dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
TIMM: Unfortunately, I cannot give the dates of the sessions exactly. I know only that the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor several times wished to report these circumstances to the Fuehrer, and that the two men, as far as I can remember, agreed that these questions should be discussed with the Fuehrer. Then, however, in order to avoid always taking things to the Fuehrer they agreed to have matters talked over with Reichsminister Lammers.
DR. FLACHSNER: You cannot give any details about that?
TIMM: Only if-I remember, for example, that the question of the blocked industries in France was discussed.
DR. FLACHSNER: Very well.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the Prosecution wish to cross-examine the witness?
M. HERZOG: Witness, were you a member of the National Socialist Party?
TIMM: Yes.
M. HERZOG: From what date?
TIMM: In 1933 I applied for admission. My application was at first refused, and as far as I remember it was approved in 1934 or 1935.
M. HERZOG: Were you a member of the SA?
TIMM: I was a member of the SA for a short time. I left the SA when proceedings for my expulsion were instituted against me in the SA, and I resigned.
M. HERZOG: Were you a member of the SS?
TIMM: No.
M. HERZOG: What were your functions up to the time you entered Sauckel's office?
TIMM: I was employed in that branch of the Reich Ministry of Labor which had the employment agency, the office for vocational guidance, and the training agency.
M. HERZOG: When did you first meet Sauckel?
TIMM: As far as I can remember, I saw Sauckel for the first time when he visited State Secretary Syrup in the Reich Ministry of Labor, and the individual officials were invited to meet him.
M. HERZOG: At what time did this take place?
TIMM: I cannot give the date exactly. I believe it was about a few weeks after the appointment of Sauckel as Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor.
M. HERZOG: What was your position at the time when Sauckel was appointed Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor?
TIMM: I was in the department for employment and unemployment relief-the employment department...
M. HERZOG: And at the end, what was your position?
TIMM: At that time I was a Ministerialrat in the Reich Ministry of Labor.
M. HERZOG: Will you tell me where Sauckel's of flees were in Berlin?
TRIM: did not understand the question.
M. HERZOG: Will you tell me where Sauckel's offices were in Berlin?
TIMM: In Berlin, Sauckel himself worked in Thuringia House, while the special sections made available by the Reich Ministry of Labor were in the building of the Reich Ministry of Labor at Saarlandstrasse 96, and some, after a part of the building had been destroyed, were in alternative quarters near Berlin.
M. HERZOG: Thank you. The of flees at Saarlandstrasse 96 therefore came under Sauckel's administration? Is that right?
TIMM: The Office at Saarlandstrasse 96 was not a new office; it was the Reich Ministry of Labor. The two sections had been made available by a Fuehrer decree to carry out the tasks of the GBA.
M. HERZOG: A document headed "Delegate for the Four Year Plan, Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor, Berlin SW 11, Saarlandstrasse 96" therefore comes from Sauckel's office?
TIMM: I did not quite understand.
M. HERZOG: A document which has the following heading: "Delegate for the Four Year Plan, Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor..."
THE PRESIDENT: Why not show him the document?
M. HERZOG: I show you Document Number L-61, which was submitted to the Tribunal in the course of the last few sessions. This document bears, as you see, the following heading at the top on the left: "The Delegate for the Four Year Plan, the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor." On the top in the righthand corner, `'Berlin SW 11, Saarlandstrasse 96." It is dated 26 November 1942, and comes, therefore, from Sauckel's offices. Is that right?
TIMM: This document comes from the GBA, therefore from Sauckel's office.
M. HERZOG: Thank you. Did you represent Sauckel at the conferences of the Central Planning Board for the Four Year Plan?
TIMM: I either represented him, or I went with the GBA to take part in the sessions. Not always, but frequently.
M. HERZOG: When you represented him there, you received instructions before going there, did you not?
TIMM: When we had to go to larger and more important conferences, we were informed by Thuringia House that there were to be sessions, and we received our instructions as to how we were to represent the GBA at these sessions.
