Himmler, 16 October 1942,
transmitting report on
cooling experiments on
human beings (_NO-428_).
1616-PS Pros. Ex. 105 Letter from Rascher to I-249
Himmler, 17 February 1943,
and summary of experiments
for rewarming of chilled
human beings by animal
warmth, 12 February 1943.
1618-PS Pros. Ex. 84 Intermediate report, 10 I-220
September 1942, on intense
chilling experiments in the
Dachau concentration camp.
1619-PS Pros. Ex. 87 Teletype from commandant of I-223
Dachau concentration camp
to Rudolf Brandt, 7 October
1942, stating that four
women would be available
from Ravensbrueck
concentration camp for
Rascher’s experiments.
1696-PS Pros. Ex. 357 Letter from Dr. Conti to the I-849
Mental Hospital in
Kaufbeuren, 16 November
1939, requesting that
questionnaires (attached)
be filled out for
individual patients; letter
from the General Sick
Transport Company to the
Mental Hospital in
Kaufbeuren, 12 May 1941,
stating that the company
would remove mental
patients; report from the
Provincial Association for
Social Welfare in Swabia, 6
May 1941, that all
transferred patients had
died; letter from Gaum, 24
November 1942, to Dr.
Leinisch stating that
epileptics would be made
available for research.
1971-A-PS Pros. Ex. 49 Letter from Rascher to I-144
Himmler, 5 April 1942, and
report, undated, on
high-altitude experiments.
1971-B-PS Pros. Ex. 51 Letter from Himmler to I-148
Rascher, 13 April 1942,
requesting a repetition of
high-altitude experiments
on prisoners condemned to
death.
1971-C-PS Pros. Ex. 50 Letter from Rudolf Brandt to I-147
Rascher, 13 April 1942,
regarding his success with
high-altitude experiments.
1971-D-PS Pros. Ex. 52 Teletype from Rascher to I-149
Rudolf Brandt, 20 October
1942, requesting
clarification on the pardon
granted by Himmler.
1971-E-PS Pros. Ex. 53 Teletype from Rudolf Brandt I-149
to Schnitzler, 21 October
1942, concerning the pardon
granted by Himmler.
3896-PS Pros. Ex. 372 Extract from the affidavit of I-853
Dr. Ludwig Sprauer, 23
April 1946, concerning the
organization of the
Euthanasia Program.
Becker-Freyseng 31 Becker-Freysen Extracts from Harper’s II-65
g Ex. 18 Magazine entitled “Secrets
by the Thousand” by C.
Lester Walker.
Becker-Freyseng 42 Becker-Freysen Affidavit of Dr. Ludwig I-455
g Ex. 29 Harriehausen, 9 January
1947, regarding use of
patients in sea-water
experiments.
Becker-Freyseng 60 Becker-Freysen Statement of Professor Dr. II-95
g Ex. 58 Hans Luxenburger and Dr.
Hans Halbach concerning the
report on experiments on
human beings in world
literature (Becker-Freyseng
60a, Becker-Freyseng Ex.
59).
Becker-Freyseng Becker-Freysen Extracts from report on II-96
60a g Ex. 59 experiments on human beings
in world literature;
excerpts from various
newspapers and medical
weeklies.
Karl Brandt 1 Karl Brandt Extract from “Life” magazine II-95
Ex. 1 concerning malaria
experiments on convicts in
U.S. penitentiaries.
Karl Brandt 12 Karl Brandt Affidavit of Dr. Walther I-350
Ex. 11 Scheiber on his efforts to
purchase experimental
animals in Spain and bring
them to Germany.
Karl Brandt 18 Karl Brandt Extracts from the affidavit I-871
Ex. 15 of Dr. Werner Kirchert, 29
January 1947, stating that
Karl Brandt was not
involved in the Euthanasia
Program.
Karl Brandt 19 Karl Brandt Affidavit of Alfred I-872
Ex. 16 Rueggeberg, 23 January
1947, concerning radio
discussions on euthanasia.
Karl Brandt 23 Karl Brandt Affidavit of Eduard Woermann, I-873
Ex. 19 18 January 1947, concerning
discussion of Karl Brandt
and Pastor Bodelschwingh on
euthanasia.
Karl Brandt 101 Karl Brandt Affidavit of Dr. Otto Ambros, I-351
Ex. 41 21 April 1947, concerning
the urgency of experiments
in the field of
chemical-warfare agents and
their countermeasures.
Karl Brandt 103 Karl Brandt Affidavit of Dr. Walter I-352
Ex. 42 Mielenz, 21 April 1947,
concerning the assignment
of Karl Brandt in
connection with chemical
warfare.
Karl Brandt 117 Karl Brandt Excerpts from the II-103
Ex. 103 dissertation “Infection
Experiments on Human
Beings” by Alfred Heilbrunn
of the Hygiene Institute of
the Wuerzburg University,
1937, concerning
experiments on human beings
in other countries.
Gebhardt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Extract from report on the I-377
Oberheuser 1 Fischer, First Conference East of
Oberheuser Ex. Consulting Specialists on
6 18 and 19 May 1942 at the
Military Medical Academy,
Berlin.
Gebhardt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Extract from report on the I-378
Oberheuser 3 Fischer, Third Conference East of
Oberheuser Ex. Consulting Specialists on
10 24 to 26 May 1943 at the
Military Medical Academy,
Berlin.
Gebhardt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Extract from “Clinic and I-405
Oberheuser 6 Fischer, Practice”, weekly journal
Oberheuser Ex. for the Practicing
9 Physician, regarding bone
transplantation.
Gebhardt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Extract from affidavit of Dr. I-377
Oberheuser 21 Fischer, Karl Friedrich Brunner, 14
Oberheuser Ex. March 1947.
20
Gebhardt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Extract from affidavit of Dr. I-407
Oberheuser 21 Fischer, Karl Friedrich Brunner, 14
Oberheuser Ex. March 1945, concerning
20 scientific experiments
conducted at the clinic of
Hohenlychen.
Gebhardt, Fischer, Gebhardt, Extract from affidavit of Dr. I-408
Oberheuser 22 Fischer, Josef Koestler concerning
Oberheuser Ex. Dr. Gebhardt’s activities,
21 27 February 1947.
Rose 11 Rose Ex. 27 Extract from report of I-298
Professor Dr. E.
Gildemeister concerning the
activities of the Robert
Koch Institute—Reich
Institute for the fight
against infectious
diseases.
Rose 16 Rose Ex. 12 Extracts from the affidavit I-581
of Professor Otto Lenz,
director of the Robert Koch
Institute in Berlin.
Rose 46 Rose Ex. 20 Extract from a certified I-582
statement, 4 March 1947, of
J. Oerskov, M.D., director
of the State Serum
Institute in Copenhagen.
Rose 47 Rose Ex. 35 Affidavit of Professor Dr. I-300
Hans Luxenburger, 24 March
1947, concerning Rose’s
interest in therapeutical
malaria treatments.
Rose 50 Rose Ex. 49 Extract from the affidavit of I-302
Professor Dr. Ernst Georg
Nauck, M.D., Hamburg 4,
Bernhard-Nocht-Institute
for nautical and tropical
diseases.
Mrugowsky 115 Mrugowsky Ex. Extracts from the affidavit I-647
108 of Udo Von Woyrsch, 3 May
1947, concerning
experiments on combating
injuries due to phosphorus
incendiary bombs.
Sievers 45 Sievers Ex. 46 Extract from the affidavit of I-752
Dr. Gisela Schmitz, 27
March 1947, on Siever’s
position in the Ahnenerbe
Society and his connection
with the skeleton
collection.
Sievers 54 Sievers Ex. 50 Regulations for the Commandos I-754
(Einsatzkommandos) of the
Security Police and the
Security Service to be
activated in Stalags.
Blome 1 Blome Ex. 8 Extracts from the affidavit I-778
of Dr. Oskar Gundermann, 28
December 1946, stating that
Blome opposed the plan to
exterminate tubercular
Poles and that the plan was
never carried out.
Blome 14 Blome Ex. 6 Extracts from a report on the I-777
German Tuberculosis
Conference of 18 to 20
March 1937, at Wiesbaden.
Pokorny 19 Pokorny Ex. 27 Affidavit of Dr. Helmuth I-874
Weese, 19 March 1947,
concerning use of caladium
seguinum for sterilization.
TESTIMONIES
Vol-
Page
Dr. Leo Alexander I-386, 417
Beiglboeck I-468
Blome I-780
Brack I-732, 876
Karl Brandt I-506, 892, 900;
II-29
Rudolf Brandt I-183, 757
Jadwiga Dzido I-381
Gebhardt I-388, 667
Dr. Eugen Haagen I-606
Handloser I-265
Dr. Friedrich Hielscher II-30
Karl Hoellenrainer I-456
Dr. Andrew C. Ivy I-994;
II-42, 60, 82,
110
Miss Karolewska I-409
Eugen Kogon I-583, 637, 648, 993
Werner Leibbrandt II-80
Dr. Mennecke I-875
Mrugowsky I-595, 651, 688;
II-56, 66
Walter Neff I-177, 260
Romberg I-186
Rose I-308, 586, 973;
II-69, 77, 118
Schmidt I-890
Schroeder I-269
Sievers I-274, 682
Stoehr I-664
Vieweg I-303
Vollhardt I-474
“_The Milch Case_”
_CASE NO. 2_
MILITARY TRIBUNAL NO. II
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
—_against_—
ERHARD MILCH
INTRODUCTION
The trial of Erhard Milch, formerly a Field Marshal in the German Air
Force, is officially designated _United States of America vs. Erhard
Milch_ (Case No. 2), and was heard by Military Tribunal II in the Palace
of Justice at Nuernberg. The proceedings lasted from 13 November 1946 to
17 April 1947, in the course of which period the Court convened 39
times. The prosecution consumed 8 and the defense 28 trial days. A
chronological table of the trial follows:
Indictment filed 13 November 1946
Indictment served 14 November 1946
Arraignment 20 December 1946
Prosecution opening statement 2 January 1947
Defense opening statement 27 January 1947
Prosecution and defense closing 25 March 1947
statements
Judgment 16 April 1947
Sentence 17 April 1947
Affirmation of sentence by Military 17 June 1947
Governor, U.S. Zone of Occupation
Order of the U.S. Supreme Court 20 October 1947
denying writ of habeas corpus
The prosecution introduced into evidence 161 written exhibits, some of
which contained several documents. The defense introduced 51 written
exhibits. The Tribunal heard the oral testimony of 3 witnesses who were
called by the prosecution; 27 witnesses called by the defense were heard
by the full court, and 3 before a commissioner. One witness was called
by the Tribunal on its own motion. The defendant Milch testified at
length in his own behalf.
The members of the Tribunal, and prosecution and defense counsel, are
listed on the ensuing pages. Prosecution counsel were assisted in
preparing the case by Walter Rapp, Chief of the Evidence Division,
Norbert Barr and Bevenuto Selcke, interrogators, and Robert Blakeslie,
Nancy Fenstermacher, and Tempa Altman Watson, research and documentary
analysts.
The material selected for this volume was principally compiled by Mr.
Paul H. Gantt as case editor, working under the general supervision of
Mr. Drexel A. Sprecher, Deputy Chief Counsel and Director of
Publications, Office, United States Chief of Counsel for War Crimes.
