on the first page, 138, Your Honor.
Q They say that, from Italy, skilled workers came. The passage reads as follows: "Very few come from the West and they are slowly starting to come from Italy. There are comparatively few skilled workers among them." What kind of labor assignment was that from Italy?
A I don't understand your question. You want to know who carried it out?
Q Yes.
A The forces that Sauckel brought from Italy.
Q Yes; were these prisoners?
A No.
Q Were they civil workers?
A No; if you read the passage like that, I'm sure that they were civilians who were brought from Italy by Sauckel.
Q In the same document, a few pages further on, you say, from the page which I have just read now, this is page 52 of the original; "A letter is on the way from the Minister to Mr. Sauckel. During the first three months Sauckel has brought in between 300,000 and 400,000 people, but not even a miserable 66,000 "red tickets" could be dispatched." Milch continues: "I personally cannot get over it! Take the help away from the housewives! In the past year 800,000 domestic servants have been negotiated and we are fighting for 2,000 men!"
Witness, who was the Minister who wrote to Sauckel? It says here, "A letter from the Minister."
A. I don't remember that.
Q. Minister?
A. Probably Speer. I think this was Speer.
Q. If it says here, Sauckel brought in from 300,000 to 400,000 people during the first three months, do they mean that these were new recruitments?
A. No, those were statements made by Sauckel that he had brought in some people. Partly, I can remember that approximately. They were probably people who were found mostly abroad and partly in Germany as well; but not transfers, I don't think that they mean transfers from one factory to the other.
Q. Well where did they find peoplo in Germany -- I mean domestic servants in Germany?
A. Well, in Germany, various people were found -Laborers, that is, particularly the younger ages. Then the civilian factories were brought against, in 1944, the so-called war production, not the armament, that part of the production which was under the orders of Speer, which dealt with the production of civilian products were combed out. I remember that the combing out of 1944 brought about 200,000 laborers which were only assigned to the armament. From the fluctuation forces, there were several people who were combed out. Sometimes, in autumn, for instance, when the agriculture could not use all the people they had on hand, they were transferred to the armament, and others, sugar factories, for instance, delivered some workers to the armament too.
Q. Right now I'm only talking about the 200,000 people who were put at the disposal -- combed out, that is -were these people also considered as brought in Sauckel's term? 735
A. That is very difficult to say, because one should know the whole connection. Unfortunately, I can't remember that today. When he said "bringing them in" he probably meant he brought them in from the exterior. Of course it is possible 735(a) that everything that was found was also considered brought in.
O cannot actually understand what this means -
735-b one should know the whole connection, of course and can not draw definite conclusions from such a term.
THE PRESIDENT: The Court will recess for a few minutes.
(A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: Tribunal No. 2 is again in session.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, on the question of the number of workers required; do you know of an Order of Hitler, according to which in the constructions of Berchtsgaden, no concentration camp inmates and foreigners were to be used?
A I did not know of the order myself, but I do know, however, that it was said that neither foreigners nor concentration camp inmates could be used there; I did not know of the orders myself.
DR. BERGOLD: I now turn back to Document No. NOKW-388, with which we were concerned before, at Page 138, we were discussing the part where according to Sauckel 300,000 to 400,000 workers were brought in but not even 66,000 red slips could be filled. What are the additional forces that could not be used for red slips?
THE WITNESS: I did not quite understand the question.
DR. BERGOLD: You stated during the first three months Sauckel has brought in between 300,000 and 400,000 people, but you added that unfortunately only 66,000 red slips could be honored. What sort of manpower were the other workers, the difference between the 66,000 and the 300,000?
THE WITNESS: Those two numbers can not be compared. In other words, the 300,000 that were brought in, and the red slip numbers, were the number of requests. The passage should probably read that if Sauckel had brought in two or three hundred thousand it would have been possible for him to provide the 66,000 for red slip requirements.
DR. BERGOLD: I turn now to the next page, 53 of the original. Here you stated it would be necessary to have workers, to take them from somewhere else, and Milch says: "You know our position. We are convinced that you are doing everything you can.
But we must now commit a robbery. We can no longer operate along legal lines." You interrupted and said, "That is the only possibility. There will be abuse but we must accept that."
Q What do you understand under the term "robbery"?
(No response)
DR. BERGOLD: Perhaps, if I could show you the document, you can answer?
