Afternoon Session
DR. ALFRED SEIDL (Counsel for Defendant Hess): Mr. President, the Defendant Hess has expressed the wish to be excused from attending this afternoon’s session, because he wants to prepare himself for his examination as a witness, which will take place in the next few days. I do not believe that this will cause a delay in the proceedings, and I should like to ask the Tribunal to grant this request.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly, on the same conditions as before, namely, that you arrange with somebody to protect your interests while you are absent.
DR. SEIDL: I will not be absent myself, only Hess.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: [To the witness.] I would like to call your attention again to the Exhibit USA-261, Document 1816-PS. Would you turn to Part 5, where you were speaking of Margraf’s jewels that disappeared?
GÖRING: That is going back to something already dealt with.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes, for a time, to Part 5. I call your attention to your statement as follows:
“Now we come to the damage sustained by the Jew, the disappearance of the jewels at Margraf’s, et cetera. Well, they are gone and he will not get them refunded. He is the one who has to suffer the damage. Any of the jewels which may be returned by the police will belong to the State.”
Do you find that?
GÖRING: Yes, that is correct, but on the basis of the laws he was compensated for that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, there was a representative of Austria present at this meeting, was there not?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And I ask you to turn to his statement in reference to conditions in Austria, a page or so farther on.
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And I ask you whether he did not report to your meeting as follows:
“Your Excellency, in this matter, we have already a very complete plan for Austria. There are 12,000 Jewish workshops and 5,000 Jewish retail shops in Vienna. Even before the National Socialist revolution we already had, concerning these 17,000 shops, a definite plan for dealing with all tradesmen. Of the 12,000 workshops about 10,000 were to be closed definitely . . .”
GÖRING: The interpreter did not follow . . .
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Do you find it?
GÖRING: I have found it, but the interpreter has not.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: “Regarding this total of 17,000 stores, of the shops of the 12,000 artisans, about 10,000 were to be closed definitely and 2,000 were to be kept open. Four thousand of the 5,000 retail stores were to be closed and 1,000 kept open, that is, were to be Aryanized. According to this plan, 3,000 to 3,500 of the total of 17,000 stores would be kept open, all others closed. This was decided following investigations in every single branch and according to local needs, in agreement with all competent authorities, and is ready for publication as soon as we shall receive the law which we requested in September. This law shall empower us to withdraw licenses from artisans quite independently of the Jewish question. That would be quite a short law.
“Göring: I shall have this decree issued today.”
GÖRING: Of course. This concerns a law for the curtailment of the heavy retail trade which, even apart from the Jewish question, would have reduced the number of retailers. That can be seen from the minutes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Very well, let us go on a little further. Do you mean to inform the Tribunal that this did not apply to Jewish shops; that it had no connection with the Jewish question?
GÖRING: I have said that independently of the Jewish question, in view of the overfilled retail trade, a limitation of the number of tradesmen would have followed, and that it can be seen from the following statement by Mr. Fischböck, which you have read, that I asked for a law which would authorize us to withdraw licenses, without any connection with the Jewish question. That would be a brief law. Whereupon I answered, “I will issue the decree today.”
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, if you will . . .
GÖRING: Naturally, above all, Jewish stores were to be eliminated, as I said in the beginning.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Please go on down two paragraphs to where this was reported:
“But I do not believe that there will be 100 stores, probably fewer; and thus, by the end of the year, we would have liquidated all the recognized Jewish-owned businesses.
“Göring: That would be excellent.
“Fischböck: . . .”
GÖRING: Yes, yes, that was the import of that meeting.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: “Fischböck: Out of 17,000 stores 12,000 or 14,000 would be shut down and the remainder Aryanized or handed over to the Trustee’s office, which belongs to the State.
“Göring: I have to say that this proposal is grand. This way the whole affair in Vienna, one of the Jewish capitals so to speak, would be wound up by Christmas or by the end of the year.
“Funk: We can do the same thing here. I have prepared a law elaborating that. Effective 1 January 1939, Jews shall be prohibited from operating retail stores and wholesale establishments, as well as independent workshops. They shall be further prohibited from keeping employees, or offering any ready-made products on the market; from advertising or receiving orders. Whenever a Jewish shop is operated the police shall shut it down.
“From 1 January 1939 a Jew can no longer be head of an enterprise, as stipulated in the law for the organization of national labor of 20 January 1934. If a Jew has a leading position in an establishment without being the head of the enterprise, his contract may be declared void within 6 weeks by the head of the enterprise. With the expiration of this period all claims of the employee, including all claims to maintenance, become invalid. That is always very disagreeable and a great danger. A Jew cannot be a member of a corporation. Jewish members of corporations will have to be retired by 31 December 1938. A special authorization is unnecessary. The competent ministers of the Reich are being authorized to issue the provision necessary for execution of this law.
“Göring: I believe we can agree with this law.”
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now I ask you to pass a considerable dialogue relating to the Vienna situation, and I call your attention to the point at which Funk inquires of you:
“Why should the Jew not be allowed to keep bonds?
“Göring: Because in that way he would actually be given a share.”
GÖRING: Yes, that was the purpose, to get him out of the enterprise. If he kept the bonds, on the basis of his rights as stockholder he still had an interest in the enterprise, and on the basis of ownership of stocks his will would still carry weight in the enterprise.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You turned Funk’s suggestion down that the Jews be allowed to keep bonds?
GÖRING: Yes. I replaced the bonds with securities.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will pass several more pages of debate, unless there is something you want to call attention to; and I come to the point where Heydrich is stating his position. I call your attention to this dialogue:
“Heydrich: At least 45,000 Jews were made to leave the country by legal measures.
“Göring: . . .”
GÖRING: One moment, please. I find it now.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: “At least 45,000 Jews were made to leave the country by legal measures.
“Göring: How was this possible?”
And then Heydrich tells you that: “. . . through the Jewish societies we extracted a certain amount of money from the rich Jews who wanted to emigrate. By paying this amount and an additional sum in foreign currency they made it possible for a number of poor Jews to leave. The problem was not to make the rich Jews leave but to get rid of the Jewish mob.”
Is that correct?
GÖRING: One moment. I do not find it here yet, but generally that is correct, yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Pass on a little further. Heydrich is making suggestions and says:
“As for the isolating, I would like to make a few proposals regarding police measures, which are important also because of their psychological effect on public opinion.
“For example, anybody who is Jewish according to the Nuremberg Laws will have to wear a certain badge. That is a possibility which will facilitate many other things. I see no danger of excesses, and it will make our relationship with the foreign Jews easier.
“Göring: A uniform?
“Heydrich: A badge. In this way we could put an end to foreign Jews being molested who do not look different from ours.
“Göring: But my dear Heydrich, you will not be able to avoid the creation of ghettos on a very large scale in all the cities. They will have to be created.”
Is that what you said?
GÖRING: I said that. At that time the problem was also to get the Jews together in certain parts of the cities and in certain streets, because on the basis of the tenancy regulations there was no other possibility, and if the wearing of badges was to be made obligatory, each individual Jew could have been protected.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, passing further in the discussion, I call your attention to this warning from Heydrich about, the measures which have been discussed:
“Göring: Once we have a ghetto, we could determine what stores ought to be there and we would be able to say, ‘You, Jew so and so, together with so and so, shall take care of the delivery of goods,’ then a German wholesale firm will be ordered to deliver the goods for this Jewish store. The store would then not be a retail shop but a co-operative store, a co-operative society for Jews.
“Heydrich: All these measures will eventually lead to the institution of a ghetto. I must say: nowadays one should not want to set up a ghetto, but these measures, if carried through as outlined here, will automatically drive the Jews into a ghetto.”
Did Heydrich give that warning?
GÖRING: Here it says so, yes, but it can be seen from the following discussion that I said: “Now comes that which Goebbels mentioned before, compulsory renting. Now the Jewish tenants will come together.” It was a question of the Jewish tenants drawing together in order to avoid the disagreeable results which arose from reciprocal subletting.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You have omitted that Funk also remarked at this point that “Jews will have to stand together. What are 3 million? Every one will have to stand up for the next fellow. Alone he will starve.”
Do you find that?
GÖRING: Yes. But in another part of these minutes it is stated very clearly: “One cannot let the Jews starve, and therefore the necessary measures must be taken.”
