Chapter M: HERZOG: First, I read Page 7 of the French text and of the German

text:

“Gauleiter Sauckel demands a further 250,000 new workers.
Gauleiter Sauckel knows very well—and his offices have
certainly informed him about this—the difficulties which the
French Government had in carrying out the program last year. The
Gauleiter must realize that as a result of the number of
prisoners of war and workers who are already employed by
Germany, the sending of another 250,000 workers will increase
even further the difficulties of the French Government. I cannot
conceal these difficulties from the Gauleiter, because they are
evident; and the Germans who are in Paris know these
difficulties. When the Gauleiter replies that they have had to
overcome the same difficulties in Germany and when he even
states that French industry must be expanded, it seems to me
that I must remind him that Germany not only demands workers of
France, but is also beginning to take away the machines from
factories in order to transport them to Germany. France may have
nothing left, but until now she still had her means of
production. If these too are taken from her, France loses even
her possibilities for working.

“I do everything to facilitate a German victory”—and you see
Laval could hardly be suspect to you, Defendant—“but I must
admit that German policy makes heavier demands on me nearly
every day and these demands do not conform to a definite policy.
Gauleiter Sauckel can tell the German workers that they are
working for Germany. I cannot say that Frenchmen are working for
France.

“I see that in many fields the French Government is not able to
act. One would almost believe that on the German side they set
no value on the good will of the French and that they are bent
on instituting a German administration throughout France. My
task is being made more difficult every day. It is true that I
do not allow myself to be discouraged; but I consider, however,
that it is my duty to remind the Gauleiter of the gravity of
Franco-German relations and of the impossibility of continuing
along this path. It is no longer a matter of a policy of
collaboration; rather, it is on the French side a policy of
sacrifice, and on the German side a policy of coercion.”

I pass to the next page, Page 11:

“The present state of mind in France, the uncertainty concerning
the means which the French Government possesses, the
half-freedom in which it finds itself, all these do not give me
the necessary authority to furnish Gauleiter Sauckel with an
immediate reply. We can do nothing. We are not free to change
salaries; we are not free even to combat the black market; we
cannot take any political measure without everywhere coming up
against some German authority which has substituted itself in
our place.

“I cannot guarantee measures which I do not take myself. I am
persuaded that the Führer is unaware that the French Government
cannot act. There cannot be in one country two governments on
questions which do not concern directly the security of the
occupation forces.”

I skip two more pages, to Page 18; and I read only this sentence:

“It is not possible for me to be a mere agent for German
measures of coercion.”

That is the document which I submit to you, Defendant, and I ask you two questions concerning it.

The first question is: What did you answer to Laval when he made this statement to you?

The second one is: Do you not think that here there is proof of the pressure which you dispute?

SAUCKEL: To begin with, if the Tribunal would permit it, I should have to read my reply to Premier Laval. The document proves, and this has been confirmed to me by Premier Laval on various occasions, that I conducted my negotiations with him in a proper manner; and in spite of the fact that I had orders not to conduct political conversations but only to deal with my actual task, I always reported to the Führer about these matters. But I think that the tone of my reply was definitely beyond reproach. These negotiations which I conducted...

M. HERZOG: That is not the question that I asked you. I asked you what you answered him when he made that statement to you, when he said to you, for instance, that it was not possible for him to be a mere agent for German measures of coercion.

SAUCKEL: I would have to read my answer. I cannot remember it now.

M. HERZOG: Do you therefore dispute the fact that this represents pressure?

SAUCKEL: Premier Laval did not complain about me in this connection. He complained about general conditions in France, because this was the time of occupation. The situation was that there was a German occupation. It was war.

M. HERZOG: Well, I am going to submit to you Document...

DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, regarding this document, I should like to draw your attention to an error of translation which will lead to considerable misunderstanding. According to this document it says that the recruitment could be approached with emphasis and more severe measures, and the word “emphasis” has been translated by “pressure” in the English. But that is not meant. It is not “Druck,” pressure; it is “Nachdruck,” emphasis. That means that the next in authority can be approached with energy.

THE PRESIDENT: I am told that the translation we have got is “emphasis.”

DR. SERVATIUS: “Pressure.”

THE PRESIDENT: I am told the translation is “emphasis.” No, no, the translation is “emphasis.” It is in this document, and the translation in English is “emphasis.”

DR. SERVATIUS: Oh, I had the French translation.

M. HERZOG: I am going to submit to you Document...

THE PRESIDENT: Is this document in the PS series?

M. HERZOG: No, Mr. President, it is a new document which I am submitting now, a French document which will bear Exhibit Number RF-1509 (Document Number F-809).

THE PRESIDENT: Where did this document come from?

M. HERZOG: That document comes, Mr. President, from the archives of the Majestic Hotel in Paris, where the German offices in Paris were located. Some months ago these archives were found again in Berlin, and we have extracted the Sauckel documents.

I submit to the Tribunal the certificate of authentication for the Sauckel files, as well as for the documents which I intend to submit to the Tribunal in the course of my cross-examination. Perhaps, as the document is in French, the Tribunal would like me to read it.

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, read it, will you? You mean this procès-verbal? What is this procès-verbal? Who is it identified by?

M. HERZOG: This procès-verbal is identified by two persons, by Commandant Henri, French liaison officer at the American Documentation Center in Berlin, and by my colleague, M. Gerthoffer, who, with Commandant Henri, took these archives.

THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you had better read this procès-verbal so that it will go into the record.