Chapter M: HERZOG: “I, Charles Gerthoffer, Deputy Prosecutor at the
Court of the Seine, on duty with the International Military
Tribunal for the Major War Criminals, having gone to Berlin to
the offices of the Ministerial Collecting Center, Commandant
Henri, Chief of the French Mission, gave to me, with the
authority of Colonel Helm of the American Army, Chief of the
6889 Berlin Collecting Center, seven files from the archives of
the German military command in France concerning forced labor
and registered at the M.C.C. under the following numbers: 3 DS,
lumbers 1 to 213; 4 DS, Numbers 1 to 230; 5 DS, Numbers 1 to
404; and two appendices; 6 DS, Numbers 1 to 218; 7 DS, Numbers 1
to 118; and one appendix; 1 to 121; 50 DS, Numbers 1 to 55; 71
DS, Numbers 1 to 40.
“I declared to Commandant Henri that I took the said files in
order to submit them to the International Military Tribunal for
the Major War Criminals so that they might be used in the course
of the proceedings and that they will thereafter be delivered to
the French Ministry of Justice, whose property they remain.
“There are five copies of this document, one of which is to
serve as an affidavit for the International Military Tribunal
for the Major War Criminals.”
Signed, “Charles Gerthoffer,” and Signed, “Henri.”
This represents the certificate of authentication of the files themselves.
I have a second certificate...
SAUCKEL: May I make a remark regarding the first document, please?
M. HERZOG: I would ask you not to interrupt me.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Herzog, the documents came from the Hotel Majestic, did they?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The Hotel Majestic was the place where the...
M. HERZOG: The place in Paris where the offices of the German military command in France and the various occupation offices were located. These documents, which had vanished at the time of the liberation, were found again at the Ministerial Collecting Center in Berlin. The document which I have just submitted to you is the certificate of authentication of these files, and I also have the certificate of authentication of the documents which I have extracted from these files and which I am now ready to read to the Tribunal, if the Tribunal so desires.
THE PRESIDENT: The Hotel Majestic was the place where the German military government was established in Paris; isn’t that right?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President, if I am not mistaken. Does the Tribunal desire that I should read the other certificate of authentication, that is to say at least in part—the one concerning the document itself?
THE PRESIDENT: I thought you had already read it.
M. HERZOG: No, Mr. President. I am submitting to the Tribunal two certificates of authentication. The first, the one which I have just read, is the certificate of authentication of seven files which contain a very large number of documents. From these seven files we have extracted only a certain number of documents which we are submitting to the Tribunal; and that is why, after having presented the certificate...
THE PRESIDENT: The second document only says that the documents which you are submitting are documents which came from those files?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: And the files themselves came from the Hotel Majestic, which was the place where the German military administration was carried on. Will you put the second document on the record?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you offering in evidence the original German documents?
M. HERZOG: Yes, Mr. President.
[_Turning to the defendant._] Since you still deny the pressure that you exerted on the government, I will submit to you Document Number 1342-PS.
SAUCKEL: I think that an error in translation has been made here. I understood that you asked whether I denied that I was putting pressure on the Tribunal. I respect this Tribunal too highly to try to exert pressure upon it. I do not understand the question. I understood you to ask me whether I denied that I exerted pressure on the Tribunal; and, of course, that question I have to answer with “no.”
M. HERZOG: I said this to you: Since you deny that you exerted pressure on the French authorities, I will submit to you a new document. It is Document Number 1342-PS which has already been submitted to the Tribunal under Exhibit Number RF-63. This document represents the minutes of a meeting which you held on 11 January 1943 in Paris with various German occupation authorities. Do you remember that on that occasion you made a declaration concerning your relations with the Vichy Government? I will read this declaration to you. It is on Page 4 of the French and German texts.
SAUCKEL: Unfortunately, I am not able to find it.
M. HERZOG: I will read the declaration:
“The French Government...”—It is the last paragraph but one
before the end of Page 4.—“The French Government is composed of
nothing but adepts at temporization. If the first 250,000
workers had arrived in Germany in time, before the autumn—the
negotiations with the French Government having already been
begun in the preceding spring—we might perhaps have been able
to recruit key men in the Reich earlier and form new divisions;
and it might then not have come to the cutting off of
Stalingrad. In any case, the Führer is now absolutely decided to
rule in France, if need be even without a French Government.”
When you made this declaration, did it not reflect the pressure which you were exerting on the French Government?
SAUCKEL: This is not a conference with the French Government. This is a statement of facts.
M. HERZOG: I did not say that it was a conference with the French Government. I asked you what you meant when you stated that the Führer was determined to rule in France, even without the French Government. Was that not pressure?
SAUCKEL: That was a straightforward decision and a statement from the Führer, for which I am not responsible. I merely repeated it, and in any case it was never realized.
