Afternoon Session
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I want to ask you some questions regarding your duties and activities on the Central Planning Board. You were a member of the Central Planning Board, were you not?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And what was the period of your membership?
MILCH: From the beginning—I believe that was in the year 1941 or 1942—until the end.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Members of that Board, in addition to yourself, were the Defendant Speer?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The Defendant Funk?
MILCH: Yes, but only later.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: When did he come on the Board?
MILCH: At the moment when a large part of the civil production was turned over to the Speer Ministry, the Ministry for Armament.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And Körner? Körner was a member of the Board?
MILCH: Körner? Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Who was Dr. Sauer?
MILCH: Sauer was an official in the Speer Ministry, but he did not belong to the Central Planning Board.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: But he did keep some of the minutes, did he not?
MILCH: No; I think he did not keep them.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Sauckel frequently attended the meetings, did he not?
MILCH: Not frequently, but occasionally.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What were the functions of the Central Planning Board?
MILCH: The distribution of raw materials to the various groups which held quotas, such as the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and for civilian requirements for various branches such as industry, mining, industrial and private building, et cetera.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And labor?
MILCH: Pardon me, labor? We did not have to distribute that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: It had nothing to do with labor? Do I understand you correctly?
MILCH: We could make suggestions, but not the distribution.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You mean by that, not the distribution amongst different industries which were competing to obtain labor?
MILCH: That was a point which concerned Armaments more than the Central Planning Board.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you know that Speer turned over to the United States all of his personal papers and records, including the minutes of this Central Planning Board?
MILCH: I did not know that; I hear it now.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I will ask that the minutes, volumes of minutes which constitute U.S. Document R-124, offered in evidence as French Exhibit Number RF-30, be made available for examination by the witness in the original German; I shall ask you some questions about it.
MILCH: Yes.
[Document R-124 was submitted to the witness.]
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: If you will point out to the witness Page 1059, Line 22.
This, Witness, purports to be the minutes of Conference Number 21 of the Central Planning Board, held on the 30th of October 1942 at the Reich Ministry of Armament and Munitions, and the minutes show you to have been present. Do you recall being there at that meeting?
MILCH: In that one sentence, I cannot see it, but I can well assume it. Yes. I see here in the minutes that my name is frequently mentioned.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I call your attention—Page 1059, Line 22−to the following entry and ask you if this refreshes your recollection about the functions of that Board:
“Speer: The question of slackers is another point to be dealt with. Ley has ascertained that the number of people reporting sick decreased to one-fourth or one-fifth where there are factory doctors and the workers are examined by them. SS and Police could go ahead with the job and put those known as slackers into undertakings run by concentration camps. There is no other choice. Let it happen a few times, and the news will go round.”
Were you not concerned with the discussion of the labor situation in that conference, and does that not refresh your recollection as to the dealing with the labor question?
MILCH: I do recall that the question of slackers as a whole was discussed. It was rather a question of slackers, workers, people, who while not normally employed in peacetime, as a result of the total mobilization of manpower, were compelled to work during the war. Among these people, who did not belong to the ranks of the workers, I repeat that there were some slackers who upset the good spirit of the workers. It was those people we had in mind.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Those were to be sent to concentration camps, as you know?
MILCH: Yes, I was told that. But no decision was arrived at. Moreover, it was not for us to send anybody to a concentration camp.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, was it not said that there was nothing to be said against the SS taking them over? You knew that the SS was running the concentration camps, did you not?
MILCH: Yes, of course.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And, therefore, you knew that turning them over to the SS and sending them to the concentration camps was a means of forcing them to produce more goods, was it not?
MILCH: Yes, of course, these people should be forced to do so. They were Germans who refused to do their duty to their country.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did this apply only to Germans?
MILCH: As far as I know this applied to Germans only. By slackers—they were also called casual workers—was meant only those people who went from place to place, who practically every week changed their job and who were reported to us mainly by the representatives of our own workers. Our own workers complained that these people availed themselves of all privileges as to food, et cetera, while they did not do anything, that they always gave up their jobs soon, and that every establishment was glad to get rid of them.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And got rid of them by sending them to the concentration camps under the SS?
MILCH: They had to be taught, and we were told that if these people had their additional—not their basic—rations made dependent on their output, as was the case in the concentration camps, they would very quickly learn.
I do, however, remember that it was proposed to limit this treatment to 2 or 3 months, after which they would be brought back, and if they had learned their lesson they would be given full freedom again.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, did you have anything to do on the Central Planning Board with the work of prisoners of war?
MILCH: No; I do not think so.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, I ask that you be shown the 22d conference of the Central Planning Board minutes of the meeting held on the 2d of November 1942, Page 1042, at Line 24, which quotes you. The English translation is on Page 27.
I ask you to refresh your recollection by reading this paragraph.
“Milch: I think that agriculture must get its labor quota. Assuming that we had given agriculture 100,000 more workers, we would now have 100,000 more people who would be decently fed, whereas, the human material we are now receiving, particularly the prisoners of war, are not sufficiently fit for work.”
Did you make that statement?
MILCH: I cannot remember details. But I suppose I did. I do not know if I have seen these minutes; but I know that we dealt with the question that agriculture, if possible, should get its workers because the food problem was so very important, and the farms could feed their people over and above the rations which the civilian population received. This proposal to put these people on the land was quite in accordance with my views, but these were merely suggestions by the Central Planning Board. I know Sauckel was present at that meeting. We also made suggestions to the armament representatives as to how their problems could be solved.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you made recommendations to the Reich Marshal, did you not?
MILCH: I cannot remember having done so, I do not know.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You never did?
MILCH: I do not know, I cannot remember.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Then you knew the Reich Marshal’s wishes in reference to the utilization of prisoners of war, did you not?
MILCH: That prisoners of war were also working was known to me. Especially on the land many prisoners of war were put to work.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Did you attend a meeting between the Führer and Minister Speer?
MILCH: On which date?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The 5th of March 1944.
MILCH: The 4th of March?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The 5th of March 1944.
MILCH: On the 5th of March, yes, I attended a meeting with the Führer. At that time there was a question of creating a “fighter” staff, that is, a general effort by the entire armament industry to produce as many fighter planes as possible.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, now I will ask that you be shown Speer’s memorandum of that meeting with the Führer at which General Bodenschatz and Colonel Von Below were also present. Were they not?
The English translation is on Page 35; the German on Page 139.
I call your attention to this paragraph:
“I told the Führer of the Reich Marshal’s wish to utilize the producing capacity of prisoners of war further by placing the Stalag under the SS, with the exception of the English and Americans? The Führer approves this proposal and has asked Colonel Von Below to take the necessary steps.”
I ask you how the SS could increase the production of the prisoners of war; what steps you expected to be taken?
Now, just answer my question. What steps did you expect the SS to take to increase the production of the prisoners of war?
MILCH: I cannot remember now. At any rate at that time we did not know what was being done by the SS—about their methods as we now know them.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: This was in March of 1944.
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, you have no knowledge of the methods by which the SS would be able to speed up production by prisoners of war. That is the way you want that to stand?
MILCH: No, that is not the way I want it to stand. I have to think this point over for a moment. I believe the point was whether or not prisoners of war should be made available. It was not a question of prisoners of war working for the SS, but of their being made available for work. That, I take it was the point.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Put at the disposal of the SS, you mean?
Well, let us go on to the 33d Conference by the Central Planning Board, held on the 16th of February 1943, at which Speer and Sauckel among others appear to have been present. The English translation is on Page 28; the German, Pages 2276 to 2307. There was at this meeting, to summarize, considerable discussion of the labor situation, first a report from Schreiber, and then Timm gave a general account of the labor situation, and I call your attention to your contribution on Page 2298 at the top.