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Toward the close of that meeting you said the following, didn’t you?
“I demand that German Jewry as a whole shall, as a punishment for the abominable crimes, et cetera, make a contribution of 1,000,000,000 marks. That will work. The pigs will not commit a second murder so quickly. Incidentally, I would like to say again that I would not like to be a Jew in Germany.”
GÖRING: That was correct, yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Were you joking about that too?
GÖRING: I have told you exactly what led to the fine of 1,000,000,000.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You pointed out that the chauffeurs of Gauleiter must be prevented from enriching themselves through the Aryanization of Jewish property, right?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: We will now take up the subject of art.
I call your attention to Document 141-PS, Exhibit Number USA-308. That is the decree establishing priorities on the claim for Jewish art property. Do you recall that?
GÖRING: That has been mentioned several times, and I have recently spoken about it in detail.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The order was issued as here stated, was it not?
GÖRING: Yes, certainly; I emphasized that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: In Paragraph 5 reference is made to art objects that are suitable to be given to French museums, and which were to be sold by auction. The profit from this auction was to be given to the French State for the benefit of war widows and children. You say that this was never done?
GÖRING: I did not say that this never happened. That was my intention in that decree.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, I am asking you if it ever has been done.
GÖRING: As far as Paragraph 5 is concerned, I cannot say. I can only refer to the payments mentioned in Paragraph 2—the things that I pointed out:—which I had had effected after an estimate, and I said the other day that this amount was kept in readiness and that I repeatedly asked into which account it should be paid. And among the objects destined to go into the collection which I was to make, I had every single item valued.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Where was this amount kept?
GÖRING: In my bank, under the name “Art Funds.”
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: In what bank?
GÖRING: It was—I cannot say for sure, there were several banks—in which bank exactly the art fund was deposited, I cannot say. I would have to have the documents here for that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: In the several interrogations you have never been able to point out where that fund is, have you?
GÖRING: I cannot say, but you would only have to question my secretary who kept account of all the funds; she can tell you quite accurately.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: This order, 141-PS, was carried out by the Rosenberg Special Staff (Einsatzstab), wasn’t it?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you know who carried it out, who actually was there? Did you know Turner?
GÖRING: I did not understand the name.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you know Mr. Turner?
GÖRING: I know a certain Turner, who, however, had nothing to do with the Einsatzstab, the Rosenberg Special Staff and who, as far as I know, was in Yugoslavia.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Wasn’t State Counsellor Turner in Paris in connection with the art collections?
GÖRING: I repeat again so that no error is possible, you said Turner, T-u-r-n-e-r, or Körner, K-ö-r-n-e-r?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Turner.
GÖRING: Körner?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: T-u-r-n-e-r.
GÖRING: Turner—I do not know whether he had anything to do with Rosenberg’s Einsatzstab.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: But you knew him, did you not?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And did you know a Dr. Bunjes?
GÖRING: Bunjes, B-u-n-j-e-s, yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You knew him?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: He had to do with captured or confiscated Jewish art treasures, did he not?
GÖRING: I do not believe that Dr. Bunjes had anything to do with that. He was competent in a different field of art; but the Einsatzstab Rosenberg and certain departments of the military administration, had something to do with it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask to have you shown, so that you can follow me, to refresh your memory, Document 2523-PS, Exhibit Number USA-783, a letter from Dr. Bunjes, and ask you if this refreshes your recollection of certain events.
“On Tuesday, 4 February 1941, at 1830 hours I was ordered for the first time to report to the Reich Marshal at the Quai d’Orsay. Field Commander Von Behr of the Einsatzstab Rosenberg was present. It is, of course, difficult to describe in words the cordial atmosphere in which the conversation was held.”
Do you recall such a meeting?
GÖRING: No, it was not important enough for me to remember it, but I do not deny it, in any case.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: We shall see if this refreshes your recollection:
“The Reich Marshal dropped the subject for the time being and asked for the report of the present state of the seizure of Jewish art property in the occupied western territories. On this occasion he gave Herr Von Behr the photographs of those objects of art that the Führer wants to bring into his possession. In addition, he gave Herr Von Behr the photographs of those objects of art that the Reich Marshal wants to acquire for himself.”
GÖRING: I cannot follow here.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You mean you do not find these words, or you do not recall the events?
GÖRING: No, I have not found the passage yet, and I would like to have a little time to see the context of this letter, which was neither written by me nor addressed to me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Let me call your attention to a further paragraph of it and see if it does not refresh your recollection:
“On Wednesday, 5 February 1941, I was ordered to the Jeu de Paume by the Reich Marshal. At 1500 o’clock, the Reich Marshal, accompanied by General Hanesse, Herr Angerer, and Herr Hofer, visited the exhibition of Jewish art treasures newly set up there.”
GÖRING: Yes, I have already stated before that at Jeu de Paume I selected the art treasures which were exhibited there. That is right.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That is right; now we are getting there.
“Then, with me as his guide, the Reich Marshal inspected the exhibited art treasures and made a selection of those works of art which were to go to the Führer, and those which were to be placed in his own collection.
“During this confidential conversation, I again called the Reich Marshal’s attention to the fact that a note of protest had been received from the French Government against the activity of the Einsatzstab Rosenberg, with reference to the Hague Rules on Land Warfare recognized by Germany at the Armistice of Compiegne and I pointed out that General Von Stülpnagel’s interpretation of the manner in which the confiscated Jewish art treasures are to be treated, was apparently contrary to the Reich Marshal’s interpretation. Thereupon, the Reich Marshal asked for a detailed explanation and gave the following orders:
“ ‘First, it is my orders that you have to follow. You will act directly according to my orders. The art objects collected in the Jeu de Paume are to be loaded on a special train immediately and taken to Germany by order of the Reich Marshal. These art objects which are to go into the Führer’s possession, and those art objects which the Reich Marshal claims for himself, will be loaded on two railroad cars which will be attached to the Reich Marshal’s special train, and upon his departure for Germany, at the beginning of next week, will be taken along to Berlin. Feldführer Von Behr will accompany the Reich Marshal in his special train on the journey to Berlin.’
“When I made the objection that the jurists would probably be of a different opinion and that protests would most likely be made by the military commander in France, the Reich Marshal answered, saying verbatim as follows, ‘Dear Bunjes, let me worry about that; I am the highest jurist in the State.’
“The Reich Marshal promised to send from his headquarters by courier to the Chief of the Military Administrative District of Paris on Thursday, 6 February, the written order for the transfer to Germany of the confiscated Jewish art treasures.”
Now, does that refresh your memory?
GÖRING: Not in the least, but it is not at all in contradiction to what I have said with respect to the art treasures, with the exception of one sentence. It is pure nonsense that I should have said that I was the highest jurist in the state because that, thank God, I was not. That is something which Mr. Bunjes said, and I cannot be held responsible for every statement which anyone may have made to somebody else without my having any possibility of correcting it. As for the rest, it corresponds to the statement I made recently.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, the art objects then were loaded on cars and shipped to Berlin, were they not?
GÖRING: A part of them, yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I now call your attention to, and ask to have you shown, Document 014-PS, Exhibit Number USA-784. Now, I ask you to refresh your recollection by following this report to the Führer with me, and tell me if this conforms with your testimony:
“I report the arrival . . .”
GÖRING: I would like to point out that this report did not come from me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I understand that. I am asking if it is right or wrong.
“I report the arrival of the principal shipment of ownerless Jewish treasures of art at the salvage point Neuschwanstein by special train on Saturday the 15th of this month. It was secured by my Einsatzstab, in Paris. The special train, arranged for by Reich Marshal Hermann Göring, comprised 25 express baggage cars filled with the most valuable paintings, furniture, Gobelin tapestries, works of artistic craftmanship, and ornaments. The shipment consisted mainly of the most important parts of the collections of Rothschild, Seligmann”—and half a dozen others.
Have you found that and is it correct?
GÖRING: I do not know whether this is correct, since the report did not come from me. The only thing which I can remember is that I was asked by the Einsatzstab to see to it that a sufficient number of special cars, box cars was put at their disposal to ship the art treasures, since Jeu de Paume was not a safe place in case of air attacks. Neuschwanstein lies south of Munich. This concerns the objects destined for the Führer.