Catherine W. Bedford, Henry Buxbaum, Emilie Evand, Gertrude Ferencz,
Helga Lund, Gwendoline Niebergall, and Johanna K. Reischer assisted in
selecting, compiling, editing and indexing the numerous papers.
John H. E. Fried, Special Legal Consultant to the Tribunals, reviewed
and approved the selection and arrangement of the material as the
designated representative of the Nuernberg Military Tribunals.
Final compilation and editing of the manuscript for printing was
administered by the War Crimes Division, Office of the Judge Advocate
General, under the direct supervision of Richard A. Olbeter, Chief,
Special Projects Branch, with Alma Soller as editor, Amelia Rivers as
assistant editor and John W. Mosenthal as research analyst.
ORDER CONSTITUTING TRIBUNAL II
OFFICE OF MILITARY GOVERNMENT FOR GERMANY (U.S.)
APO 742
16 DECEMBER 1946
GENERAL ORDERS }
No. 85 }
PURSUANT TO MILITARY GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE NO. 7
1. Effective as of 14 December 1946, pursuant to Military Government
Ordinance No. 7, 24 October 1946, entitled “Organization and Powers of
Certain Military Tribunals”, there is hereby constituted, Military
Tribunal II.
2. The following are designated as members of Military Tribunal II:
ROBERT M. TOMS Presiding Judge
FITZROI D. PHILLIPS^{*} Judge
MICHAEL A. MUSMANNO Judge
JOHN J. SPEIGHT Alternate Judge
^{*} OMGUS General Orders No. 5, 21 January 1947, corrected spelling to
Fitzroy D. Phillips.
3. The Tribunal shall convene at Nurenberg, Germany, to hear such cases
as may be filed by the Chief of Counsel for War Crimes or by his duly
designated representative.
BY COMMAND OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL CLAY:
C. K. GAILEY
_Brigadier General, GSC_
_Chief of Staff_
OFFICIAL: SEAL:
G. H. GARDE Office of Military Government
_Lieutenant Colonel, AGD_ for Germany (U. S.)
_Adjutant General_
DISTRIBUTION: “B” plus
2—AG MRU USFET
[Illustration: TRIBUNAL II—CASE TWO
L. to R.: _F. Donald Phillips_; _Robert M. Toms, presiding_;
_Michael A. Musmanno_; _John J. Speight, alternate_.]
[Illustration: _Former Luftwaffe Field Marshal Milch,
seated in the defense counsel section of courtroom one,
listens with his lawyer Dr. Bergold and his brother Werner
as Tribunal II announces its verdict in his case._]
[Illustration: _Defendant Erhard Milch with_
_his counsel, Dr. Friedrich Bergold._]
[Illustration: _Mr. Clark Denny, Chief
Trial Counsel of Case II._]
MEMBERS OF MILITARY TRIBUNAL II
ROBERT M. TOMS, Presiding
Judge of the Third Judicial Circuit Court, Detroit, Michigan
FITZROY DONALD PHILLIPS, Member,
Judge of the Superior Court for the 13th Judicial District of the
State of North Carolina
MICHAEL A. MUSMANNO, Member,
United States Naval Reserve, on military leave from Court of Common
Pleas, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania
JOHN JOSHUA SPEIGHT, Alternate,
Prominent member of the Bar of the State of Alabama
ASSISTANT SECRETARIES GENERAL
Judge RICHARD D. DIXON From 20 December 1946 to 25 March 1947
Major MILLS C. HATFIELD From 16 April 1947 to 17 April 1947
PROSECUTION COUNSEL
CHIEF OF COUNSEL:
Brigadier General TELFORD TAYLOR
CHIEF TRIAL COUNSEL:
Mr. CLARK DENNEY
ASSISTANT TRIAL COUNSEL:
Mr. JAMES S. CONWAY
Miss DOROTHY M. HUNT
Mr. HENRY T. KING, JR.
Mr. RAYMOND J. MCMAHON, JR.
Mr. MAURICE C. MYERS
DEFENSE COUNSEL
Dr. FRIEDRICH BERGOLD
Main Counsel
Dr. WERNER MILCH^{*}
Assistant Counsel
^{*} Brother of the defendant Milch.
I. INDICTMENT
The United States of America, by the undersigned Telford Taylor, Chief
of Counsel for War Crimes, duly appointed to represent said Government
in the prosecution of war criminals, charges the defendant Erhard Milch
with the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity as defined
in Control Council Law No. 10,[62] duly enacted by the Allied Control
Council on 20 December 1945. The defendant Milch between 1939 and 1945
was State Secretary in the [Reich] Air Ministry (Staatssekretaer im
Reichsluftfahrt ministerium), Inspector General of the Air Force
(Generalinspekteur der Luftwaffe), Deputy to the Commander in Chief of
the Air Force (Stellvertreter des Oberbefehlshabers der Luftwaffe), and
Member of the Nazi Party (Mitglied der NSDAP). The defendant Milch was
also Field Marshal in the Luftwaffe (Generalfeldmarschall in der
Luftwaffe) 1940-45, Aircraft Master General (Generalluftzeugmeister)
1941-44, Member of the Central Planning Board (Mitglied der “Zentralen
Planung”) 1942-1945, and Chief of the Jaegerstab 1944-1945. The war
crimes and crimes against humanity charged herein against the defendant
Milch include deportation, enslavement and mistreatment of millions of
persons, participation in criminal medical experiments upon human
beings, and murders, brutalities, cruelties, tortures, atrocities, and
other inhumane acts.
COUNT ONE
1. Between September 1939 and May 1945 the defendant Milch unlawfully,
wilfully, and knowingly committed war crimes as defined by Article II of
Control Council Law No. 10, in that he was a principal in, accessory to,
ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and was connected with
plans and enterprises involving slave labor and deportation to slave
labor of the civilian populations of Austria, Czechoslovakia, Italy,
Hungary, and other countries and territories occupied by the German
Armed Forces, in the course of which millions of persons were enslaved,
deported, ill-treated, terrorized, tortured, and murdered.
2. Between September 1939 and May 1945 the defendant Milch unlawfully,
wilfully, and knowingly committed war crimes as defined by Article II of
Control Council Law No. 10, in that he was a principal in, accessory to,
ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and was connected with
plans and enterprises involving the use of prisoners of war in war
operations and work having a direct relation with war operations,
including the manufacture and transportation of arms and munitions, in
the course of which murders, cruelties, ill-treatment, and other
inhumane acts were committed against members of the armed forces of
nations then at war with the German Reich and who were in custody of the
German Reich in the exercise of belligerent control.
3. In the execution of the plans and enterprises charged in paragraphs 1
and 2 of this count, millions of persons were unlawfully subjected to
forced labor under cruel and inhumane conditions which resulted in
widespread suffering. At least 5,000,000 workers were deported to
Germany. The conscription of labor was accomplished in many cases by
drastic and violent methods. Workers destined for the Reich were sent
under guard to Germany, often packed in trains without adequate heat,
food, clothing, or sanitary facilities; other inhabitants of occupied
countries were conscripted and compelled to work in their own countries
to assist the German war economy and on fortifications and military
installations. The resources and needs of the occupied countries were
completely disregarded in the execution of the said plans and
enterprises. Prisoners of war were assigned to work directly related to
war operations, including work in munitions factories, loading bombers,
carrying ammunition, and manning antiaircraft guns. The treatment of
slave laborers and prisoners of war was based on the principle that they
should be fed, sheltered, and treated in such a way as to exploit them
to the greatest possible extent at the lowest expenditure.
4. The defendant Milch from 1942 to 1945 was a member of the Central
Planning Board which had supreme authority for the scheduling of
production and the allocation and development of raw materials in the
German war economy. The Central Planning Board determined the labor
requirements of industry, agriculture, and all other phases of German
war economy, and made requisitions for and allocations of such labor.
The defendant Milch had full knowledge of the illegal manner in which
foreign laborers were conscripted and prisoners of war utilized to meet
such requisitions, and of the unlawful and inhumane conditions under
which they were exploited. He attended the meetings of the Central
Planning Board, participated in its decisions and in the formulation of
basic policies with reference to the exploitation of such labor,
advocated the increased use of forced labor and prisoners of war to
expand war production, and urged that cruel and repressive measures be
utilized to procure and exploit such labor.
5. During the years 1939-1945 the defendant Milch, as State Secretary in
the Air Ministry, Inspector General of the Air Force, Deputy to the
Commander in Chief of the Air Force, Field Marshal in the Luftwaffe,
Aircraft Master General, and Chief of the Jaegerstab, had responsibility
for the development and production of arms and munitions for the German
Air Force. The defendant Milch exploited foreign laborers and prisoners
of war in the arms, aircraft, and munitions factories under his control,
made requisitions for and allocations of such labor within the aircraft
industry, and personally directed that cruel and repressive measures be
adopted towards such labor.
6. Pursuant to the order of the defendant Milch, prisoners of war who
had attempted escape were murdered on or about 15 February 1944.
7. The said war crimes constitute violations of international
conventions, particularly of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, 46, and 52 of the
Hague Regulations, 1907, and of Articles 2, 3, 4, 6, and 31 of the
Prisoner-of-War Convention (Geneva, 1929), the laws and customs of war,
the general principles of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws
of all civilized nations, the internal penal laws of the countries in
which such crimes were committed, and Article II of Control Council Law
No. 10.
COUNT TWO
8. Between March 1942 and May 1943 the defendant Milch unlawfully,
wilfully, and knowingly committed war crimes as defined in Article II of
Control Council Law No. 10, in that he was a principal in, accessory to,
ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and was connected with
plans and enterprises involving medical experiments without the
subjects’ consent, upon members of the armed forces and civilians of
nations then at war with the German Reich and who were in the custody of
the German Reich in the exercise of belligerent control, in the course
of which experiments the defendant Milch, together with divers other
persons, committed murders, brutalities, cruelties, tortures, and other
inhumane acts. Such experiments included, but were not limited to, the
following:
(_A_) _HIGH-ALTITUDE EXPERIMENTS._ From about March 1942 to
about August 1942 experiments were conducted at the Dachau
concentration camp for the benefit of the German Air Force to
investigate the limits of human endurance and existence at
extremely high altitudes. The experiments were carried out in a
low-pressure chamber in which the atmospheric conditions and
pressure prevailing at high altitudes (up to 68,000 feet) could
be duplicated. The experimental subjects were placed in the
low-pressure chamber and thereafter the simulated altitude
therein was raised. Many victims died as a result of these
experiments and others suffered grave injury, torture, and
ill-treatment.
(_B_) _FREEZING EXPERIMENTS._ From about August 1942 to about
May 1943 experiments were conducted at the Dachau concentration
camp primarily for the benefit of the German Air Force to
investigate the most effective means of treating persons who had
been severely chilled or frozen. In one series of experiments
the subjects were forced to remain in a tank of ice water for
periods up to 3 hours. Extreme rigor developed in a short time.
Numerous victims died in the course of these experiments. After
the survivors were severely chilled, rewarming was attempted by
various means. In another series of experiments, the subjects
were kept naked outdoors for many hours at temperatures below
freezing. The victims screamed with pain as parts of their
bodies froze.
9. The said war crimes constitute violations of international
conventions, particularly of Articles 4, 5, 6, 7, and 46 of the Hague
Regulations, 1907, and of Articles 2, 3, and 4 of the Prisoner-of-War
Convention (Geneva, 1929), the laws and customs of war, the general
principles of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws of all
civilized nations, the internal penal laws of the countries in which
such crimes were committed, and of Article II, of Control Council Law
No. 10.
