dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
M. HERZOG: First, I read Page 7 of the French text and of the German text: "Gauleiter Sauckel demands a further 250,000 new workers. Gauleiter Sauckel knows very well-and his offices have certainly informed him about this-the difficulties which the French Government had in carrying out the program last year. The Gauleiter must realize that as a result of the number of prisoners of war and workers who are already employed by Germany, the sending of another 250,000 workers will increase even further the difficulties of the French Government. I cannot conceal these difficulties from the Gauleiter, because they are evident; and the Germans who are in Paris know these difficulties. When the Gauleiter replies that they have had to overcome the same difficulties in Germany and when he even states that French industry must be expanded, it seems to me that I must remind him that Germany not only demands workers of France, but is also beginning to take away the machines from factories in order to transport them to Germany. France may have nothing left, but until now she still had her means of production. If these too are taken from her, France loses even her possibilities for working. "I do everything to facilitate a German victory"-and you see Laval could hardly be suspect to you, Defendant-"but I must admit that German policy makes heavier demands on me nearly every day and these demands do not conform to a definite policy. Gauleiter Sauckel can tell the German workers that they are working for Germany. I cannot say that Frenchmen are working for France. "I see that in many fields the French Government is not able to act. One would almost believe that on the German side they set no value on the good will of the French and that they are bent on instituting a German administration throughout France. My task is being made more difficult every day. It is true that I do not allow myself to be discouraged; but I consider, however, that it is my duty to remind the Gauleiter of the gravity of Franco-German relations and of the impossibility of continuing along this path.
M. HERZOG: It is no longer a matter of a policy of collaboration; rather, it is on the French side a policy of sacrifice, and on the German side a policy of coercion." I pass to the next page, Page 11: "The present state of mind in France, the uncertainty concerning the means which the French Government possesses, the half-freedom in which it finds itself, all these do not give me the necessary authority to furnish Gauleiter Sauckel with an immediate reply. We can do nothing. We are not free to change salaries; we are not free even to combat the black market; 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. I am persuaded that the Fuehrer is unaware that the French Government cannot act. There cannot be in one country two governments on questions which do not concern directly the security of the occupation forces." I skip two more pages, to Page 18; and I read only this sentence: "It is not possible for me to be a mere agent for German measures of coercion." That is the document which I submit to you, Defendant, and I ask you two questions concerning it. ·	The first question is: What did you answer to Laval when he made this statement to you? The second one is: Do you not think that here there is proof of the pressure which you dispute?
SAUCKEL: To begin with, if the Tribunal would permit it, I should have to read my reply to Premier Laval. The document proves, and this has been confirmed to me by Premier Laval on various occasions, that I conducted my negotiations with him in a proper manner; and in spite of the fact that I had orders not to conduct political conversations but only to deal with my actual task, I always reported to the Fuehrer about these matters. But I think that the tone of my reply was definitely beyond reproach. These negotiations which I conducted...
M. HERZOG: That is not the question that I asked you. I asked you what you answered him when he made that statement to you, when he said to you, for instance, that it was not possible for him to be a mere agent for German measures of coercion.
SAUCKEL: I would have to read my answer. I cannot remember it now.
M. HERZOG: Do you therefore dispute the fact that this represents pressure?
SAUCKEL: Premier Laval did not complain about me in this connection. He complained about general conditions in France, because this was the time of occupation. The situation was that there was a German occupation. It was war.
M. HERZOG: Well, I am going to submit to you Document...
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, regarding this document, I should like to draw your attention to an error of translation which will lead to considerable misunderstanding. According to this document it says that the recruitment could be approached with emphasis and more severe measures, and the word "emphasis" has been translated by "pressure" in the English. But that is not meant. It is not "Druck," pressure; it is "Nachdruck," emphasis. That means that the next in authority can be approached with energy.
THE PRESIDENT: I am told that the translation we have got is "emphasis."
DR. SERVATIUS: "Pressure."
THE PRESIDENT: I am told the translation is "emphasis." No, no, the translation is "emphasis." It is in this document, and the translation in English is "emphasis."
DR. SERVATIUS: Oh, I had the French translation.
M. HERZOG: I am going to submit to you Document . . .
THE PRESIDENT: Is this document in the PS series?
M. HERZOG: No, Mr. President, it is a new document which I am submitting now, a French document which will bear Exhibit Number RF-1509 (Document Number F-809).
THE PRESIDENT: Where did this document come from?
M. HERZOG: That document comes, Mr. President, from the archives of the Majestic Hotel in Paris, where the German offices in Paris were located. Some months ago these archives were found again in Berlin, and we have extracted the Sauckel documents. I submit to the Tribunal the certificate of authentication for the Sauckel files, as well as for the documents which I intend to submit to the Tribunal in the course of my cross-examination. Perhaps, as the document is in French, the Tribunal would like me to read it.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, read it, will you? You mean this proces-verbal? What is this proces-verbal? Who is it identified by?