I should like, however, to refer to the next sentence of this document, which was not written by me. It goes as follows:
“The confiscation actions of my Einsatzstab were begun in October 1940 in Paris according to your order, my Führer.”
That coincides with what I have said in my previous statements.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And would you care to read further?
GÖRING: You mean where it says:
“Besides this special train, the main art objects selected by the Reich Marshal—mainly from the Rothschild collection—had previously been shipped in two special cars to Munich and were there put into the air raid shelter of the Führerhaus.”
They are those most precious works of art which I had designated for the Führer, and which were to be sent, at the wish of the Führer, to the air raid shelter. This had nothing to do directly with my affairs, but I did not dispute the fact, and I have explained it in detail.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: When you were examined by the American Foreign Assets Commission, you estimated your art objects as having a value, at the time you turned them over to the government, of 50 million Reichsmark, as I recall it. Am I right?
GÖRING: That is not quite correct. The Commission insisted on a valuation, and the discussion continued a long time backwards and forward. I expressly told the Commission that I could not assess the value because I did not have the objects in hand nor a list of them, and I could not quote them from memory; furthermore, that the estimates were subject to fluctuation depending on the one hand upon the prices art lovers might pay and, on the other, upon the actual market value. Since I did not see a copy of the minutes, in spite of my pleas, and especially as minutes of this nature often give rise to misunderstandings, I can only acknowledge the records which I have signed.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, do you question this fact? “When I gave the news to the Minister of Finance I estimated the value at that time at 50 million marks.” Did you say that or did you not?
GÖRING: I cannot estimate the value. I only told the Finance Minister that the entire collection, including my own, would be turned over to the State. And since I know my passion for collecting, I thought that it was quite possible that something might suddenly happen to me, and that as I had put my entire fortune into these works of art, the entire collection might possibly become State, that is, public property, and my family would thus be deprived of every means of subsistence. I therefore asked him to provide for a pension or some compensation for my family. That was the negotiation with the Finance Minister, to which he can testify.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What proportion of your art collection was acquired after 1933?
GÖRING: I did not understand the question.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What proportion of your art collection was acquired after 1933?
GÖRING: That I could not say in detail—quite a number of pictures and statues.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you have claimed that some part of your art collection you bought?
GÖRING: Certainly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And in connection with that some inquiry was made into your financial transactions, was there not?
GÖRING: I do not know who made the inquiries.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, you were asked, were you not, about your receipt of 7,276,000 Reichsmark from the Reemtsma cigarette factory?
GÖRING: No, I was never asked about that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You were never asked about it?
GÖRING: No, neither about the amount nor about the cigarette factory, nor anything else.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Let me refresh your recollection about that. Did you not tell them and did you not tell Colonel Amen in interrogations that this money was given to you by this cigarette factory and that their back taxes were canceled?
GÖRING: No, I even denied that their back taxes were ever canceled. I remember now that the question was put to me in a different connection. A sum of money was set aside for the so-called Adolf Hitler Fund, and this amount the Führer put at my disposal for general cultural tasks.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: By the cigarette factory?
GÖRING: Not by the cigarette factory; a number of business men subscribed to the Adolf Hitler Fund, and Mr. Reemtsma gave me this sum from the fund in the course of the years, after agreement with the Führer. A part of it was allotted to the State theaters, another part for building up art collections, and other cultural expenditure.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you were interrogated on the 22d day of December 1945 by the External Assets Branch of the United States Investigation of Cartels and External Assets, were you not?
GÖRING: May I first say explicitly that I had been asked whether I would be ready to make any statements about it, and was told that these statements would in no way be connected with this Trial. Therefore the presence of my defense counsel would not be necessary. This was expressly told me, and was repeated to me by the prison authorities, and before the interrogation it was again confirmed to me that these statements should in no way be brought in in connection with this Trial. However, that is all the same to me. You may produce them as far as I am concerned. But because of the method employed, I desire to have this made known here.
DR. STAHMER: I protest against the use of the statements for the reason that has just been given by the witness. I myself sometime ago—I think it was around Christmas—was asked by, I believe, members of the United States Treasury whether they could interrogate the Defendant Göring on questions of property, adding expressly that I did not have to be present at the interrogation because this had nothing to do with the Trial, and would not be used for it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I am not able either to affirm or deny, and therefore I will not pursue this subject further at this time. I do not believe that any stipulation was made that these facts should not be gone into. I was not informed of it, and if there has been, of course, it would be absurd.
[Turning to the witness.] Now, you were asked about receiving some art objects from Monte Cassino.
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask you if it is not the fact that an altar statue taken from the Cassino Abbey was brought and delivered to you, and that you expressed great appreciation for it.
GÖRING: I am glad to be able to clarify this affair also. After the monastery of Monte Cassino had been completely destroyed by shelling and had been defended by a paratroop division, a delegation arrived one day bringing along a statue of some saint, entirely worthless from an artistic point of view, as a souvenir of this destroyed monastery. I thanked the men and showed the statue to the curator of my art collection, and he also considered the statue as of absolutely no value. It then remained in the box and was put away somewhere. The other . . .
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think this is coming through sufficiently loud for the shorthand writers to hear.
GÖRING: The rest of the art treasures from Monte Cassino, according to my knowledge, were shipped in the following manner: A large part, especially those objects which belonged to the old monastery itself, was sent to the Vatican. I must assume this from the fact that the abbot of the monastery sent me and my division a letter written in Latin in which he expressed his extreme gratitude for this action.
Secondly, as far as I remember, the art treasures from the museum in Naples, which were at Monte Cassino, were for the greater part sent by us to Venice and there turned over to the Italian Government. Some pictures and statues were brought to Berlin, and there they were turned over to me. On the very same day I gave the list to the Führer, and some time later also the objects themselves which were in my air raid shelter, so that he could negotiate about the matter with Mussolini. I did not keep a single one of these objects for my own collection. If my troops had not intervened, these priceless art treasures, which were stored in Monte Cassino and belonged to the monastery there, would have been entirely destroyed by enemy bombardment, that is to say, by the British-American attackers. Thus they have been saved.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you say of no value—no substantial value?
GÖRING: That is even now my conviction, and I depended, above all, on the judgment of my experts. I never took this statue out of its packing case. It did not interest me. On the other hand, I wanted to say a few words of thanks to the men who brought it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The labor shortage in the Reich was becoming acute by November of 1941, was it not?
GÖRING: That is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you yourself gave the directives for the employment of Russian prisoners of war, did you not?
GÖRING: Employment for what?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: For war industry—tanks, artillery pieces, airplane parts.
GÖRING: That is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That was at the conference of the 7th of November 1941, that you gave that order, was it not?
GÖRING: At what conference that was I could not tell you; I issued these directives only in a general way.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And the directive was that Russian prisoners of war should be selected in collecting camps beyond the Reich border, and should be transported as rapidly as possible and employed in the following order of priority: mining, railroad maintenance, war industry—tanks, artillery pieces, airplane parts, agriculture, building industry, et cetera. You gave that order, did you not?
GÖRING: If I have signed it, the order is from me. I do not remember details.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the number of that, Mr. Jackson?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask to have you shown Document Number 1193-PS.
GÖRING: I have not seen it yet.
[Document 1193-PS was submitted to the witness.]
This document, which you have just mentioned . . .
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I did not get the answer.
GÖRING: Excuse me. I have just received a document about the use of Russian troops. Is that the document of which you speak?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That is right. I call your attention to the fact that it is referred to as an annex in the letter signed by Göring.
GÖRING: I want to point out that this document is not signed by me, but by Körner, which, however, does not diminish my responsibility.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, you do not question that on the 7th day of November 1941, you gave the order, as Körner reports it, do you, in the document referred to as 1193-PS?
GÖRING: I said only that it was not signed by me but by Körner, and here even a still younger official, a Regierungsrat, and I wanted only to explain that this was my field and that therefore I assume responsibility. But I have not read it through yet. This deals with directives and outlines which I gave in general and which were then filled in and revised by the department concerned, whereby naturally not every word or every sentence written here was said or dictated by myself. But that does not alter the fact that I bear the responsibility for it, even if I did not know it in detail, or would have perhaps formulated it differently. But the general directives were given by me and implemented accordingly by the lesser authorities.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You also gave the order, did you not, that 100,000 men were to be taken from among the French prisoners of war not yet employed in armament industry? Gaps in manpower resulting therefrom will be filled by Soviet prisoners of war. The transfer of the above-named French prisoners of war is to be accomplished by October the 1st. You gave the order, did you not?