COUNT THREE
10. Between September 1939 and May 1945 the defendant Milch unlawfully,
wilfully, and knowingly committed crimes against humanity, as defined by
Article II of Control Council Law No. 10, in that he was a principal in,
accessory to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and was
connected with plans and enterprises involving slave labor and
deportation to slave labor of German nationals and nationals of other
countries in the course of which millions of persons were enslaved,
deported, ill-treated, terrorized, tortured, and murdered. The
particulars of these crimes are set forth in count one of this
indictment and are incorporated herein by reference.
11. Between March 1942 and May 1943 the defendant Milch unlawfully,
wilfully, and knowingly committed crimes against humanity as defined in
Article II of Control Council Law No. 10 in that he was principal in,
accessory to, ordered, abetted, took a consenting part in, and was
connected with plans and enterprises involving medical experiments,
without the subjects’ consent, upon German nationals and nationals of
other countries, in the course of which experiments the defendant Milch,
together with divers other persons, committed murders, brutalities,
cruelties, tortures, atrocities, and other inhumane acts. The
particulars of such experiments are set forth in count two of this
indictment and are incorporated herein by reference.
12. The said crimes against humanity constitute violations of
international conventions, the laws and customs of war, the general
principles of criminal law as derived from the criminal laws of all
civilized nations, the internal penal laws of the countries in which
such crimes were committed, and Article II of Control Council Law No.
10.
WHEREFORE, this indictment is filed with the Secretary General of the
Military Tribunals and the charges herein made against the above-named
defendant are hereby presented to the Military Tribunals.
TELFORD TAYLOR
Brigadier General, USA
Chief of Counsel for War Crimes
Acting on Behalf of the United States of America
Nuernberg, 13 November 1946
-----
[62] See vol. I, this series, pref. pp. III thru XXVIII for basic
papers.
II. ARRAIGNMENT[63]
THE MARSHAL: Military Tribunal No. 2 is now in session. God save the
United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: The Marshal will ascertain whether the defendant,
Erhard Milch, is present in Court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honors, the defendant is present in the
Court.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: Is counsel for the defendant, Dr. Bergold, also
present?
THE MARSHAL: Dr. Bergold is also present in the courtroom.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: Prosecution may proceed with the arraignment by
reading the indictment.
[At this point Mr. Clark Denney read the indictment. See p.
360.]
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: The defendant will stand. You have heard the
indictment just read?
ERHARD MILCH: Yes.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: And it has been translated into the German
language which you understand?
ERHARD MILCH: Yes.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: For more than 30 days you have had in your
possession a copy of this indictment translated into the German
language?
ERHARD MILCH: Yes.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: You have also had the benefit of Dr. Bergold’s
counsel for at least 30 days?
ERHARD MILCH: Yes.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: Now then to this indictment how do you plead,
guilty or not guilty?
ERHARD MILCH: Not guilty.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: The Secretary General will enter upon the records
of the Court the defendant’s plea of not guilty. You may be seated.
The Tribunal has set Thursday, the second day of January 1947 for the
commencement of the trial of this action. Will the United States be
ready on that date?
MR. DENNEY: The Government will be ready at that time, your Honor.
PRESIDING JUDGE TOMS: Dr. Bergold, will you be ready to proceed with the
trial on the second of January?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes.
* * * * *
-----
[63] Tr. p. 7.
III. OPENING STATEMENTS
A. Opening Statement for the Prosecution[64]
MR. DENNEY: May it please your Honors, this defendant is Erhard Milch,
Field Marshal in the Luftwaffe, Inspector General of the Luftwaffe,
State Secretary in the Air Ministry, Generalluftzeugmeister, sole
representative of the Wehrmacht on the Central Planning Board, Chief of
the Jaegerstab,[65] and member of the Nazi Party.
This man is accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity in that he
took part in the program for the enslavement and ill-treatment of the
civilian population of vast territories conquered by the armed forces of
Germany and in the employment of prisoners of war in tasks forbidden by
the laws and customs of war. He is also accused of the torture and
murder of concentration camp inmates and prisoners of war who were made
the unwilling subjects of savage and fatal medical experiments.
The life of Erhard Milch is a story of personal and professional
betrayal. A man of high intelligence, of great executive ability, he
misused these talents to dedicate them to a scheme for conquest and a
plan for the enslavement of the world. The 10 years of military service
of the defendant from the age of 18 to 28 which took him through the
First World War were a perfect preparation for the tasks to come. From
1915 to 1919, Milch was a scout, observer, adjutant and squadron leader
in the German Air Force. At the very infancy of military aviation, the
defendant began an association which was to last through his entire
public career. It was at this time that he learned the needs and the
problems of flying men, a knowledge which was to stand him in such good
stead in his work as the founder of the Luftwaffe.
The defendant never dissociated himself from the aims and ideals of
German militarism. He became one of the silent army of men who
remembered, hated, and hoped; but unlike many others, this man did not
sit idly by. He did not wait passively for Germany to rise again, he
devoted his best efforts towards that end. In 1921, only 1 year after
his discharge from the army, we find him working as chief of air
operations [flights] in the new business of commercial aviation.
There is no necessity to fill out in detail the successive steps in the
defendant’s rise in civilian air transportation—a few broad strokes
suffice. The next significant event in his career came in 1925 when he
joined the state-sponsored Lufthansa which within 3 years he was to form
into the nucleus of a new air force. It is no euphemism that he was
called the Father of German Air Transportation.
When Hitler came into power in 1933, Milch acceded to the requests of
both Goering and Hitler and assumed the additional duty of State
Secretary in the Air Ministry. It was understood from the start, and it
was confirmed in 1937, that Milch would succeed Goering as Chief of the
German Air Force in the event of the latter’s death or withdrawal. By
the time the new Luftwaffe had publicly emerged from such embryos as the
Air Sport League, the Air Defense League, and the Flying [Flieger]
Hitler Youth, the defendant had become a Generalleutnant (the equivalent
of the American major general). The honors which followed: field marshal
in the Luftwaffe in 1940, which was gained from 2 months’ participation
in the invasion of Norway; Generalluft-Zeugmeister in 1941; member of
the Central Planning Board in 1942; Chief of the Jaegerstab in 1944,
were proof alike of the evil genius of Erhard Milch and of his complete
compatibility with the Nazi ambitions and methods.
This defendant became a member of the Nazi Party in May 1933. His work
in the Party was important. He was indeed one of the little group of
specialists of whom Mr. Justice Jackson, in his closing address before
the International Military Tribunal, aptly said:
“It is doubtful whether the Nazi master plan could have
succeeded without their specialized intelligence which they so
willingly put at its command. They (speaking of Goering, Keitel,
Jodl, and the rest) did so with knowledge of its announced aims
and methods and continued their services after practice had
confirmed the direction in which they were tending. Their
superiority to the average run of Nazi mediocrity is not their
excuse. It is their condemnation.”[66]
Various Germans allowed themselves to be absorbed into the Nazi Party
for a variety of reasons. Depression, financial and business betterment,
ambition, discouragement with the previous political situation, and
human weakness in the face of terrorism, all played their part in the
recruitment of the Nazi machine. There were few cases in which a man
made as clear, as deliberate, and as discreditable a choice of Nazism as
did Milch.
The high esteem in which the defendant was held by Hitler and his
position within the inner circle of Nazi militarists can be seen from
the fact that he was one of a party of fourteen of Hitler’s highest and
most trusted officers who attended a conference in the new Reich
Chancellory on 23 May 1939, at which Hitler made known to his military
chiefs his plans and objectives. (_L-79._)
All in all, two points stand out in even a quick survey of Milch’s
career: First, he never accepted the defeat of Germany in the First
World War; his life between the wars was devoted to the work of placing
Germany in a position to challenge the world in the matter of air
supremacy; and second, he was a man who was unlikely to allow either
difficulty or honor to stand in the way of the accomplishment of his
purpose—the objectives of the Nazi Party. If these characteristics are
borne in mind, much of the defendant’s fanaticism and the unbelievable
savagery with which he adhered to the Nazi plan for conquest at the
expense of all values of human decency may be seen as the natural
consequences of the acts of a man with his criminal philosophy.
We have then, at the outbreak of the war this man, already within the
inner circle, already devoted to the Nazi scheme of things and quite
essential to their fulfillment, with a record of organization and with
the work of preparation behind him—poised with his companions for the
kill. We see the air armadas, which were the labor of his love, helping
to shatter Poland within 18 days, helping to reduce the Lowlands to
smoking ruins within a few days’ time, assisting in the subjugation of
the French military machine and in driving the British from the
continent in a period of a few weeks. We see the hordes of the
Fatherland racing on and on with the air arm always overhead, preparing
the way, until Germany had overrun a territory from the Normandy Coast
to Moscow, and from the North Sea to El Alamein.
Then began the occupation, the next step in the plan of the Third
Reich—an empire which was to last a thousand years. Over an entire
continent there spread the deadly rigor of a “Pax Germanica” in which
there was to be one citizen class, one race of supermen, and the
balance, one class of slaves. At first the occupation overlords
maintained the appearance of legality. They gave receipts for the
property they plundered, they offered inducements to the laborers they
shanghaied, they went through the mockery of signing contracts which
were both illusory and fraudulent. But even this sham disappeared as the
war went on, and as early as 1942, the German occupation appeared in
public as the ugly thing it was, complete with armed recruiters,
military escorts on deportation trains and prison camps for the workers
brought into Germany. Mr. Justice Jackson, in his opening address on
behalf of the United States of America before the International Military
Tribunal,[67] vividly described the character and extent of the
slave-labor program in the following words:
“Perhaps the deportation to slave labor was the most horrible
and extensive slaving operation in history. On few other
subjects is our evidence so abundant and so damaging. In a
speech made on 25 January 1944 the defendant Frank, Governor
General of Poland, boasted, ‘I have sent 1,300,000 Polish
workers into the Reich.’ (_059-PS, p. 2._) The defendant Sauckel
reported that ‘out of the 5 million foreign workers who arrived
in Germany not even 200,000 came voluntarily.’ * * * Children of
10 to 14 years were impressed into service * * *.
“When enough labor was not forthcoming, prisoners of war were
forced into war work in flagrant violation of international
conventions (_016-PS_). Slave labor came from France, Belgium,
Holland, Italy, and the East. Methods of recruitment were
violent (_R-124_, _018-PS_, _204-PS_). The treatment of these
slave laborers was stated in general terms, not difficult to
translate into concrete deprivations, in a letter to the
defendant Rosenberg from the defendant Sauckel, which stated:
* * * * *
“‘All the men’ (prisoners of war and foreign civilian
workers) ‘must be fed, sheltered, and treated in such a
way as to exploit them to the highest possible extent at
the lowest conceivable degree of expenditure * * *’
(_016-PS_)”.
Working as we do every day with crimes of unbelievable enormity, we are
apt to become quite deadened to the hideous nature of specific crimes.
It is, therefore, well to stop and consider the particular offenses with
which this man stands charged.
Crimes are best evaluated in terms of the rights they violate. The evil,
slavery, which is the deprivation of another’s liberty, is best judged
through a consideration of its opposite good, freedom. Freedom is, to an
extent, properly regarded as the symbol of human progress, the measure
of civilization. Much of man’s history can be expressed in terms of his
fight for freedom. Man’s personal freedom is his most precious
prerogative, the exercise of his free will is his distinctive function.