M. HERZOG: This proces-verbal is identified by two persons, by Commandant Henri, French liaison officer at the American Documentation Center in Berlin, and by my colleague, M. Gerthoffer, who, with Commandant Henri, took these archives.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you had better read this proces-verbal so that it will go into the record.
M. HERZOG: "I, Charles Gerthoffer, Deputy Prosecutor at the Court of the Seine, on duty with the International Military Tribunal for the Major War Criminals, having gone to Berlin to the offices of the Ministerial Collecting Center, Commandant Henri, Chief of the French Mission, gave to me, with the authority of Colonel Helm of the American Army, Chief of the 6889 Berlin Collecting Center, seven files from the archives of the German military command in France concerning forced labor and registered at the M.C.C. under the following numbers: 3 DS, Numbers 1 to 213; 4 DS, Numbers 1 to 230; 5 DS, Numbers 1 to 404; and two appendices; 6 DS, Numbers 1 to 218; 7 DS, Numbers 1 to 118; and one appendix; 1 to 121; 50 DS, Numbers 1 to 55; 71 DS, Numbers 1 to 40. "I declared to Commandant Henri that I took the said files in order to submit them to the International Military Tribunal for the Major War Criminals so that they might be used in the course of the proceedings and that they will thereafter be delivered to the French Ministry of Justice, whose property they remain. "There are five copies of this document, one of which is to serve as an affidavit for the International Military Tribunal for the Major War Criminals." Signed, "Charles Gerthoffer," and Signed, "Henri." This represents the certificate of authentication of the files themselves. I have a second certificate...
SAUCKEL: May I make a remark regarding the first document, please?
M. HERZOG: I would ask you not to interrupt me.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Herzog, the documents came from the Hotel Majestic, did they?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The Hotel Majestic was the place where the . . .
M. HERZOG: The place in Paris where the of flees of the German military command in France and the various occupation offices were located. These documents, which had vanished at the time of the liberation, were found again at the Ministerial Collecting Center in Berlin. The document which I have just submitted to you is the certificate of authentication of these files, and I also have the certificate of authentication of the documents which I have extracted from these files and which I am now ready to read to the Tribunal, if the Tribunal so desires.
THE PRESIDENT: The Hotel Majestic was the place where the German military government was established in Paris; isn't that right?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President, if I am not mistaken. Does the Tribunal desire that I should read the other certificate of authentication, that is to say at least in part-the one concerning the document itself?
THE PRESIDENT: I thought you had already read it.
M. HERZOG: No, Mr. President. I am submitting to the Tribunal two certificates of authentication. The first, the one which I have just read, is the certificate of authentication of seven files which contain a very large number of documents. From these seven files we have extracted only a certain number of documents which we are submitting to the Tribunal; and that is why, after having presented the certificate...
THE PRESIDENT: The second document only says that the documents which you are submitting are documents which came from those files?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President. loci PRESIDENT: And the files themselves came from the Hotel Majestic, which was the place where the German military administration was carried on. Will you put the second document on the record?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you offering in evidence the original German documents?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President. [Turning to the defendant.] Since you still deny the pressure that you exerted on the government, I will submit to you Document Number 1342-PS.
SAUCKEL: I think that an error in translation has been made here. I understood that you asked whether I denied that I was putting pressure on the Tribunal. I respect this Tribunal too highly to try to exert pressure upon it. I do not understand the question. I understood you to ask me whether I denied that I exerted pressure on the Tribunal; and, of course, that question I have to answer with "no."
M. HERZOG: I said this to you: Since you deny that you exerted pressure on the French authorities, I will submit to you a new document. It is Document Number 1342-PS which has already been submitted to the Tribunal under Exhibit Number RF-63. This document represents the minutes of a meeting which you held on 11 January 1943 in Paris with various German occupation authorities. Do you remember that on that occasion you made a declaration concerning your relations with the Vichy Government? I will read this declaration to you. It is on Page 4 of the French and German texts.
SAUCKEL: Unfortunately, I am not able to find it.
M. HERZOG: I will read the declaration: "The French Government..."-It is the last paragraph but one before the end of Page 4.-"The French Government is composed of nothing but adepts at temporization. If the first 250,000 workers had arrived in Germany in time, before the autumn-the negotiations with the French Government having already been begun in the preceding spring-we might perhaps have been able to recruit key men in the Reich earlier and form new divisions; and it might then not have come to the cutting off of Stalingrad. In any case, the Fuehrer is now absolutely decided to rule in France, if need be even without a French Government." When you made this declaration, did it not reflect the pressure which you were exerting on the French Government?
SAUCKEL: This is not a conference with the French Government. This is a statement of facts.
