THE MARSHAL: Tribunal Number 2 is again in session.
Q Witness, will you turn to Document 1317 PS, which is page 145 of Your Honor's Document Book 5-B. It is Exhibit No. 111, Dr. Bergold, Now, incidentally, Witness, when you were in London in November you were given copies of many of these documents, were you not?
A Yes, November 1948.
Q By Colonel McClellan?
A I got hold of a number of documents which/I mentioned or which preceded that written statement of mine.
Q And, you had ample time to go over them over there?
A In November, yes.
Q Will you turn to page 111 of Document 1617 PS, I think the soldier has just given it to you; did you ever see that letter before?
A To the best of my knowledge and belief, I did not see it. I believe that this document which has just been submitted to me is the draft of the letter which Dr. Rascher submitted to the Reichsfuehrer for his signature, and sent it to Fieldmarshal Milch. This letter, Himmler had already started to correct it in its original, and among other things he erased this sentence, in the first and second lines, "You will recall that through SS Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff particularly recommends to you for your consideration the work of a certain Dr. Rascher, who is a physician of the Air Force on leave." He crossed out here, "through SS Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff". He wanted to show that, it could clearly be seen from the photostatic copy, that not I told Fieldmarshal Milch who Dr. Rascher was. I only twice sent a promulgation of a report which had already taken place on 16 April 1942 to Hippke, and a half a year later, toward the end of November, the letter to Fieldmarshal Milch concerning the transfer of Rascher from the Luftwaffe to the SS, but I never recommended Rascher' s work to Fieldmarshal Milch.
Q Now, then later in the letter he refers to "non-Christian physicians." That is down in paragraphs 2, 4, 6, 7. At the end of the paragraph, "I suggest that the liaison between you and Wolff and nonChristian physicians should be----"1260 A A (Interposing) Yes, yes, yes, indeed! I knew that at that time I did not see the draft because it was never presented for the signature nor for sending it, but only the writer--in other words, the chief secretary of the Reichsfuehrer, Dr. Brandt, was an accurate basis for that letter which I wrote to Milch, in the second half of November.
Q Then, turning to that other letter, the one which you wrote to Milch, page 179, Exhibit 118, the one we were talking about before. This is the second paragraph in the letter. I think it is on the second page of the German original, the second paragraph from the top.
A Yes.
Q The part where he does not wish that you and he should become angry about the developments. He is of the opinion that it will take at least another decade until we eliminate such narrow mindedness from our people. What were you talking about in that letter narrow mindedness?
A I already mentioned that I did not set up the letter myself. I just signed the letter myself, and probably as I mentioned this morning, I just glanced through it. Maybe I just signed it without having glanced at it, without having read it, due to the fact there was a small slip attached to it; therefore, I am very sorry not to be able to answer this question.
Q You may not have known what was in the letter at all?
A Yes, indeed, that is possible. I do not ascertain that, however, as Dr. Brandt mentioned, who is in the prison jail, according to my opinion, I am sure Dr. Brandt will testify to the effect that he used to present all these letters which were not drawn up by myself, but which had to be signed by me, that he would just submit them to me in order to facilitate my work. He would use a small slip of paper for that work. I want the Prosecution and Tribunal to remember that Dr. Brandt for a period of ton years was Himmler's right-hand, and in these ten years there was not one single case of abuse of Brandt toward me, and I could not sign the amount of signatures that had to be signed daily, and it is not possible that I could have signed all these letters, and glance through them at the same time.
Q What was the name-
A (Interposing) I cannot see anything negative in that.
Q What was the name of your particular assistant, Captain Heckenstaller, was it?
A Heckenstaller, yes, indeed.
Q And, as far as you recall now you never got any advice that the pressure chamber was going to remain in Dachau for an additional two months period?
A May I ask the Prosecution when I heard, that or whether I was not to have heard that, and at what time?
Q. I say, as far as you can recall now?
A. Yes.
Q. You never knew that the pressure chamber was to remain available for experiments for an additional two months period?
A. Yes. Pardon me, but when was that application to be made with the low pressure chamber to be kept there for two more months? We have a letter later on, from November that I take it, that the Prosecutor maybe means something that happened in the summer or perhaps in the spring.