M. HERZOG: And when you came back from these meetings, you gave Sauckel a report on them, did you not?
TIMM: After the sessions we either reported the results of the conference to him personally, or through his personal advisers.
M. HERZOG: Sauckel then had to take the responsibility for the declarations you made at the various meetings? Is that right?
TIMM: As an official, it was always my duty to make sure when I made reports in a session and to ascertain . . .
M. HERZOG: That is not what I asked. Will you answer my question? You received instructions before the conferences began. You reported to Sauckel afterwards what was discussed at these conferences. Consequently Sauckel was responsible for what was discussed there, was he not?
TIMM: If I might be allowed to explain about this. . . 10; PRESIDENT: Is not that really a matter of law, not a matter of evidence?
M. HERZOG: Yes, of course, Mr. President. [Turning to the witness.] You declared a short while ago that the conversations at which you had been present in Paris were of a friendly nature. Do you remember taking part in the conference of 12 January 1943?
TIMM: At the moment I cannot remember just from the date whether I took part, but I could tell from the subject of the discussion whether I was present or not.
M. HERZOG: I have already submitted Document Number F-809 to the Tribunal. It contains the minutes of this conference. In the course of the conference, Laval, among other things, said to Sauckel: "It is no longer a matter of a policy of collaboration; it is rather, on the French side, a policy of sacrifice, and on the German side a policy of coercion... "We cannot take any political measure without everywhere coming up against some German authority which has substituted itself in our place. "I cannot guarantee measures which I do not take myself ... "It is not possible for me to be a mere agent for German measures of coercion." Do you think that those are friendly remarks?
TIMM: I did not understand one word. "Do you believe that those. . . "?
M. HERZOG: ". . Friendly remarks." You said that these conversations were friendly. I have given you an extract from the contents of these conversations. Do you still say that they were friendly?
TIMM: I can only confirm the spirit of the negotiations in which I took part. I do not recognize these statements in the form you give them to me.
M. HERZOG: If you had known them, would you still have said that they were friendly conversations?
THE PRESIDENT: He was not there. He just said that he did not know about it. We can judge for ourselves whether the tone of it is friendly.
M. HERZOG: Witness, you stated earlier that you had no knowledge of forced deportations.
TIMM: I said that I knew of no forced deportations under the authority of the GBA; and I do not know of any deportations.
M. HERZOG: Do you remember a conference held on 15 and 16 July 1944 at Wartburg, which you attended, and at which Sauckel, a number of chiefs of Au labor of fires, and people who worked with Sauckel were also gathered?
TIMM: At Wartburg there was a conference of the presidents of the Au labor offices. I was there for that conference.
M. HERZOG: Do you remember having spoken there?
TIMM: Yes.
M. HERZOG: Do you remember the statements you made about recruiting methods?
TIMM: I do not recall that so well; no.
M. HERZOG: I will now show you Document Number F-810, which I submitted to the Tribunal under the Exhibit Number RF-1507. The Tribunal will find the extract I want to submit to the witness on Page 10. You were speaking of the conferences which the Plenipotentiary General for Allocation of Labor was having with the Wehrmacht about its co-operation in compulsory recruiting, and you said: "The Fuehrer has approved the use of measures of coercion to the fullest extent." Do you deny that you knew that workers were being recruited for forced deportations?
TIMM: I ask for a moment's time. I have not yet found the place. It was not shown me before. These are notes made by some one present, presumably the Military Commander in Paris. I have not my statements on this I June 46 question at hand, but I should imagine that the GBA, in view of the difficult . . .
M. HERZOG: Will you please look at Page 8, Paragraph IV?
TIMM: Page 8, yes.
M. HERZOG: Under Paragraph IV, on Page 8: "As regards the employment of European labor and the problems, methods, and means for the same, Timm made the following remarks: 1) Northern Europe; 2) Southeast; 3) Italy; 4) France." Then we come to the passage about which I am asking you for an explanation, because you made this statement. Will you answer that? Do you still deny your knowledge of the fact that these deportations were forced?