M. HERZOG: Why did you transmit it to the occupation authorities in France in the course of a conference that you were holding with them concerning the recruitment of labor?
SAUCKEL: Because it was my duty to give a description of the situation as I saw it at the time.
M. HERZOG: But do you not think that, in expressing to them this declaration of the Führer, you were using it to exert pressure?
SAUCKEL: I could not exert any pressure by that, because this was merely transmitting a statement of the situation. I did not tell the French Government that the Führer would remove them and that therefore they would have to do such and such a thing. I merely negotiated.
M. HERZOG: But you did state, and I ask you to confirm it, you did state in the course of that conference that the Führer had decided to rule in France, if need be, even without a French Government?
Did you say that? I ask that you answer me “yes” or “no.”
SAUCKEL: Yes, I repeated that, but not with the intention of doing that.
M. HERZOG: Do you remember the discussion which you had on 14 January 1944 in Paris with various German personalities?
SAUCKEL: Yes; it is possible that I had a discussion there at that time, but I cannot remember at the moment what it was about.
M. HERZOG: You do not remember a discussion which you had on 14 January, and you do not remember the German personalities who were present, at this meeting?
SAUCKEL: Probably there were several conferences, but I cannot tell you now which one you are talking about. Neither do I remember, of course, what the actual subjects of the discussions were.
M. HERZOG: On 14 January 1944 you had a conference in Paris with Abetz, Von Stülpnagel, Oberg, and Blumentritt. Do you remember that in the course of that discussion you submitted to your listeners the draft of a law which you had drawn up and which you wanted to impose on the French authorities?
SAUCKEL: I was not trying to impose it. I was trying to discuss it. I was negotiating. I was not trying to impose it upon them. The wording of the minutes shows that quite clearly.
M. HERZOG: Do you dispute the fact that you yourself drafted a law which you transmitted to the French Government?
SAUCKEL: No, that I do not deny. That I submitted such a draft law and that I drafted it, I do not deny.
M. HERZOG: You do admit then that you yourself drafted the text?
SAUCKEL: Yes, but I cannot tell you which one you mean.
M. HERZOG: I submit to you Document Number F-813, which I put in under Exhibit Number RF-1512. It is the minutes of this meeting of 14 January 1944, Document Number F-813. These minutes are signed by Abetz, Oberg, Von Stülpnagel, Blumentritt, and you. I read from Paragraph III the heading: “The Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor”—which was you—“has drawn up a draft law for the French Government.”
Do you still dispute the fact that you yourself drew up draft laws which you submitted to the French Government?
SAUCKEL: That I do not deny; I had to submit a proposal. However, it was based on mutual negotiations.
M. HERZOG: Do you deny the fact that you imposed this law by pressure?
SAUCKEL: That I imposed this law by pressure, that I do deny. I negotiated about it.
M. HERZOG: Do you not remember that you gave an account to the Führer of the mission which you carried out in Paris in January 1944?
SAUCKEL: It was my duty to report when I made such journeys for I was carrying out the Führer’s orders.
M. HERZOG: I submit to you this report, Document Number 556-PS, which was submitted to the Tribunal under Exhibit Number RF-67. Twice in the course of this report you speak of German demands. Do you not think that to give an account to the Führer of German demands having been accepted is to give an account to him of the success of the pressure which you exerted?
SAUCKEL: I cannot conceive in what other way a basis for negotiations could be found. The German Government made demands, and because of those demands there were negotiations with the French Government which had to be considered by me as _de jure_.
M. HERZOG: Do you admit, therefore, that the German Government and you, who were its agent, were making demands? Please answer “yes” or “no.”
SAUCKEL: The German Government was making demands; yes, that is true.
M. HERZOG: Thank you. And those demands, did they not, at times, take the form of a veritable ultimatum?
SAUCKEL: I am, not aware of that. I can only say that I was very polite and accommodating when talking to the French Premier and that our negotiations ran very smoothly. He often mentioned that, and it is in the record.
M. HERZOG: When you took action concerning the mobilization of the 1944 class, do you not remember that you demanded this mobilization in a veritable ultimatum? Answer “yes” or “no.”
SAUCKEL: I cannot say so from memory.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Herzog, I think you might put to him the last sentence in the letter of the 25th of January 1944, 556-PS.
M. HERZOG: “I have, however, allowed no doubts to remain that
further and more severe measures will be taken if the demands
for the transfer of workers is not met.”
SAUCKEL: Yes, I probably said that, though not in the form in which it is put down in this letter.
M. HERZOG: Do you remember that on 6 June 1944, the day of the dawn of our liberation, you addressed a letter to Ambassador Abetz?
SAUCKEL: I cannot tell you that from memory.
Comments
Log in to leave a comment.
Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremburg, 14 November 1945-1 October 1946, Volume 15Chapter M: HERZOG: “I, Charles Gerthoffer, Deputy Prosecutor at the
0%8 min left in chapter