MILCH: Yes, I have just read it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: It is as follows:
“Milch: We have demanded that in the anti-aircraft artillery a certain percentage of personnel should consist of Russians. Fifty thousand in all should be brought in. Thirty thousand are already employed as gunners. This is an amusing thing, that Russians must work the guns . . .”
What was amusing about making the Russian prisoners of war work the guns?
MILCH: The words “We have demanded,” do not mean the Central Planning Board, but that Hitler made this demand.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: “We” means Hitler?
MILCH: Yes, the German Government. And I myself find it strange that prisoners of war should be made to shoot at planes of their allies. We did not like it because it meant that these men could no longer work for us. We were opposed to their being used in the anti-aircraft artillery.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You said: “This is an amusing thing that the Russians must work the guns.”
What was amusing about it?
MILCH: What is meant by amusing? . . . peculiar, strange, I cannot say, however, whether this word was actually used. I have not seen the minutes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I call your attention to the rest of your contribution.
“. . . 20,000 are still needed. Yesterday I received a letter from the Army High Command, stating: We cannot release any more men, we have not enough ourselves. Thus there is no prospect for us.”
Whom does “for us” refer to, if not to your industry requirements?
MILCH: I consider these minutes incorrect, it has never been discussed in this manner, it must be wrong. I cannot accept the minutes as they stand. To clarify this matter I may say that the proposal was to take people out of the armament industry and put them into anti-aircraft defense. We who were concerned with armament did not want to release these men and were opposed to it. That was the idea of the whole thing, and the OKH declared that they did not have enough people.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I understand the sense of this to be that you applied for certain workmen for the armament industry and that the Army High Command refused to give you the men, saying that they are already employed making guns and on other work. Now, is that the sense of that, or is it not?
MILCH: No, not quite.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, just tell me what the sense of it is.
MILCH: As far as I remember, the armament industry was to release 50,000 Russian prisoners of war to the Air Force for anti-aircraft defense, and the armament industry could not spare these people.
THE PRESIDENT: I am afraid we must adjourn due to some technical difficulty.
[A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson, it may be convenient to you to know that we are going to rise at 4:30 today.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I hope to have finished before.
[Turning to the witness.] I will ask to have your attention called to Page 2297, in the English translation about Page 28, to your contribution, which reads as follows:
“Milch: There is of course a front also somewhere in the East. This front will be held for a certain time. The only useful thing the Russians will find in an area evacuated by us, is people. The question is whether the people should not generally be taken back as far as 100 kilometers behind the front line. The whole civilian population goes 100 kilometers behind the front.”
Do you find that?
MILCH: Yes, I have found it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And I understood you this morning to state that it was a rule promulgated in your book that the civilian population should not be interfered with.
MILCH: From the last paragraph, according to which people were no longer to be employed on digging trenches, it appears that these people were last employed on this work. I cannot say what kind of people these were, only that they were already employed somewhere.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you knew that. You knew that they were being used for that kind of work?
MILCH: So it says here. I do not remember it any more. It has been recorded in the minutes, provided they are correct.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you knew they were being used, the civilian population was being forced to dig trenches for your troops.
MILCH: Today I cannot remember any more, but at that time it was discussed according to the minutes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, I will ask to have your attention called to the minutes of Conference Number 11 of the Central Planning Board, held on 22d of July 1942; German, Page 3062; English translation, 38.
First let me call your attention to the fact that at that meeting it appears that among those present were Speer, yourself, Körner. Did Körner represent the Reich Marshal?
MILCH: Yes, for the Four Year Plan; he was the representative for the Four Year Plan.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: At all meetings of this Board, Körner represented the Reich Marshal did he not?
MILCH: Yes. He represented him as regards the Four Year Plan.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And Sauckel was present, and representatives from the Iron Association, the Coal Association, and the Ministry for Armament and Munitions.
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: There was considerable discussion of the labor problem, and the requirements of those industries. On Page 3062 I call your attention to this entry:
“General Field Marshal Milch undertakes to accelerate the procuring of the Russian prisoners of war from the camps.”
I ask you what measures you expected to take to accelerate procuring prisoners of war from the camps.
MILCH: As I was a soldier I undertook to submit this question to the OKW, which was in charge of prisoners of war.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You did not personally deal with the prisoners of war, but you undertook to obtain them from the OKW?
MILCH: The government had put these prisoners of war at our disposal for work. The transfer was very slow, and as we had to deal with the OKW in this matter, I was asked and I undertook to request the OKW to speed up the transfer.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now let us turn to Conference Number 36, dated 22d of April 1943; the English translation, Page 13; German, 2125. There again I call your attention to the fact that Speer, yourself, Sauckel, and Körner were among those present. There again you discussed the labor problem, did you not?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And Körner reported as follows:
“On 1 April agriculture was still in need of about 600,000 workers. To cover this, labor from the East, mainly women, should be brought in. This labor must be supplied before we take other workers away from agriculture. We are now approaching a very busy season in work on the land which requires many workers,”—and considerably more, which I will not take the time to quote.
I call your attention to Page 2128, your contribution to that discussion, which reads as follows:
“If you do what I proposed and what has also been agreed to by Timm, no harm can be done. It should definitely be done. Moreover, I am also of the opinion that in any circumstances we have to bring in workers for coal mining. The bulk of the labor we are going to receive from the East, will be women. The women from the East are, however, accustomed to agricultural work, particularly to the kind of work which will have to be done during the next few weeks, that is, hoeing and planting of root crops, et cetera. We can use women quite well for this. Only one thing has to be kept in mind—agriculture must get the women before the men are taken away. It would be wrong to take men away and to leave the farmers without labor for 4 to 6 weeks. If the women come after that, it will be too late.”
I ask you how many women were transported to agriculture as a result of this conference?
MILCH: As a result of this conference none at all, as only suggestions were put forward by us for an arrangement between industry and agriculture to procure the necessary labor for the former. Without the necessary labor in the coal-mining industry the war could not be carried on. Therefore labor had to be found, and in this respect a suggestion was made for an exchange, namely, to replace men engaged in agriculture by women, who, of course, could not be put to work in the mines.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: To whom did you make these suggestions? You say they were not decisions but just suggestions.
MILCH: No. The suggestions were made to representatives of the Ministry of Labor or to the Office for the Allocation of Labor. I see Timm is mentioned. He was one of the higher officials in this ministry.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And Sauckel?
MILCH: I do not know whether Sauckel attended that conference. I see only Timm’s name.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: It appears from the minutes that he was there; but whether he was or not, you made suggestions to Sauckel as to the needs for labor, did you not, and called upon him to supply them?
MILCH: Yes; it was necessary to get workers for coal mining. New workers could not be found, thus there was no alternative but to make an exchange.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: We understand you. You will save a great deal of our time if you will just answer the questions.
Now I call your attention to Conference Number 54 of the Central Planning Board, held on 1 March 1944; English translation Page 1, German Page 1762. At this conference I remind you that it appears that Sauckel, Milch, Schreiber, and Körner were among those present. It was held at the Air Ministry and you discussed the desirability of draining off young men from France so that they would not be available to act as partisans in case there was an invasion by the Allies of French territory.
Do you recall such a meeting?
MILCH: I cannot remember details. In the course of other interrogations here in Nuremberg and in England I already stated that it is impossible to remember in detail all these matters, which were heaped upon us, especially as my memory has suffered through heavy blows on the head received at the time of my capture.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: It will help you if you will refer to Page 1799, opposite the name “Milch” and read the entry, as follows:
“Milch: If landings take place in France and more or less succeed, we will have in France a partisan uprising, such as we never had in the Balkans or in the East, not because the people are particularly able to carry it through, but because we allow them to do so by failing to deal with them in the right manner. Four entire age groups have grown up in France, men between 18 and 23, that is, of an age when young people, for patriotic reasons or because they have been stirred up, are prepared to do anything to satisfy personal hatred—and it is only natural that they do hate us. These young men should have been registered according to age groups and brought to us, as they constitute the greatest danger in the event of a landing.
