Sunbringer 1st Edition Hannah Kaner

Visit to download the full and correct content document:

https://textbookfull.com/product/sunbringer-1st-edition-hannah-kaner/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Sunbringer (The Fallen Gods 2) 1st Edition Hannah Kaner

https://textbookfull.com/product/sunbringer-the-fallen-
gods-2-1st-edition-hannah-kaner/

Legacy Blackwater Pack 3 1st Edition Hannah Mcbride

Mcbride Hannah

https://textbookfull.com/product/legacy-blackwater-pack-3-1st-
edition-hannah-mcbride-mcbride-hannah/

Witherward Hannah Mathewson

https://textbookfull.com/product/witherward-hannah-mathewson/

Free Stuff For Baby 1st Edition Sue Hannah

https://textbookfull.com/product/free-stuff-for-baby-1st-edition-
sue-hannah/
Prey (Blackwater Pack #2) 1st Edition Hannah Mcbride
[Mcbride

https://textbookfull.com/product/prey-blackwater-pack-2-1st-
edition-hannah-mcbride-mcbride/

Foul Is Fair Hannah Capin

https://textbookfull.com/product/foul-is-fair-hannah-capin/

Archaeology: An Introduction 6th Edition Hannah Cobb

https://textbookfull.com/product/archaeology-an-introduction-6th-
edition-hannah-cobb/

The Search Party 3rd Edition Hannah Richell

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-search-party-3rd-edition-
hannah-richell/