GÖRING: That is correct. Here we deal primarily with the fact that a large part of French skilled workers who were prisoners of war were turned into free workers on condition that they worked in the German armament industry. The shortages which occurred at their previous places of work at that time, where they had worked as prisoners of war, were to be remedied by Russian prisoners of war, because I considered it pointless that qualified skilled industrial workers should be employed in agriculture, for instance, or in any other field not corresponding to their abilities. Thus there was an incentive in the fact that these people could become free workers instead of remaining prisoners of war, if they would agree to these conditions. The directives were given by me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And did you know that there was any forced labor employed in Germany?
GÖRING: Compulsory labor.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you not testify under interrogation on the 3rd of October 1945, that:
“I would like to add something to the last question of the interrogation. The Colonel asked me if the forced labor program was effective, and I said ‘Yes’. There are two remarks I would like to make to that.
“All right.
“I must say that in the results as such it was effective. However, a great number of acts of sabotage did occur, and also treason and espionage.
“Question: But on the whole you would say it was a successful program from the German point of view?
“Answer: Yes. Without this manpower many things could never have been achieved.”
Did you say that?
GÖRING: That is obvious, because without workers one cannot do any work.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not think you answered the question. The question was if you said the forced labor had been a success. What do you have to say to that? Did you say that?
GÖRING: I have said what I did in answering the question whether the manpower used was successful; yes, that is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you were shown a document, 3700-PS, written by Schacht to you, and you have said that you received it?
GÖRING: Yes, I remember.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you and Schacht were somewhat rivals in the economic field at one period, were you not?
GÖRING: I explained that only recently, and to what extent.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You wanted his position abolished in the event of war and he wanted your position abolished in event of war, did he not—your economic position?
GÖRING: Not quite. They were two similar authorities having similar powers at the same time, two personalities, and that in the long run was not possible. It simply had to be decided which one of the two should be the sole authority. That would have been especially necessary in case of a mobilization.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You, in testifying on the 17th day of October last, as to your relations with Schacht, made this statement, did you not, in reference to your disagreements with Schacht: “This I must underline: Schacht always tried to maneuver for a new post, while all the other ministers co-operated absolutely.” Did you say that?
GÖRING: Not exactly as it is there, but I wanted to emphasize that, contrary to the other ministers who obediently followed my directives for the Four Year Plan, I had certain difficulties with Schacht, which I have already explained, due to his original and strong personality.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The question was whether you made that statement in substance or in those words?
GÖRING: Not exactly in these words, but as I have just explained, in substance.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, do you have in mind Schacht’s letter to you, Document Number 3700-PS?
GÖRING: Yes, I read it a short time ago.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And in that letter Schacht said this to you, did he not, referring to 3700-PS? “It may be militarily necessary . . .” Do you want to follow it?
[Document 3700-PS was submitted to the witness.]
“It may be militarily necessary to conscript the 15-year-olds, but it will heavily tax the fighting morale of the German people. The facts as the German people see them are as follows:
“First, the original prospect of a short war has not been realized.
“Second, the prospective quick victory over England by the Air Force did not materialize.
“Third, the public statement that Germany would remain free of enemy air raids has not been fulfilled.
“Fourth, the repeated announcements that the Russian resistance was definitely broken have been proved to be untrue.
“Fifth, Allied supplies of arms to Russia, and the manpower reserves of Russia have, on the contrary, been sufficient to bring continuous heavy counterattacks against our Eastern Front.
“Sixth, the original victorious advance into Egypt has been halted after repeated attempts.
“Seventh, the landing of the Allies in North and West Africa, declared impossible, has nevertheless been accomplished.
“Eighth, the extremely large amount of shipping space which was required for this landing has shown that our U-boats, in spite of their great successes, did not suffice to prevent this transport. In addition, the reductions in civilian traffic, in material for armaments, and in the availability of manpower are obvious to all the people.
“The conscription of the 15-year-olds will increase the doubts concerning the termination of this war.”
Can you fix any more definitely than you have done the date when you received that letter?
GÖRING: I can only say again that it is dated the 3rd of November, but the year is missing. If I were to be given a copy where the year is stated, I could give an exact answer. I have said recently that, according to my knowledge of events, it is a question of either November 1944 or November 1943. But, unfortunately, that is not indicated here. I can only see 3rd of November. The year is missing.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Do you know when Schacht was sent to the concentration camp? Do you know the date of that?
GÖRING: Not exactly, but now that you remind me of it, I can say that this letter certainly was not written in 1944 because in November 1944, I believe, Mr. Schacht was already in the concentration camp; consequently, it must date back to November 1943.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And he was sent to the concentration camp shortly after dispatching that letter to you, wasn’t he?
GÖRING: No, that is not correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: How much longer was he at large?
GÖRING: The letter is of 3 November 1943, as we have just found. I heard about the arrest of Schacht only after the attempt on the life of the Führer and after my return a few days later, after an illness of some time, that is to say, in September 1944. There is not the least connection between this letter and his arrest, because, when I asked about his arrest, I was told definitely it was in connection with the 20th of July.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you make an agreement, as Supreme Commander of the Air Force, with the Reichsführer SS, the Youth Führer of the German Reich, and the Reich Minister for Occupied Eastern Territories, about the recruiting of youthful Russians, Ukrainians, White Russians, Lithuanians, and Tartars between the ages of 15 and 20? Did you come to some agreement with Himmler and Rosenberg about that?
GÖRING: That I personally concluded such an agreement, I do not think so. It is possible and even probable that my office did so, however.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you have testified yesterday or the day before—I think Friday—as follows; let me refresh your recollection about the questions of confiscations.
“Now, about the question of confiscation of State property and it was only such property that was confiscated. As far as I know, private property is mentioned in the official report as far as the winter of 1941 and 1942 is concerned, that might have been the case in the matter of furs or perhaps fur boots, and some soldiers may have taken little odds and ends from the people; but on the whole there was no private property and so none could be confiscated.”
And I think you also said that you never took anything, not even so much as a screw or a bolt, when you were in occupation of foreign territory. Do you recall that testimony?
GÖRING: Very exactly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Do you still stand on it?
GÖRING: Of course.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask to have you shown a Document EC-317.
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, that is a secret command matter, is it not, dated the 7th of September 1943? Is that right?
GÖRING: I have a letter here before me of 21 February 1944.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then you have the wrong exhibit—EC-317, Page 3.
GÖRING: Yes; Page 3.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: This letter of transmittal we will not bother about. Your secret command matter is dated 7 September 1943, is it not?
GÖRING: That is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And it reads as follows:
“Concerning the removal of the harvested crops and the destruction of the means of production in the agricultural and food economy in parts of the Occupied Eastern Territories.
“By direction of the Führer, I give the following orders:
“First: In the territories east of the line fixed by the highest military command, the following measures are to be taken gradually, according to the military situation at the time. The measures are to be determined by the commanders of the army groups:
“(1) All agricultural products, means of production, and machinery of enterprises serving the agriculture and food industry are to be removed.
“(2) The factories serving the food economy, both in the field of production and of processing, are to be destroyed.
“(3) The basis of agricultural production, especially the records and establishments, storage plants, et cetera, of the organizations responsible for the food economy, are to be destroyed.
“(4) The population engaged in the agricultural and food economy is to be transported into the territory west of the fixed line.”
Right?
GÖRING: Absolutely correct; but I want to make the following statement in connection with it. We are dealing here with purely military measures in a retreat, and may I comment on these four points: I emphasized the other day that a great number of agricultural machines had been brought to Russia by us. As the Russians, in their retreat, destroyed everything, we had all the less military reason to allow the machinery of industries which we had set up and brought there to fall into their hands undestroyed. This concerns an urgently necessary military order which had been issued during a retreat, and which was executed in the same way as before in the reverse sense. It does not deal with any sort of private property.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And it was signed by you?
GÖRING: Yes, this order bears my signature.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I am about to go into a different subject, may it please Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, we will adjourn now.
[A recess was taken.]