“I am firmly convinced, and have said so several times, that if and when the invasion starts, acts of sabotage to railways, works, and supply bases will be a daily occurrence. The Wehrmacht, however, will then no longer be able to deal with this internal situation, as it will have to fight at the front and will have in its rear a very dangerous enemy who will threaten supplies, et cetera. If severe executive measures had been taken, all would have been as quiet as the grave behind the front at a time when things were about to happen. I have drawn attention to this several times, but I am afraid nothing is being done. When we have to start shooting these people, it will already be too late. We shall no longer have the men to polish off the partisans.”
You then go on to state that you think the Army should handle the executive action required in rounding up these people. Does that refresh your recollection?
MILCH: Yes, that was roughly what I meant to say, but I cannot say whether I used these very words. In this life and death struggle of our country we had to make sure that we were not suddenly stabbed in the back by a secret army, as unfortunately happened later on.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And you proposed to eliminate the population behind the lines insofar as they might constitute a menace to your operations in this invasion?
MILCH: No, it was proposed to send these people at the right time to work in Germany, as had been promised by the French Government. That was my view. It was necessary that these people should come to work in Germany, as the French Government had promised in its agreement with the German Government, instead of allowing these people to join the Maquis and commit sabotage, which would necessitate shootings as a countermeasure.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You did not confine your use of forced labor to your enemies; it was also applied against your own allies, was it not? For example turn to Page 1814, and did you not contribute to this discussion?
“Milch: Would not the S-factories”—that is, protected factories—“be better protected if we handle the whole problem of feeding the Italians and tell them: ‘You will get your food only if you work in S-factories or come to Germany.’ ”
MILCH: That was after a part of Italy had broken away, and it applied to Italian soldiers who had declared themselves against Mussolini. These people remained behind the front, did not want to work, and committed sabotage against the German Armed Forces. Thus it was proposed to say to these people, “You will have your food and everything else provided, but you will have to work somewhere, either in Italy in the iron ore mines, or in Germany.”
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I think you said in your direct examination, or perhaps earlier in your cross-examination, that you did not know about any forced labor from occupied territory, you had no knowledge of that. Is that still your statement?
MILCH: I did not quite understand that. Forced labor?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Forced labor, yes.
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You did not know about it?
MILCH: These people were prisoners of war, Italians, who were at our disposal for work according to an agreement with the Italian Government which we had recognized. Mussolini had expressly put these men at our disposal for this purpose.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Excuse me for interrupting you, but let us not bother with Mussolini here. I ask you whether you still stand by the statement you made earlier, as I recall it, that you did not know of any forced labor brought in from the occupied countries to Germany. Is that your statement, or is it not?
MILCH: Insofar as they were free workers and free people, I still maintain this. My point is that these were people who had been placed at our disposal, and, Mr. Justice, as far as we are concerned, at the time this was said there was still an Italian Government, though this fact is forgotten today; but at that time it still existed.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask that your attention be brought to Page 1827 of the minutes of this meeting at which you were present, and where the discussion you just admitted took place; and I call your attention to the line opposite the name “Sauckel,” from which it appears that Sauckel then reported: “Out of the 5 million foreign workers who arrived in Germany, not even 200,000 came voluntarily.”
MILCH: No, I cannot remember that at all.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You do not have any recollection of that? All right.
MILCH: No, I have no recollection of that.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will go on then to Conference Number 23 of the Central Planning Board, held the 3rd of November 1942. It is the English translation, Page 27. The German text is on Page 1024, in which it appears that you were present at and participated in the discussion, and I call your attention to Page 1024, Line 10, to these entries of the stenographic minutes:
“Speer: Well, under the pretext of industry we could deceive the French into believing that we would release all prisoners of war who are rollers and smelters if they give us the names.
“Rohland: We have installed our own office in Paris. I see, you mean the French should give the names of the smelters who are prisoners of war in Germany?
“Milch: I would simply say, you get two men in exchange for one.
“Speer: The French firms know exactly which prisoners of war are smelters. Unofficially, you should create the impression that they would be released. They give us the names and then we get them out. Have a try.
“Rohland: That is an idea.”
Now, your contribution was to want two men in place of one; is that right?
MILCH: Yes; that is to say, two people from another trade for one of these particular skilled workers. In what straits we were, you can see from . . .
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That was your entire objective?
MILCH: The entire purpose was to get these people and to give them others in exchange.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, let us take up Conference Number 53 of the Planning Board, held the 16th of February 1944; English translation, Page 26, and the German from Page 1851 on. You will find yourself included among those who were present and it was at the Reich Air Ministry that it was held. I first call your attention to the entry on Page 1863, the words opposite “Milch”:
“The armament industry employs foreign workers in large numbers; according to the latest figures, 40%. The latest allocations from the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor are mostly foreigners and we had to give up many German workers in the recruitment drive. Particularly the aircraft industry, which is a young industry, employs a great many young men who should be called up. This will, however, be very difficult, as those working for experimental stations cannot be touched. In mass production, the foreign workers preponderate and in some instances represent 95 percent and even more; 88 percent of the workers engaged in the production of our newest engines are Russian prisoners of war and the 12 percent are German men and women. On the Ju-52, which are now regarded as transport planes only, and the monthly production of which is from 50 to 60 machines, only six to eight German workers are engaged; the rest are Ukrainian women who have lowered the record of production of skilled workers.”
Do you recall that?
MILCH: Yes, I can remember that distinctly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And on Page 1873, you come forward with this suggestion:
“Milch: The list of slackers should be handed to Himmler. He will make them work all right. This is of a great general educational importance, and has also a deterrent effect on others who would also like to shirk.”
MILCH: Yes, this applies again to the slackers in agriculture as I mentioned this morning.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Among foreign workers, was it not?
MILCH: No; these were Englishmen, the slackers.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Englishmen are foreigners in Germany, are they not? I do not know what you mean, they were not foreigners. They were Englishmen.
MILCH: Englishmen never worked for us. So they cannot have been Englishmen.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What were they? You say they were all German.
MILCH: What we understood as slackers were those people who were compelled to work during the war, Germans who normally were not regular workers, but were forcibly made to work during the war.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: We will get to that in a minute. First, I want to ask you how Himmler was going to make them work. What did Himmler do, what methods did Himmler use? Why were you making proposals to Himmler in this matter?
MILCH: Because Himmler at a meeting had stated that as regards supplementary rations—the worker in Germany had the same basic rations as the rest of the population, and apart from this he received quite considerable additions which in the case of those doing the heaviest work were several times the normal basic rations. The general routine was that these rations were issued by food offices, irrespective of where and how the individual was working. The suggestion was made by Himmler that these additions should be made dependent upon the output of the workers. This was possible in the case of those workers who came from concentration camps, et cetera, and were under Himmler. This procedure could not be applied to free workers; hence the proposal to bring to reason those who sabotaged work in their own country, by issuing additional rations, as laid down for their type of work, only in proportion to their output.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You know the difference between labor camps and concentration camps, do you not?
MILCH: Yes, of course.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And these people who were doing work in these industries were kept mainly in the work camps, were they not, in which their rations were controlled without Himmler’s hands being in it at all?
