The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)
Nuremberg, war crimes, crimes against humanity

The Trial of German Major War Criminals

Sitting at Nuremberg, Germany
27th May to 6th June, 1946

One Hundred and Forty-Fourth Day: Saturday, 1st June, 1946
(Part 4 of 7)

[M. HERZOG continues his cross examination of MAX TIMM]

[Page 240]

Q. Thank you. I have one last question to ask you. In this quotation you say, "The Fuehrer has approved." If the Fuehrer approved something, it means that something was suggested to him. Is that not a fact?

A. As far as I can remember, Gauleiter Sauckel always reported the results of his talks in Paris to the Fuehrer. It is possible that he reported to the Fuehrer on the question of recruiting methods, which he had discussed with Laval, and it was customary for him, as I have already said in my testimony, always to make sure of the Fuehrer's approval so that he did not work against the Fuehrer's ideas.

HERZOG: Thank you. I have no more questions.


BY DR. SERVATIUS (for the defendant Sauckel):

Q. Witness, the document which was last submitted to you, L-6I, from Saarland Strasse, is not here in the original, but it contains the words: "Signed Sauckel." The defendant Sauckel has informed me that it is possible he did not sign it himself, but had only been informed in a general way that there were letters about one thing and another - routine office correspondence - and he gave authority for them to be signed. Is that possible?

A. It was like this: the departments in Saarland Strasse -

THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Servatius, did Sauckel state that in evidence, or are you telling us simply what he said to you? Do you remember?

DR. SERVATIUS: I cannot say exactly whether he stated that here.

THE PRESIDENT: Go on then.


Q. Answer the question.

A. Yes, as Sauckel continued to exercise his functions as Gauleiter in Weimar, it sometimes happened that things did not reach him. The sections in Saarland Strasse submitted their drafts to their personal representative in Thuringia House, and I know from my own knowledge of conditions that it is quite possible that the contents of the drafts were transmitted by telephone and that the personal represen tatives were authorized to sign the name of the General Plenipotentiary.

Q. Was the mail so extensive that he did not have any exact knowledge of individual letters?

A. That is hard for me to judge.

Q. That is enough. One more question - Fuehrer, Sauckel, Speer. Is it true that the defendant Sauckel told you that the Fuehrer had ordered him to fulfil all Speer's demands?

A. I do not know if such a direct statement was made.

Q. We have shown you the document in which Laval complains about the conduct of the German agencies. Did this complaint refer to Sauckel's activities, or was it not that he had told Sauckel of these complaints and was thanking him personally for his attitude?

A. I recall from the talks with Laval, that Laval repeatedly expressed his gratitude to Sauckel for the fact that measures, and means for facilitating matters suggested by him, had been put into effect. Laval attached special importance - to use his own expression - to clearing the atmosphere and having talks with Hitler himself as soon as possible; and he asked Sauckel to open the way for him. As far as I know, Sauckel did actually arrange talks of this kind and Laval thanked him for doing so.

DR. SERVATIUS: I have no more questions for this witness.


Q. The job of the GBA was to get workmen to replace the men who had been taken into the army out of industry. That was largely your work, wasn't it?

[Page 241]

A. The task of the GBA was much more comprehensive, since previously all the tasks -

Q. Well, I understand, but that was part of your work, was it not?

A. Yes.

Q. All right. Now, you were therefore told beforehand the number of people that the army was taking out of industry, were you not, so you could make up your estimates?

A. The numbers were adjusted in the Central Planning Board. For that was the task of the Central Planning Board.

Q. Wait a minute. I do not care who examined the figures, but your organization certainly had knowledge of the needs of the army, of the number of people the army was taking out of industry. You had to have that information, did you not?

A. The number of men to be drafted was reported to the Central Planning Board.

Q. All right, reported to the Central Planning Board. Now, then, they were taking people out of industry also who were not needed for the army, were they not? I mean Jews. They were taking Jewish people out of industry, were they not? Sauckel said yesterday that Jewish people were being taken out of industry. You admit that, do you not?

A. Yes. Jews were eliminated from industry.

Q. All right; and I suppose the Central Planning Board were given the number of Jewish people that were taken out of industry, were they not?

A. I do not know that. In the sessions at which I was present -

Q. Do you not assume that that must have been the case if they had to find the number of replacements. It must have been so, must it not?

A. I cannot judge that because I only learned the total number of men to be drafted, but independently of the Jewish question. I will not venture an opinion, I do not know.

Q. Do you not know that Himmler and the SS told the Central Planning Board the number of Jews that were being taken out of industry for whom replacements were needed? You know that as a fact, do you not?