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask that the witness be shown a document, 3786-PS, of which there are no extra copies available because it came to us so late. I will ask you to examine that and tell me whether you recall the meeting to which these minutes refer?
GÖRING: We are apparently concerned here with a report dealing with a meeting which took place daily with the Führer. As meetings occurred once or twice daily, I naturally cannot, with any accuracy, without first having read the report, recall the report of 27 January 1945, for I was present at a great number of these meetings during the course of the war.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I shall call your attention to specific incidents in it. The minutes indicate that the Führer, yourself, Keitel, and Jodl were present, were they not?
GÖRING: That is according to the notes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And I will call your attention to Page 31 and ask you to follow with me the notes and see if it refreshes your recollection. Now this relates to 10,000 imprisoned air force officers. I quote what is attributed to you.
“Göring: Near Sagan, there are 10,000 imprisoned air force officers. Their custody is the responsibility of the Commander-in-Chief of the Reserve Army (B.d.E.). Personnel for guarding or transporting them is said to be lacking. The suggestion was made as to whether the prisoners should not be left to their Soviet Russian allies. It would give them 10,000 airmen.
“The Führer: Why did you not remove them earlier? This is an unequaled bungling.
“Göring: That is the business of the commander of the B.d.E. We have nothing to do with it. I can only report it.
“The Führer: They must be removed, even if they have to go on foot. The Volkssturm must be called in. Anyone who escapes will be shot. Any means must be used.
“Göring: That is from Sagan, there are 10,000 men.
“Guderian: In the transfer process the 4th Armored Division has been moved out completely, also the 227th Division; the remainder of the 32d Division is now moving out. The next in line is the Headquarters of the 3rd SS Panzer Corps which will move tonight, and tomorrow night the Division Niederland, which has already pulled out. Parts of the Division Nordland have also been withdrawn from the front.
“The Führer: Are they to get replacements? Are they already on the move?
“Guderian: Fegelein took care of that. He has already ordered that they should be replenished immediately.
“The Führer: It is absolutely clear that the Army Group Vistula has nothing, for the time being, besides the Corps Nehring, the one group, and what it has on the Vistula. This must be organized. It will come from here and partly from Germany. It must be done, notwithstanding.
“Göring: How many cattle cars are needed for 10,000 men?
“The Führer: If we transport them according to German standards, then we need at least 20 transport trains for 10,000 men. If we transport them according to Russian standards, we need 5 or 3.
“Göring: Take their pants and boots off so that they cannot walk in the snow.”
Do you recall that incident?
GÖRING: I remember this incident but vaguely.
Now that I have given the answer I would like to give a short explanation of the value of this document.
I understood that this document has just now arrived, but I have already been interrogated with respect to this document long before the beginning of the proceedings. Already at that time I pointed out that at the stenographic recording of a meeting two stenographers took notes at the same time, since the meetings often lasted 4 or 5 hours, and therefore these stenographic notes always had to be gone over afterwards, especially as frequently, because of the presence of many men, inaccuracies occurred in the recordings so that statements made by one person were credited to another in the minutes. For that reason I said at that time already that not only did I not remember this statement, but that in my opinion I have never made this statement. We were concerned solely with the preparation of motor vehicles for transport.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, I must say that you were interrogated with reference to the incident, but not with reference to these notes which were not transcribed.
GÖRING: In respect to this transcript and this incident, it was especially emphasized that we were concerned with the stenotype record of the report of the meeting, and I already uttered a similar opinion at that time. It was not submitted to me at that time.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Not stenotype, but stenographic.
You are also reported on Page 35. I call your attention to this and ask you, is it attributed to you mistakenly?
“Göring: The 10,000 prisoners in Sagan should be transported away by Obergruppenführer Jüttner.” Perhaps I do not pronounce the word as you would.
“The Führer: These prisoners must be removed by all available means. Volkssturm must be employed with the most energetic men. All who attempt to flee will be shot.
“Fegelein: We have a man for that who guards the concentration camps. That is Gruppenführer Glücks. He must do the job.”
Did that occur?
GÖRING: That I do not know. I have already testified before that the B.d.E. had to take charge of the transportation, because we had nothing to do with it. What ideas and opinions the other gentlemen expressed in the discussions I cannot completely testify to, or state here. It was a question of whether these 10,000 were to be surrendered or shipped away.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask you a question or two about the Warsaw bombing. Was it known to you that on the 3rd of September, the house of the Ambassador of the United States, situated some 17 kilometers out of Warsaw, was bombed by the German Air Force?
GÖRING: No; that is unknown to me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Your Air Force took a good many pictures of the Polish villages and of Warsaw and used them for distributing among the German people, didn’t they?
GÖRING: That is possible, I was not concerned with that. In any event, the Luftwaffe did not distribute pictures to the German people. It is possible that pictures taken by the Luftwaffe might have got into the German press by way of the Propaganda Ministry. But distribution, in the sense of the Luftwaffe’s distributing photographs like leaflets, never occurred.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The Luftwaffe did take the pictures for the purpose of determining the efficiency of its hits, did it not?
GÖRING: The Luftwaffe took pictures before the target was bombed, and again after the target had been bombed, to determine whether the target had actually been hit.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask to have you shown five photographs and ask you if those are not photographs taken by the Luftwaffe, following the attack on Poland.
[Photographs were shown to the witness.]
GÖRING: To answer the first question, whether the pictures had actually been taken by the German Air Force, I regret I cannot give a positive answer for there is no indication that these were made by the German Air Force. Four out of the five pictures were, if you observe them closely, taken from an oblique angle, as though they had been taken from a church steeple rather than from an airplane, from which generally only vertical pictures are taken because of the built-in camera.
The picture showing the destruction of parts of Warsaw can be regarded technically as such an aerial photo. The date is lacking here. But none of these pictures give any proof that they were taken by the Luftwaffe.
However, let us assume that they were taken by the Luftwaffe, so that further questions will be facilitated.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You say you will assume they were by the Luftwaffe?
GÖRING: Yes, although I doubt it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I do not want you to give away anything here. If you think they were not taken by the Luftwaffe, I do not want you to admit it.
GÖRING: I said there is no proof. I did not take the pictures, I do not recognize them, they were not submitted to me as Luftwaffe pictures and from a purely technical point of view they could only have been taken from a plane with a private camera from a very oblique angle. They are not true aerial pictures, that is vertical pictures as taken by the Air Force.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will pass them then and go to something else.
Let us take up Document 638-PS, Exhibit Number USA-788, about which you have been interrogated and which, as I recall, you authenticated.
[Document 638-PS was submitted to the witness.]
This is the document which was signed by Dr. Joel and I ask you to follow me.
“From the Reich Marshal’s plans of 24 September 1942.
“First: The Reich Marshal is looking for daring fellows who will be employed in the East as Sonderkommandos and who will be able to carry out the task of creating confusion behind the lines. They are to be formed into bands under leadership, and with interpreters assigned to them. For this purpose the Reich Marshal is considering convicts who are first offenders, who have committed not particularly heinous offenses for which there can be some human understanding.
“The Reich Marshal first of all mentioned persons convicted of poaching. He knew, of course, that the Reichsführer SS had picked out the so-called poachers, and they were already in his hands. He requests, however, that the question be re-examined. The only suitable men are those with a passion for hunting, who have poached for love of the trophy, not men who have laid snares and traps. The Reich Marshal also mentioned fanatical members of smuggling gangs, who take part in gun battles on the frontiers and whose passion it is to outwit the customs at the risk of their own lives, but not men who attempt to bring articles over the frontier in an express train or by similar means.
“The Reich Marshal leaves it to us to consider whether still another category of convicts can be assigned to these bands or pursuit commands.
“In the regions assigned for their operations, these bands, whose first task should be to destroy the communications of the partisan groups, could murder, burn and ravish; in Germany they would once again come under strict supervision.
“Signed: Dr. Joel, 24 September 1942.”
Do you wish to make an explanation of that document to the Tribunal?
GÖRING: Yes, with the same that I made once before. The first two paragraphs clearly show that I wanted only those people who had committed no offenses involving laws of honor, such as poachers, distinguishing between those having a passion for hunting and those who only want to steal. I made a distinction also with regard to smugglers, between those who take personal risks showing a certain passion for their activity, and those who do it in a dishonorable way.