Q. I am going back to the spring, sometime in May or June.
A. According to the best of my knowledge and belief, I cannot remember having heard anything in that respect, because all this correspondence I have not seen, and that I did not see.
Q. You only went to Dachau once in February 1942 with Himmler?
A. In this the experimental business, yes.
Q. Do you remember any other time in 1942 when these experiments were going on?
A. No, at no other time was I there when they had experiments; only I had been in Dachau several times, namely, in peacetime. In other words, I was there accompanying Himmler in order to convince myself everything was in order, was clean, and that the food was good, and that the health of the inmates was good. However, never at any other time did I participate in experiments on human beings, or had anything to do with it.
Q. You never heard of any deaths in connection with the Dachau experiments?
A. No, only now after the capitulation.
THE PRESIDENT: Did you find that the food was good and that the health of the inmates good at Dachau?
THE WITNESS: Yes, indeed. It was so clean that one could actually cat off the floor. The inmates were all very well fed, as well as the people of the Curate of the Catholic and Protestant Church, who were in termed there stated that five years of Nazi concentration camp is about the same as one year in an internment camp after the capitulation.
Q. What was the date of your visit?
A. The last time according to my recollection, that was the Spring 1939, I did make this statement, and during one of my former visits there, as precisely as possible.
Q. The last time that you were at Dachau was in 1939?
A. Mr. President, it is practically impossible without this diary of mine, but if I had my diary I would be able to tell you with one hundred per cent certainty, as I know, however, the whole correspondence of the Reichfuehrer-SS and of his people--of his personnel staff is in the Huff Hauser; it was found in the Huff Hauser and my official diary should also be there, the diary until 18 February 1943.
Q. Was your last visit at Dachau after the war started?
A. Just a moment. According to the best of my knowledge, in November 1939, on the occasion of the activating of the so-called Deathhead Division, Totenkopf Division, which was the Third Motorized SS Division, and the French campaign, which was put into action for the first time under command of Obergruppenfuehrer Eicke-
Q. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Did you not say that you went there with Himmler to observe the high altitude experiments?
A. Yes, what I just said now was in no connection with the high altitude experiments which I had mentioned. Of course, I did participate in this high altitude experiment.
Q. Then you were in Dachau in 1942?
A. Yes, of course.
Q. Well, now, when you went over there in 1942, were the inmates well fed, and healthy? That was your last visit, was it?
A. Yes, that was my last visit in Dachau, indeed.
Q. At that time you found the floor clean enough to eat on, and the inmates were well fed and healthy, and they told you so?
A. Yes, because they had the work, and as everyone knows, one can only work if fed accordingly.
MR. DENNEY: No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Denney, will you explain an exhibit, I think it is No. 111, a draft of a letter, Document No. 1617-PS, which purports to be a letter which was drafted by Rascher, and sent to Hitler. -to Himmler to be signed by him, and forwarded to Milch through the channel -- or purported channel.
MR. DENNEY: That is what this witness said, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: It is not signed.
MR. DENNEY: No, Your Honor, this copy that we have was taken from Himmler's files, and it was put in evidence in the first case, and we have never been able to find the original.
THE PRESIDENT: Is it your impression that it was drafted and prepared by Rascher?
MR. DENNEY: I don't know, sir. I don't know who prepared it. All we know it was in Himmler's files, just as it is stated, and then it is the other exhibit 118, letter dated 21 or 27 November 1942, which the witness sent to Milch, which is substantially the same with some changes. That is as close as we have been able to account.
THE PRESIDENT: In any event, it is doubtless natural that Himmler would write such a letter to Milch.
MR. DENNEY: Yes, to Milch, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Who intended it for him?
MR. DENNEY: Who intended it or drafted it, we don't know.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Witness, I understand you to say that you were in Dachau in 1942?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. And you got a fairly good view of the camp, of the entire camp?
A. We journeyed through the camp very slowly as usual, and we went straight to that low pressure chamber, which was set up in front of the inmates barracks, from which those inmates volunteered for these experiments.
At that time we did not visit the whole camp, because we were mostly interested in these experiments.
Q. You have already testified of theextremely immaculate condition of the camp?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you also visit the extermination sections of Dachau?
