dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
SAUCKEL: Will you please indicate the place to me? I have not found it yet. Which page in German?
M. HERZOG: It must be on Page 5 of the text which was given to you.
SAUCKEL: Yes, that is correct. That is a statement, a rather abbreviated statement, probably made by Reich Minister Dr. Lammers. But I should like to say emphatically that it can be interpreted only in this way: In those areas, which were very numerous at the time, I could not put into effect an administration to deal with manpower until order had been restored through executive forces. This statement, therefore, is not quite correct as presented here.
M. HERZOG: Defendant Sauckel, you said to us only yesterday that you were formerly a worker. Did you ever consider that a worker could be taken to his work handcuffed?
SAUCKEL: NO, I never thought of such a thing. I hear now for the first time that I am supposed to have sent, or had workers sent to their places of work handcuffed. I do not remember that. In any case, I never decreed anything like that; that much I can say.
M. HERZOG: On 30 August 1943, you made a speech in Paris to the Allocation of Labor staffs which you were setting up in France. I give you Document Number F-816, which I submitted to the Tribunal this morning, and I ask you to look at it again. I ask you to read... Mr. President, I think I have made a mistake. I do not think I submitted that document, and, therefore, I submit it now, under the Exhibit Number RF-1517. Turning to the  defendant.] Please look at Page 10 of the photostat which has been given to you-Page 38 of the French translation, the last line on the page: "The most severe measures for recruiting labor-police action or the use of handcuffs-must be applied by us in the most unobtrusive manner." That is what you declared on 30 August 1943 to the Allocation of Labor staffs when they met in Paris.
SAUCKEL: I have not found the place. Will you please have it shown to me?
M. HERZOG: It is on Page 10, some 14 lines down. Have you found it now?
SAUCKEL: Yes; I have found it.
M. HERZOG: And you considered that handcuffs could be used in the recruitment of labor?
SAUCKEL: It can only be a statement regarding cases of flagrant resistance to the authority of the state or to the execution of some administrative action. Experience shows us that this has been found necessary the whole world over. I merely said that everything should be done in an orderly and correct way. I did not call that a rule to be applied for the recruitment of labor. It cannot be understood in any other way.
M. HERZOG: But you said that to the Allocation of Labor officials in France. The Tribunal will judge that.
SAUCKEL: Yes, but it must be interpreted as being applied only if there were flagrant resistance to an executive authority; otherwise it was never intended.
M. HEREOF: The Tribunal will form its own opinion. Defendant Sauckel, have you ever created any special police for the recruitment of labor?
SAUCKEL: No, I established no special police; I explained that yesterday. That was a suggestion put forward by the French units themselves for protection. At a conference I exaggerated and called it "police," but it was not a police force.
M. HERZOG: Have you heard of a "Committee for Social Peace"?
SAUCKEL: Yes, that was talked about.
M. HERZOG: Have you heard a committee mentioned which was called the "League for Social Order and Justice?"
SAUCKEL: Yes.
M. HERZOG: Have you ever drafted any order or sent any instructions which advised the institution of these committees?
SAUCKEL: It was proposed, yes, and it was discussed. As far as I remember that was in the spring of 1944.
M. HERZOG: And you claim that you never set up these committees, or drafted any instructions concerning the setting up of these committees?
SAUCKEL: I have already said that I did that.
M. HERZOG: You admit that you drafted instructions concerning the formation of these special police forces?
SAUCKEL: That was done on the basis of discussions which I had with these French units.
M. HERZOG: So you did do this?
SAUCKEL: Yes, in agreement with these 'French units.
M. HERZOG: Very well. I submit to the Tribunal Document Number F-827, under Exhibit Number RF-1518. These are instructions of the Defendant Sauckel for the formation of these special police forces. The document consists of several sets of instructions. On Page 6, there is an order of 25 January 1944 by the Defendant Sauckel.
THE PRESIDENT: Where is it?
M. HERZOG: On Page 6, immediately after Document 1292 in my document book, you will find the instructions of the Defendant Sauckel. I read: "Berlin, 25 January 1944. Secret. "Subject: Formation of a protection corps for the execution of the tasks of the Allocation of Labor in France and in Belgium during the year 1944. "1) To the Military Commander in France, Paris. To the Military Commander for Belgium and Northern France, Brussels. "In order to secure the carrying out of the necessary tasks of the Allocation of Labor in Belgium and France, especially the assignments for Germany, and to strengthen the executive, a protective corps, the Committee for Social Peace, is to be created in France and Belgium. This protective corps is to consist of indigenous forces with a nucleus of German police who will act as leaders. This protective corps will consist of approximately 5,000 men in France, and approximately 1,000 men in Belgium. I give the following provisional instructions for the formation of this protective corps and the accomplishment of its tasks: "I. Selection of members of the Protective Corps. "The selection shall be made in close agreement with the competent Police and SD offices, which shall approve the candidates, especially from the point of view of their loyalty. The selection shall be made especially among the members of political movements favorably disposed to collaboration with Germany. "II. Organization of the Protective Corps. "The Protective Corps will be directed from central offices to be set up in Paris and Brussels. The heads of these offices shall be designated by me."-That is to say, by you, Defendant Sauckel.-"They shall take orders from my delegates in France. In purely police questions, the Protective Corps shall be directed by the Higher SS and Police Leader. The regional groups of the Protective Corps shall take orders from the commanders of German police forces, and the latter will receive technical directions from the Feldkommandantur and from the recruiting offices as to their participation in tasks concerning the Allocation of Labor.