MILCH: No; the German workers were not kept in labor camps but they lived at home and, therefore, received their additional rations from the local food offices. I want to stress again that it was the German workers themselves who asked that measures be taken—the factory foremen, who were infuriated to see that people who did not do anything, who let their country down in times of stress, received more rations than ordinary civilians.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: You still say that all you are talking about were German and never foreign workers. Now, be clear about that.
MILCH: By slackers I meant German workers; in my opinion, only these were in question.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I ask that your attention be called to Page 1913: This is your contribution at that point:
“Milch: It is therefore quite impossible to utilize every foreigner fully unless we make them do piecework and are in a position to take measures against foreigners who are not doing their bit.”
Do you find that entry?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: And then you proceed to complain that:
“If a foreman lays his hands on a prisoner of war and boxes his ears, there is at once a terrible row; the man is put in prison, and so on. There are many officials in Germany who consider it their first duty to stand up for other men’s human rights instead of looking after war production. I, too, am for human rights, but if a Frenchman says, ‘You fellows will be hanged and the works manager will be the first to have his head cut off’ and then if the boss says, ‘I’ll give him one for that,’ then he is in for it. Nobody sides with the manager, but only with the ‘poor devil’ who said that to him.”
Did you report that to the meeting?
MILCH: That may well be the case.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: What did you suggest?
MILCH: I can remember cases where foreign workers threatened and even assaulted their German foreman, and when he defended himself action was taken against him. I did not think it right.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Now, you provided your own remedy, did you not? In the next line you say:
“I told my engineers, ‘If you do not hit a man like this, then I shall punish you. The more you do in this respect, the more I shall think of you; I shall see to it that nothing happens to you.’ This has not yet gone round. I cannot talk to every works manager individually. But I should like to see some one try to stop me, as I can deal with anyone who tries it.”
Do you find that?
MILCH: I cannot remember the exact words but I stick to the point that it was an impossible situation for a prisoner or foreign worker to be able to say to his German foreman, “We will cut your throat,” and the foreman . . .
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, do you mean to say that if a prisoner of war attempted or threatened to cut his employer’s throat, that German officers would stand up for him as against the employer? You do not mean that, do you?
[There was no response.]
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, we will go on:
“If the small works manager”—I am still quoting from you—“does that, he is put into a concentration camp . . .”
Do you find that?
MILCH: Yes, I see it here.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON:
“. . . and runs the risk of having his prisoners of war taken from him.”
Now, I am still quoting you and I want you to find the entry.
“In one case, two Russian officers took off with an airplane but crashed. I ordered that these two men be hanged at once. They were hanged or shot yesterday. I left that to the SS. I wanted them to be hanged in the factory for the others to see.”
Do you find that?
MILCH: I have found it, and I can only say I have never had anybody hanged nor have I even given such an order. I could not possibly have said such a thing. I had nothing to do with this question. Neither do I know of any instance where two Russian officers tried to escape by plane.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Is there anything else you would like to say with reference to that entry?
MILCH: No. I have nothing to say. I do not know anything about it and I also do not believe I ever said it.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: That is all that I have at the present time.
MR. G. D. ROBERTS (Leading Counsel for the United Kingdom): Witness, I have some questions on behalf of the British Delegation. My first point is this: You said on Friday that, beginning in 1935, an air force was built up in Germany for defensive purposes. Do you remember that?
MILCH: Yes; 1935.
MR. ROBERTS: And do you say that it remained on a defensive basis up to December 1939?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: You do. I want you to listen to three pieces of evidence—speeches made by your chief, the Defendant Göring. I am quoting from the shorthand notes of the 8th of January, in the afternoon, on Page 2306. In May 1935, Göring said:
“I intend to create a Luftwaffe which, if the hour should strike, will burst upon the foe like an avenging host. The enemy must feel that he has lost even before he has started fighting.”
Does that sound like a defensive air force?
MILCH: No, that does not sound like it; but one has to distinguish between words and deeds.
MR. ROBERTS: I shall come to the deeds in a moment.
[Laughter.]
THE PRESIDENT: If there is any more of this laughter, the Court will have to be cleared.
MR. ROBERTS: On the 8th of July 1938 Göring, addressing a number of German aircraft manufacturers, said:
“War with Czechoslovakia is imminent; the German Air Force is already superior to the English Air Force. If Germany wins the war, she will be the greatest power in the world; she will dominate the world markets, and Germany will be a rich nation. To attain this goal risks must be taken.”
Does that sound like a defensive German Air Force? Does it?
MILCH: No, that certainly does not sound like it. I should like to be allowed to say something to that, when you have finished.
MR. ROBERTS: Please limit yourself, if you can, in the interest of time, to answering my question, which is very short. Now may I read you one further piece of evidence; the speech made by Göring on 14 October 1938, that is less than a month after the Munich Pact.
“Hitler has ordered me to organize a gigantic armament program, which would make all previous achievements appear insignificant. I have been ordered to build as rapidly as possible an air force five times as large as the present one.”
Does that sound like an air force for defensive purposes?
MILCH: This air force would have taken many years to build.
MR. ROBERTS: I suggest to you that your evidence on that point was grossly incorrect. I now want to come to my second point. You were present at the conference of chiefs of the services in the Chancellery on 23 May 1939?
MILCH: What was the date please?
MR. ROBERTS: I would like you to see the document, which is L-79. You did see it on Friday, I think.
MILCH: On 23 May, was it not?
MR. ROBERTS: Yes, that is right. I just want to remind you who else was present. There were the Führer, Göring, Raeder, Von Brauchitsch, Keitel, yourself, Halder, General Bodenschatz, Warlimont—was Warlimont the deputy for Jodl?
MILCH: I cannot say for whom he was there.
MR. ROBERTS: Very well—and others; I will not mention the names. Now, Witness, those were leaders of the German Armed Forces?
MILCH: May I say, as far as I can remember Field Marshal Göring was not present. I cannot remember.
MR. ROBERTS: He is down there as being present. You think he was not there?
MILCH: Yes. I cannot remember, but to my recollection I was sent there at the last moment to represent him.
MR. ROBERTS: Well, then, apart from Göring, if he was not there, those were mostly the leaders of the German forces, is that right?
MILCH: Yes. It was the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, and the OKW, yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Would you describe them, from your knowledge of them, as men of honor?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Is it one of the qualities of a man of honor that he keeps his word?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: You knew, of course, did you not, that Germany had pledged her word to respect the neutrality of Belgium, of the Netherlands, and Luxembourg?
MILCH: I suppose so, but I did not know the various agreements.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you not know that less than a month before that meeting, namely on the 28th of April, Hitler in the Reichstag gave an assurance of his respect for the neutrality of a large number of countries, European countries, including the three I have mentioned? Did you not know that as a matter of history?
MILCH: I suppose so, yes.
MR. ROBERTS: We have seen the film, you know, in this Court, of that very occurrence with the Defendant Göring presiding as President of the Reichstag while that assurance was given.
MILCH: I have not seen the film. I do not know the film.
MR. ROBERTS: Yes. It is a German newsreel. Do you remember that at that conference Hitler said these words, which are well known to the Tribunal:
“The Dutch and Belgian air bases must be occupied by the Armed Forces. Declarations of neutrality must be ignored. . . . An effort must be made to deal the enemy a heavy or decisive final blow right at the start. Considerations of right or wrong, or treaties, do not enter into the matter.”
Do you remember those words being said?
MILCH: I cannot remember exactly what the words were. I know that it was a question of the Polish Corridor and Danzig, that in this connection Hitler explained what complications might follow in the West, and what he intended to do about it; but what he said in detail I can no longer remember.
MR. ROBERTS: Was any protest made by any of these honorable men at the breach of Germany’s pledged word?
MILCH: During this meeting it was impossible for anyone present to speak at all. Hitler addressed us from his desk, and after the speech he left the room. A discussion did not take place; he did not allow it.