A. I learn for the first time here that there was an extermination division in Dachau, Your Honor.
Q. You did not know of the crematory in Dachau when you were there in 1942?
A. No. How was I to know that?
Q. Yes. You knew that the floors were clean enough to eat from, but you did not know -
A. Yes.
Q. (continuing) -- that they were killing people by the hundreds, or thousands in gas chambers, and then cremating them there right on the premises. You did not know that?
A. No, indeed.
Q. But you did know of this extreme purity of the floors on which one could have his dinner.
A. Yes, that is for this reason, Your Honor, because I thought of it myself, as I was in the barracks with these inmates at this time, inside of the barracks, and some distance from the barracks a pressure chamber, and there were clean places on the floor where they could dress. I took a look at these barracks, in other words, these barracks where they slept, and the toilets, and the washing facilities in these barracks, that is how I know it.
Q. And you know nothing about the crematory there at Dachau?
A. No, I don't.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please this Tribunal, concerning the truthfulness of this witness, I would like to state that as far as I am informed, these crematories were only set up later on, in other words, not in 1942, not already from the very beginning, Your Honor, were the crematories in the concentration camp of Dachau or in any other concentration camp set up, and one should not consider the final situation of this development compared with the early status of this camp, or with the status to which it was a submittal.
Personally I have no further questions of the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold, in 1942 the war had been in progress three years. The invasion of Poland and the Russian campaign had started.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, correct. Early in 1942 the Russian campaign had been going on for half a year. I have no further questions of the witness,your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may be removed.
THE WITNESS: May I ask you one more question, if this Tribunal is of the opinion that the assumption of the statement that I was mentally sick is correct or not, because it is of great importance to me that this be cleared completely. This statement here that I made, I want to know if it is taken into consideration, and if it is valid, or not?
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, this Court has no authority or right to determine the question which you ask, officially. My colleagues and I are willing to state, however, for your consolation, that your attitude on the stand, the readiness with which you answer questions, the ease with which you understand what is being said, and answer any inquiries, persuades us, personally, that you are an intelligent, sound-minded nan.
THE WITNESS: Thank you very much.
(The witness was excused.)
DR. BERGOLD: May it please this Tribunal, for today I have nothing at all to state. I have neither a document nor a witness, and therefore could you postpone it until tomorrow? However, I do have a request. From those witnesses which were granted me, quite a number of important witnesses have not been transported to Nurnberg as yet, in particular, the witness Vorwald, who, for a long period of years, was the closest cooperator of the defendant and who could clarify most of the points; who, so to say, was a sort of deputy to the defendant and I would appreciate it very much if this Tribunal itself would make the suggestion that the transportation of this witness to Nurnberg be expedited.
THE PRESIDENT: Where is the witness new, Dr. Bergold?
DR. BERGOLD: According to the last news which I received, I understood he was in British captivity in the so-called Muenster Camp of the Lueneburger Heide.
THE PRESIDENT: How far is that from Nurnberg?
DR. BERGOLD: It is approximately the same distance -- if you know Hanover, Your Honors -- I don't know if you do -- it is approximately the distance from here to Hanover. It is on the way from Berlin to Hamburg,that is called the Lueneburger Heide.
THE PRESIDENT: You say he is in the British Zone?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, indeed; as far as I know; that is, in British captivity.
I mentioned all that to the Secretary General. Thereupon at that time, I was granted permission to bring the witness to Nurnberg. After I had stated all that exactly.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has approved this witness?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes. Yes, after I had made that announcement that he was in Muenster Camp.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we have already arranged for tomorrow's program taking the depositions of several witnesses. Do you have anybody ready now to call on Thursday morning?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, indeed. Herr Oberst Brauchitsch, and I could also get the witness, General Warlimont, but I would have to speak to the latter two; these witnesses however have been transferred to Nurnberg by the prosecution as witnesses or defendants and therefore I'd like to speak to them, in the presence of a commissioner.
THE PRESIDENT: You could do that tomorrow.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes; I could do it tomorrow, but tomorrow I have my session here.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, your session shouldn't take all day.
DR. BERGOLD: No, I don't think so; not all day. I believe we will be through in the morning.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, then in the afternoon you could consult those witnesses.