Hannah Arendt The Promise of Education Jon Nixon

https://textbookfull.com/product/hannah-arendt-the-promise-of-
education-jon-nixon/
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
offices which dealt with the recruiting of volunteers, and also a
number of recruiting offices which worked with them. But from the
very beginning these labor organizations worked under the
supervision of the Feldkommandanturen in Belgium. These
Feldkommandanturen were offices of the military commander. There
was no question of the Plenipotentiary General taking over the work.
Before he appointed his deputies he could only send his requests
directly to the military administration, to General Von Falkenhausen,
but not directly to a labor office.
DR. SERVATIUS: What were the conditions in Holland? Who
was the competent district head there?
HILDEBRANDT: It was the Reich Commissioner.
DR. SERVATIUS: And was there a deputy of Sauckel’s with
him?
HILDEBRANDT: Yes, a deputy was appointed there too, who
was a member of the administration of the Reich Commissioner.
DR. SERVATIUS: Who issued the labor service decrees there?
HILDEBRANDT: The Reich Commissioner.
DR. SERVATIUS: And who carried out the recruiting? German
or Dutch offices?
HILDEBRANDT: As far as I remember there were Dutch labor
offices. The heads of these labor offices were Germans; the rest of
the personnel was mainly Dutch. These offices took the necessary
steps for the allocation of labor.
DR. SERVATIUS: Now, I have one more question concerning
Germany. The metal industries came into your field, did they not?
HILDEBRANDT: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: Krupp, for instance.
HILDEBRANDT: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: What kind of reports did you receive about
conditions in the Krupp works as far as the welfare of the workmen
was concerned?
HILDEBRANDT: I had no unfavorable reports about Krupp. The
personal adviser of the Plenipotentiary General, Landrat Berk, visited
the Krupp works frequently and informed me of the requests made
by the firm and of the impressions he had received, but he never
said that proper care was not taken of foreign workmen. I myself
never visited the Krupp firm during the war.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have no more questions for the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of the German counsel want to ask
questions? Prosecution?
M. HERZOG: Mr. President, we have the same problems here.
The Tribunal has already heard explanations on these points. The
Tribunal is in possession of the documents which I have submitted,
and I have, therefore, no questions to put to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness can retire.
[The witness left the stand.]
DR. SERVATIUS: Then with the permission of the Tribunal, I will
call the witness Stothfang.
[The witness Stothfang took the stand.]
THE PRESIDENT: Would you state your full name?
WALTER STOTHFANG (Witness): Walter Stothfang.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you repeat these words after me: I swear
by God—the Almighty and Omniscient—that I will speak the pure
truth—and will withhold and add nothing.
[The witness repeated the oath.]
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down.
DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, what was your position with
Sauckel?
STOTHFANG: I was personal adviser to the Plenipotentiary
General for the Allocation of Labor.
DR. SERVATIUS: When did you assume that position?
STOTHFANG: One year after the Plenipotentiary General for
the Allocation of Labor had assumed office; that was on 19 April
1943.
DR. SERVATIUS: Was the witness Timm there when you came?
STOTHFANG: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: And the witness Hildebrandt?
STOTHFANG: Yes.
 DR. SERVATIUS: What orders did you receive when you came?
STOTHFANG: The Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of
Labor did not give any special personal directives because his
general principles could be clearly seen in his decrees and in his
program, and I only started work 1 year later.
DR. SERVATIUS: Before that, had you already been in the
Ministry of Labor?
STOTHFANG: Yes, I had been connected with that type of work
since 1926; and for the last 8 years I was the personal assistant of
State Secretary Dr. Syrup in the Ministry of Labor.
DR. SERVATIUS: Was it a considerable change when you came
to Sauckel?
STOTHFANG: No.
DR. SERVATIUS: What did your colleagues in the office tell you
about the whole work, and Sauckel’s attitude to the work?
STOTHFANG: The work, as such, was carried out according to
principles and decrees which were not essentially different to
previous ones. In practice of course, they were much more far