The building of a legal structure to protect the freedom of the
individual is the basic purpose of good government. Men have lived for
freedom, worked for it, fought for it, and died for it.
It is precisely because of their destructive effects on the freedom of
the individual that governments such as the Nazi German State are so
hatefully and essentially evil. The Nazi rise to power is a story of
duress which ripened into slavery, first for the people within Germany
and then for those in the lands she conquered. The enforced labor
program was no expedient forced upon Germany by the exigencies of war.
It was a basic concept of the Nazi scheme and the permanent destiny of
those who would come under the German yoke.
It is most natural, therefore, that Control Council Law No. 10, which
was enacted for the guidance of this and other tribunals which are set
up for the trial of the principals in the crime of Nazi Germany, should
deal in very severe terms with that most Nazi of all crimes—slavery.
Article II, paragraph 1 (sec. _b_) specifically names among the
enumerated war crimes the ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor of
civilian populations from occupied territory and the murder or
ill-treatment of prisoners of war. Paragraph 1 (sec. _c_) specifies as a
crime against humanity, deportation of civilian populations. Article II,
paragraphs 2 and 3 proclaim that anyone taking a principal or consenting
part in these crimes, or belonging to a plan or enterprise for the
commission of these crimes, is guilty of an offense for which the death
penalty may be prescribed.
The prosecution will prove that Milch was a principal in the deportation
into slave labor of civilian populations from occupied territories. It
will show that he was involved in the murder and ill-treatment of
prisoners of war. Evidence will be presented which will prove that he
was engaged in plans and enterprises which directly involved the use of
slave labor. We will show that this man was as much concerned with the
employment of slave labor as was any man in Germany. In his positions as
a member of the Central Planning Board, as Generalluftzeugmeister, and
as Chief of the Jaegerstab, he had full opportunity to hear all the grim
details of the exploitation of slave labor. He participated in decisions
and formulated basic policies with reference to its use, and over and
above all this he showed his personal animosity and his gratuitous
fanaticism in constantly urging the most repressive and cruel measures
in the procurement and exploitation of foreign workers.
During the course of this trial, an attempt will be made to distinguish
among that which this defendant did as Generalluftzeugmeister, as Chief
of the Jaegerstab, as State Secretary for Air, and as a member of the
Central Planning Board. At times it will be difficult, if not
impossible, to state in just which capacity he was acting at a
particular time. We must emphasize now that it is not essential to the
proof of this case that we should be able always to specify the exact
capacity in which the defendant acted. The multiplicity of his
connection with the slave-labor program is his greatest condemnation,
and it is because he knew so much and did so much that there can be no
excuse for him.
Erhard Milch operated at a policy level high in the chain of command
above the work boss and the concentration camp guard. We need not show
him driving the workers to their tasks or crowding them into the hovels
in which they lived. We are not primarily concerned with the minute
details of the slave-labor program which were carried out by minions who
obeyed men like the defendant. We were dealing with a planner of a great
crime, and it has not been difficult for the law to seek out and punish
those who plan as well as those who obey. The law would indeed be
derelict if only those were punished who pulled the trigger to kill, or,
comparably speaking, ran a slave camp in which people worked an 84-hour
week and dragged out a miserable existence under conditions from which
death was welcome relief.
This defendant cannot plead in truth that he did not know that the use
of slave labor was wrong. He cannot use even the technical excuse, so
common among the Nazis, that this was not illegal because the Nazi law
authorized it. Official sanction of slavery would have been a law so
evil that even the Nazi masters dared not proclaim it. A search through
the mass of decrees and pronouncements which passed for law during the
regime of Adolf Hitler fails to reveal sanction for slavery of foreign
laborers. On the other hand, certain prohibitory laws survived from a
more respectable day.
Paragraph 234 of the German Criminal Law (published in 1942 in Munich
and Berlin, pp. 364-365) provides that “whoever seizes another by ruse,
threat or force in order to expose him in a state of helplessness, or to
deliver him into slavery, bondage, or a foreign military or naval
service shall be punished for kidnapping by confinement in a
penitentiary.” This law was in force during the Nazi regime and was
published in the most recent edition of German Criminal Law which we
have been able to find.
That maltreatment was commonplace in the course of the enforced labor
program in Germany is well known; that starvation, murder, and all types
of personal abuses took place is notorious. All of this was found as a
fact in the decision of the International Military Tribunal. There can
be no question of the responsibility of the defendant for the murders
and privations which were the inevitable byproduct of the slave-labor
program.
But we need not follow the crime of slave labor down to its last detail
in order to show the defendant as the murderer he was. We can and will
prove that he directly participated in crimes of which murder was often
the intended and on numerous occasions the inevitable result.
The prosecution charges, and will prove, that he took an important,
responsible, and essential part in the practice of experiments upon
human beings carried out against their wills and in callous disregard of
the lives of its victims.
Cut then to bare essentials the charges set forth in paragraphs 8 and 9
of count two of the indictment and in paragraph 11 of count three can be
summarized by the statement that the defendant was officially connected
with and took a consenting part in enterprises in which criminal medical
experiments were performed upon involuntary subjects.
The nature and extent of these experiments and the fact that they were
conducted for the specific benefit of the Luftwaffe will be shown in
some detail. We will prove that the defendant was the responsible
Luftwaffe officer with ultimate supervisory authority over the
experiments. The Court will see that throughout the duration of these
experiments, the defendant was constantly treated by all concerned as
the ultimate authority within the Luftwaffe in control of the
experimental equipment and in charge of certain personnel who were
actively engaged in them.
Evidence will be presented which will prove that the defendant was
thoroughly informed of the criminal activities of Dr. Rascher, the
experimenter, and his associates. We will prove that a conference was
held at the defendant’s office, that films were shown there, that
communications were sent to him from highest Nazi sources which
specifically referred to opposition on the part of “narrow-minded
doctors” to the experiments. A web of evidence will be adduced to
portray the defendant, as he really was, an active partner in crime. We
will show that the defendant authorized the initiation of freezing
experiments and that he ordered an extension of the high-altitude
experiments for a period of 2 months, during which extended period a
number of experimental subjects died.
At the conclusion of the evidence with respect to the medical
experiments upon human beings there will remain no doubt that Erhard
Milch was a knowing, willing, and active participant in murder.
Throughout the trial the prosecution will place before the Court a
number of statements which will portray him as a man who believed no
tears should be shed for the victims of total war when German soldiers
every day were making the ultimate sacrifice for the Fatherland. This
man was not a hard-headed, single-minded production chief whose only
problem was to get things done and whose rash statements were the
impetuous remarks of an over-worked executive. Milch will be shown as a
man who boasted of his responsibility in the hanging of prisoners of
war, who urged that any effort on the part of foreign workers to strike
during enemy action should be met with rifle fire, who offered
protection to slave supervisors who should mistreat their subjects. We
will show that he was not too busy to inform himself fully of everything
with which he was officially connected and that over and above this he
went out of his way to learn the most minute details of matters with
which he was very remotely connected.
And now a brief word about the type of evidence with which the
prosecution will prove its case. It must be borne in mind that we are
not concerned with a single localized incident or with a series of such
incidents. The proof which we must show cannot be brought forth from the
daily events of ordered society. It must be drawn from the cold ashes of
a broken nation. The documents which will be brought into Court have
been taken from all corners of a continent. They have one common feature
which elevates them in the hierarchy of evidence to a place above the
story of sincere but fallible eyewitnesses. These documents are official
German records, some of them records of the defendant’s own
organizations. In some cases they bear the defendant’s signature or his
handwritten initials. In every case they are authentic records compiled
by Germans, accurate because there was no reason for falsification or
exaggeration, thorough because of a national fetish for attention to
detail, reliable because they were made at times when the German
fortunes of war were high and their scriveners had no reason to fear
that one day they would be confronted with their hand-made records of
criminality.
It would seem that at this point there should be some discussion of the
various organizations with which the defendant was connected.
We are concerned principally with that part of the OKW (Oberkommando der
Wehrmacht), Supreme Command of the Armed Forces, known as the OKL
(Oberkommando der Luftwaffe), the High Command of the German Air Force.
The Chief of the OKL was Reich Marshal Hermann Goering. His Inspector
General and State Secretary in the Air Ministry was the defendant Erhard
Milch. As such, from July 1940, he held the rank of field marshal
(comparable to the American rank of general of the armies).[68]
The other two branches of the OKW with which we are incidentally
concerned were the OKH (Oberkommando des Heeres), High Command of the
Army, and the OKM (Oberkommando der Marine), High Command of the Navy.
The army was commanded by Field Marshal von Brauchitsch until December
1941, at which time it was taken over by Hitler. The navy was commanded
by Grand Admiral [Admiral of the Fleet] Raeder until 1943, thereafter by
Grand Admiral Doenitz.
The Luftwaffe Medical Service came under this defendant in his capacity
as Inspector General of the Luftwaffe. The Medical Service was headed by
Dr. Erich Hippke until January 1944; thereafter it was headed by Dr.
Oskar Schroeder.
There was an experimental institute in Berlin called the DVL which was a
technical research institution for aero-research. This was subordinate
to the defendant in his position as Generalluftzeugmeister.
We now turn to the Central Planning Board. This was established by a
Goering decree, pursuant to a Hitler order of 22 April, 1942. The Board
consisted of Albert Speer, Erhard Milch, and Paul Koerner. Later, by a
supplementary Goering decree, in September 1943, Walter Funk was added
to the Board. Speer and Milch were the dominant members, and Koerner and
Funk played comparatively minor roles. The Central Planning Board was,
in effect, a consolidation of all controls over German war production.
The Board was found by the International Military Tribunal to have “had
supreme authority for the scheduling of German production and the
allocation and development of raw materials. * * *”[69] Hand in hand
with this goes the corollary of the procurement and allocation of labor.
Reich Marshal Goering, in his decree of 22 April, 1942, stated in
part——“It (the Central Planning Board) encompasses that which is
fundamental and vital. It makes unequivocal decisions and supervises the
execution of its directives”. The Central Planning Board requisitioned
labor from Sauckel with full knowledge that the demands would be
supplied by foreign forced labor, and the Board determined the basic
allocation of this labor within the German war economy. Sauckel was the
servant of the Central Planning Board in the procurement of slave labor.
There are records of some 50-odd meetings of the Board between the time
of its establishment in 1942, and 1945. The defendant was present at all
but a few of these meetings and on occasion his was the dominant voice.
The International Military Tribunal found that the Central Planning
Board determined the total number of laborers needed for German
industry, and required Sauckel to produce them, usually by deportation
from occupied territories.
It is worthy of note that Speer was appointed Reich Minister for
Armaments and Munitions on 2 February 1942, Sauckel was appointed
Plenipotentiary General for Labor Allocation on 21 March 1942, and the
Central Planning Board was created on 22 April 1942.
Turning now to the defendant’s position as Chief of the Jaegerstab. The
Jaegerstab was formed pursuant to a Speer decree of 1 March 1944, for
the purpose of increasing the production of German fighter aircraft,
which, because of effective and heavy raids by strategic air forces of
Great Britain and America, had suffered a production decrease to a
figure below 1,000 planes a month.