Both these main paragraphs plainly show that I did not wish to use criminals of any type, and that is why I explicitly denied having said what is stated in the last paragraphs. It is not a question of the minutes but of the notes taken by an official with whom I discussed these things. He should be able to testify where and if he heard these words uttered by me. But they contradict my ideas so much, and I particularly emphasize this, and in particular, as I have clearly said, as regards rape, which I always punished with death even if committed against citizens of enemy states, that I rejected that statement; and I again pointed out that the main paragraphs are in utmost contradiction to the last remark, because if it had been a matter of indifference to me, I could have selected criminals.
Thirdly, I expressly stated above, that their main task behind the lines was to create confusion, to disrupt communications, to destroy railways, and the like. Fourthly and lastly, the whole thing never took place.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You objected to the word “ravish” which had been translated the first time “rape”, and that is the only objection you made to this document when it was presented to you. Is that not correct?
GÖRING: No, it is not correct that way. I say this because it is a most significant concept which has always particularly contradicted my sense of justice, for shortly after the seizure of power I instigated a sharpening of this phase of German penal laws. And I wanted to show by this word and this concept, that this entire latter part could not have been uttered by me, and I deny having said it. I will absolutely and gladly take responsibility for even the most serious things which I have done, but I deny this statement, as being in complete contradiction to my opinions.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Who is the signer of this document?
GÖRING: Dr. Joel.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes—you knew him?
GÖRING: I knew him slightly. I saw him at this conference.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: He was present at the conference?
GÖRING: I instructed him to come to tell him that I wished that type of people.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you dealt in economic matters with the various occupied countries through Reichskommissars?
GÖRING: I testified the other day that all sorts of authorities, including the Reichskommissars had to follow my economic directives and orders.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And were to report to you on economic matters?
GÖRING: Not about all of them, only insofar as they concerned my directives.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And who was your Reichskommissar in Poland?
GÖRING: There was no Reichskommissar in Poland. There was a Governor General in Poland, that was Dr. Frank.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And who was the Reichskommissar in the Netherlands?
GÖRING: Dr. Seyss-Inquart was Reichskommissar for Holland.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Who was the Reichskommissar for Norway?
GÖRING: In Norway the Gauleiter Terboven was Reichskommissar.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Terboven—he was also a Gauleiter you say?
GÖRING: He was Gauleiter at Essen.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You appointed him to Norway or attained his appointment?
GÖRING: I neither appointed him for Norway—because that was beyond my jurisdiction—nor did I have him appointed. I did not oppose his appointment in any way as I considered he would make a very competent Reichskommissar.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And he was there from 1940 until 1945?
GÖRING: I believe that is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I will ask to have you shown Document R-134, a communication from Terboven to you.
[Document R-134 was submitted to the witness.]
That is a communication of the 1st of May 1942, is it not?
GÖRING: I note the date; yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And that reports to you as follows, does it not—it is addressed to you as Reich Marshal, “My esteemed Reich Marshal”, is that right?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Omitting the first paragraph, unless you are to give it.
“Several days ago on an island west of Bergen we captured a Norwegian sabotage unit, trained by the Secret Service, and found extensive stores of sabotage instruments, some of them of a new kind, including probably poison and bacteria. Those which appeared unfamiliar were forwarded to the Reich Security Main Office for closer examination.
“Besides other tasks, this sabotage unit was to begin its sabotage work, on Sola and Herdla using the explosive of which a sample is enclosed herewith. This appears from written directives found. Since it must be assumed that similar actions are under way on airfields on the rest of the European coast, and assuming that a means of sabotage actually unknown until now is involved, I am communicating with you by the fastest possible means, in order to give you an opportunity to issue an appropriate warning.
“Unfortunately, two especially reliable officers of the Security Police were killed in the fight against the sabotage unit. We buried them this morning at 1000 hours in the Heroes’ Cemetery in Bergen.
“On the same day and at the same hour 18 Norwegians were shot on my order. These had been captured some time previously in the attempt to go to England illegally.
“On the same day, the entire village which had harbored the sabotage unit was burned down and the population deported. All the males were taken to a German concentration camp without any notification being sent to their families. The women were sent to a female forced labor camp in Norway, and those children who were not capable of working went to a children’s camp. Heil Hitler! Yours obediently, Terboven.”
Is that correct?
GÖRING: It says so in the letter, a copy of which is before me.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Terboven remained after that report until 1945, didn’t he?
GÖRING: That’s correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, later in the same year, 1942, you adopted very similar means to those reported by Terboven to you, did you not?
GÖRING: I did not understand the question.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, you adopted later in the same year the same means as Terboven, didn’t you?
GÖRING: I? Where?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, I will ask that you be shown Document 1742-PS.
[Document 1742-PS was submitted to the witness.]
Now, this is a decree of 26 October 1942, by Göring. I ask you to follow me:
“Simultaneously with the intensified combating of guerrilla activity ordered by the Führer, and the cleaning up of the land behind the lines, in particular that behind the Army Group Center, I request that the following points be taken into consideration, and the conclusions drawn therefrom be put into practice:
“1. Simultaneously with the combating of the underground forces and the combing out of the areas contaminated by them, all available livestock must be driven off to safe areas. Similarly, food supplies are to be removed and brought into safety, so that they will no longer be available to the guerrillas.
“2. All male and female labor suitable for any kind of employment must be forcibly recruited and allocated to the Plenipotentiary General for Labor, who will then employ them in safe areas behind the lines or in the Reich. Separate camps must be organized behind the lines for the children.”
Is that right?
GÖRING: Absolutely. It concerns areas overrun by guerrillas, and no one could expect me to leave cattle and foodstuffs at their disposal. Furthermore, people who were repeatedly being incited to guerrilla activities and revolts against us had to be brought back to safe areas and put to work. I would like to emphasize that this was absolutely vital for the security of the troops. But I may emphasize again that you said I gave the same orders which you read from Terboven’s letter. I did not order villages to be burned, and did not order the shooting of hostages. This was something basically different.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You simply seized all the men, women and children and moved them out. That is what I referred to.
By May of 1944 your problem in the loss of fighter aircraft and fighter personnel was becoming serious?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: On the 19th of May, 1944, you had a conference in your office, on the subject of fighter aircraft and the losses of fighter personnel, did you not?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you have been shown the minutes of that meeting and authenticated them in your interrogations?
GÖRING: It is not the minutes of that conference. It is a short and brief summary by an officer of a meeting which, as far as I know, lasted 2 days.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask to have you shown Document L-166. It is entitled, “Most Secret Document,” isn’t it?
GÖRING: That is correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And it is also entitled, “Minutes of conference on fighter aircraft with the Reich Marshal on 15 and 16 May 1944.” That is correct, too, is it not?
GÖRING: No, it says, “Notices of a conference on fighter aircraft at the Reich Marshal’s on 15 and 16 May 1944.”
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: “Notices,” you translate it “notices”?
GÖRING: It says “memorandum” here and that is the original.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: “Notes of Conference on Fighter Aircraft.”
GÖRING: Lasting 2 days.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Yes. And at first General Galland described in detail the situation regarding fighter personnel. That took place, didn’t it, and he reviewed the losses?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And reviewed the losses?
GÖRING: That is right.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And then he reviewed at some length under Item 2, “Remedial Measures,” is that right?
GÖRING: According to the memorandum, yes, but whether that actually took place I cannot say.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: This conference took place, didn’t it?
GÖRING: Absolutely, 2 days.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And under Item 3 General Galland made certain proposals, did he not?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And then after considerable discussion General Schmidt made certain proposals, Items 12 and 13, is that right?
GÖRING: It must have been so. At any rate it says so according to the memorandum.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You recommended a conference between the chief of the General Staff and the chief of artillery, as soon as possible, did you not? Item 13?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And General Schmidt’s recommendations and requests appear in Items 14 and 15 and 16 and 17 and 18?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then you decided:
“The Reich Marshal has decided that only the III-groups of fighter squadrons are to remain in the Reich, and that all the fighters fit for operations are to be pressed into service.”
That occurred, did it not?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then:
“The Reich Marshal desires that when low-level attack on airfields are made, causing considerable loss in personnel and material, the measures taken for defense and dispersal are to be re-examined by the Luftwaffenführungsstab.”
Number 19. That occurred, did it not?