M. HERZOG: I did not say that it was a conference with the French Government. I asked you what you meant when you stated that the Fuehrer was determined to rule in France, even without the French Government. Was that not pressure?
SAUCKEL: That was a straightforward decision and a statement from the Fuehrer, for which I am not responsible. I merely repeated it, and in any case it was never realized.
M. HERZOG: Why did you transmit it to the occupation authorities in France in the course of a conference that you were holding with them concerning the recruitment of labor?
SAUCKEL: Because it was my duty to give a description of the situation as I saw it at the time.
M. HERZOG: But do you not think that, in expressing to them this declaration of the Fuehrer, you were using it to exert pressure?
SAUCKEL: I could not exert any pressure by that, because this was merely transmitting a statement of the situation. I did not tell the French Government that the Fuehrer would remove them and that therefore they would have to do such and such a thing. I merely negotiated.
M. HERZOG: But you did state, and I ask you to confirm it, you did state in the course of that conference that the Fuehrer had decided to rule in France, if need be, even without a French Government? Did you say that? I ask that you answer me "yes" or "no."
SAUCKEL: Yes, I repeated that, but not with the intention of doing that.
M. HERZOG: DO you remember the discussion which you had on 14 January 1944 in Paris with various German personalities?
SAUCKEL: Yes; it is possible that I had a discussion there at that tune, but I cannot remember at the moment what it was about.
M. HERZOG: You do not remember a discussion which you had on 14 January, and you do not remember the German personalities who were present at this meeting?
SAUCKEL: Probably there were several conferences, but I cannot tell you now which one you are talking about. Neither do I remember, of course, what the actual subjects of the discussions were.
M. HERZOG: On 14 January 1944 you had a conference in Paris with Abetz, Von Stulpnagel, Oberg, and Blumentritt. Do you remember that in the course of that discussion you submitted to your listeners the draft of a law which you had drawn up and which you wanted to impose on the French authorities?
SAUCKEL: I was not trying to impose it. I was trying to discuss it. I was negotiating. I was not trying to impose it upon them. The wording of the minutes shows that quite clearly.
M. HERZOG: Do you dispute the fact that you yourself drafted a law which you transmitted to the French Government?
SAUCKEL: No, that I do not deny. That I submitted such a draft law and that I drafted it, I do not deny.
M. HERZOG: You do admit then that you yourself drafted the text?
SAUCKEL: Yes, but I cannot tell you which one you mean.
M. HERZOG: I submit to you Document Number F-813, which I put in under Exhibit Number RF-1512. It is the minutes of this meeting of 14 January 1944, Document Number F-813. These minutes are signed by Abetz, Oberg, Von Stulpnagel, Blumentritt, and you. I read from Paragraph III the heading: "The Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor"-which was you-"has drawn up a draft law for the French Government." Do you still dispute the fact that you yourself drew up draft laws which you submitted to the French Government?
SAUCKEL: That I do not deny; I had to submit a proposal. However, it was based on mutual negotiations.
M. HERZOG: Do you deny the fact that you imposed this law by pressure?
SAUCKEL: That I imposed this law by pressure, that I do deny. I negotiated about it.
M. HERZOG: Do you not remember that you gave an account to the Fuehrer of the mission which you carried out in Paris in January 1944?
SAUCKEL: It was my duty to report when I made such journeys for I was carrying out the Fuehrer's orders.
M. HERZOG: I submit to you this report, Document Number 556-PS, which was submitted to the Tribunal under Exhibit Number RF-67. Twice in the course of this report you speak of German demands. Do you not think that to give an account to the Fuehrer of German demands having been accepted is to give an account to him of the success of the pressure which you exerted?
SAUCKEL: I cannot conceive in what other way a basis for negotiations could be found. The German Government made demands, and because of those demands there were negotiations with the French Government which had to be considered by me as de jure.
M. HERZOG: Do you admit, therefore, that the German Government and you, who were its agent, were making demands? Please answer "yes" or "no."
SAUCKEL: The German Government was making demands, yes, that is true.
M. HERZOG: Thank you. And those demands, did they not, at times, take the form of a veritable ultimatum?
SAUCKEL: I am not aware of that. I can only say that I was very polite and accommodating when talking to the French Premier and that our negotiations ran very smoothly. He often mentioned that, and it is in the record.
M. HERZOG: When you took action concerning the mobilization of the 1944 class, do you not remember that you demanded this mobilization in a veritable ultimatum? Answer "yes" or "no."
SAUCKEL: I cannot say so from memory.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Herzog, I think you might put to him the last sentence in the letter of the 25th of January 1944, 556-PS.
M. HERZOG: "I have, however, allowed no doubts to remain that further and more severe measures will be taken if the demands for the transfer of workers is not met."
SAUCKEL: Yes, I probably said that, though not in the form in which it is put down in this letter.