737 A
THE WITNESS: I no longer recall it. It appears to have taken place, but to my recollection, I can not place it. The only thing that it can mean was a request to other industries Milch probably thought of taking the workers for the Luftwaffe from other industries and other branches of production. I did not contradict him then, because at that time I knew it was entirely out of the question, that the other industries would not have permitted it. There is no statement hero as to what actually happened, as a result of this. It simply is one of those boasts, to which I referred before.
DR. BERGOLD:
Q It was simply one of those proposals or statements which you previously characterized as witness as a strongly exaggerat ed statement?
A When he said this, the only possibility (pause) when I said that was the only thing we could do, I meant that probably ironically, but I do not recall that statement.
Q By "robbery" did he possibly mean that they should be stolen from a foreign country?
A Whether Milch meant that, I do not know, but I certainly did not understand it so, because I could have told him it was entirely out of the question. Besides Sauckel, no one was permitted on his own initiative to take foreign workers.
Q Please turn the page forward and find the passage in which there is a discussion of taking by force workers from other industries, could that be discussed under the word "robberies" here?
A I don't find the passage.
Q It reads "the proposal to take agricultural workers and give them to the air industry and not to return them has not been accepted by Sauckel." Thereupon Milch said "that that is out of the question; nothing is going to be taken away from the fighter production." What does Mich mean here?
A The situation in the autumn was as follows: In the autumn agriculture, that is in 1943 and also in 1944, surrendered a number of workers loaned them to armaments, with the understand that they Would be returned to agriculture in the Spring when they were needed. The return caused enormous difficulties since the plants did not want to return those workers, who in the course of the winter had been trained. This question was discussed at great length. Sauckel had undertaken the obligation to return those workers in the following Spring especially as they had after all also been trained for agriculture during the past summer and he insisted also in contradiction to Speer's wishes that agriculture should receive the workers back. As far as I recall there was even a discussion of this with Hitler whether these forces had to be returned or not. Milch's wish, when the fighter production stood in the fore-front, and was called most important armament in March, not to return these workers was also communicated to Sauckel and here also he insisted that they should be returned. Then apparently this passage refers to this refusal by Milch to give them back; but they had to be given back after all.
Q Then if he made such a statement that they would not be given back to them; would such an action be robbery?
A Yes, it must have been something of that sort. At least it would have been an order that contradicted all existing orders, namely, that they should be given back as ordered by Sauckel.
Q Then Milch speaks on the next page of the following matter:
"We must protect all plant which work for fighter air craft industries, You should not surrender people except on orders of the Fighter staff. Nobody can get at you, not even high offices or ministerial directors; all requests have to be made to the fighter staff; we want to state this fundamentally as an order.
739A then further below, he says we must write a latter to General Keitel and the OKW in which it will be said requests are to be made only directly to the Jaegerstab Can it be deduced from this passage that the Fighter Staff really had these workers at its disposal?
A It was a question here of workers who were already employed in the Fighter Production. According to the agreement between Speer and Sauckel, as a basic principle, armament plants should not surrender workers except with the approval of the corresponding armament authorities. This agreement also extended to the Luftwaffe probably, although the Luftwaffe armament was previously independent; it extended to the Fighter Staff though. At this time, according to the orders then existing, in other words, no workers could be withdrawn as a matter of practice. This order was frequently disobeyed, and apparently in this case Milch was correct that demands for workers from air production should, if at all, be directed to the Fighter Staff. Also, inductions into the army were carried out in such a way that the armament industries received a certain quota, let us say 100,000 men should be given up; the distribution or allocation of this quota to the individual district and finally to the individual plants was being carried out by the armament agencies themselves, who knew where the workers could best be snared. This principle was infringed upon again when the so-called measures for total war were introduced. At that time workers were to be given to the Wehrmacht and not to the armament agencies or the plant managers, but by the party agency that Goebbels instituted. Consequently enormous difficulties frequently arose. And it is possible, although I don't know what time this statement was made, but it is possible that this has reference to that.
Q This is the meeting of 28 March 1944.
A No, that cannot be, because the measures for total war were taken later.
Q But it means, however, that the Fighter Staff had a right to protect its workers?
A No, as previously the Jaegerstab could only keep or dispose of such workers as it had already.
740 A