M. HERZOG: The German Police and the services of the SD will deal with instruction in police matters; technical training, as far as the Allocation of Labor is concerned, will be given insofar as is necessary by the experts of the Felikommandantur and the recruiting offices. "The members of the Protective Corps will not wear uniform; they will however, carry firearms. "III. Execution of orders. "The members of the Protective Corps assigned to the recruiting of flees or to the Feldkommandantur shall be employed in such a way as to insure maximum efficiency in the execution of measures ordered. For example, they must be informed immediately if Frenchmen who have been summoned by German offices do not appear. They must find out the domiciles of these persons and bring them to report in accordance with instructions from the German police leader in collaboration with the French and German police. Furthermore, they must track down immediately all those who have refused to appear when summoned, and those who have broken their contracts. In the interests of an effective executive, it is expedient that they receive regularly lists of persons summoned and persons liable for service, to enable them to act immediately in cases where German directives have not been complied with. "It is to be presumed that these quick methods, coupled with fitting punishment and immediate publication of the punishments, will have a more deterrent effect than that achieved by tracking down the men afterwards, as has been done up to now. Furthermore, members of the Protective Corps are to keep the German offices informed of any particular difficulties in recruitment...." And all that, Defendant, is signed "Sauckel." Do you still claim that you did not form a special police corps in France and Belgium?
SAUCKEL: I already told my attorney yesterday that in agreement with French organizations such a protective corps was set up, so that on the one hand people who wanted to work could be protected, and on the other hand administrative measures could be carried out. Since the Frenchmen themselves declared that they were ready and willing to collaborate, I did not see anything unfavorable in this or anything that was in any way out of order. It was to alleviate the conditions of the indigenous people themselves.
M. HERZOG: I ask you to answer my question "yes" or "no." Do you admit that you set up this special police service?
SAUCKEL: I admit that I suggested this Protective Corps, and that it was set up, but only on a small scale.
M. HERZOG: Is it true that you issued instructions, or imposed measures of constraint against those who evaded the compulsory labor service?
SAUCKEL: I did not issue them myself, but rather the French Government did. That is correct; for in every occupied territory -and that is true the whole world over-the authority of the occupying power must be respected.
M. HERZOG: Is it true that you demanded that the death penalty should be applied to officials who, for instance, hindered your action?
SAUCKEL: It is true that at a conference with the French Premier Laval, I demanded, by way of negotiations, the death penalty in cases of very serious obstruction.
M. HERZOG: Then you admit that you demanded the application of the death penalty in the case of these officials?
SAUCKEL: Yes, if a serious case of sabotage was in question- according to martial law.
M. HERZOG: Is it true that your task was to procure for the German war industry the labor it required?
SAUCKEL: That was one of my tasks.
M. HERZOG: In this respect were you responsible to the Defendant Speer, Minister for Armaments and Munitions, for the carrying out of your task?
SAUCKEL: I was responsible to the Four Year Plan and to the Fuehrer, and I had instructions from the Fuehrer to meet the requirements of Reich Minister Speer as far as it was possible for me to do so.
M. HERZOG: Did the Defendant Speer approve of all the steps which you took in recruiting foreign labor?
SAUCKEL: At all events he agreed, or he demanded, that workers should be put at his disposal. Sometimes, however, we did not entirely agree as to how it should be done; for instance, we did not agree about the protected factories in France.
M. HERZOG: We will come to that later. I ask you to tell me whether you always succeeded in satisfying the demands for workers which were made to you by the different sections of German industry?
SAUCKEL: No, I was not always successful.
M. HERZOG: And when you failed, did the orders that were sent to you by Defendant Speer have to have priority over all others?
SAUCKEL: Yes, they had to have priority.
M. HERZOG: Were there not incidents in this respect? For instance, did it not happen that some transports of workers were diverted from their original destination on instructions from Defendant Speer?
SAUCKEL: It did happen that, contrary to my instructions, labor transports were stopped, or transferred to other regions or to other factories. But whether the order always emanated from Herr Speer, or from an armament commission, or from another office, I do not know. It was not always from the same quarter.