Because of this reduced production of fighter planes, Milch had
requested Speer to establish a commission to deal with this most vital
problem. The commission was created and Speer and Milch were joint
chiefs. The Jaegerstab was actually a group of experts, drawn from the
various phases of German industry and supplemented by representatives of
the various Ministries concerned, such as Labor, Supply, Transportation,
Power and Energy, Raw Materials, Health, Repairs, and so forth.
Meetings were held almost daily, in the beginning at the Air Ministry in
Berlin and later at Tempelhof airfield in the same city. The Jaegerstab
functions were these: the quick repair of plants damaged in bombing or
strafing operations, the dispersal of German aircraft plants, and the
construction of underground factories for aircraft production.
As it was with the Central Planning Board, so it was with the
Jaegerstab, a major problem was the procurement of slave labor. The
workers for the Jaegerstab were procured from the Sauckel Ministry, from
occupied countries, and from the SS, who supplied concentration camp
inmates and Hungarian Jews.
So successful was the work of the Jaegerstab that Speer decided to
enlarge its functions to include other phases of armament and munitions
production. Accordingly, on 1 August 1944, he issued a decree expanding
the functions of the Jaegerstab and changing its name to Ruestungsstab.
The position of Generalluftzeugmeister was taken over by the defendant
in 1941, following the death of Colonel General Ernst Udet. In this post
the defendant was in charge of all technical research in the Luftwaffe
and his was the over-all responsibility for all aircraft production. As
such he spoke for the Luftwaffe in the meetings of the Central Planning
Board and in conferences with Hitler. It is obvious that here again the
procurement of labor was a primary consideration for one who had the
complete responsibility for keeping the Luftwaffe in the air.
In the trial before the International Military Tribunal, it was
determined that 5,000,000 laborers were deported to Germany. Of these,
4,800,000 did not come voluntarily.
The evidence will show that the defendant’s responsibility was as great,
if not greater, than was Sauckel’s. Erhard Milch raised his voice in
demanding that foreign labor be procured by any methods and in
advocating that cruel and repressive measures be taken by those in
charge of these laborers. There is no record of any utterance by him,
which can be offered as a mitigating circumstance to his complete
complicity in the criminality of the slave-labor program.
The evidence on the altitude and freezing experiments will reveal him as
a man completely without concern for the welfare and lives of the
wretched, unwilling victims of the criminal tortures conducted for the
benefit of the Luftwaffe.
The series of trials, of which this is one, if it is to serve its
purpose in exposing and punishing the abuses of Nazidom, must strike
hard at the cores of savage German militarism and its technical
counterpart, industry for war. Erhard Milch is the foremost example of
the union between German militarism and German heavy industry. What
useful purpose is served by condemning these two and allowing their
sponsors, men like Milch, to go unpunished?
We take it as a fundamental proposition that man is not the helpless
product of his environment. Civilization is a lengthy chronicle of men
who triumphed over difficulty. Its survival depends on the moral fibre
of individuals who can use circumstance, not be determined by it. If
society must answer for the actions of men, and not men for the course
of society, then, indeed, governments are our masters and not our
servants; then, indeed, law dictates but does not express justice.
Erhard Milch lived during years of violence and in an evil environment
but he was a man well able to overcome these factors and become a force
for good. It was by his own free choice that he followed the line of
least resistance and became one of the evil spirits who cast a dark
shadow of war and crime over Germany and the world. He had a choice
between the easy wrong and the hard right—he chose the former. Peace,
order, and progress depend on men of sufficient courage to choose at
times a hard, just path. Ours indeed is an exacting standard, but the
rewards are great, and the alternative is chaos.
-----
[64] Opening statement is recorded in mimeographed transcript.
[65] See section IV A3, p. 524 ff.
[66] Trial of the Major War Criminals, vol. XIX, pp. 417-18, Nuremberg,
1947.
[67] Ibid., vol. II, pp. 139-140.
[68] See Table of comparative ranks, p. 331.
[69] Trial of Major War Criminals, vol. I, p. 331.
B. Opening Statement for the Defense[70]
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Tribunal, I undertake now to present the
evidence for the defense. The prosecution has painted the blackest
possible picture of the man I am here to defend. It has pronounced a
moral judgment on him, even for the period of his life, which, according
to the indictment, is not to be judged by this Tribunal.
Because of the great difference between the American and the German
people I have no knowledge of whether such a method of prosecution is
customary in the United States of America. The good principles of law
which were practiced in Germany before 1933 provided that even counsel
for the prosecution should not reproach the defendant for anything that
is not subject to examination by the Tribunal. The meaning of this is
that defense counsel also should be in a position to express his views
with regard to these charges. This, according to my opinion, seems to be
a fair principle.
Therefore, if it please the Tribunal, it shall be my aim in the course
of my submission of evidence to prove by witnesses who have been
approved and by the defendant himself that the charges made by the
prosecution are incorrect, and I shall aim to prove that also for the
charges which are not contained in the indictment.
Erhard Milch has never in his life been a traitor, as a person or in his
profession, not even at the end of the National Socialist rule when he
himself was threatened as to his life and his honor. As a man of high
intelligence and great talent for organization, he always tried to do
his best for his people and for the world.
To say of him that he misused his talent and devoted his life to a plan
for conquest and enslavement of the world is to have a completely wrong
conception of reality. He was never a militarist in the bad sense of the
word. Never did he arm secretly before 1933 nor make use of the peaceful
instrument of the commercial air fleet for any sinister purposes. He,
the man who wanted to devote himself only to the tasks of peace, the man
who in his capacity as director of the German Lufthansa collaborated
with many European air transport companies and who conceived this
collaboration as almost a forerunner of a unified Europe; he, the man
who in 1937 devoted all his efforts, together with a few wise and
courageous statesmen, to the attempt to bring about a full understanding
and a large scale collaboration between France, Belgium, and Germany
(unfortunately, the high Tribunal has not given me permission to furnish
complete proof for this fact); he, Erhard Milch, truly never tried to
enslave the world. If he had succeeded in his plans in 1937, then there
would have been no 1938. And, all the more, there would not have been
the horrible period of 1939 to 1945, the period in which the battle
against intolerance became so hard and so complicated that we might
think today that, as in an Arabian tale, this spirit of intolerance
freed itself from the bottle and spread itself over so wide an area
that, even today, it causes actions which one day must also be condemned
by the just and the wise.
I shall prove that from the moment when this man tried, in 1937, to
achieve his plans for peace he lost the confidence of his superiors. He
never belonged to the intimate circle in which his superiors confided,
even less so after 1937. They employed him unwillingly and only because
they believed that they could not spare him because of his ability. It
is cheap and easy to say now that this man should have denied his
superiors the benefit of his talents. We shall prove that he tried to do
so. But who can dare to judge with certainty what went on in the heart
of such a man who was terribly aware of what dangers threatened his
people, once the fateful step of starting the war had been taken?
Neither did he want this step nor could he prevent it.
Should he really have chosen the path of revolt, this man who was
brought up in a world in which, for all ages, military obedience had
been an inviolate law, this man who had a passionate love for his
people? How many human beings in any country are capable of breaking the
chains of their education, and turn against the laws which have been
inviolate for them ever since their childhood?
There is no punishable guilt, perhaps even no moral guilt in the fact
that a man cannot free himself from the world of his education. Because
it is the very essence of all education to give the man unbreakable laws
and to create around him what philosophers call “the environment proper
to his own nature.” Therefore, he has not made himself guilty by doing
what his education and the conceptions of his environment made him call
his duty, in a war which he did not want, which he tried to prevent; and
the stopping of which he advised again and again after it had started.
This duty, he felt, was to do his work and to prevent the worst which he
anticipated, namely, the terrible devastation of his fatherland and its
complete and helpless collapse.
I shall prove that he always, even after the war had broken out,
concerned himself with questions of defense only; that he wanted to
strengthen the fighter force, a defensive weapon with which he wanted to
prevent the doom of the German cities. Perhaps, one day, the necessity
for this doom will be judged differently. I shall prove that he
condemned the attack against Soviet Russia as folly, and that he tried
to prevent it. I shall show that in the spring of 1943 he submitted to
Hitler detailed proposals for an immediate termination of the war and
that he told him without reserve that the war was lost.
If it is true that from that moment onward he made efforts again and
again to strengthen the fighter force, and that he took part in the
creation of the Jaegerstab, who can reproach him with the intention to
prolong the war if it will be proved that he knew that the enemy air
forces would make a desert of Germany? Was it inhuman that he tried to
prevent this total destruction even if the war was lost? He alone could
not end the war. But he could try to prevent the inferno in Germany from
becoming full reality. What true lover of his own country in any part of
the world would not make the same attempt? Never can he be considered
guilty on account of that, and even less so because of the fact that in
other countries also voices have arisen and still arise which say that
during the destruction of Germany many a thing happened which was not
always compatible with military necessity.
Despite the pains he took, his superiors mistrusted him so much that
both Goering and Hitler contemplated to have him put out of the way.
I shall show that he never endorsed the theory of the superman and of
the master race; that he always remained humane and that he intervened
on behalf of friends with disregard for his own security. He never was
cruel. It may be that some of the minutes carry wild speeches about him
which must strike your Honors who come from a different world and are
used to different customs as terrible and incomprehensible. I shall
prove to you that in the barracks yards, which made the first impress on
the sensitive mind of young Milch, wild expressions were quite common
and that in German barracks yards bombastic expressions were considered
normal and truly militaristic style. Nobody in Germany did at any time
take these expressions at face value. For this human element in
particular, the old saying holds true that dogs which bark do not bite.
This man, however, was all the more inclined to use these shocking
expressions due to the fact that in a number of accidents he had
suffered severe concussions of the brain as a result of which he was
more susceptible to fits of anger than other people; all the more so
since he was overburdened with work and always frantic because time was
too short. But witnesses will appear before this Tribunal who will
confirm that no one in his surroundings took these fits of wrath, these
crazy words, seriously; that these expressions never went further than
the circle of his intimates, and that they in no way had any effect. His
raving and yelling would make so little impression that when people
around him noticed he was about to have another fit of rage, one would
hear the familiar quotation: “In a moment somebody will be hanged again
and then nothing happens.”
I shall show that this man knew nothing at all of the many abominable
happenings which occurred out in the country, sometimes committed by
persons who were under his command, and that, for example, the
connection with the experiments at Dachau were so remote and incidental
that he could not even surmise what the men there undertook to do. The
sphere of his duties was so terrific, the burden of his work so great
that he truly would have needed to be a superman if he were expected to
have known all that the prosecution finds out today from records and
from the examination of the offenders. It is appropriate to use a Latin
quotation here with a little change: “_Quod est in actis, non semper est
in munde._” Not everything that the investigating mind uncovers at a
later date and interconnects was so in actual fact. The poet says “Easy
for him to speak who speaks last.” This man is charged with letting
prisoners be abused and killed. I shall prove that this was not so. I
shall even prove that, for example, he did everything possible to
protect so-called terror fliers from being lynched. He was a man who
tried to attenuate verdicts pronounced by competent courts of justice
and who never favored death sentences.