reaching than anything hitherto.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you work very closely with Sauckel in your
sphere? You were his personal assistant.
STOTHFANG: As far as that was necessary for carrying out the
task of the Plenipotentiary General for the war effort. Sauckel was
not only Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor, but at
the same time he had remained Reichsstatthalter and Gauleiter in
Thuringia. Besides that, during the last 1½ years of his activities, he
was very much occupied with the construction of an underground
factory in Kahle, in Thuringia; so that he...
DR. SERVATIUS: We will come back to that later.
STOTHFANG: ...could only be in Berlin from time to time; at the
most 1 day a week, and often only half a day.
DR. SERVATIUS: And what was your task as his personal
adviser?
STOTHFANG: We had to receive incoming mail, sort out what
had to be reported, and pass on the rest to the competent
departments. We also had to submit newly arrived drafts to the
Plenipotentiary General.
DR. SERVATIUS: Who called staff conferences? Do you know
that?
STOTHFANG: That was generally done by the office.
DR. SERVATIUS: You always attended these conferences?
STOTHFANG: Yes, from the time I first came into the office.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you participate in conferences to which
individual members returned from so-called inspection trips and
made their reports?
STOTHFANG: Later that no longer happened or only very
seldom. It was only in the beginning.
DR. SERVATIUS: That you were present, or that inspection trips
took place?
STOTHFANG: No; that reports were made.
DR. SERVATIUS: There were fewer reports later?
STOTHFANG: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: What was the reason for that?
STOTHFANG: I do not know the reason.
DR. SERVATIUS: During the period when you were present, did
you learn of anything particularly shocking as regards irregularities in
Germany? We will include transports to Germany, transit camps, the
work shops themselves, the camps, and the factories.
STOTHFANG: I myself found out about some irregularities on
the occasion of inspection trips which I made on orders, but these
were at once discussed with the competent offices and steps were
taken to put a stop to them.
DR. SERVATIUS: Sauckel had to work with a number of offices.
Was there any special opposition to overcome here?
STOTHFANG: With the exception of two cases, no.
DR. SERVATIUS: What cases were these?
STOTHFANG: One was the Party Chancellery; and the other
was the Reichsführer SS and Chief of the Secret State Police.
 DR. SERVATIUS: Do you know of specific instances in the case
of the Reichsführer SS?
STOTHFANG: The general treatment of foreign workers—
particularly of those coming from the East—as far as it was
determined by the Reichsführer SS or the principles laid down by the
Reichsführer SS, was contrary to the ideas of the Plenipotentiary
General for the Allocation of Labor. The Reichsführer SS was not
inclined to meet the far-reaching, definite demands of the
Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor. The same thing
happened, in other directions, in the case of the head of the Party
Chancellery.
DR. SERVATIUS: In what directions?
STOTHFANG: For example, where social insurance was
concerned. In this case the Party Chancellery was of the opinion that
equality with German workers was not justified on either practical or
political grounds; nor was as high a rate of pay.
DR. SERVATIUS: And what did Sauckel say to that?
STOTHFANG: He tried, again and again, to regulate all these
matters according to his principles. In some things he was definitely
unsuccessful, and in others he was successful only after great
efforts. I would remind you of the equal status given to the Eastern
Workers which was actually only put into effect in March 1945
through a decree.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you receive any special reports from the
Gauleiter who were appointed deputies for the Allocation of Labor, or
did you speak to the Gauleiter?
STOTHFANG: There were instructions that on inspection trips
the competent Gauleiter of the district visited had to be seen, so that
any relevant questions could be discussed with him.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you take part in meetings of the Central
Planning Board?
STOTHFANG: I went to one single meeting of the Central
Planning Board with the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of
Labor.
 DR. SERVATIUS: Witness, you have just mentioned March
1945 as the date when the Eastern Workers were given equality with
the rest of the workers. Are you not mistaken in the year—1944? I
will show you the decree.