MR. ROBERTS: You say it is impossible for an honorable man to protect his honor, Witness?
MILCH: I cannot remember Hitler’s actual words shown here.
MR. ROBERTS: Can you give the Tribunal your opinion of it?
MILCH: At this meeting I did not have the impression that Hitler said anything contrary to the obligations entered into. That I cannot remember.
MR. ROBERTS: Are you now saying that those minutes are wrong?
MILCH: No, I cannot say that either. I can only say I have no recollection of the exact words used. Whether the minutes are completely correct I do not know either. As far as I know they were recorded subsequently by one of the adjutants present.
MR. ROBERTS: Because we know that is exactly what Germany did 12 months after, when she broke her pledged word to Belgium, to the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, and brought misery and death to millions. You know that now, do you not?
MILCH: That I know, yes; but as soldiers we had nothing to do with the political side. We were not asked about that.
MR. ROBERTS: Do you call the honoring of . . .
DR. RUDOLPH DIX (Counsel for the Defendant Schacht): I do not speak now for the Defendant Schacht, but for the entire Defense. I ask the Tribunal that the witness be questioned about facts, and not about his opinion as to moral standards.
THE PRESIDENT: He is being asked about facts.
MR. ROBERTS: You have just said that you know now—we know, that 12 months later Germany did violate the neutrality of Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg.
MILCH: But we do not know what the reasons were for this, and what other obligations these countries might have entered into. It was not a job of the soldiers to judge this.
MR. ROBERTS: Was it not a job of the soldier to object if he was asked to break his country’s word?
MILCH: I fully agree with you, if a soldier breaks his word in matters which are his province and where he has a say as a soldier. As regards matters quite outside his province, which he cannot judge and about which he knows nothing, he cannot be made responsible and called to account.
MR. ROBERTS: You can only speak for your own knowledge. Are you saying that you did not know that your country was pledged to observe the neutrality of these three small countries?
MILCH: That I have read in the Reichstag speech. But I did not know how the other side had reacted to that promise. It was not known to me, and it could easily be that the other side did not at all want this protection, or this promise, or this guarantee. The soldier could not judge this at all; only the political authorities could know this.
MR. ROBERTS: Well, we perhaps will have to ask that of the soldiers in the High Command, who are now in the dock, when they get in the witness box. But I put it to you it must have been common knowledge in Germany that Hitler was giving guarantees and assurances to all these smaller countries?
MILCH: Hitler proposed and offered many things. He offered limitations of armaments for all countries; he offered not to use bombers; but in these cases also his proposals were not accepted. Therefore the political authorities alone could know what they should and could demand from their soldiers. The only duty of a soldier is to obey.
MR. ROBERTS: Will you please answer my question. That was not an answer at all to my question. We know the facts now, Witness, from the documents, from your own German documents. I want to test your knowledge and your ideas of honor. Did you not think it grossly dishonorable to give a pledge on 28 April, and to make secret resolution to break it on 23 May?
MILCH: You are right, if the situation had not changed in any way, and that I cannot judge.
MR. ROBERTS: You must have your own code of honor, even though you are in the service. You know, of course, that the neutrality of Norway was violated?
MILCH: Yes, according to our knowledge and in our opinion it was violated twice.
MR. ROBERTS: Do you know that on the 12th and 13th of March 1940 Jodl was putting in his diary, “The Führer is still looking for a pretext” to give out to the world for an invasion of Norway? Do you know that?
MILCH: I do not know this diary and this entry.
MR. ROBERTS: You took an active part in the invasion of Norway, did you not?
MILCH: A few days after the invasion started I was in command of the air force up there for a short time.
MR. ROBERTS: You had actually a command in Norway?
MILCH: Yes.
DR. JAHRREISS: I think it necessary to clear up a point which apparently concerns a misunderstanding by the interpreter. I have just heard that a diary entry by the Defendant Jodl has been wrongly translated back into German. The German text says “nach einer Begründung,” that is “for a justification.” I also believe the word “justification” is in the English translation. It should not have been interpreted as “Ausrede,” that would be “prétexte” in French and that is something quite different.
MR. ROBERTS: Whatever it reads in the translation, Witness, would you agree that according to the entry in the diary, the Führer was still looking for it, whether it was a reason or an excuse?
Now I want to ask you only one more question on this side of the case.
You know that Belgrade was bombed in, I think, April 1941?
MILCH: I heard about that from the Army report at the time.
MR. ROBERTS: Without any declaration of war, or any warning to the civilian population at all, you heard that?
MILCH: That I do not know, no.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you not discuss it with Göring?
MILCH: The attack on Belgrade? No; I cannot remember.
MR. ROBERTS: Did not even he express regret, shall we say, regarding the large-scale bombing of a large capital without even one hour warning to the civilian population?
MILCH: I do not know. I cannot remember any such conversation.
MR. ROBERTS: That is murder, is it not?
[There was no response.]
MR. ROBERTS: Perhaps you would rather not answer that question?
MILCH: I cannot answer “yes” or “no,” because I know nothing of the circumstances of the attack. I do not know whether war had been declared; I do not know whether a warning had been given. Neither do I know whether Belgrade was a fortress, nor which targets were attacked in Belgrade. I know of so many bombing attacks about which the same questions could be asked in the same manner.
MR. ROBERTS: I asked the question, Witness, because we had the use of the document in front of us, and knew that it was Hitler’s order that Belgrade was to be suddenly destroyed by waves of bombers, without any ultimatum, or any diplomatic arguments, or negotiations at all. Would I put that question if I had not known of the document? Let me turn to something else.
MILCH: May I say I have heard of this document only today because you quoted it.
MR. ROBERTS: I want to put to you now an incident with regard to the Camp Stalag Luft III at Sagan. Do you know about what I am talking?
MILCH: Yes, I know about that now.
MR. ROBERTS: Do you know that on 24 and 25 March 1944 about 80 air force officers, British and Dominion, with some others, escaped from the Stalag Luft III Camp?
MILCH: I know about this from the British interrogation camp in which I was kept, where the whole case was posted up on the wall.
MR. ROBERTS: We will come to that in a moment. Do you know that of those 80, 50 were shot?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: In various parts of Germany and the occupied countries from Danzig to Saarbrücken; you have heard of that?
MILCH: I heard that about 50 were shot, but did not know where.
MR. ROBERTS: Have you heard that quite unusually the bodies were never seen again, but that urns said to contain their ashes were brought back to the camp; you heard of that?
MILCH: I heard of it in the camp where I was kept, from Mr. Anthony Eden’s speech in the House of Commons.
MR. ROBERTS: You heard that although these officers were reported by your Government as having been shot while offering resistance or trying to escape, yet not one was wounded, and all 50 were shot dead.
MILCH: At first I heard only the official report in Germany, that these officers had been shot while resisting or trying to escape. We did not believe this version, and there was a lot of discussion about this without precise knowledge. We were afraid that these men might have been murdered.
MR. ROBERTS: You were afraid that murder had been committed. It does appear likely, does it not?
MILCH: We got that impression, as the various details we heard could not be pieced together.
MR. ROBERTS: It is quite clear that if that was murder, the order for that murder would have to come from a high level, is it not?
MILCH: Certainly. I heard further details about this from the Inspector General for Prisoners of War, General Westhoff, while both of us were in captivity in England.
MR. ROBERTS: Now, I want to ask you, first of all, about the Prisoner-of-War Organization. Was the Prisoner-of-War Organization a department of the OKW?
MILCH: In my opinion, yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Which was called KGW, Kriegsgefangenenwesen?
MILCH: I cannot say anything about its organization, because I do not know. I only knew that there was a chief of the Kriegsgefangenenwesen with the OKW.