A. No.

Q. You do not?

A. No. I know only that we received certain excerpts from reports from the Reichsfuehrer SS that people were being taken out of industry, and on the objection of the General Plenipotentiary, who was to take care of replacements - I remember that - this measure was cancelled in part.

Q. And you do know that one of the duties of the Reichsfuehrer SS was to withdraw Jews from industry; you know that.

A. I know from excerpts from reports that Jews were to be withdrawn from industry.

THE TRIBUNAL (Mr. Biddle): That is all.

THE PRESIDENT: The witness may retire and the Tribunal will adjourn.

(A recess was taken.)

HUBERT HILDEBRANDT, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:


Q. Will you state your full name.

A. Hubert Hildebrandt.

Q. Will you repeat this oath after me:

I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.

(The witness repeated the oath.)

THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down.

[Page 242]



Q. Witness, you were working in the office of Sauckel, is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. You were subordinate to Timm. What was your special field?

A. In the Reich Ministry of Labour from 1930 I dealt with questions concerning the employment of workers in the iron and metal industry and the chemical and textile industries; and after 1940 I also dealt with questions concerning workers in the West.

Q. Regional questions of the West?

A. Yes, in France, Belgium, and Holland, part of those questions.

Q. You must remember to pause before you answer. Did you have any general information about what happened in Sauckel's office?

A. No, I did not have any.

Q. But you participated in the staff conferences?

A. Yes, mostly I was present.

Q. And in that way you found out, to a certain extent, about what happened in other offices?

A. Yes.

Q. I want to ask you especially about conditions in France. What was the position of the General Plenipotentiary for the Employment of Labour in France?

A. The General Plenipotentiary for the Employment of Labour in France, just as in other occupied countries, had appointed special agents who transmitted his wishes and helped to carry out these wishes and his tasks. The organization of the entire labour forces from the Occupied Western Territories remained in the hands of the German military or civil administrative offices there.

Q. So he did not have an organization of his own?

A. The first agent in France tried to establish an organization of his own, but after. a short time, he met with opposition from the German administrative offices, and the offices which he had established in the meantime were taken over by the military commander.

Q. What was the position of the military commander?

A. The military commander was, and remained responsible for the entire labour assignment in his district, and also for the labour forces sent from his district to Germany.

Q. What was the position of the German Embassy?

A. The German Embassy had the decisive say in all negotiations which were to be carried out by the General Plenipotentiary or his special agents with French Government offices.

Q. What was the position of the French Government as regards the Employment of Labour?

A. The French Government made agreements with the General Plenipotentiary for the carrying out of his programmes and ordered its own offices to carry out certain tasks, especially when compulsory labour was introduced in France. It published the necessary decrees and gave the necessary directives to the subordinate offices.

Q. And who had the executive power to recruit labour? Was that done by the French or the Germans?

A. One must distinguish between two periods. When it was still a question of recruiting volunteers, until the autumn of 1942 these volunteers could report to German offices as well as to French offices, and also to recruiting offices which had been established by German firms and partly by branches of the German armed forces. After the introduction of compulsory labour, the administrative executive for the carrying out of the order rested only with the French offices.

Q. And what happened when somebody did not report?

[Page 243]

A. Then they received a first summons to appear from the French offices and then repeated summonses, and if these proved to be unsuccessful, the French offices called the French police into action.

Q. Were those who did not come brought before the courts?

A. I assume that that may have happened sometimes. I do not know for certain.

Q. German or French courts?

A. French courts, according to French decree.

Q. What was your estimate of the number of voluntary workers who came from France to Germany?

A. The number of voluntary workers from France, until the middle of 1942 - but I can only give approximate figures from memory -

Q. Please, just the approximate figure.

A. Something over 200,000. After the compulsory labour decree had been introduced in the course of 1942, there were still voluntary recruitments as well on a fairly large scale at the same time. The number of volunteers was, at times, considerably larger than the number of labour conscripts, so that, all together, more than half of all the labour recruited in France consisted of volunteers. It is noticeable that women were only recruited if they volunteered. There was no compulsory service for them. With regard to the service liabilities, moreover, it must be pointed out that a large number of them were only formal. In reality, these people had come voluntarily, but for economic reasons or out of consideration for their relatives' and friends in their home towns, they attached importance to being conscripted. We had service liabilities which were only put on an official basis afterwards. Such requests reached the German labour officers, especially during the last months before the end of the war; and the Foreign Office requested the General Plenipotentiary to approve such demands, which was then done.

Q. In your department, did you hear anything about recruiting measures such as the surrounding of churches, cinemas and similar places in France?

A. No, I do not know of any such recruiting measure. I only know that in France as well as in Belgium, identity papers were controlled amongst members of those age-groups which had been called up to register.

[ Previous | Index | Next ]

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.