STOTHFANG: As far as I remember, it was March 1945.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, I will have it shown to the
witness in a moment; we are looking for it.
[Turning to the witness.] What was the relationship between
Speer and Sauckel?
STOTHFANG: Apparently the appointment of the
Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor was due to a
suggestion which Minister Speer had made to the Führer.
DR. SERVATIUS: I refer to Document 58, in Document Book
Number 2, Page 167 of the German text, and Page 156 of the
English text. That is the decree concerning the conditions of
employment of Eastern Workers, of 25 March 1944, and I read
Paragraph 2:
“Wages.
“For Eastern Workers the same conditions apply for wages
and salary as for other foreign workers. Eastern Workers
are paid wages only for work they actually do.”
THE PRESIDENT: How did the wages compare with the wages
of the German workers?
STOTHFANG: It was a fundamental rule that they must be
based on the German wages for the same type of work, in order to
avoid additional profits for the industries which employed Eastern
Workers.
DR. SERVATIUS: Do you remember a conference at which
Goebbels stated his opinion to Sauckel as regards the latter’s policy
concerning social questions and questions of wages?
STOTHFANG: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: Can you describe it to us?
STOTHFANG: I myself did not take part in that conference. I
only knew about it from the description given by my colleague Dr.
Hildebrandt, who was present at the meeting with Gauleiter Sauckel.
It was the first discussion between the two gentlemen after
Reich Minister Goebbels had become Reich Plenipotentiary for Total
War Effort. At this conference Minister Speer was also present, and
in the course of the conference Reich Minister Dr. Goebbels
reproached the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor
with the fact his previous measures...
THE PRESIDENT: He is now telling us, is he not, what
Hildebrandt told him?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Hildebrandt has been in the witness
box and he has not been asked about it.
DR. SERVATIUS: There has been confusion of the two
witnesses. They arrived only a short time ago. I ask permission for
this witness to say what Hildebrandt told him. It can be explained by
the fact that the witness was here for only a very short time.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Servatius, the Tribunal does not think that
you ought to be allowed to ask him that question.
DR. SERVATIUS: Were there any difficulties with Speer?
STOTHFANG: Not at the beginning. In the course of years
difficulties arose because of the fundamentally different ideas of the
two men.
THE PRESIDENT: We have had the relationships between
Sauckel and Speer gone into elaborately.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes. I will withdraw that question.
[Turning to the witness.] What did the offices have to do with the
employment of concentration camp prisoners? Did they deal with
that?
STOTHFANG: No.
DR. SERVATIUS: Did you not receive reports that manpower
was disappearing from other industries, and in this way became
concentration camp workers?
STOTHFANG: No reports were received about that.
 DR. SERVATIUS: Are you aware that concentration camp
workers were employed in large numbers for work?
STOTHFANG: It was the general practice of the Police to put
prisoners to work.
DR. SERVATIUS: You did not receive any reports about that, did
you?
STOTHFANG: No. An effort was made to gain influence to the
extent of having reports sent to the offices of the labor administration
concerning the employment of concentration camp prisoners, so that
they could be considered in the general planning of labor allocation.
But these reports were not received by the labor offices.
DR. SERVATIUS: Now I have only a few more questions
concerning the control offices, and other control agencies, which had
been established in order to investigate conditions among the
workers in Germany. Do you know how far foreign workers
themselves were included in that control system? I am thinking first
of all of the office of Ambassador Scapini. How did this office work?
Did you hear anything about it?
STOTHFANG: I do not know many details about the office of
Scapini. I know of its existence, but to the best of my knowledge
Scapini’s office was chiefly occupied with the welfare of French
prisoners of war rather than with the welfare of French civilian
workers, because for the latter a special office existed under M.
Brunedon. But generally the foreign workers were represented by
the German Labor Front. So-called Reich liaison offices were set up
everywhere, from the central office via the Gaue to the small