MR. ROBERTS: And was the chief of the Kriegsgefangenenwesen at that time Major General Von Graevenitz?
MILCH: Von Graevenitz, yes.
MR. ROBERTS: This was an air force camp? Stalag Luft III was an air force camp?
MILCH: Yes. So it was called, but I understand that all prisoners were under the OKW. That is what I thought. I cannot, however, state this definitely because I did not know much about that organization.
MR. ROBERTS: Was the directorate for supervising the air force camps, or the inspectorate, rather, called Inspectorate Number 17?
MILCH: There was an inspectorate, which as its name indicated had to deal with supervision. What it had to do and what were its tasks, I cannot say. Whether it was just for interrogation, I do not know.
MR. ROBERTS: Was the head of that Major General Grosch?
MILCH: I cannot say, it is possible, I know the name but not whether he held that post.
MR. ROBERTS: And the second in command, Colonel Waelde?
MILCH: Not known to me.
MR. ROBERTS: You were Number 2 in the Air Force at the Air Ministry in March 1944, were you not?
MILCH: There were several Number 2 people at that time. I held the same rank as the chief of the general staff, the chief of the personnel office, and the chief of technical armament, who were independent of me and on the same level. As to seniority, I ranked as second officer in the Air Force.
MR. ROBERTS: Was there a conference in Berlin on the morning of Saturday, the 25th of March, about this escape?
MILCH: I cannot remember.
MR. ROBERTS: Did not Göring speak to you about that conference?
MILCH: I have no recollection.
MR. ROBERTS: Did Göring never tell you that there was a conference between Hitler, Himmler, himself, and Keitel on that Saturday morning?
MILCH: No. I do not know anything about that. I do not remember.
MR. ROBERTS: At which the order for the murder of these recaptured prisoners of war was given?
MILCH: I cannot remember. According to what I heard later, the circumstances were entirely different. I had information about this from the previously mentioned General Westhoff and also from General Bodenschatz.
MR. ROBERTS: General Westhoff we are going to see here as a witness. He has made a statement about the matter saying . . .
MILCH: I beg your pardon. I could not hear you just now. The German is coming through very faintly. I can hear you, but not the German transmission.
MR. ROBERTS: General Westhoff . . .
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: . . . has made a statement . . .
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: . . . and we are going to see him as a witness.
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: So perhaps I had better not put his statement to you, because he is going to give evidence. Perhaps that would be fairer from the point of view of the Defense. But are you suggesting that action against these officers, if they were murdered—to use your words—having escaped from an air force camp, that action could have been taken without the knowledge of Göring?
MILCH: I consider it quite possible in view of the great confusion existing in the highest circles at that time.
MR. ROBERTS: High confusion in March 1944?
MILCH: All through there was terrible confusion.
MR. ROBERTS: But it is quite clear . . .
MILCH: Hitler interfered in all matters, and himself gave orders over the heads of the chiefs of the Wehrmacht.
MR. ROBERTS: But did you never discuss this matter with Göring at all?
MILCH: No. I cannot remember ever speaking to Göring about this question.
MR. ROBERTS: Do you not think this is a matter which reflects shame on the Armed Forces of Germany?
MILCH: Yes; that is a great shame.
MR. ROBERTS: Yet Göring never spoke to you about it at all? Did you ever speak to Keitel?
MILCH: I could not say. During that time I hardly ever saw Göring.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you ever speak to Keitel about it?
MILCH: No, never. I saw even less of Keitel than of Göring.
MR. ROBERTS: Was there not a General Foster or Foerster at the Air Ministry?
MILCH: Yes, there was.
MR. ROBERTS: General Foerster?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Was he director of operations?
MILCH: No. He was chief of the Luftwehr. As such he had to deal with replacements of personnel and he worked with the departments concerned, with the General Staff, and also the Reich Marshal. During the war he was also in charge of civil aviation, and in that capacity he worked together with me, but during the war it was a very small job . . .
MR. ROBERTS: I was going to ask you, did he ever mention this shooting to you?
MILCH: I have been asked that before, but try as I may I cannot remember. It is possible that in the course of conversation he may have told me that officers had been shot, but whether he did so, and in what way, under what circumstances, I cannot recollect. I did not receive an official report from him; I had no right to ask for one either.
MR. ROBERTS: If Foerster told you, did you ever report it to Göring?
MILCH: I cannot remember a conversation with Foerster about it: I do not think I spoke to him. He did not give me a report either, which I should have had to pass on to Göring. Such a report would have been given by him to Göring direct, through quite different channels and much quicker.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you take any steps to prevent this shooting from being carried out?
MILCH: When I first heard about it it was not clear to me what had actually happened. But even if it had been clear, it was evident from what Westhoff told me that it would unfortunately have been too late.
MR. ROBERTS: Why too late?
MILCH: Because Westhoff was the first officer to have knowledge of it. When he was informed he was told that the order had already been carried out. I may say that General Westhoff made this statement and will confirm it.
MR. ROBERTS: Very well, you never went to Göring at all in the matter, as you say.
MILCH: I do not know anything about it.
MR. ROBERTS: Now I am going to deal further with three short points. With regard to the use of labor for the armament industry, Mr. Justice Jackson has asked you questions on that. Was labor from concentration camps used?
MILCH: Yes.
MR. ROBERTS: Would you just look at Document Number 1584-PS: That is shorthand note 1357, 12 December, in the afternoon.
Is that a teletype from Göring to Himmler, dated 14 February 1944? There are various code numbers; then, to Reichsführer SS—that was Himmler, Reichsminister Himmler. Who actually sent that teletype? It is signed by Göring, but he would not be dealing with questions of labor, would he?
MILCH: I could not say, I could not say from whom it originated.
MR. ROBERTS: That was a subject with which you dealt, was it not, the provision of labor for air armament?
MILCH: Only while I had to do with air armament did I send demands for labor to the respective offices. But this telegram did not come from my office.
MR. ROBERTS: If it did not come from your office, whose office did it come from?
MILCH: It deals with various matters, there is first the question of another squadron.
MR. ROBERTS: Please answer the question, whose office did it come from?
MILCH: I cannot say that offhand.
MR. ROBERTS: Very well.
MILCH: I do not know.
MR. ROBERTS: Second sentence: “At the same time I request that a substantial number of concentration camp prisoners be put at my disposal for air armament, as this kind of labor has proved to be very useful.” You had frequently used concentration camp labor, had you?
MILCH: Latterly, yes. May I ask, is the teletype dated the 15th and what is the month?
MR. ROBERTS: Yes, I told you, Witness, 14 February 1944. It is on the top.
MILCH: Yes, I could not read it here.
MR. ROBERTS: No, I quite understand. And did Himmler respond by providing you with 90,000 further concentration camp prisoners? I refer to Document 1584-PS, Number 3, dated 9 March 1944. It is to the “Most Honored Reich Marshal” from Heinrich Himmler. It says: “At present approximately 36,000 prisoners are employed for the Air Force. It is proposed to bring the number up to 90,000.”
Then he refers in the last paragraph: “The transfer of aircraft manufacturing plants underground requires a further 100,000 prisoners.”
Now, those were concentration camp internees, Witness?
MILCH: Yes; I see that from the letter.
MR. ROBERTS: You said you were almost ignorant of the conditions in concentration camps?
MILCH: No; I do not know anything about that.
MR. ROBERTS: You have not seen the films taken when the camps were captured?
MILCH: No.
MR. ROBERTS: The grim contrast—just wait a moment—the grim contrast between the plump and well-fed guards and civilians and the skeletons of the internees?
MILCH: I have not seen the film, but I saw photographs when I was in England.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you close your eyes deliberately to what was going on in Germany?