TIMM: I have no intention of denying anything. I can only say that Sauckel probably had powers from the Fuehrer to use all reasonable means to speed up the procurement of workers. Measures were introduced and carried out in France which, even if they were approved by Laval, the Premier at the time, might nevertheless be termed compulsory.
M. HERZOG: Thank you. I have one last question to ask you. In this quotation you say, "The Fuehrer has approved...." If the Fuehrer approved something, it means, that something was suggested to him. Is that not a fact?
TRIM: As far as I can remember, Gauleiter Sauckel always reported the results of his talks in Paris to the Fuehrer. It is possible that he reported to the Fuehrer the question of recruiting methods which he had discussed with Laval; and it was customary for him, as I have already said in my testimony, always to make sure of the Fuehrer's approval, so, that he did not work against the Fuehrer's ideas.
M. HERZOG: Thank you. I have no more questions.
DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, the document which was last submitted to you, L-61, from Saarlandstrasse, is not in the original, but it contains the words: "Signed, Sauckel." The Defendant Sauckel has informed me that it is possible he did not sign it himself, but that he may have been informed, in a general way only, that there were letters about one thing and another-routine office correspondence-and he might have given authority for them to be signed. Is that possible?
TIMID: It was like this; the departments in Saarlandstrasse. . .
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Servatius, did Sauckel state that in evidence, or are you telling us simply what he said to you? Do you remember?
DR. SERVATIUS: I cannot say exactly whether he stated that here.
THE PRESIDENT: Go on then.
DR. SERVATIUS: [Turning to the witness.] Answer the question.
TIMM: Yes. As Sauckel continued to exercise his functions as Gauleiter in Weimar, it sometimes happened that things did not reach him. The sections in Saarlandstrasse submitted their drafts to the personal adviser in Thuringia House, and it is quite possible- as I know from my own knowledge of conditions-that the contents of the drafts were transmitted by telephone, and that the personal advisers were authorized to sign the name of the Plenipotentiary General.
DR. SERVATIUS: Was the mail so extensive that he did not take exact cognizance of individual letters?
TIMM: That is hard for me to judge.
DR. SERVATIUS: That is enough. One more question: Fuehrer- Sauckel-Speer. Is it true that the Defendant Sauckel told you that the Fuehrer had ordered him to fulfill all Speer's demands?
TIMM: I do not know whether exactly such a statement was made.
DR. SERVATIUS: We have shown you the document in which Laval complains about the conduct of the German authorities. Did this complaint refer to Sauckel's activities, or was it not that he had told Sauckel of these complaints and was thanking him personally for his attitude?
TIMM: I recall from the talks with Laval, that Laval repeatedly expressed his gratitude to Sauckel for having put into effect measures and means for facilitating matters which he had suggested. Laval attached special importance-to use his own expression-to putting the climate and the atmosphere in order, and to having talks with Hitler himself as soon as possible; and he asked Sauckel to pave the way for him. As far as I know, Sauckel did actually arrange for talks of this kind and Laval thanked him for doing so.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have no more questions for this witness.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): The job of the GBA was to get workmen to replace the men who had been taken into the Army out of industry. That was largely your work, was it not?
TIMM: The task of the GBA was much more comprehensive, as previously all the tasks...
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Well, I understand, but that was part of your work, was it not?
TIMM: Yes.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): All right. Now, you were therefore told beforehand the number of people that the Army was taking out of industry, weren't you, so you could make up your estimates?
TIMM: The numbers were adjusted in the Central Planning Board. It was precisely the task of the Central Planning Board, that the plans made in the OKW...
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Wait a minute. I don't care who examined the figures, but your organization certainly had knowledge of the needs of the Army, of the number of people the Army was taking out of industry. You had to have that information, had you not?