districts, and each employed several people who visited the camps,
listened to complaints and negotiated with the offices of the German
Labor Front, or with other offices of the labor administration.
DR. SERVATIUS: Those were German employees that you
mentioned?
STOTHFANG: No; they were foreign employees from countries
abroad, in fact from almost every country.
DR. SERVATIUS: In the factories themselves, did the workmen
have any representatives who had contact, as liaison men, with the
supervisory offices of the German Labor Front?
 STOTHFANG: Not to my knowledge.
DR. SERVATIUS: For the Eastern Workers there was also a
control office. Do you know that office?
STOTHFANG: In Rosenberg’s department there was a special
one for that purpose.
DR. SERVATIUS: How did that office work? Did you hear
anything about it?
STOTHFANG: Yes. It had regular contact with the technically
competent offices of the labor administration.
DR. SERVATIUS: And whom had this office to contact if it
received complaints? The Labor Front, Sauckel’s office, or the
Minister of Labor? To whom did they have to go?
STOTHFANG: That depended on the nature of the irregularities,
or the complaints which were made.
DR. SERVATIUS: I will give you an example—complaints about
labor conditions.
STOTHFANG: In that case one had to go first to the competent
local labor office in order to have detailed inquiries made into the
case, and to see about the general conditions, or the actual
conditions.
DR. SERVATIUS: And if it was a matter of housing and nutrition,
to whom did one go?
STOTHFANG: First to the offices of the German Labor Front,
which, by a decree of the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation
of Labor—I believe it was Decree Number 4—was given the general
task of looking after the foreign workers.
DR. SERVATIUS: And did the Labor Front report to you further?
STOTHFANG: Within the scope of their capacity they tried to put
matters right.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then the Labor Front itself, in fact, was the
highest authority for questions of complaints about the welfare of
workers?
STOTHFANG: If you put it like that, yes.
 DR. SERVATIUS: Who supervised the treatment of prisoners of
war? Did the complaints come to Sauckel?
STOTHFANG: No.
DR. SERVATIUS: Who had charge of that?
STOTHFANG: The High Command of the Armed Forces.
DR. SERVATIUS: The Reich Inspection Board was also a
control office. What did Sauckel have to do with the Reich Inspection
Board?
STOTHFANG: That must be an incorrect designation. I do not
know what you mean by the Reich Inspection Board.
DR. SERVATIUS: I mean the Trade Inspection Board, the Reich
Trade Inspection Board.
STOTHFANG: In Germany the trade inspection boards in
principle were competent for labor protection in factories. As far as
labor protection in factories was concerned, they had to see that the
decrees which had been issued, and were in force, were carried out
and obeyed. Therefore in case of complaints they were the
competent authorities.
DR. SERVATIUS: Was Sauckel accused by other offices of
looking after the workmen too well? And was there not, in some
cases, even envy of the situation of certain foreign workers?
STOTHFANG: Yes. Such accusations came from three places.
First, from the two offices I mentioned before, which offered general
objections and resistance to the far-reaching demands of the
Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor. Then Bormann’s
office, and Himmler’s office. It went so far that the Plenipotentiary
General for the Allocation of Labor was even suspected of being pro-
Bolshevik.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have no further questions to put to the
witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any other defense counsel wish to ask
any questions?
[There was no response.]
Does the Prosecution wish to?
[There was no response.]
 The witness can retire.
[The witness left the stand.]
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, I do not know whether the
witness Jäger has arrived yet.
THE PRESIDENT: I am told not.
DR. SERVATIUS: I assume that he will be here by Monday, and
I would suggest that I be permitted to submit some documents now,
or perhaps an interrogation of the witness Goetz, which is in the
document book. Perhaps I may refer to several passages. It is a very
long affidavit, and it throws some light on the matter in this
connection and will make it easier to understand.
THE PRESIDENT: You probably have some remarks to make
about your documents, have you not, which will take you up until 1
o’clock?
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, the document books contain
primarily the decrees which Sauckel issued, and they cover what has