GÖRING: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Item 20 reads:
“The Reich Marshal wishes to propose to the Führer that American and English crews who shoot indiscriminately over towns, at moving civilian trains, or at soldiers hanging to parachutes should be shot immediately on the spot.”
Have I correctly read that?
GÖRING: It says so here. And I objected at once at that time that this was not correct. This passage has no connection at all with the context of these notes, 19-21. Besides the expression “soldiers hanging to parachutes” is entirely misleading and not commonly used. I thought for a long time about how this could have got into the notes, which I never saw and which were drawn up over a period of 2 days, and can only find the explanation that I pointed out—as can be gathered from the other evidence—that around that time the Führer gave a directive in that connection, and that in any event there must be a mistake; that is, it should not be that the Reich Marshal wants to propose, et cetera, to the Führer, but that I might have suggested that the Führer had some such intention. But about this the author of these notes would have to be consulted. No other item in all these notes refers to this. Even the next item is entirely different. Whereas everything else stands in relationship, this one point is extraneous.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: In all the notes of the 2 days, this is the one thing that you say is mistaken.
Now I ask to have you shown Document 731-PS.
[Document 731-PS was submitted to the witness.]
Now, the conference, the notes of which I have just read you, was followed within a week by the order, 731-PS, was it not, the memorandum, 731-PS, which reads:
“The Führer has reached the following decision in regard to measures to be taken against Anglo-American air crews in special instances:
“Enemy airmen who have been brought down are to be shot without court martial proceedings in the following instances . . .”
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson, shouldn’t you refer to a passage four lines above that, after “Report of the Reich Marshal”?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I did not, but perhaps for the record it ought to be in full.
“Chief of the Command Staff of the Armed Forces, Chief WFSt. Please direct drafting of order. W (Warlimont). K (Keitel), Deputy Chief of Command Staff of the Armed Forces. Must go to Reichsführer SS. According to the report of the Reich Marshal, General Korten made the following statement: ‘Memorandum’ ”—I think the next line is not in the original—
“ ‘The Führer has given the following ruling in regard to measures to be taken against Anglo-American air crews in special instances:
“ ‘Enemy airmen whose machines have been shot down are to be shot without trial by court martial in the following cases:
“ ‘(1) In the event of the shooting of our own German air crews while they are parachuting to earth.
“ ‘(2) In the event of aerial attacks upon German planes which have made emergency landings and whose crews are in the immediate vicinity.
“ ‘(3) In the event of attacks upon railway trains engaged in public transport.
“ ‘(4) In the event of low-level aerial attacks upon individual civilians, farmers, workers, single vehicles, and so forth.’ ”
Now, there is a note: “In the event of low-level aerial attacks on individual civilians, single civilian vehicles, and so forth,” is there not?
GÖRING: On my copy, “In the event of low-level aerial attacks—on single”—“single” is crossed out here and there are two words written above which I cannot read. Before the expression, “single vehicles,” is the word “civilian” and referring to Point 2, it says:
“I consider it doubtful, because the destruction of a plane which has made an emergency landing cannot be designated as gangster methods but rather as a measure in keeping with the strictest standards of civilized warfare.”
We are concerned with the entire series of questions discussed in these days and weeks and to which Von Brauchitsch also testified recently.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That note about that emergency landing is signed by “J,” isn’t it, which, stands for “Jodl”?
GÖRING: Certainly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think that is all I care to ask.
There are a number of documents which should be introduced in this connection, and I think it will be best perhaps if we tabulate them and get them ready over the evening and present them in the morning.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly, Mr. Justice Jackson, you can put them all in then.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want to ask you first some questions about the matter of the British Air Force officers who escaped from Stalag Luft III. Do you remember that you said in giving your evidence that you knew this incident very completely and very minutely? Do you remember saying that?
GÖRING: No—that I had received accurate knowledge; not that I had accurate knowledge—but that I received it.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Let me quote your own words, as they were taken down, “I know this incident very completely, very minutely, but it came to my attention, unfortunately, at a later period of time.” That is what you said the other day, is that right?
GÖRING: Yes, that is what I meant; that I know about the incident exactly, but only heard of it 2 days later.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You told the Tribunal that you were on leave at this time, in the last period of March 1944, is that right?
GÖRING: Yes, as far as I remember I was on leave in March until a few days before Easter.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: And you said, “As I can prove.” I want you to tell the Tribunal the dates of your leave.
GÖRING: I say again, that this refers to the whole of March—I remember it well—and for proof I would like to mention the people who were with me on this leave.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: What I want to know is, where you were on leave.
GÖRING: Here, in the vicinity of Nuremberg.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: So you were within easy reach of the telephone from the Air Ministry or, indeed, from Breslau, if you were wanted?
GÖRING: I would have been easily accessible by phone if someone wanted to communicate with me.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want you to help me with regard to one or two other dates of which you have spoken. You say: “I heard 1 or 2 days later about this escape.” Do you understand, Witness, that it is about the escape I am asking you, not about the shooting, for the moment; I want to make it quite clear.
GÖRING: It is clear to me.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Did you mean by that, that you heard about the actual escape 1 or 2 days after it happened?
GÖRING: Yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Did you hear about it from the office of your adjutant or from your director of operations?
GÖRING: I always heard these things through my adjutant. Several other escapes had preceded this one.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Yes, that’s right. There had been a number of escapes from this camp.
GÖRING: I cannot tell you exactly whether they were from this camp. Shortly before several big escapes had taken place, which I always heard of through the office of my adjutant.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want you to tell the Tribunal another date: You say that on your return from leave your chief of staff made a communication to you. Who was your chief of staff?
GÖRING: General Korten was chief of staff at that time.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Can you tell us the date at which he made this communication to you?
GÖRING: No, I cannot tell you that exactly. I believe I discussed this incident with my chief of staff later, telling him what I had already heard about it from other sources.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Who was the first to tell you about it? Was it your chief of staff who told you about the shootings? Do you mean that some one else had told you about the shooting?
GÖRING: I cannot say exactly now whether I heard about the shooting from the chief of staff, or from other sources. But in any event I discussed this with the chief of staff.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: What was the date that you talked about it with your chief of staff?
GÖRING: I cannot tell you the date exactly from memory, but it must have been around Easter.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: That would be just about the end of March, wouldn’t it?
GÖRING: No. It might have been at the beginning of April, the first half of April.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: And then you had an interview with Himmler, you have told us?
GÖRING: Yes, I talked with Himmler about this.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Can you fix that?
GÖRING: Of course I cannot establish this date with certainty. I saw Himmler, and, at the first opportunity after I had heard about this incident, spoke to him about it.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: So that you can’t fix the date in relation to your coming back from leave, or the interview with your chief of staff, or any other date, or Easter?
GÖRING: Without any documents it is, as I said, impossible for me today to fix the date. I can only mention the approximate period of time; and that I have done.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You said the other day that you could prove when you were on leave. Am I to take it that you haven’t taken the trouble to look up what your leave dates were?
GÖRING: I have already said that I was on leave during March. Whether I returned on the 26th or the 28th or the 29th of March I cannot tell you. For proof of that you would have to ask the people who accompanied me, who perhaps can fix this date more definitely. I know only that I was there in March.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Witness, will it be perfectly fair to you if I take the latest of your dates, the 29th of March, to work on?
GÖRING: It would be more expedient if you would tell me when Easter was that year, because I do not recall it. Then it will be easier for me to specify the dates, because I know that a few days before Easter I returned to Berchtesgaden in order to pass these holidays with my family.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: A few days before Easter you went back to Berchtesgaden?
GÖRING: Yes.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: So you had come back on leave some day before that. Before you went to Berchtesgaden you had come back from your March leave?
GÖRING: Berchtesgaden was then at the same time the headquarters of the Führer. I returned from my leave to Berchtesgaden, and with my return my leave ended, because I returned to duty. The return to Berchtesgaden was identical with the termination of my leave.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Well, I can’t give you Easter offhand, but I happen to remember Whitsuntide was the 28th of May, so that Easter would be early, somewhere about the 5th of April. So that your leave would finish somewhere about the end of March, maybe the 26th or the 29th; that is right, isn’t it?
Now, these shootings of these officers went on from the 25th of March to the 13th of April; do you know that?