The prosecution charges him with the enslavement of the peoples of
Europe. I shall prove that he never aspired to enslavement; that
information on deportations and shanghaiing never reached him; and that,
on the contrary, information reached him which was bound to confuse his
judgment and which permitted him to engage in deeds which now are
considered as wrong. Up to this day the opinion still prevails that
everybody in Germany knew everything about all the cruelties. Slowly,
however, the recognition comes through that this is not correct. In the
“Neue Zeitung”, the official organ of the military government, a German
anti-Fascist by the name of Arnold Weiss Reuthel, whose book on the
concentration camps is considered noteworthy by the newspapers,
published an article “On the Psychological Causes.” There he states
literally:
“One would have termed anybody who informed the public of such
happenings a scoundrel or a lunatic. This also explains why
people who did not see these things with their own eyes and did
not suffer from them day after day, even today still refuse to
believe that they actually happened. Yes, to me too it seems
today often a dream and impossible when I think back and try to
persuade myself that they really happened, the fearful excesses
to which I was a witness during my 5 years in the concentration
camp.”
Thus writes, be it noted, a man who suffered for years in a
concentration camp himself. It has been proved again and again that the
most painstaking secrecy was maintained regarding the atrocities. This
is no hollow talk. This is the truth. The actual perpetrators
dissembled, denied, lied, in a way that could not have been surpassed in
cunning. The documents show you, Honorable Judges, that it was forbidden
for Rascher to make reports without Himmler’s authorization. Himmler
wanted to draw the veil of secrecy over everything. But even with a
Hitler, Sauckel, for example, soft-pedalled all his doings in the
procuring of the foreign workers. Regarding this, I will submit
evidence.
I shall also show that the assignment of these workers was not a point
in any program existing from the outset; that it was exclusively an
emergency device which the exigencies of the war forced upon Germany. So
at least all this had to appear to him, the man who did not belong to
the innermost circle. That he could not think otherwise will be
demonstrated to the Court, to the Tribunal.
It is misleading when the honorable representative of the prosecution in
his opening speech points out that this man had more to do with the use
of forced labor than any other man in Germany. The International
Military Tribunal, in its judgment on Speer, whose position, as no one
in this courtroom can doubt, was far more powerful and significant than
that of this man here, has stated:[71] “Speer’s position was such that
he did not have to deal directly with the atrocities and the carrying
out of the forced labor program.” On Sauckel, the International Military
Tribunal says:[72] “It is nevertheless established beyond all doubt that
Sauckel had the over-all responsibility for the slave-labor program.” I
shall offer evidence that Sauckel actually also had the sole power over
the manner in which the people were recruited and brought to Germany,
and over the urgent work for which they were required.
The prosecution submitted much evidence in Document Books No. IA and IB
which contain the speeches and decrees of all kinds of persons and
offices in Germany and in the territories formerly occupied. In my
opinion, however, it never proved that the defendant knew of all these
things, much less that he had anything to do with them. I shall prove
that he knew nothing of all this and that it was all so far remote from
his sphere of action that, logically speaking and considering his
numerous tasks, he could know nothing about it.
I ask permission to remark here that in cases of this kind it is perhaps
after all not in keeping with the rules of true justice to charge one
person with everything that happened somewhere and was committed by
someone among a people of eighty million. In my opinion the concept of
conspiracy is in such a case inflated to the point of monstrosity. It
was created for conditions of a narrower and smaller scope where it was
within the framework of a man’s possibilities to keep an over-all view
of his associates and their deeds. But to extend the concept of
conspiracy over an entire nation and, simultaneously, over numerous
organizations with millions of members, that no longer can be
commensurate with true justice. This would result in the creation of a
conspirator to whom would be ascribed a Godlike stature. That, however,
would be a distortion of an intelligent legal thought.
It must, therefore, be demanded that in the case of each document, of
each act, with due consideration of the extent of the defendant’s
working sphere and, consequently, with due consideration for his working
capacity, one should examine whether he could obtain knowledge thereof,
whether he could humanly anticipate, examine any of them, and by reason
of his authority, could somehow prevent them.
Finally, I shall prove to you that the documents submitted to you as
official documents are not exact, not reliable; that they never were
examined by the defendant and his associates, and that they contain
inaccuracies, distortions, and wilful deceptions.
Regarding the powers and position held by the defendant, a number of
witnesses and the defendant himself will attest that his powers were not
so great nor so permanent as the prosecution assumes.
We will show that while the Medical Inspector of the Luftwaffe was
subordinate to him in his capacity of Inspector General of the
Luftwaffe, this subordination was more a formal than a practical one,
that the staff of the Medical Service was not at all subordinate to him
and that especially he did not have under his direction the DVL (German
Experimental Institute for Aviation).
We shall further prove that even the Central Planning Board did not have
the significance that the prosecution assumes, that this agency was much
more an advisory and information agency, that it was chiefly occupied
with the allocation of raw materials and that only those decisions of
the meetings were binding which were summarized in the so-called
“Results.”
Finally, we shall show that although, it is true, the defendant was one
of the founders of the Jaegerstab, he was not its chief and that his
importance in this connection was far less than it would appear on first
consideration. The work of the Jaegerstab and of the defendant was aimed
solely at the protection of Germany against bombing attacks, and Milch
very soon lost all influence in this Jaegerstab.
In the presentation of all this evidence, I would ask the high Tribunal
to have in mind one difficulty which, particularly in this case, is
nearly insurmountable.
The documents submitted by the prosecution are only parts of a body of
material the extent of which can be termed gigantic. When one considers
that the Jaegerstab, for instance, from the time of its establishment
held daily meetings and that from those meetings only these few
stenographic records of a few sessions have been submitted that appear
in the document books of the prosecution, then one realizes that not
even five percent of the material pertaining to the Jaegerstab has been
submitted.
Similar, although perhaps not equally striking, is the situation with
reference to the minutes of the Central Planning Board. All these
documents which were not submitted are not accessible to me at all. Does
not, however, justice demand that the material in its entirety should be
available to the defense counsel for examination? Already it has been
possible for me to discover in the incriminating documents numerous
passages which throw a different light on the indictment. Is it not
highly probable, then, that numerous other passages may be found in all
of the other material likely to extenuate to a high degree the guilt of
the defendant, or which, in any case, might show many things in a better
light?
In an ordinary trial with a considerably narrower scope it is much
easier for a defendant to conduct his defense than here where material
of such volume is at hand that even if he had the best of memories, it
would be impossible for him to point out to me, his counsel, where and
what kind of exonerating material can be found. That simply surpasses
the capacity of the human memory, of the human ability to think.
In passing, I would say that probably in all of the armies which fought
in this war the responsible men used strong language during meetings and
discussions which, had they all gone down in records, would today cause
the milder ones to shake their heads. Wrath, impatience, worry, and
anguish because of damages sustained frequently lead responsible persons
to wild utterances. What counts is not whether such words are uttered
but the deeds which come after such excitement dies away.
The prosecution had many long months to prepare its case. We, the
defendant and I, received the real documents on the indictment only in
January. It is beyond human capacity to examine everything within such a
short period of time with the thoroughness which is necessary to
assemble the required counter-evidence. The presentation of argument on
the part of the defendant must therefore, be full of gaps. It is
particularly difficult in this case because within the short time
available for preparation it is impossible to study all the problems
which are brought to light as a result of the Dachau experiments. This
calls for special technical knowledge which a man such as the defendant,
who never studied medicine, simply cannot possess. However, as this
trial is held simultaneously with the trial on the Dachau
experiments,[73] the danger exists that the important and exonerating
facts brought to light there, through the defendant experts and their
well informed counsel, cannot be properly appraised in the present case,
and in this way the cause of justice is endangered.
All of this I merely say in order to ask your Honors not to lose sight
of these angles in judging this present case. Honorable Judges, please
bear that in mind also when examining the documents which I shall submit
and, giving ear to that extent to the voice of humanity and of justice,
lend your assistance to a man who, cut off for so long and bitter a time
from all his information and other aids to support his memory, has been
called upon to defend himself before you. If at any time the fundamental
principle of penal justice, which exists since the days of the wise
Romans, should find application, “_In dubio pro reo_” (In case of doubt
favor the accused), it should find strict application in this case. That
is what I wanted to tell you as an introduction.
-----
[70] Opening statement is recorded in mimeographed transcript 27 January
1947. Tr. pp. 494-504.
[71] IMT mimeographed German transcript p. 16614. See also Trial of
Major War Criminals, vol. I, p. 332, Nuremberg, 1947.
[72] Ibid., p. 16598. See also Trial of Major War Criminals, vol I, p.
321.
[73] United States _vs._ Karl Brandt, et al. See vol. I.
IV. SELECTIONS FROM THE DOCUMENTS AND
TESTIMONY OF WITNESSES OF PROSECUTION
AND DEFENSE
A. Slave Labor
I. GENERAL SLAVE LABOR PROGRAM IN GERMANY
_Prosecution Documents_
Doc. No. Pros. Ex. No. Description of Document Page
L-79 3 Extract from minutes of Fuehrer 387
conference, 23 May 1939.
EC-68 6 Letter from the Ministry of 389
Finance and Economics of
Baden, 6 March 1941,
containing directives
regarding the treatment of
Polish farm workers.
3005-PS 7 Extracts from letter from the 392
Reich Labor Ministry to
presidents of regional labor
offices, 26 August 1941,
concerning the use of French
and Russian PW’s.
EC-194 8 Memorandum of Keitel, 31 393
October 1941, concerning the
use of PW’s in the armament
industry.
1206-PS 9 Outlines of directives of 395
Goering regarding the
employment of PW’s in the
armament industry, 7 November
1941.
3040-PS 10 Extracts from secret order of 399
Himmler, 20 February 1942,
concerning the commitment and
treatment of manpower from
the East.
016-PS 13 Letter from Sauckel to 405
Rosenberg, 24 April 1942, and
extracts from report on
Sauckel’s labor mobilization
program, 20 April 1942.
084-PS 16-A Extracts from interdepartmental 408
report of the Ministry for
Occupied Eastern Territories,
30 September 1942, concerning
the status of eastern
laborers.
294-PS 19-A Extracts from top secret 411
memorandum, signed by
Braeutigam, 25 October 1942,
concerning effects of slave
labor program.
L-61 20 Letter from Sauckel to the 413
presidents of labor offices,
26 November 1942, concerning
deportation and employment of
Poles and Jews.
1063-D-PS 21 Extract from order of Mueller, 415
17 December 1942, concerning
prisoners qualified for work
to be sent to concentration
camps.
1526-PS 25 Extracts from letter from 416
German-appointed Ukrainian
main committee to Frank,
February 1943.
407-V-PS 30 Extracts from letter from 418
Sauckel to Hitler, 14 April
1943, concerning labor
questions.
407-IX-PS 33 Letter from Sauckel to Hitler, 420
3 June 1943, concerning
foreign labor situation.
3000-PS 34 Extracts from report rendered 422
to Riecke,
Ministerialdirektor in the
Ministry of Agriculture, 28
June 1943, on experiences in
political and economic
problems in the East.
265-PS 35 Extracts from report by Leyser 423
to Rosenberg, 30 June 1943,
on conditions in the district
Zhitomir.
204-PS 39 Extracts from memorandum of a 424
conference, 18 February 1944,
concerning the release of
indigenous labor for purposes
of the Reich.
R-103 40 Extracts from a letter from the 426
(German-appointed) Polish
main committee to the General
Government of Poland on the
conditions of Polish workers
in Germany, 17 May 1944.
208-PS 55 Report by Sauckel, 7 July 1944, 428
on the accomplishments of
labor mobilization in the
first half of 1944.