TIMM: The number of men to be drafted was reported to the Central Planning Board.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): All right, reported to the Central Planning Board. Now then, they were taking people out of industry also who were not needed for the Army, weren't they? I mean Jews. They were taking Jewish people out of industry, were they not? Sauckel said yesterday that Jewish people were being taken out of industry. You admit that, don't you?
TRIM: Yes. Jews were eliminated from industry.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): All right; and I suppose the Central Planning Board was given the number of Jewish people that were taken out of industry, were they not?
TIMM: I do not know that. In the conferences at which I was present . . .
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Do you not assume that that must have been the case, if they had to find the number of replacements. It must have been so, mustn't it?
TIMM: I cannot judge as to that because I learned only the total number of men to be drafted, independently of the Jewish question. I will not venture an opinion; I do not know.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): Do you not know that Himmler and the SS told the Central Planning Board the number of Jews that were being taken out of industry for whom replacements were needed? You know that as a fact, don't you?
TIMM: No.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): You do not?
TIMM: No. I know only that we received certain statements from the Reichsfuehrer SS that people were being taken out of industry, and owing to the objections of the Plenipotentiary General, who had to supply the replacements-I remember that this measure was partly withdrawn.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): And you do know that one of the duties of the Reichsfuehrer SS was to withdraw Jews from industry? You know that?
TIMM: I know from statements in reports that Jews were to be withdrawn from industry.
THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): That is all.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may retire and the Tribunal will adjourn. [A recess was taken.] [The witness Hildebrandt took the stand.]
THE PRESIDENT: Will you state your full name.
HUBERT HILDEBRANDT (Witness): Hubert Hildebrandt.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you repeat this oath 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.]
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down.
DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, you were working in the office of Sauckel, is that correct?
HILDEBRANDT: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: You were subordinate to Timm. What was your special field?
HILDEBRANDT: In the Reich Ministry of Labor from 1930 I dealt with questions concerning labor for the iron and metal industry, the chemical industry, and the textile industry. After 1940 I also dealt with questions concerning workers in the West.
DR. SERVATIUS: Regional questions in the West?
HILDEBRANDT: Yes; in France, Belgium, and Holland; some of those questions.
DR. SERVATIUS: You must remember to pause before you answer. Did you have any general idea about what happened in Sauckel's office?
HILDEBRANDT: No; I did not.
DR. SERVATIUS: But you participated in the staff! conferences?
HILDEBRANDT: Yes; I was present at most of those.
DR. SERVATIUS: And in that way you found out, to a certain extent, about what happened in other offices?
HILDEBRANDT: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: I want to ask you especially about conditions in France. What was the position of the Plenipotentiary- General for the Allocation of Labor in France?
HILDEBRANDT: The Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor in France, just as in other occupied countries, had appointed special deputies who transmitted his wishes, and helped to carry out these wishes and these tasks. The organization of the entire labor strength from the occupied western territories remained in the hands of the German military or civil administrative offices there.
DR. SERVATIUS: So he did not have an organization of his own?
HILDEBRANDT: The first deputy in France tried to establish an organization of his own, but after a short time he met with the opposition of the German administrative offices, and the offices which he had established in the meantime were taken over by the military commander.
DR. SERVATIUS: What was the position of the military commander?
HILDEBRANDT: The military commander was and remained responsible for the entire allocation of the labor in his district, and also for the labor sent from his district to Germany.
DR. SERVATIUS: What was the position of the German Embassy?
HILDEBRANDT: The German Embassy took the leading part in all negotiations which were to be carried out by the Plenipotentiary General or his deputies, with French Government offices.
DR. SERVATIUS: What was the position of the French Government as regards the allocation of labor?
HILDEBRANDT: The French Government made agreements with the Plenipotentiary General concerning the carrying out of his programs, and ordered its own offices to carry out certain tasks, especially when compulsory labor was introduced in France. It published the necessary decrees and gave the necessary directives to the subordinate offices.
DR. SERVATIUS: And who had the executive power to recruit labor? Was that done by the French or the Germans?