MILCH: No, it was not possible for us to see it.
MR. ROBERTS: You, in your position, could not know what was going on?
MILCH: It was absolutely impossible.
MR. ROBERTS: Now then, I just want to deal very shortly with a matter upon which Mr. Justice Jackson touched, but he did not read the letter. That is the question of the experiments for the purpose of Air Force research. I am anxious to refer to as few documents as possible, but I can give the reference.
Do you know that on 15 May 1941, and the reference is shorthand note 1848, Document Number 1602-PS, that Dr. Rascher wrote to Himmler?
MILCH: I did not know him. I think I mentioned that during my interrogation.
MR. ROBERTS: He had very dangerous experiments to make for which no human being would volunteer. Monkeys were not suitable, so he asked for human subjects which Himmler at once provided—said he would be glad to provide human subjects for the experiment. Now, that was in 1941. Did you know that was taking place?
MILCH: No, I did not know anything about that.
MR. ROBERTS: Now, Rascher was . . .
MILCH: I did not know Rascher personally.
MR. ROBERTS: He was a doctor on the staff of the Air Force.
THE PRESIDENT: But, Mr. Roberts, this is not a letter to this witness, is it?
MR. ROBERTS: My Lord, I am leading up to it. The next letter is a letter signed by this witness. That was preliminary. Perhaps I had better come to the letter which he signed now; I am much obliged.
I want to put to you now Document Number 343-PS, and I also want to put to you, if the officer in charge of the documents would be so good, I want to put to you Document Number 607-PS.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Roberts, he has already been cross-examined upon this letter, has he not?
MR. ROBERTS: I did not think the letter was read or was dealt with sufficiently. I believe Your Lordship thinks it was.
THE PRESIDENT: The letter was put to him. I do not know whether it was actually read.
MR. ROBERTS: I shall be guided by the Court entirely. I know the matter was touched upon. I felt perhaps the letter should be read but I may be quite wrong.
THE PRESIDENT: I am told it was not read but the two letters were put to him.
MR. ROBERTS: I agree. If Your Lordship would be good enough to bear with me for a very few minutes I can perhaps deal with the matters I think should be dealt with.
[Turning to the witness.] You will see that on the 20th of May 1942—this is your letter to “Wolffy,” is it not, that is Obergruppenführer Wolff, and that is signed by you is it not?
MILCH: Yes, I signed it. That is the letter which, as I said this morning was submitted to me by the Medical Inspection department and from which it appears that we wanted to dissociate ourselves from the whole business as politely as possible.
MR. ROBERTS: The point of the letter is, if I may summarize it, that you say: “In reference to your telegram of 12 May our Medical Inspection department . . .”
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Roberts, if I remember right, when these letters were put to the witness he said he had not read them; that he signed them without reading them.
MR. ROBERTS: Well, My Lord, perhaps I had better leave the matter if Your Lordship thinks I am going over ground which has been trodden too often.
[Turning to the witness.] Are you asking this Tribunal to believe that you signed these two letters to Wolff, who was liaison officer, was he not, between—who was Wolff?
MILCH: No, Wolff was not liaison officer, he was Himmler’s adjutant. He sent a telegram to us, apparently for the attention of the Medical Inspection department. The Medical Inspection department replied via my office because for some reason or other it did not appear expedient to reply direct. I stated in my interrogations that these letters, though signed by me, were not dictated in my office, but that for this reply from the Medical Inspection department my stationery was used as was customary. I had nothing to do either with our high altitude experiments or with the Medical Inspection department, nor was I in any way connected with experiments by the SS.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you know that these pressure chamber experiments were being carried out with human bodies, human souls, provided by Dachau?
MILCH: On whom they were made appears from the letter submitted to me by the Medical Inspection department. In the Air Force we made many experiments with our own medical officers who volunteered for it; and as we did it with our own people we considered it to be our own affair. We, therefore, did not want any experiments by the SS; we were not interested in them. We had for a very long time experimented with our own people. We did not need the SS, who interfered in a matter which did not concern them; and we could never understand why the SS meddled with this matter.
MR. ROBERTS: Did not Himmler write you a letter—the reference is shorthand note 1852—in November 1942, that is Document Number 1617-PS, in which he says: “Dear Milch: . . . both high pressure and cold water experiments have been carried out. . . .” and that he, Himmler, provided asocial persons and criminals from concentration camps? Do you remember that letter?
MILCH: This letter was shown to me but I cannot remember this letter either. I do not know why Himmler wrote to me at all. These letters were always passed on direct by my office, without my seeing them, to the respective offices of the Medical Inspection department and replied to via my office. I was not in a position to do anything in this respect because I did not know what it was all about, nor had I any idea of the medical aspect.
MR. ROBERTS: If you say you know nothing about letters which you signed I cannot carry the matter any further.
Now I want to deal with the last point.
MILCH: During the course of the day I had to sign several hundred letters and I could not know what they dealt with in detail. In this particular case it was a question for a specialist and I merely signed in order to relieve the Medical Inspector of responsibility who, for the reason mentioned this morning, did not want to sign himself.
MR. ROBERTS: Very well, I am leaving that point.
Now then, the last point. You said on Friday that a German general has been executed for looting jewelry. Where did the looting take place?
MILCH: I cannot say that. I seem to recollect that it was in Belgrade. The name of the general is General Wafer, this I still remember.
MR. ROBERTS: It was jewelry looted from Belgrade?
MILCH: That I cannot say. I know only what I said on Friday.
MR. ROBERTS: So the German authorities regarded the death penalty as a suitable one for looting; apparently that is right.
MILCH: I could not hear the question.
MR. ROBERTS: Well, perhaps it was a comment. I will ask you the next question. What was the value of the jewelry which was looted?
MILCH: I can say only that I do not know how it was stolen, or what was stolen, or how valuable it was; but only that it was said to be jewelry which he had appropriated and that he was sentenced to death.
MR. ROBERTS: Did Göring ever speak to you about his art collection he was getting from occupied countries?
MILCH: I do not know anything about that.
MR. ROBERTS: May I read you a piece of evidence, shorthand note 2317, and it is an order of Göring signed on the 5th of November 1940.
“Göring to the Chief of the Military Administration in Paris and to the Einsatzstab Rosenberg:
“To dispose of the art objects brought to the Louvre in the following order of priority:
“First, those art objects . . .”
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Roberts, he has never seen this document and he says he knows nothing about it.
MR. ROBERTS: If your Lordship pleases, if you do not think I should put it to him . . .
[Turning to the witness.] You say Göring never discussed with you his art collection?
MILCH: No.
MR. ROBERTS: Did you not know that valuable art objects, according to an inventory over 21,000 objects, were taken from the western occupied countries?
MILCH: No; that is not known to me.
MR. ROBERTS: What ought the general who looted the jewelry, perhaps from Belgrade, to have done with it? Given it to the Führer, or given it to Göring?
MILCH: I ask to be excused from answering this question.
GEN. RUDENKO: Will you please tell me when you heard of Hitler’s plan to go to war with the Soviet Union? In January 1941?
MILCH: As I said on Friday, I heard in January from Reich Marshal Göring that Hitler had told him he expected there would be an attack on Russia. Then for several months I heard nothing more about the whole thing, until by chance I found out from a subordinate that war with Russia was imminent and preparations for the clothing of the troops were being made.
GEN. RUDENKO: Did you know about Case Barbarossa?
MILCH: I had heard the name, and I heard the plan expounded at a Führer conference with the commanders of the various army groups and armies 1 or 2 days before the attack.
GEN. RUDENKO: And when did this take place—1, 2 days before the invasion?
MILCH: I will let you know the exact date in a minute.
GEN. RUDENKO: Please do.