3819-PS 56 Minutes of a conference on 11 430
July 1944 attended by Milch,
concerning the labor problem.
_Defense Documents_
Doc. No. Pros. Ex. No. Description of Document Page
R-124 1 Extract from report on Fuehrer 438
conference attended by Milch
on 19 February 1942.
R-124 32 Extract from the Fuehrer 438
conference minutes, 21 and 22
April 1942.
R-124 2 Extract from the Fuehrer 439
conference minutes of 3, 4, 5
January 1943.
407-II-PS 3 Report from Sauckel to Hitler, 439
10 March 1943, concerning
difficulties originating from
the draft of manpower in
former Soviet territories.
R-124 33 Extract from report on Fuehrer 441
conference of 30 May 1943.
R-124 4 Extract from report of Fuehrer 442
conference of 11-12 September
1943.
R-124 34 Extract from Fuehrer conference 443
of 1-4 January 1944,
concerning Speer’s report on
the French labor situation.
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT L-79[74]
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 3
EXTRACT FROM MINUTES OF FUEHRER CONFERENCE, 23 MAY 1939
Top Secret
To be transmitted by officer only
Minutes of a Conference on 23 May 39
Place: The Fuehrer’s Study, New Reich Chancellery.
Adjutant on duty: Lt.-Col. (GSC) Schmundt.
Present: The Fuehrer, Field Marshal Goering, Grand Admiral [Admiral of the
Fleet] Raeder. Col. Gen. [General] von Brauchitsch, Col. Gen.
Keitel, Col. Gen. Milch, Gen. (of Artillery) [Lt. General]
Halder, Gen. Bodenschatz, Rear Admiral Schniewind, Col. (GSC)
Jeschonnek, Col. (GSC) Warlimont, Lt.-Col. (GSC) Schmundt, Capt.
[Army] Engel, Lt. Comdr. Albrecht, Capt. [Army] v. Below.
Subject: Indoctrination on the political situation and future aims.
The Fuehrer defined as _the purpose of the conference_:
1. Analysis of the situation.
2. Definition of the tasks for the armed forces arising from the
situation.
3. Exposition of the consequences of those tasks.
4. Ensuring the secrecy of all decisions and work resulting from
these consequences.
Secrecy is the first essential for success. The Fuehrer’s observations
are given in systematized form below.
Our present situation must be considered from two points of view: (1)
the actual development of events between 1933 and 1939; (2) the
permanent and unchanging situation in which Germany lies.
In the period 1933-1939, progress was made in all fields. Our military
situation improved enormously.
Our situation with regard to the rest of the world has remained the
same.
Germany had dropped from the circle of Great Powers. The balance of
power had been effected without the participation of Germany.
This equilibrium is disturbed when Germany’s demands for the necessities
of life make themselves felt, and Germany reemerges as a Great Power.
All demands are regarded as “Encroachments”. The English are more afraid
of dangers in the economic sphere than of the simple threat of force.
A mass of 80 million people has solved the ideological problems. So,
too, must the economic problems be solved. No German can evade the
creation of the necessary economic conditions for this. The solution of
the problems demands courage. The principle by which one evades solving
the problems by adapting oneself to circumstances is inadmissible.
Circumstances must rather be adapted to aims. This is impossible without
invasion of foreign states or attacks upon foreign property.
Living space, in proportion to the magnitude of the state, is the basis
of all power. One may refuse for a time to face the problem, but finally
it is solved one way or the other. The choice is between advancement or
decline. In 15 or 20 years’ time we shall be compelled to find a
solution. No German statesman can evade the question longer than that.
We are at present in a state of patriotic fervor, which is shared by two
other nations—Italy and Japan.
The period which lies behind us has indeed been put to good use. All
measures have been taken in the correct sequence and in harmony with our
aims.
After 6 years the situation is today as follows:
The national-political unity of the Germans has been achieved, apart
from minor exceptions. Further successes cannot be attained without the
shedding of blood.
The demarcation of frontiers is of military importance.
The Pole is no supplementary enemy. Poland will always be on the side of
our adversaries. In spite of treaties of friendship, Poland has always
had the secret intention of exploiting every opportunity to do us harm.
Danzig is not the subject of the dispute at all. It is a question of
expanding our living space in the East and of securing our food
supplies, of the settlement of the Baltic problem. Food supplies can be
expected only from thinly populated areas. Over and above the natural
fertility, thorough German exploitation will enormously increase the
surplus.
There is no other possibility for Europe.
Colonies: Beware of gifts of colonial territory. This does not solve the
food problem. [Remember]—blockade!
If fate brings us into conflict with the West, the possession of
extensive areas in the East will be advantageous. Upon record harvest we
shall be able to rely even less in time of war than in peace.
The population of non-German areas will perform no military service, and
will be available as a source of labor.
The problem “Polish” is inseparable from conflict with the West.
Poland’s internal power of resistance to Bolshevism is doubtful. Thus
Poland is of doubtful value as a barrier against Russia.
It is questionable whether military success in the West can be achieved
by a quick decision; questionable too is the attitude of Poland.
The Polish government will not resist pressure from Russia. Poland sees
danger in a German victory in the West, and will attempt to rob us of
the victory.
There is therefore no question of sparing Poland, and we are left with
the _decision_:
_To attack Poland at the first suitable opportunity._
* * * * *
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT EC-68
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 6[75]
LETTER FROM THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE AND ECONOMICS OF
BADEN, 6 MARCH 1941, CONTAINING DIRECTIVES REGARDING
THE TREATMENT OF POLISH FARM WORKERS
49-7
Copy
III B 5 C (in pencil)
Karlsruhe, 6 March 1941
Minister of Finance and Economics of Baden
Provincial [Land] Food Office Dept. A.
(Provincial Farmers Association)
Confidential Only for Official Business
To all District Farmers Associations [Kreis]
Subject: Directives regarding the treatment of foreign farm workers of
Polish nationality.
The agencies of the Reich Food Estate, Provincial Farmers Association of
Baden, have received the results of the negotiations with the Higher SS
and Police Leader in Stuttgart on 14 February 1941, with great
satisfaction. Appropriate memoranda have already been turned over to the
District Farmers Associations. Below, I promulgate the individual
regulations, as they have been laid down during the conference and how
they are not to be applied accordingly:
1. Fundamentally, farm workers of Polish nationality no longer
have the right to complain, and thus no complaints may be
accepted any more by any official agency.
2. The farm workers of Polish nationality may not leave the
localities in which they are employed, and have a curfew from 1
October to 31 March from 2000 hours to 0600 hours, and from 1
April to 30 September from 2100 hours to 0500 hours.
3. The use of bicycles is strictly prohibited. Exceptions are
possible, for riding to the place of work in the field, if a
relative of the employer or the employer himself is present.
4. The visit of churches, regardless of faith, is strictly
prohibited, even when there is no service in progress.
Individual spiritual care by clergymen outside of the church is
permitted.
5. Visits to theaters, motion pictures or other cultural
entertainment are strictly prohibited for farm workers of Polish
nationality.
6. The visit of restaurants is strictly prohibited to farm
workers of Polish nationality except for one restaurant in the
village, which will be selected by the Rural Councillor’s
Office, and then only one day per week. The day, which is
determined as the day to visit the restaurant, will also be
determined by the Rural Councillor’s Office. This regulation
does not change the curfew regulation, mentioned above under No.
2.
7. Sexual intercourse with women and girls is strictly
prohibited, and wherever it is established, it must be reported.
8. Gatherings of farm workers of Polish nationality after work
is prohibited, whether it is on other farms, in the stables, or
in the living quarters of the Poles.
9. The use of railroads, buses, or other public conveyances by
farm workers of Polish nationality is prohibited.
10. Permits to leave the village may only be granted in very
exceptional cases, by the local police authority (mayor’s
office). However, in no case may it be granted if he wants to
visit a public agency on his own, whether it is a labor office
or the District Farmers Association, or whether he wants to
change his place of employment.
11. Arbitrary change of employment is strictly prohibited. The
farm workers of Polish nationality have to work daily so long as
the interests of the enterprise demand it, and as it is demanded
by the employer. There are no time limits to the working time.
12. Every employer has the right to give corporal punishment to
farm workers of Polish nationality, if instructions and good
words fail. The employer may not be held accountable in any such
case by an official agency.
13. Farm workers of Polish nationality should if possible be
removed from the community of the home, and they can be
quartered in stables, etc. No remorse whatever should restrict
such action.
14. Report to the authorities is compulsory in all cases when
crimes have been committed by farm workers of Polish nationality
which are to sabotage the enterprise or slow down work, for
instance, unwillingness to work, impertinent behavior; it is
compulsory even in minor cases. An employer who loses his Pole
who must serve a longer prison sentence because of such a
compulsory report will receive another Pole from the competent
labor office on request with preference.
15. In all other cases, only the state police is still
competent.
For the employer himself, severe punishment is contemplated if it is
established that the necessary distance from farm workers of Polish
nationality has not been kept. The same applies to women and girls.
Extra rations are strictly prohibited. Noncompliance of the Reich
tariffs for farm workers of Polish nationality will be punished by the
competent labor office by the taking away of the worker.
In any case of doubt, the Provincial Farmers Association—IB—will give
information.
Forwarding in writing of the above agreement to the farm workers of
Polish nationality is strictly prohibited.
These regulations do not apply to Poles who are still prisoners of war
and are thus subordinated to the armed forces. In this case, the
regulations published by the armed forces apply.
Heil Hitler!
BY ORDER:
[Signed] DR. KLOTZ
PARTIAL TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 3005-PS
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 7
EXTRACTS FROM LETTER FROM THE REICH LABOR MINISTRY TO
PRESIDENTS OF REGIONAL LABOR OFFICES, 26 AUGUST 1941,
CONCERNING THE USE OF FRENCH AND RUSSIAN PW’S
Vol. 78-L
Annex 1 to the Decree of the Reich Minister of Armament
and Munitions
THE REICH MINISTER OF LABOR
_Va 5135/1277_
Nr. 371-4770/41 secret 216/985
Berlin, SW 11, 26 August 1941
Special Delivery
To the Presidents of Regional Labor Offices
(including Nuernberg Branch Office)
Subject: Use of Russian PW’s.
Reference: Circular of 14 August 1941—Va 5135/1189—.
Upon personal order of the Reich Marshal [Goering], 100,000 men are to
be taken from among the French PW’s not yet employed in armament
industry, and are to be assigned to the armament industry (airplane
industry). Gaps in manpower supply resulting therefrom will be filled by
Soviet PW’s. The transfer of the above-named French PW’s is to be
accomplished by 1 October. Russian PW’s can be utilized only in larger
concentrated groups under the well-known, tougher employment conditions.
In the civilian field the regional labor offices will have to determine
immediately those work projects where French prisoners of war can be
withdrawn and replaced by Soviet groups. For the time being, no
additional assignment of Soviet prisoners of war can be considered.
Initially all replacement possibilities must be completely exhausted.
Similarly, all French PW’s no longer needed are not to be channeled into
agriculture and forestry any more, but exclusively into armament
industry (aircraft industry).
All branches of economic life employing French PW’s, with the exception
of armament industry and mining, are to be encompassed in determining
those work projects where exchanges are feasible. The absolute necessity
that Soviet PW replacements be employed in larger concentrated groups,
requires, among other things, special checking of all larger
construction projects of any kind (including construction of the Reich
railroads, navigational and cultivation projects). Reich Minister Dr.