been said here by the witnesses and by the defendant himself as a
witness. As far as possible, the book is divided up into sections
dealing with special subjects, but as the decrees which were issued
frequently applied to several subjects at the same time, the separate
divisions overlap in this book.
I refer principally to Volume I, to all the decrees included there,
which I do not want to read individually. I should like only to call
special attention to the decrees about police matters. That is
Document 6, which is on Page 16; Document 10, on Page 20; and
Document 15, on Page 25. These documents...
THE PRESIDENT: You understand that you must offer in
evidence each document or number of documents that you want to
put in evidence? It is not sufficient to put it in your document book.
So please state the document which you wish to put in evidence.
DR. SERVATIUS: These documents are included in a collection
of laws which has already been submitted.
THE PRESIDENT: The whole thing you mean? The whole thing
has been submitted?
 DR. SERVATIUS: It has, as far as I know. That is Document
Number 3044-PS: “Enactments, Decrees, Announcements.”
THE PRESIDENT: Well, probably only a small part of 3044-PS
has been read and, therefore, unless it is translated into the four
languages, it does not form part of the record. Dr. Servatius, if you
will go into the matter and offer what you want to offer in evidence on
Monday morning, that will be quite satisfactory.
DR. SERVATIUS: But may I refer to them now, and then submit
the documents on Monday?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: These three decrees and enactments of the
Reichsführer SS I have submitted in order to show how efforts were
made at improvement even in this difficult field. Decree Number 6
was issued shortly before Sauckel came into office, and one must
assume that this was done in order to produce a fait accompli.
The next decree, Document Number 10, already shows an
improvement. It deals with the barbed wire and the workers’ outings,
and this is even more relaxed in the next document. Document
Number 15, that is Decree Number 4, which has already been
submitted, is probably the most important first decree, which
describes the fundamental authority and directives, as well as
recruiting methods, transportation, and treatment in Germany.
Decree Number 16 deals with the employment of Eastern
Workers and gives the first basic regulations, because until then
there was no definite legal regulation of a uniform type.
Then I come to Document Number 19, which is on Page 54 in
the English text. This is a decree and a letter from Sauckel to the
Gau labor offices and the Gauleiter, of 14 October 1942, concerning
good treatment for foreign workers. This letter is an intervention on
the part of Sauckel to remove poor conditions and to correct certain
abuses of which he had been informed. I quote here in the German
text on Page 59 the following...
THE PRESIDENT: Well, that document has been quoted
already I think, hasn’t it?
DR. SERVATIUS: A part of the document has already been
mentioned.
 THE PRESIDENT: Which part has not been quoted?
DR. SERVATIUS: It is Page 59 in my book; in the English text,
Page 54.
THE PRESIDENT: Page 54 is only the heading.
DR. SERVATIUS: Heading: “Decree and letter of Sauckel dated
14 October 1942,” and on the next page the text begins. The first
page contains only the title of the decree.
THE PRESIDENT: But Page 55 in the English text, the
beginning of the document has already been read.
DR. SERVATIUS: The beginning has already been read.
THE PRESIDENT: Then what did you want to read?
DR. SERVATIUS: I should like to read the whole thing in order to
show how far Sauckel...
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you see, beginning with the words, “If in
a Gau district the statement was recently still made,” that has been
read already, down to the bottom of that paragraph.
DR. SERVATIUS: I have here only a short note. If it has already
been read, then I need not read it again. I will dispense with the
reading.
Document Number 20 on Page 56 in the English document
book deals with compulsory labor service for foreign female
domestic help and shows the regulations in force at that time...
THE PRESIDENT: Which document?
DR. SERVATIUS: Document Number 20.
THE PRESIDENT: Continue.
DR. SERVATIUS: ...whereby it is pointed out particularly that a
forced transfer of foreign women for domestic help would not be
carried out; and the statement made by Sauckel emphasizes that
only voluntary workers should be taken for domestic employment.
Decree Number 21 introduces the labor book. That is in the
English text on Page 57. The purpose of the labor book was, as
Sauckel has stated here, to facilitate a registration of manpower, so