HILDEBRANDT: One must distinguish between two periods. When it was still a question of recruiting volunteers, until the fall of 1942 these volunteers could report to German offices as well as to French offices; and also to recruiting offices which had been established by German firms, and some by branches of the Wehrmacht. After the introduction of compulsory labor, the administrative executive for the carrying out of the decrees rested solely with the French authorities.
DR. SERVATIUS: And what happened when somebody did not report? HILDEBRANDT Then a first summons to appear was received from the French authorities, and then repeated summonses, and if these proved to be unsuccessful the French authorities called in the French police.
DR. SERVATIUS: Were those who did not come brought before the courts?
HILDEBRANDT: I assume that that may have happened sometimes. I do not know for certain.
DR. SERVATIUS: German or French courts?
HILDEBRANDT: French courts, according to French regulations.
DR. SERVATIUS: What would be your estimate of the number of voluntary workers who came from France to Germany?
HILDEBRANDT: The number of voluntary workers from France, . until the middle of 1942-but I can only give approximate figures from memory...
DR. SERVATIUS: Please, just the approximate figure.
HILDEBRANDT: Something over 200,000. After the compulsory labor decree had been introduced in the course of 1942, there were still voluntary recruitments as well on a fairly large scale. The number of volunteers was, at times, considerably larger than the number of conscripts, so that altogether more than half of all the labor recruited in France consisted of volunteers. It is noticeable that women were only recruited if they volunteered. There was no compulsory service for them. With regard to the compulsory labor assignments moreover, it must be pointed out that a number of them were only formal. In reality these people had come voluntarily, but for economic reasons, or out of consideration for their relatives and friends in their home towns, they attached importance to being conscripted. We had compulsory labor assignments which were only put on an official basis afterwards. Such requests reached the German labor offices especially during the last months before the end of the war; and the Foreign Office requested the Plenipotentiary General to approve such demands, and that was done.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you hear anything in your department about recruiting measures such as the surrounding of churches, cinemas, and similar places in France?
HILDEBRANDT: No; I do not know of any such recruiting measure. I know that in France, as well as in Belgium, identity papers were controlled among members of the age groups which had been called up to register.
DR. SERVATIUS: You were also probably in Paris, and you spoke to the German authorities there; is that right?
HILDEBRANDT: Yes. Every time I was in Paris I took the opportunity to talk to members of the offices about current events.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did they not tell you about things which must have surprised you?
HILDEBRANDT: With each major task we carried out we had some difficulties, course, and certain excesses. Once it was reported to me, among other things, that there were impossible conditions in the "Pepiniere"-a camp, a kind of transit camp for people who had to leave. These conditions were reported immediately to the Town Major of Paris who remedied matters. Then there were irregularities in the recruiting in Marseille, where recruiting agents used blackmail. This was also stopped immediately. Beyond that, a fairly large number of individual cases were brought to me. These were minor difficulties about vacations, salaries, and so forth, which I transmitted each time to the competent offices for further action.
DR. SERVATIUS: Was it part of your official duties to follow these things up?
HILDEBRANDT: As far as they came within my sphere, I took the necessary steps immediately. As far as it was the business of other, departments I immediately transferred them to those departments for further attention.
DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, I did not ask what you did, but whether it was your official duty to look after these things.
HILDEBRANDT: The general problems of recruiting and statistical checking of programs came within my field of duty. Questions of housing, pay, and transport were dealt with by other departments. Of course, when I found out about bad conditions it was my duty to investigate them at once, if only in the interests of further recruiting. We considered it of the greatest importance that every abuse should be stopped immediately, because it was only in this way that further recruiting of volunteers could be guaranteed. Labor conscription was therefore looked on as a last resort.
DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, I would like to know whether it was your official duty, or your moral duty to look after these things?
HILDEBRANDT: In this case it was my moral duty as well as my official duty.
DR. SERVATIUS: As regards the way transports were erected, I have one question. Mention has been made of irregularities on transports. That is why I would like you to tell us what steps you took to have the transports that came from France supervised and directed. Can you describe that briefly?