Todt has already consented to the exchange of French PW’s employed by
the Reich super highways. In agriculture the exchange can naturally be
effected only in the case of large estates (especially estates with
outlying farms).
Exchange of PW’s will frequently encounter resistance. The factories
concerned will be reluctant to exchange the trained and proven French
PW’s for Soviet PW’s. In such cases the labor offices have to draw the
factories’ attention to the necessities of state, and to the directive
of the Reich Marshal.
As soon as the regional labor offices have determined the work projects
affected by the exchange, they will inform the Service Commands
Headquarters, indicating how many French PW’s are being made available
and how many Soviet PW’s will be needed to replace the French PW’s.
Without my express consent not more than 120 Soviet PW’s may be
requested for each 100 French PW’s made available. Since the determining
factors in the allocation of Soviet PW’s are military and
counter-intelligence considerations, final decision about the exchange
rests with the Service Commands [Military Districts] Headquarters.
* * * * *
The first 100,000 French prisoners of war shall be channeled into the
aircraft industry. * * *
* * * * *
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT EC-194
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 8
MEMORANDUM OF KEITEL, 31 OCTOBER 1941, CONCERNING THE
USE OF PW’S IN THE ARMAMENT INDUSTRY
Copy
Fuehrer Headquarters, 31 October 1941
The Chief of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces
Secret
WFSt/Abt. L (II Org/IV Qu [sic]
No. 0 2588/41 Secret
Subject: Use of prisoners of war in the war industry.
The lack of workers is becoming an increasingly dangerous hindrance for
the future German war and armament industry. The expected relief through
discharges from the armed forces is uncertain as to extent and date. Its
possible extent will by no means correspond to expectations and
requirements in view of the great demand.
The Fuehrer has now ordered that also the working power of the Russian
prisoners of war should be utilized to a great extent by large scale
assignment for the requirements of the war industry. The prerequisite
for production is adequate nourishment. Also very small wages are to be
planned for the most modest supply with a few consumers’ goods for every
day life, and perhaps rewards for production.
For labor utilization [Arbeitseinsatz], the following may be considered
as examples:
I. _Armed Forces._
_a._ Clearing and construction units of all kinds in the occupied
eastern territories.
_b._ Work and construction battalions in the other occupied territories
and in Germany.
_c._ Large scale employment in units to relieve soldiers in labor
service.
II. _Construction and Armament Industry._
_a._ Work units for construction of all kind, particularly for the
fortification of coastal defenses (concrete workers, unloading units for
essential war plants).
_b._ Suitable armament factories which have to be selected in such a way
that their personnel should consist in the majority of prisoners of war
under guidance and supervision (perhaps after withdrawal and transfer to
other employment of the German workers).
III. _Other War Industries._
_a._ Mining as under II _b_.
_b._ Railroad construction units for building tracks, etc.
_c._ Agriculture and forestry in closed units.
The utilization of Russian prisoners of war is to be regulated on the
basis of above examples by:
To I. The armed forces.
To II. The Reich Minister of Armament and Munitions and the Inspector
General for the German road system, in agreement with the Reich Minister
of Labor and the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces (Economic Armament
Office).
Commissioners of the Reich Minister of Armament and Munitions are to be
admitted to the prisoner of war camps to assist in the selection of
skilled workers.
To III. The Reich Minister of Labor. Limitations are—
1. The securing of guards to protect the German people from
dangers.
2. Housing in closed camps.
3. Securing adequate nourishment.
The observance of the counter-intelligence regulations which apply for
the use of prisoners of war will be supervised by military
counter-intelligence agencies as until now.
OKW (AWA)[76] will furnish the Reich Minister of Labor with blueprints
based on professional selection for the appropriate use of labor and
will also permanently provide workers for assignment to the labor
utilization [Arbeitseinsatz].
Furthermore, the Commander in Chief of the Army is asked to take the
necessary measures for the recruiting of voluntary labor in the eastern
operational zone in cooperation with the Reich Minister of Labor.
[Signed] KEITEL
Distribution:
* * * * *
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 1206-PS
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 9
OUTLINES OF DIRECTIVES OF GOERING REGARDING THE
EMPLOYMENT OF PW’S IN THE ARMAMENT INDUSTRY,
7 NOVEMBER 1941
Draft
Rue(IV)
Berlin, 11 November 1941
Top Secret
6 Copies—6th Copy
_NOTES ON OUTLINES LAID DOWN BY THE REICH MARSHAL
[GOERING] AT THE MEETING OF 7 NOVEMBER
1941 IN THE REICH AIR MINISTRY [RLM]_
Subject: Employment of laborers in war industries
The Fuehrer’s point of view as to employment of prisoners of war in war
industries has changed basically. So far, a total of 5 million prisoners
of war—employed so far 2 million.
Directives for employment:
Frenchmen: Individual employment, transposition into the armament
industry. [Rue-Wirtschaft.]
Belgians: Individual employment, transposition into the armament
industry. [Rue-Wirtschaft.]
Serbs: Preferably agriculture.
Poles: If feasible, no individual employment.
Output of Russian armament industry surpasses the German one. Assembly
line work, a great many mechanical devices with relatively few skilled
workers.
Readiness of Russians to work in the operational area is strong. In the
Ukraine and other areas discharged prisoners of war already work as free
labor. In Krivoi Rog, large numbers of workers are available due to the
destruction of the factories.
_Employment of Russian PW’s_
As a rule, employment in groups [geschlossener Arbeitseinsatz]; no
individual employment, not even in agriculture. Guard personnel, not
only soldiers but also foremen, at least during the working time proper.
As a rule soldiers in the camp.
One has to distinguish between _employment in_:
1. Operational area,
2. Reich Commissariats (occupied territories in the East),
3. General Government, and
4. Interior and Protectorate.
To 1: In the _operational area_ take preferably into consideration:
_a._ Railroads.
_b._ Highway construction.
Very important that in the Ukraine some roads be built with
increased speed, not by German skilled labor but by Russian PW’s.
_c._ Clearing work.
_d._ Agriculture.
The Ukraine being conquered, we now finally have to secure the
feeding of the German people. If necessary Frenchmen and Belgians
are to be used for directing the work of the Russian farm workers
in the eastern area. If farm machinery is lacking, employ masses of
workers. Transfer of German farmers only where actual success can
be expected.
_e._ Railroad-repair-factories, etc.
Best supervision: “Field kitchen”. Quick evacuation from operational
area necessary. Losses during transport very heavy (escaping and joining
with partisan and robber bands).
Barbed wire hard to get. (Discarding of barbed wire fences in East
Prussia desirable.)
Leave Asiatic people in operational area if possible.
From construction battalions 69,000 workers have been transferred to the
armament industry: replacement by prisoner-of-war battalions.
Again and again skilled workers are being found in the construction
battalions (machine [wood or metal] operators). Investigation by army
desirable. Express will of the Fuehrer, that every skilled worker is
used in the proper place. If necessary, repeated checking should be
instituted.
To 2: The same applies to employment in _Reich Commissariats_.
To 3: The above is also applicable to the _General Government_.
Attention is to be paid to avoiding of unnecessary transport of
machinery, as thereby often the available manpower in the General
Government is not fully utilized and, on the other hand, the machinery
cannot be made use of for a long time in other places.
To 4: In the _Interior and the Protectorate_ it would be ideal if entire
factories could be manned by Russian PW’s except the employees necessary
for direction. For employment in the Interior and the Protectorate the
following are to have priority:
_a._ At the top, _coal mining industry_.
Order by the Fuehrer to investigate all mines as to
suitability for employment of Russians. At times manning
the entire plant with Russian laborers.
_b._ _Transportation_ (construction of locomotives and cars,
repair shops).
Railroad repair and industry workers are to be sought
out from the PW’s. Railroad is most important means of
transportation in the East.
_c._ _Armament industries._
Above all factories producing tanks and guns. Possibly
also construction of parts for airplane engines.
Suitable complete sections of factories to be manned
exclusively by Russians. For the remainder, employment
in columns. Use in factories of tool machinery,
production of farm tractors, generators, etc. In
emergency, erect in individual places barracks for
occasional workers which are used as unloading details
and similar purposes. (Reich Minister of the Interior
through communal authorities.)
The General Armed Forces Office of the Supreme Command Armed Forces
[OKW/AWA] is competent for _transporting_ Russian PW’s, employment
through “_Planning Board for Employment of all PW’s_.” If necessary,
offices of Reich Commissariats.
No employment where _danger to people_ [_fuer Menschen_] or their supply
exists, i.e., factories sensitive to explosions, waterworks, powerworks,
etc. No contact with German population, especially no “solidarity”.
German worker as a rule is foreman of Russians.
_Food_ is a matter of the Four Year Plan. Supply their own food (cats,
horses, etc.).
_Clothing_, _billeting_, _messing_ somewhat better than at home where
part of the people live in caverns.
_Supply of shoes_ for Russians, as a rule wooden shoes; if necessary
install Russian shoe repair shops.
Examination of _physical fitness_, in order to avoid importation of
diseases.
_Clearing of mines_ as a rule by Russians, if possible by selected
Russian engineers.
Employment offices for _civilian workers_ to be kept separate from those
for PW’s. In this respect the wage problem is to be considered.
Furthermore, families in Russia have to share the support. As a rule
employment in groups [geschlossener Einsatz].
_Some aspects for labor utilization [Arbeitseinsatz] in general._
Rather employ PW’s than _unsuitable foreign workers_. Draft Poles,
Dutchmen, etc., if necessary as PW’s, and employ them as such, if work
through free contract cannot be obtained. Strong action.
General employment of all _German women_ repudiated by the Fuehrer.
Where Russians can be employed, _labor service_ is not to be used. Labor
service to be used where greatest effect is produced, even if the
principle of education through labor service is curtailed thereby. War
situation to be taken into consideration.
_As a matter of principle, central interests precede local interests_,
therefore no resistance from Reich Commissioners and other local
authorities against labor utilization [Arbeitseinsatz] in the homeland.
_Savings in wages_ are to be offset by compensatory contributions [to
the Reich] by the respective management.
_Express order by the Fuehrer._ Under no circumstances may the _wage
level in the East_ be raised or assimilated to the wages in western
Germany. Strong action is imperative against recruiting agents who offer
high wages.
It is intended to issue a basically new regulation of _wages for foreign
workers_.
_Foreigners not to be treated like German workers_, on the other hand do
not provoke inferiority complex in foreigners by posters.
The _welfare installations_ of the German Labor Front [DAF] are _under
no circumstances_ to be used by PW’s or eastern workers.
All agencies are to promote maximum _utilization of Russian manpower_.
Employment of Russians not to be improvised, but first to be thoroughly
organized in the operational area. _Speed_ is necessary, as the mass of
manpower is decreasing daily by losses (lack of food and billets).
Make provisions to decrease the excessive number of _escaping
prisoners_. Especially in and around Berlin, strictest guarding is
essential.
[illegible initials]
Distribution:
* * * * *
PARTIAL TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 3040-PS[77]
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 10
EXTRACTS FROM SECRET ORDER OF HIMMLER, 20 FEBRUARY 1942,
CONCERNING THE COMMITMENT AND TREATMENT OF
MANPOWER FROM THE EAST
_GENERAL COLLECTION OF DECREES [ALLGEMEINE_
_ERLASSAMMLUNG (AES)]_