M. HERZOG: In your interrogatory you declared, however, that the original destination of these transports was sometimes changed in order to satisfy the demands of Speer's offices. Do you confirm this?
SAUCKEL: Yes; but I meant by that something rather different. In that case I was informed about it. There were two kinds of changes, or deviations: those which I did not know about, and those which were agreed upon.
M. HERZOG: Will you tell the Tribunal what was understood by the "red ticket" system?
SAUCKEL: The red ticket system was applied when there was a demand for workers, mostly specialized or skilled workers, which had to take priority over all other demands because the work was necessary.
M. HERZOG: The system of the red ticket was applied to the armament industry, was it not?
SAUCKEL: The red ticket system was applied to the armament industry.
M. HERZOG: And it was established by agreement between the Defendant Speer and yourself?
SAUCKEL: That was a system which, in my opinion, was always intended to meet emergencies; there were variations, such as lists or red tickets. Originally, there were only lists, and the red ticket was added by decree.
M. HERZOG: You therefore admit that by these various systems you share with the Defendant Speer the responsibility of having compelled workers to work in German factories for the needs of the war which Germany was fighting against their own native lands?
SAUCKEL: I should like to emphasize particularly that This red ticket system did not apply only to foreign workers; it applied especially to German workers too-German fulfilled workers.
M. HERZOG: But it was applied also to foreign workers?
SAUCKEL: It applied to foreign workers as welt if they were specialists and declared their willingness.
M. HERZOG: Will you tell the Tribunal what is meant by the "blocking" of factories?
SAUCKEL: A factory was "blocked" if it was manufacturing articles which were not essential for war, or if it was a question of so-called luxury articles.
M. HERZOG: I do not think you understood my question. What were, for instance, the "S" factories in France the factories protected by Speer?
SAUCKEL: "Sperrbetriebe" known as "S" factories-is that what you mean?
M. HERZOG: Yes.
SAUCKEL: Sperrbetriebe were factories which worked for Speer in France, which had been agreed to by the French Minister Bichelonne, and they were blocked as far as labor recruitment was concerned.
M. HERZOG: Did you not exert strong pressure on the Defendant Speer to get him to abandon the practice of blocking industries?
SAUCKEL: I asked him and I urged him, but I could not SUCceed in putting an end to the blocking of these factories.
M. HERZOG: Did you ever bring up the matter with Hitler and insist that Speer should give up his position?
SAUCKEL: Yes, I was very insistent with Hitler about it, but I had no success.
M. HERZOG: In this connection did you not ask the Fuehrer to increase your powers at the expense of the Defendant Speer?
SAUCKEL: I did not ask for a general extension of my powers, but I asked that conditions should be allowed to remain as they had been previously, for-I ask to be permitted to explain this to the Tribunal-my task was to bring workers from France to Germany-may I make this statement: The departments under Speer demanded skilled workers from me. There skilled workers already in the factories which Speer had blocked. Similar industries in Germany would, of course, be worse off if instead of having skilled French workers they were supplied with unskilled French workers, or men without experience in that particular trade. I had to procure workers in any case, but I considered it wiser for German economy to procure for it the right kind of workers and not workers who were unskilled.
M. HERZOG: I beg the Tribunal to turn back to Document Number 3819-PS, the second part of 3819-PS. It consists of two letters, each addressed to the Fuehrer, by the Defendant Sauckel and by the Defendant Speer, on this subject of the blocking of industries. First of all, I will read to the Tribunal some extracts from Sauckel's letter, which happens to be the second.
THE PRESIDENT: Have these not both been read already?
M. HERZOG: I think they have already been read, Mr. President; I cannot affirm it, but believe so. Document Number 3819-PS has already been submitted to the Tribunal as Exhibit Number GB-306. If the Tribunal wishes, I can limit myself to very short extracts.
THE PRESIDENT: You need not read them for the purpose of your question of the defendant.
M. HERZOG: [Turning to the defendant.] In this letter, on Page 27, you asked whether you could obtain in a general manner a free hand for the rational utilization of labor. Do you admit that you asked the Fuehrer for this free hand?
SAUCKEL: I have not found the place. I could never have asked for a free hand, but I did ask to be permitted to recruit as before. I cannot find the place that you are quoting.
M. HERZOG: You will find it on Page 27.
SAUCKEL: In this German text it says: "In this situation, it is absolutely necessary that I should again have a free hand." That means that I should have a free hand once again, as I had had before the blocked industries were instituted. That is correct, for I was interested in a rational use of labor.
M. HERZOG: That is what I asked you to confirm. Did you ask that your powers should be increased at the expense of those of your Codefendant Speer? Will you answer "yes" or "no," if you can?
SAUCKEL: I do not understand the question. Was it obtain them or ask for them?
M. HERZOG: Ask for them.
SAUCKEL: Yes, I asked for them, for it was to Speer's advantage.