MILCH: On 14 June. That is about eight days before the attack which took place on the 22d.
GEN. RUDENKO: And before that, you had neither heard of, nor seen this plan?
MILCH: I say that I had probably heard the name Barbarossa before.
GEN. RUDENKO: And how long before?
MILCH: That I cannot say, because during the months of January, February, March, and also in April I was outside Germany and I did not return until May. I was in Africa, Greece, Yugoslavia, and the West.
GEN. RUDENKO: I am interested in the period when you were in the High Command of the German Air Force. Were you in Germany in December and January?
MILCH: In December 1940.
GEN. RUDENKO: So?
MILCH: Only part of December as during that month I was in France and also in Italy.
GEN. RUDENKO: And where were you in January 1941?
MILCH: I was in the West, and as far as I remember not one day in Germany.
GEN. RUDENKO: But you just told us that in January 1941 you had a talk with Göring about the plan of war against the Soviet Union.
MILCH: Yes, I . . .
GEN. RUDENKO: In January 1941?
MILCH: Yes, on 13 January, but I cannot say now whether I spoke to Göring in France, or whether it was over the telephone, or whether I was in Germany for a day or two. That I cannot say, I did not make a note of it.
GEN. RUDENKO: Excuse me; what has a telephone conversation to do with an attack on the Soviet Union?
MILCH: Not an attack on Russia, but an attack by Russia on Germany was mentioned at that time, and we had . . .
GEN. RUDENKO: You mean to say you discussed over the telephone the question of an attack by the Soviet Union on Germany?
MILCH: No, I have not stated anything like that, but I said I do not know whether I received the information on a special line which could not be tapped, or whether the Reich Marshal told me about it in France, or whether on that particular day I was in Germany.
GEN. RUDENKO: And when did you discuss this question with Göring, and when did Göring express his apprehension as to this war against the Soviet Union?
MILCH: That was on 22 May.
GEN. RUDENKO: The 22nd of May 1941?
MILCH: 1941, yes.
GEN. RUDENKO: And where was this question discussed?
MILCH: In Veldenstein near Nuremberg.
GEN. RUDENKO: Did you discuss this question with Göring alone, or was anybody else present at this conversation?
MILCH: At that time only with Göring. We were alone.
GEN. RUDENKO: And you assert that Göring did not wish to go to war with Russia?
MILCH: That was my impression.
GEN. RUDENKO: So. And why did Göring not want this war against the Soviet Union? This was a defensive war, was it not?
MILCH: Göring was opposed to such a war, because he wanted, all of us did . . .
GEN. RUDENKO: He was opposed also to a defensive war?
MILCH: He personally was against any war.
GEN. RUDENKO: That is strange. Maybe you will be able to give me precise reasons why Göring did not wish war against the Soviet Union.
MILCH: Because a war on two fronts, especially a war against Russia, as I saw it, meant losing the war; and I believe that many fighting men and others thought as I did.
GEN. RUDENKO: So you too were opposed to a war against the Soviet Union?
MILCH: Yes, most definitely so.
GEN. RUDENKO: Strange. Your statements are not very consistent. On the one hand, you say that the Soviet Union was going to attack Germany, and on the other hand that German officers did not want a war with the Soviet Union.
MILCH: May I explain again. On 13 January Göring told me that Hitler had the impression that Russia intended to march against Germany. That was not Göring’s opinion, neither was it mine. I assume it was Hitler’s opinion which he had expressed as his own.
GEN. RUDENKO: Excuse me. Do I understand that neither you nor Göring thought this opinion of Hitler’s to be correct?
MILCH: I can only speak for myself. I often expressed it as my view that Russia would not go against us. What Göring thought about it I could not say. He did not talk to me about it. You should ask him.
GEN. RUDENKO: Yes, and now I shall ask you. You mean to say that you personally did not share Hitler’s opinion? And you mean that Göring, too, did not want a war against the Soviet Union?
MILCH: On 22 May, when I spoke to Göring about this matter and urgently requested him to do everything to prevent a war with Russia, he told me that he had used the same arguments with Hitler but that it was impossible to get Hitler to change his mind; he had made his decision and no power on earth could influence him.
GEN. RUDENKO: I see. You mean that Göring was opposed to a war with the Soviet Union, because he thought it impracticable while you were at war with England, and he wanted to prevent war on two fronts?
MILCH: From a purely military point of view, yes; and I believe that if war had been avoided at that time it would not have come about later.
GEN. RUDENKO: And you seriously maintain that it is possible to talk about a preventive war so far ahead, and at the same time to work out Case Barbarossa and all the directives to implement it, as well as gaining allies for the attack on Russia? Do you seriously believe in the preventive character of such a war?
MILCH: I do not understand the meaning of the question.
GEN. RUDENKO: Do you think one could make known that the Soviet Union was going to attack Germany, and at the same time work out an aggressive plan against the Soviet Union, and this as early as December 1940, as appears from the dates of the official documents?
MILCH: As I understand it, Hitler, expecting an attack by Russia—if he really expected it—said that he had to meet a Russian invasion by a preventive war. This, however, has nothing to do with the opinion for which I have been asked here. Speaking for myself, I did not unreservedly hold the view that Russia would invade us. Without being able to judge the situation as a whole, I personally believed that Russia in her own interest, which I tried to visualize, would not do this.
GEN. RUDENKO: I understand. I should like to put a few questions to you with regard to the prisoners of war. The employment of prisoners of war, especially from the Soviet Union, on work in the aircraft industry has already been mentioned here.
MILCH: Yes.
GEN. RUDENKO: What is your attitude to employing prisoners of war on work against their own country? What do you think of that?
MILCH: It is, of course, not a nice thing to do; but as far as I know it was also done to our prisoners of war by all the other countries.
GEN. RUDENKO: I am talking of Germany now. You say it is not a nice thing. Is not that a rather mild way of putting it?
MILCH: It depends upon what the others do. All laws of warfare are based on reciprocity, as long as there is any reciprocity.
GEN. RUDENKO: I should like you to answer my question. What was the German High Command’s attitude to this kind of employment? Do you consider that by this employment the regulations of international law were being violated?
MILCH: That is a moot point which even now is not clear to me. I only know that orders were given to employ them, and to use these men, as well as women, in the struggle for our existence.
GEN. RUDENKO: Do you consider this to be a legitimate order?
MILCH: I cannot judge that; that depends upon conditions and, as I said, upon reciprocity.
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, I ask to have this question and answer stricken from the record. The witness has been asked to give a legal opinion, and it is not for him to do so; since the question is not admissible, the answer too should be stricken.
THE PRESIDENT: General Rudenko?
GEN. RUDENKO: I should like to say I did not realize that the witness did not know whether or not this was a violation of international law. I had every reason to believe that the witness was competent to answer this question, the more so as at the beginning of his statement today, and on Friday, he mentioned the ten rules of the soldier, which he said must not be broken as they were based on international law. I thought, therefore, the witness to be competent to answer the question concerning the use of prisoners of war by the Luftwaffe against their own country. If the Tribunal considers this question to be inadmissible, I will of course withdraw it.
THE PRESIDENT: The question might have been framed differently, as to whether it was not a breach of the rules set out in the soldiers’ pay book. However, as to international law, that is one of the matters which the Tribunal has got to decide, and upon that, of course, we do not wish the evidence of witnesses.
GEN. RUDENKO: Yes. I still have two questions to put to this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: We wanted to rise at half-past 4. If it is your intention to ask some more questions, perhaps we had better rise now, or, have you finished?
GEN. RUDENKO: We had better call a recess now, because I may still have a few questions to put to this witness.
[The Tribunal adjourned until 12 March 1946 at 1000 hours.]