M. HERZOG: Do you remember that on 6 June 1944, the day of the dawn of our liberation, you addressed a letter to Ambassador Abetz?
SAUCKEL: I cannot tell you that from memory.
M. HERZOG: Well, I am going to produce this letter. It is the French document, Number F-822, which I submit to the Tribunal under Exhibit Number RF-1513: "6 June 1944. Paris. "Your Excellency and dear Party Comrade Abetz: "The long-expected invasion has finally begun. Thus ends also for the Allocation of Labor a period of waiting which up to now has served as an obvious, sometimes tacit, pretext for saying that the sending of workers into the Reich was impossible owing to the political atmosphere in the country." I skip a few dines and I quote again. "Now that the German soldier must once more fight and bleed on the Channel coast, now that the struggle may extend at any hour to many other parts of France, any call or any ' words from Laval can have no weight whatsoever. The only language which can now be understood is that of the German soldier. I beg you, therefore, in these decisive hours to ask Premier Laval at last to do something which is obviously very difficult for him; that is to say, that he should at last sign the order for the calling up of the 1944 class. I do not wish to be kept waiting any longer. Neither do I wish to leave with an opinion which might be unjust but which at the same time is forced upon me, concerning the temporizing tactics of the French Government. "I beg you, therefore, most urgently, to obtain by 10 o'clock tomorrow morning the signature of the French Premier to the decree for the calling up of the 1944 class, or else to inform me quite clearly if Laval should answer with a categorical 'no.' I will not accept any delaying excuses, as all technical preparations regarding the quotas from the departements, as well as the arrangements for transport, have either been made or are now about to be made, thanks to the joint discussions which have been going on." Do you not call this a veritable ultimatum?
SAUCKEL: It is only an ultimatum insofar as my departure was in question and nothing else. I could not exert any pressure on Laval or use any threats.
M. HERZOG: What did you mean when you said: "I beg you, therefore, most urgently to obtain by 10 o'clock tomorrow morning the signature of the French Premier to the decree for the calling up of the 1944 class, or else to inform me quite clearly if Laval should answer with a categorical 'no.' I will not accept any delaying excuses..." Is that not an ultimatum?
SAUCKEL: It is only an ultimatum insofar as I could not wait any longer. I had to leave, because I had orders to leave. I was trying to get a decision, a "yes" or "no," nothing else.
M. HERZOG: And to demand an answer "yes" or "no"-you do not consider that an ultimatum, Defendant Sauckel?
SAUCKEL: I had to leave, and I wanted a decision as to whether the French Premier would sign it or not.
M. HERZOG: Thank you. The Tribunal will, I am sure, note your answer. Do you know how many French workers were deported to Germany as the result of your various actions?
SAUCKEL: As far as I can remember-I cannot say exactly offhand-there were 700,000 to 800,000 French workers employed in Germany. However, I cannot tell you exactly without documents.
M. HERZOG: Is it correct that in Belgium and in Northern France the deportation of workers for forced labor was regulated through laws of the army of occupation?
SAUCKEL: I do not know about it being through the laws of the army of occupation but through labor administration.
M. HERZOG: Is it correct that it was the decree of 6 October 1942 which instituted forced labor in Belgium and in Northern France?
SAUCKEL: We called it "compulsory labor service" in German law. That is correct.
M. HERZOG: Is it correct that General Von Falkenhausen, the German Military Commander in Belgium and in Northern France, who signed the order of October 1942, did so under pressure from you?
SAUCKEL: No, he did not sign it under pressure from me, because I talked to him about it and there was not any argument. This was done at the request of the Reich Government and the Fuehrer.
M. HERZOG: I submit to you the interrogatory of General Von Falkenhausen, who testified before a French magistrate on 27 November 1945. I submitted this interrogatory under Exhibit Number RF-15 (Document Number RF-15) in the course of my presentation in January. I read from Page 1. Question 3: "Question: 'Will you swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?' "Answer: 'I swear.' "Question: 'On 6 October 1942 there appeared an order which instituted compulsory labor service in Belgium and in the departments of Northern France..."' I skip two lines. "Answer: 'I was Commander for Northern France and Belgium.' "Question: 'Does the witness remember having promulgated this order?' "Answer: 'I do not remember exactly the text of this order, because it was drawn up after a long struggle with Sauckel, the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor.' "Question: 'Did you have any difficulties with Sauckel?' "Answer: 'I was fundamentally opposed to the institution of compulsory labor service, and it was only after having received orders that I consented to promulgate the decree."' Do you still deny that General Von Falkenhausen issued this order under pressure from you?
SAUCKEL: I deny the version as it is put before me now, emphatically.
M. HERZOG: You dispute the testimony of General Von Falkenhausen?
SAUCKEL: In this version, yes, because the institution...
M. HERZOG: This statement was given under oath, and your testimony today is given under oath. The Tribunal will take note of it.