that one could review it and not lose control. Above all, in connection
with this, there was to be an allocation of land to the Eastern
Workers, as the Defendant Sauckel has explained. A central file was
to be compiled, and with the help of this the regular transportation of
the workers home again was to be arranged at a later date. That was
the preparatory measure of the labor book.
Then we come to Document Number 22, of 23 July 1943, which
deals with the limitation of the duration of employment of Eastern
Workers. It is said in this connection that the duration of employment
should be for 2 years, with certain modifications, and that there
should be facilities for leave, and premiums should be given for the
work done. There was to be leave in Germany, and, under certain
conditions, home leave. For vacations in Germany, as can be seen
here, special leave camps were set up for Eastern Workers. The
reason was that, on account of transport conditions and other
circumstances, these workers could not go home, especially if they
came from territories which in the meantime were no longer
occupied by Germans.
Then there follows Decree Number 13. That is Document
Number 23, Page 62 in the English document book. This decree
deals with the keeping of order in factories and works. It is the
decree on the basis of which measures could be taken for the
maintenance of discipline. I have submitted it in order to show that it
was valid both for German and for foreign workers, and is not a
decree which discriminates against Eastern Workers.
Now I will refer to Document Number 26. That is Page 66 in the
English document book. This is a decree of 25 July 1944 according
to which the position of female domestic workers from the East was
in principle to be equal to that of the German domestic help. Working
hours are regulated and also time off. It reads: “Every week the
female Eastern Worker is to have an adequate amount of free time.”
The question of vacations is regulated in Paragraph 7, to the
effect that they will be granted leave after 12 months’ work in Reich
territory.
THE PRESIDENT: Are those figures right in Document 26, Page
67 in the English document book? Working hours to fall between 6
o’clock in the morning and 9 o’clock at night?
 DR. SERVATIUS: It says there: “The regular working hours,
including rest periods and preparation for work, are to fall between
0600 and 2100 hours, unless special conditions call for other
arrangements.” That does not mean that the work is to be done from
6 o’clock in the morning until 9 o’clock at night. It means that
between these two time limits these people have to work. They
cannot work before 6 o’clock in the morning, and these girls cannot
work after 9 o’clock at night. It cannot...
THE PRESIDENT: I am only asking if the figures are correct.
DR. SERVATIUS: The figures are correct.
Document 27 deals with the position of foreign workers in
factories. It is a decree of the German Labor Front and there are one
or two basic statements made in it. Here for example:
“The pleasure they take in their work and the willingness of
German workers must in no circumstances be endangered
by preferential treatment for foreign workers.
“As regards the treatment of foreign workers, it must be
taken into consideration that they came to Germany
voluntarily and are giving us their services for the carrying
out of tasks of military importance. In order to maintain their
pleasure in their work, the conditions of their contracts must
be respected, and absolutely fair treatment and
comprehensive care and attention must be given them.”
Document 28 is the agreement between Ley and Sauckel
instituting the supervision by the Central Inspectorate. It has already
been submitted by the Prosecution.
Document 30 deals with the tasks in detail and it states:
“The Reich Inspectorate, with regard to allocation of labor,
affairs of the Reich Trustee, and administration, is entrusted
with the following tasks:
“The supervision of the execution of my regulations and
decrees. On the basis of the practical knowledge gained,
the Reich Inspectorate is to make suggestions, propose
improvements and foster mutual exchange of experiences.”
 The last document in this book deals with the establishment of
French offices. It is in the English document book on Page 79, and is
entitled, “French agencies for the care of the French workers
employed in the Reich.”
I believe I have already read the document here. With that, I
have finished Document Book 1.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well; we will adjourn.
[The Tribunal adjourned until 3 June 1946 at 1000 hours.]
 ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-FIFTH DAY
Monday, 3 June 1946