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, I could if the prosecution would be kind enough to give me permission to do so.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, will you notify the prosecution then of the witnesses which you plan to call on Thursday?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes; the witness, General Velmi, -
THE PRESIDENT: I think you should give them this notice in writing.
DR. BERGOLD: Very well, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal, then, in session, will recess until Thursday morning at 9:30, the day after tomorrow.
We will recess at this time.
THE MARSHAL: This Tribunal is in recess until 0930, Thursday morning, the 20th of February.
(The Tribunal recessed until 20 February 1947, at 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the Matter of the United States of America against Erhard Milch, defendant, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 20 February 1947, O940 to 1630 hours, Justice Toms presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II.
Military Tribunal II is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court.
DR. BERGOLD (Counsel for defendant Milch): Your Honors, I ask permission to call the witness Brauchitsch.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will bring the witness Brauchitsch ts the courtroom.
BERNDT VON BRAUCHITSCH, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE SPEIGHT: Witness, raise your right hand and repeat after me: I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE SPEIGHT: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, please state your first and last names.
A I am named Berndt von Brauchitsch.
Q When were you born?
A 30 September 1911.
Q What was your last position?
A I was first military adjutant, Chief Adjutant, in the Luftwaffe.
Q And from when did you occupy that position?
A From 1940 to the conclusion of the war.
Q Where were you before 1940?
A Before 1940 I was commander of a Stuka group on the Western Front, and theretofore I was Ordnance Officer with the OKL.
Q Do you know Milch?
A Yes, I know him.
Q Can you identify him here in the court?
(The witness indicated.)
DR. BERGOLD: I ask that the record show that the witness identified the defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will so show.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, do you know from what time on Milch was GL?
A Field Marshal Milch was GL, or he took over that job after the death of Colonel General Udet.
Q Witness, do you know how workers were recruited within the air armaments industry?
A I know that on the part of the Luftwaffe there was no connection in the matter of worker recruitment; rather, workers were requested through Offices.
Q What did the Luftwaffe do on its own in the worker question, or had the Luftwaffe nothing to do with if
AAs far as I know, the Luftwaffe took care of purely statistical matters in the worker question within the organization of the GL, but it had nothing to do with the finding or recruiting of workers.
Q Is it not true that workers for industry were recruited by the Armaments Inspectorate?
A How the workers got from the Labor Offices to industry and what the details were, I can not say.
Q Are the armaments Inspectorates subordinate to the Luftwaffe?
A No, the Armaments Inspectorates were subordinate to the OKW.
Q To whom were the workers in Germany subordinate in their recruiting and their care and supervision?
A Orginally the Ministry of Labor, and then later, at a time which I can not state specifically, Sauckel, who took over this job directly from Hitler and was immediately subordinate to and reported directly to Hitler. 1272
Q Is it not true that according to the existing regulations Sauckel was formally subordinate to Goering under the Four Year Plan?
A It is possible that formally he was subordinate to the Four Year Plan, but in practice he received his orders directly from Hitler and passed them on accordingly.
Q Do you know who ordered the use of concentration camp inmates?
A Since the Luftwaffe had nothing to do with preparing and finding manpower, this decision could only have been made outside and must have been done by Sauckel's office.
Q Is it not correct that such use traces back to Hitler and Himmler?
A I hold it to be quite possible that this decision -- or rather, I consider it absolutely certain that that is where the decision was made.
Q Did the GL have an opportunity in regard to workers assigned by to him by the Labor Offices to refuse them, or did he have to take what was offered?
A The GL had no influence on the finding of workers or on the use of them; rather, he had to take the workers who were assigned to him for the tasks of his industry. That is to say, they were not given to him as GL but were given to the industry.
Q Do you know that Milch made efforts to have as many German workers as possible?
A I know that the fight for German workers played an enormous role and that everyone made efforts to keep German workers. I also know in this connection that there was a struggle with the OKW to keep workers who were to be inducted as soldiers and, after they were unsuccessful in this endeavor, to have them made Luftwaffe soldiers and then to be transferred back to industry. I seem to remember a number of roughly 40,000 who were involved in this matter, and there were also soldiers from the Luftwaffe who were assigned to industry.