M. HERZOG: You asked for that?
SAUCKEL: Yes, I asked for that in the interests of my tasks.
M. HERZOG: And do you not remember that on other occasions, the Defendant Speer likewise asked that his powers should be increased at the expense of yours?
SAUCKEL: Yes, that might have happened also.
M. HERZOG: You declared in your interrogatory that the very close relations between Speer and Goebbels after the fall of Stalingrad made Speer want particularly to have you under his authority. Can you confirm this?
SAUCKEL: Yes.
M. HERZOG: Is it true that your general program for recruiting labor included the employment of prisoners of war?
SAUCKEL: The employment of prisoners of war as far as they should and could be put to work under the care of the Wehrmacht.
M. HERZOG: Do you remember the decree white we mentioned this morning, your Decree Number 10, which stipulated the order of priority of work and gave priority to armament? Was this order applicable to prisoners of war as well?
SAUCKEL: As I explained yesterday, this decree was applicable to prisoners of war only by way of exchange, and to the extent as set forth in the rules of work issued by the OKW and by me in a catalog of work.
M. HERZOG: But Article 8 of this decree stipulates only that it was applicable to prisoners of war.
SAUCKEL: Yes, in accordance, of course, with the other decrees which existed; that was a matter of course.
M. HERZOG: You spoke to us yesterday about inspectorates. Is it true that in September 1943 you came to an agreement with Dr. Ley concerning the setting up of a central inspectorate for foreign workers?
SAUCKEL: Yes, for the purposes of their welfare.
M. HERZOG: In consequence, you admit that you are responsible for the measures concerning the treatment of foreign workers?
SAUCKEL: I am responsible for the directives which I issued; they are all available.
M. HERZOG: Do you consider yourself responsible for the feeding of foreign workers?
SAUCKEL: I consider myself responsible for the directives which I issued regarding the feeding of foreign workers. The actual feeding of these people was not the task and responsibility of the labor authorities. That was the responsibility of the factories, or the camp leaders who had been charged by the factories to look after this.
M. HERZOG: I am going to have submitted to you Document Number 025-PS. This document was submitted to the Tribunal under Exhibit Number USA-698. You already had it yesterday. It consists of the report of a meeting in the office of the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor-that is to say, you yourself-on 3 September 1942. The document is dated 4 September. This document, Mr. President, is at the end of my document book, after Document F-827, the last page of the French translation. I read:...
THE PRESIDENT: The last page is Document F-857, is it not? The document called 857-the last page I have got. It is just in front of Document 2200-PS. Did you come across that? It is just after Document 1913-PS.
M. HERZOG: After Document 1913-PS, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
M. HERZOG: I read: "The Fuehrer cannot understand that, in the struggle for the future of Europe, the country which has to bear the brunt of this struggle is the one to suffer most from hunger; whereas in France..."
THE PRESIDENT: It is on Page 1 or Page 4? , 30 May 46
M. HERZOG: No, Mr. President, on Page 4 of the French text- that is to say, on the last page. "The Fuehrer cannot understand that, in the struggle for the future of Europe, the country which has to bear the brunt of this struggle is the one to suffer most from hunger; whereas in France, in Holland, in Hungary, in the Ukraine, or anywhere else, there is no talk of hunger. He desires that it should be the reverse in the future. As regards the foreign workers living in the Reich-with the exclusion of the Eastern Workers-little by little their rations must be reduced and made to correspond to their output. It is not admissible that lazy Dutchmen or Italians should receive better rations than good Eastern Workers. In principle the guiding rule of utmost output must apply equally to feeding." [Turning to the defendant.] I ask you what you meant when you stated that, "In principle the guiding rule of utmost output must apply equally to feeding?"
SAUCKEL: There was a standard ration in the Reich which was increased by additional rations based on output or performance. I fought for the principle that these additional rations, which the workers from the West were already largely receiving, should be granted to the workers from the East as well; and that where western workers that is, Dutch and Belgian workers-did not keep up their output in the same way as the Eastern Workers, these additional rations should be cut down accordingly, but not the standard ration which applied to the German people as well.
M. HERZOG: You therefore consider that if the output of one worker is smaller than that of another, his food rations must be smaller. Is that what I am to understand?
SAUCKEL: No, it is not right to interpret it that way. I should like to explain the system again. In Germany each worker received his ration as fixed by the Reich Minister for Food. In addition to that there were special increases as a reward for increased output. At the beginning these additional rations were not granted to Russian workers, and it is these additional rations we are dealing with here; not with starving people, or cutting down their standard food ration additional rations for increased output.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps we had better adjourn now. [A recess was taken.]
MARSHAL: If it pleases the Tribunal, the report is made that the Defendant Raeder is absent.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Herzog, do you anticipate being able to conclude your cross-examination before half past 4?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President, I think that I might even finish before that.