GÖRING: I do not know that exactly.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You may take that from me, because there is an official report of the shooting, and I want to be quite fair with you. Only 49 of these officers were shot on the 6th of April, as far as we can be sure, and one was shot either on the 13th of April or later. But the critical period is the end of March, and we may take it that you were back from leave by about the 29th of March.
I just want you to tell the Tribunal this was a matter of great importance, wasn’t it? Considered a matter of great importance?
GÖRING: It was a very important matter.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: General Milch—I beg pardon—Field Marshal Milch has said that it was a matter which would require the highest authority, and I think you have said that you know it was Hitler’s decision that these officers should be shot; is that so?
GÖRING: The question did not come through clearly.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: It was Hitler’s decision that these officers should be shot?
GÖRING: That is correct; and I was later notified that it was Hitler’s decree.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want you just to remember one other thing, that immediately it was published, the British Foreign Secretary, Mr. Eden, at once said that Great Britain would demand justice of the perpetrators of these murders; do you remember that?
GÖRING: I cannot remember the speech to the House of Commons given by Eden. I myself do not know the substance of this speech even today. I just heard that he spoke in Parliament about this incident.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want you to tell the Tribunal just who the persons in your ministry involved were. I will tell you; I think it would be shorter in the end. If you disagree you can correct me.
The commandant of Stalag Luft III was Oberst Von Lindeiner of your service, was he not?
GÖRING: That is quite possible. I did not know the names of all these commandants. There was a court martial against him and that was because the escape was possible. He was not connected with the shootings.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: No, but he was commandant of the camp, and I suppose you had to review and confirm the proceedings of the Zentralluftwaffengericht which convicted him and sentenced him to a year’s imprisonment for neglect of duty. That would come to you, wouldn’t it? Wouldn’t that come to you for review?
GÖRING: No, only if larger penalties were involved. One year imprisonment would not come to my attention. But I know, and I would like to certify, that court proceedings were taken against him for neglect of duty at the time of the escape.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: In May of 1943, Inspectorate Number 17 had been interposed between the Luftwaffe and the Prisoners of War Organization of the OKW, the Kriegsgefangenenwesen; do you remember that?
GÖRING: I do not know the details about inspection nor how closely it concerned the Prisoners of War Organization of the OKW, or how it was otherwise.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want to remind you of who your own officers were. You understand, Witness, that your own officers are involved in this matter. I want to remind you who they were. Was the head of Inspectorate 17 Major General Grosch of the Luftwaffe?
GÖRING: Major General Grosch is of the Luftwaffe.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You told the Tribunal the other day—I am quoting your own words—that you knew from information, you knew this incident very completely and very minutely. You are now telling the Tribunal you don’t know whether Major General Grosch was head of Inspectorate Number 17 of the Luftwaffe.
GÖRING: That is irrelevant. I told the High Tribunal that I heard an accurate account of the incident of the shooting of these airmen, but that has no connection with General Grosch and his inspectorate, for he did not participate in the shooting.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I will show you that connection in one minute if you will just answer my questions. Was Grosch’s second in command Oberst Welder; do you remember that?
GÖRING: I do not know the particulars of the organization for inspection of prisoner-of-war camps, nor the leaders, nor what positions they held. At least not by heart. I would like to emphasize again, so that there will be no confusion, that when I said I knew about this matter, I mean that I knew how the order was issued and that the people were shot, that I came to know all about this; but not as far as this was related to inspections, possibilities of flight, et cetera.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: And did General Grosch, as head of Inspectorate 17, have to report to General Fōrster, your director of operations at the Luftwaffe Ministerium?
GÖRING: That I cannot tell you without having the diagram of the subordinate posts before me. General Fōrster was, I believe at that time, head of the Luftwehr, or a similar designation, in the ministry. I concerned myself less with these matters, because they were not directly of a tactical, strategic, or of an armament nature. But it is quite possible and certain that he belonged to this department.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I put it to you quite shortly, and if you don’t know I will leave it for the moment. Did you know Major General Von Graevenitz was head of the Defendant Keitel’s department, the Kriegsgefangenenwesen, that dealt with prisoners of war?
GÖRING: I first heard about General Graevenitz here, for this department did not directly concern me. I could not know all of these military subordinate commanders in their hundreds and thousands of departments.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: So I take it that you did not know Colonel, now General Westhoff, of the department under Von Graevenitz?
GÖRING: Westhoff I never saw at all, and he did not belong to the Luftwaffe.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I am not suggesting that Von Graevenitz and Westhoff belonged to the Luftwaffe. I wanted to make it clear that I was suggesting they belonged to General Keitel’s organization.
GÖRING: I did not know either; and I did not know what posts they occupied.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Up to that time you still had a considerable influence in the Reich, didn’t you?
GÖRING: At this time no longer. This no longer concerns 1944.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: But you were still head of the Luftwaffe and head of the Air Ministry, weren’t you?
GÖRING: Yes, I was.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: And you had, as head of the Luftwaffe and head of the Air Ministry, been responsible for six prisoner-of-war camps for the whole of the war up to that time, hadn’t you?
GÖRING: How many prisoner-of-war camps I do not know. But of course I bear the responsibility for those which belonged to my ministry.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: To the Air Force?
GÖRING: Yes, those which were subordinate to the Air Force.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You knew about the general plan for treatment of prisoners of war, which we have had in evidence as the “Aktion Kugel” plan, didn’t you?
GÖRING: No. I knew nothing of this action. I was not advised of it.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You were never advised of Aktion Kugel?
GÖRING: I first heard of Aktion Kugel here; saw the document and heard the expression for the first time. Moreover no officer of the Luftwaffe ever informed me of such a thing; and I do not believe that a single officer was ever taken away from the Luftwaffe camps. A report to this effect was never presented to me, in any case.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You know what Aktion Kugel was: That escaped officers and noncommissioned officers, other than British and American, were to be handed over to the police and taken to Mauthausen, where they were shot by the device of having a gun concealed in the measuring equipment when they thought they were getting their prison clothes. You know what Aktion Kugel is, don’t you?
GÖRING: I heard of it here.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Are you telling the Tribunal that you did not know that escaped prisoners of war who were picked up by the police were retained by the police and taken to Mauthausen?
GÖRING: No, I did not know that. On the contrary, various prisoners who escaped from my camps were caught again by the police; and they were all brought back to the camps; this was the first case where this to some extent did not take place.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: But didn’t you know that Colonel Welder, as second in command of your ministry’s inspectorate, issued a written order a month before this, in February 1944, that prisoners of war picked up by the Luftwaffe should be delivered back to their camp, and prisoners of war picked up by the police should be held by them and no longer counted as being under the protection of the Luftwaffe; didn’t you know that?
GÖRING: No. Please summon this colonel to testify if he ever made a report of that nature to me, or addressed such a letter to me.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Well, of course I cannot tell whether your ministry was well run or not. But he certainly issued the order, because he says so himself.
GÖRING: Then he must say from whom he received this order.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I see. Well, he says that he issued this order, and you know as well as I do that prisoners of war is a thing that you have got to be careful about, because you have got a protecting power that investigates any complaint; and you never denounced the Convention and you had the protecting power in these matters all through the war, had you not? That is right, isn’t it?
GÖRING: That is correct, but I take the liberty to ask who gave him this order, whether he received this order from me.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Well, he would not get it direct from you. I do not think you had ever met him, had you? He would get it from Lieutenant General Grosch, wouldn’t he?
GÖRING: Then Grosch should say whether he received such an order from me. I never gave such an order.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I see. So you say that you had never heard—this was 3½ years after the beginning of the war—and you had never heard that any escaped prisoners of war were to be handed over to the police. Is that what you ask the Tribunal to believe?
GÖRING: To the extent that escaped prisoners of war committed any offenses or crimes, they were of course turned over to the police, I believe. But I wish to testify before the Court that I never gave any order that they should be handed over to the police or sent to concentration camps merely because they had attempted to break out or escape, nor did I ever know that such measures were taken.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: This is my last question: I want to make it quite clear, Witness, that I am referring to those who had escaped, who had got away from the confines of the camp and were recaptured by the police. Didn’t you know that they were handed over to the police?
GÖRING: No. Only if they had committed crimes while fleeing, such as murder and so on. Such things occurred.
[The Tribunal adjourned until 21 March 1946 at 1000 hours.]