Morning Session
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Servatius.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, the witness Jäger is to appear
in about half an hour. I shall read some other documents from my
document book, if it please the Tribunal.
In the last session I had read all the documents from the first
document book with the exception of Document Sauckel-16, which I
left out by mistake. It is a leaflet for Eastern Workers. I need not read
it, but I shall refer to it.
I have submitted as Exhibit Sauckel-1 the Handbuch für die
Dienststellen ... (Manual for Labor Employment), and in this exhibit
we find the following documents which I have read in part, and shall
read some now: Documents Sauckel-12, 13, 15, 22, 28, 58(a), 67(a),
82, 83, 85, 86, and 88.
Then, I have submitted Exhibit Sauckel-2,
Sonderveröffentlichung des Reichsarbeitsblattes (Special Publication
of the Reichsarbeitsblatt)—namely, Einsatzbedingungen der
Ostarbeiter, sowie der sowjetrussischen Kriegsgefangenen
(Conditions for the Employment of Eastern Workers and Soviet
Russian Prisoners of War), which contains the following documents:
Documents Sauckel-6, 32, 36, 39, 47, and 52.
Then, as Exhibit Sauckel-3, I have submitted the Manifest des
Generalbevollmächtigten für den Arbeitseinsatz (Manifesto of the
Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor), Document
Sauckel-84.
Then, as Exhibit Sauckel-4, Arbeitsgesetze: Textsammlung des
Deutschen Arbeitsrechtes (Labor Laws: Collection of German Laws),
which contains Documents Sauckel-16, 31, and 49.
 As Exhibit Sauckel-5, I have submitted a book, Fritz Sauckels
Kampfreden (Fritz Sauckel’s Battle Speeches). That is Document
Sauckel-95.
As Exhibit Sauckel-6, Nationalsozialistische Regierungstätigkeit
in Thüringen, 1932-33 (National Socialist Governmental Activity in
Thuringia, 1932-33), has been submitted. It is contained in
Document Sauckel-96.
Exhibit Sauckel-7, Nationalsozialistische Regierungstätigkeit in
Thüringen, 1933-34 (National Socialist Governmental Activity in
Thuringia, 1933-34), is contained in Document Sauckel-97.
I have once more submitted as Exhibit Sauckel-8 the publication
entitled Europa arbeitet in Deutschland (Europe Works in Germany),
which has already been submitted as Document RF-5.
Then I shall submit an affidavit of Sauckel’s son, Dieter Sauckel,
which is very short. It refers to the evacuation of the Buchenwald
Camp which Sauckel is said to have ordered. I shall read the eight
lines of the affidavit:
“Between 4 and 7 April 1945, approximately, I was present
when my father, Gauleiter Fritz Sauckel, had a conference
in his study. On this occasion the question of the
Buchenwald Camp was discussed, and the following was
decided: A certain number of guards should remain in the
camp until the arrival of the enemy in order to hand the
camp prisoners over to them.”—This is Sauckel Document
Book 3, Document Sauckel-94, Page 247.
“I swear to the truth of the preceding statement for the
purpose of having it submitted to the International Military
Tribunal in Nuremberg.
“I am ready to swear upon oath to the truth of my
statement. Schönau, 22 March 1946. Dieter Sauckel.”
I submit this as Exhibit Sauckel-9.
In Exhibit USA-206, Document 3044-PS, which has been
submitted already, the following documents of Volume II are
contained, which I shall read later: Sauckel-7, 10, 14, 18, 19, 27, and
41.
The documents which have not been read yet are in the official
collections of laws. I have had the individual laws laid aside in the
library. I do not know whether it is necessary to submit them
individually, or whether it is sufficient for me to state here in what
volume of the Reichsgesetzblatt they can be found.
THE PRESIDENT: Are they in your document book?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes. They are short excerpts from the official
legal gazettes. In each case the relevant passages have been
extracted.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Servatius, I think it would be convenient if
you gave their exhibit numbers, if they are in your book; but I do not
quite understand how you are arranging these. You told us that
Number 1 contained a great number of other numbers. Now is
Number 1 the exhibit number?
DR. SERVATIUS: Number 1 is the exhibit number, and this
exhibit contains these documents with the numbers they have in the
document book.
THE PRESIDENT: In the books?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I understand. So that you are only
submitting—up to the present you have only got as far as nine
exhibits.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: And then you are going to give these various
laws which you have in your books additional exhibit numbers. They
will be 10 to...
DR. SERVATIUS: I did not know whether it was necessary to
submit these Reich legal gazettes as exhibits. As far as I know they
have already been submitted because they are an official collection
of laws from the Reichsgesetzblatt of 1942 and 1940. Of course, I
can take out these individual issues and submit them here.
THE PRESIDENT: Would it not be best if you submitted them
as, say, Exhibit 10, and then told us the numbers in your books
which are contained in Number 10?
DR. SERVATIUS: Then it would be necessary to submit the
original text of the collection of laws. I wanted to avoid that.
THE PRESIDENT: We can take judicial notice of them.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice
of them. I shall point out in what volumes these documents can be
found. That will be Reichsgesetzblatt 1942 in which Documents
Sauckel-8, 11, and 17 are contained; Reichsgesetzblatt 1940 which
contains Document Sauckel-45; Reichsgesetzblatt 1943, which
contains Document Sauckel-21...
THE PRESIDENT: Wait a minute. Which was the first
Reichsgesetzblatt? The one which contained 8, 11, and 17?
DR. SERVATIUS: 1942.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: The second was Reichsgesetzblatt 1940, with
Document Sauckel-45. The third was Reichsgesetzblatt 1943, with
Document Sauckel-21. The fourth is Reichsarbeitsblatt 1940,
Document Sauckel-33...
THE PRESIDENT: What year, though?
DR. SERVATIUS: 1940. Reichsarbeitsblatt, Document Sauckel-
33. The fifth is Reichsarbeitsblatt 1942, which contains Documents
Sauckel-9, 35, 40, 46, 50, 51, 64(a). The sixth, Reichsarbeitsblatt
1943, contains Documents Sauckel-20, 23, 37, 42, 43, 44, 48, 54,
55, 57, 60, 60(a), 61, 62, 64, and 68.
And the last, Reichsarbeitsblatt 1944, has Documents Sauckel-
26, 30, 38, 58, 59, 65, 67, and 89.
I shall now go briefly through the document book. I begin with
Sauckel Document Book 2, Document Sauckel-32, “Orders and
Decrees Concerning the Employment of Prisoners of War.” That is
the agreement of 27 July 1939. This is an excerpt concerning the
work of prisoners of war, and in Article 31 prohibited labor is listed.
In the next document, Sauckel-33, there is a decree of the Reich
Minister of Labor, “Use of Prisoners of War in Places of Work.” There
the types of work for which these prisoners of war are being used
are listed in detail. Among the types of work not included is the