Q Witness, what observations did you make regarding the treatment of foreign workers?
A I can say but little on this subject. I know that when the High Commander visited industry, he spoke to workers, asked them about their troubles and their needs. There were many foreign workers among this group, because Germans and foreigners worked together and were not separated at the work benches, but I do not remember any complaints, except one case which I remember when a Czech student said that he would prefer to keep on studying rather than to work at the work bench, whereupon Goering told him that that would take a while but that he would examine that particular question.
Q Were steps taken then?
A Since this was a civilian matter, I can say nothing on the subject for certain.
Q Witness, were acts of sabotage frequent in the air armaments industry?
A Sabotage in the air armaments industry was very infrequent. I remember no really important case, except for little, minor matters that came up from time to time, such as a hammer being missing or being left under the hood of an airplane, or something of that sort. Really essential cases of sabotage or whole series of acts of sabotage did not occur.
Q. Witness, do you know what the attitude was, on the part of the high officials, namely, in regard to the question whether the workers liked or did not like to work?
A. The opinion was that the few cases of sabotage were proof to the fact that the workers were doing their work willingly, and it was repeatedly ascertained that the work was done very satisfactorily.
Q. Witness, can you tell us whether and to what extent Milch had to carry out work as Goering's deputy?
A. Until 1937 the offices of the Luftwaffe were directly under Field Marshal Milch. From 1937 on, the matter was reorganized, the General Staff, the GL, the Luftwaffe Personnel Office, wore separated, and these offices were immediately subordinated to the Chief of the OKL personally. I remember that the question came up regarding who was the Chief of the OKL's deputy when he was on vacation, and he stated specifically that the oldest and highest ranking officer in the organization of the OKL did not want to take over this deputization, but had refused it, and, that is to say, the GL should remain competent for matters of the GL and the Chief of the OKL for OKL matters and the personnel manager should remain competent for personnel matters, and so on.
Q. Did you know that after 1937 -- did you know of any order after 1937 according to which Milch was to take over the deputization for Goering?
A. No; I know of no such case--rather, I do know that the Reichsmarshal refused to have any such total representation, very strenuously.
Q. Why was that?
A. That is somewhat beyond me. There were technical and personal differences frequently between Milch and Goering. The reasons for that may have been that the Chief of the OKL did not want to entrust Milch with the Central Command.
Q. Can you state, or are you not in a position to state that relations became tense as early as 1937 or 1938?
A. As I said before, I do remember the change in the organization, and the channels of command, when certain offices were put directly under the Chief 1275 a of the OKL.
This could have been the reason why the opinions of the two gentlemen did not entirely correspond, from then on.
Q. Do you know that Goering once said that it was not important to him that Milch take over the activity of General Inspector?
A. I do recall such a remark on the occasion of a conference in East Prussia, where the GL made suggestions regarding changes in the way the air arms should be used. A discussion followed in rather sharp terms, and Goering said at that time that he was not really interested in having Milch function as General Inspector.
Q. Is it true that there were continual difficulties between the two men on the question of the aircraft production program?
A. In this field, there were considerable troubles during the war in the Luftwaffe. Do you want me to tell you the time, the situation at Udet's time, or the program situation under Milch?
Q. First, please, the situation under Milch.
A. Field Marshal Milch was, after 1941, after the beginning of the Russian campaign, and the two-front war had become a reality, of the opinion, and said so in writing and orally, several times, and told Goering several times in 1942 and 1943, that the essential condition for maintaining the strength of the nation with regard to economic and political leadership was the protection of the home country; that, moreover, the soldier on the front shall have the possibility and the certainty of knowing that his relatives at home are in safety. Consequently, he demanded the predominance of the fighter production to the production of bombers. All sorts of fighters, day and night fighters, anti-aircraft, radar and so on -- all of these should be under one direction, the production and development of these weapons, and that was his attitude until this suggestion or attitude met with unconquerable opposition, until 1943 that is, until the defensive war began to decline. In these discussions which often became very spirited, Milch expressed his opinion very sharply and clearly to Goering because he was responsible for this job; ho also made demands for material and personnel for anti-aircraft defense in order to meet the demands that Hitler made on him.
