4000bce - 399
400 - 1399
1400 - 1499
1500 - 1599
1600 - 1699
1700 - 1799
1800 - 1899
1900 - 1999
MR. DODD: Mr, President, I would like to be heard very briefly this morning on the application of Dr. Stahmer for permission for the Defendant Göring to take the stand. I made no objections Friday, but I feel that I should make one so that the Tribunal will know what our attitude is.
I do not want it to be understood that I am in any conflict with my distinguished colleague, Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, but I do wish to add a few comments on behalf of the United States.
I would like to point out to the Tribunal that the reasons given by Dr. Stahmer, as we understand them, are the evidence or the testimony of the witness Sievers and the document which was offered during his examination, wherein there is some indication that the Defendant Göring had authorized or ordered a Dr. Haagen to institute these medical experiments.
Now, it seems to me that the reasons which I called to the Tribunal's attention at the time of the Funk application apply here. Of course, I accept the ruling of the Tribunal with respect to the Funk application with good grace. I do not want to have it appear that I am raising objections against a matter that has been ruled on.
THE PRESIDENT: Which application did you say?
MR. DODD: The Funk application. It seems to me that there is a similarity in these matters, and particularly the Funk experience now would seem to have some bearing on this Göring application. It is my own judgment, which I respectfully offer for the Court's consideration, that Funk did not really add anything pro or contra to the proof in this case by his reappearance on the stand. He only succeeded in taking up a little of the Tribunal's time.
Now I suggested at the time of the Funk application that he had already denied really the heart and soul of the Pohl affidavit and that he could not do much more than reaffirm it on the witness stand, and that is, I respectfully suggest, almost precisely what happened.
I think the same will be true with respect to Göring, and I would like to call to the Court's attention that, long before Göring took the witness stand, the Prosecution had offered its proof concerning these Luftwaffe medical experiments, so that he knew about them; his counsel knew about them, and if his counsel had cared to inquire about them, he could have done so on Göring's direct examination; but he chose not to do so. He did not raise the question at all. He passed it by and preferred, as was his right, I assume, to rest the matter with Göring's witness Milch and we cross-examined, through our chief counsel, Mr. Justice Jackson, the witness Milch on that question.
If Göring wishes merely to deny that he had any knowledge or participation in these Luftwaffe medical experiments it is a very simple matter, and there is some precedent here for it now in view of the Frank affidavit. I suggest he might file a very brief affidavit that would be no more than a few short sentences saying he did not have knowledge and that he did not participate in these experiments. The Tribunal allowed Frank to do that. He went pretty far, if I may say so with great respect. His affidavit took 20 minutes. I certainly would not think it would be necessary for Göring to take anywhere near that time. As an alternative, and I have not had time to talk with my French and Russian colleagues, Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe and I agree, and I think they will, that the record might showwe would quite agree that the record showed-that Göring denies that he had knowledge of or participated in the Luftwaffe experiments. That would be satisfactory to us. In any event, what we would like to avoid is any kind of a procession to the witness stand by these defendants. They have had such a full hearing. This Tribunal has been so patient that I think it is imposing on the Tribunal if they take the stand for these purposes which can be accomplished in a much more simple manner.
I must say to the Tribunal that I have very grave doubt that Göring really wants to take the stand for this simple purpose. I think he wants to filibuster against judgment here. I think I would be remiss in my duty if I did not so advise the Tribunal this morning. Therefore, we object very strongly, if I may say so with great respect, and ask that either he submit his denial in the form of an affidavit or that the stipulation in the form we suggested be accepted by the Tribunal, and in any event that he and any other defendant who filed a similar application be refused at this stage of these proceedings the opportunity again to get on this stand and again take up time with matters that really do not go to the heart of the proof. I would be the last man here to try to cut out of this very important trial anything that I thought was really vital or important. I would not cast any shadow of unfairness, or any suspicion of it, upon this splendid record the Tribunal has compiled in matters of fairness to these defendants. I do not believe any prejudice will be evidenced if we ask Göring to fill out a brief affidavit or if we ask his counsel to agree to our offer to stipulate. Thus we will save much of the Tribunal's time and we will get on further with these proceedings.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider the matter. Dr. Servatius, you were going through these various affidavits, with great ability, as I said on Friday, were you not?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Is it not the case that all these affidavits are summarized in the proceedings before the Commission and we therefore have before us, in the evidence before the Commission, a summary or a reference to each one of these affidavits?
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, that is only partially true. I, personally, was not able to attend all the sessions of the Commission. I do not have an exhaustive picture. The affidavits which I wish to submit now I shall characterize quite briefly before turning to the collective affidavits which were not dealt with before the Commission. There are but a few left.
THE PRESIDENT: Up to the present, I am only pointing out to you with reference to the past. Up to the present you have drawn our attention to a number of affidavits. I find in the record before the Commission that nearly all of these affidavits have been literally and expressly summarized by counsel on behalf of the Corps of Political Leaders. The Prosecution has stated its position with reference to those affidavits.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, Mr. President, a very brief compilation was made, and it was submitted at the beginning of the presentation 6f evidence. Perhaps I can briefly treat the last ones so that I can pass on to the collective affidavits.
THE PRESIDENT: I hope you will be very short, then, and confine yourself only to these affidavits which have not been summarized before the Commission.
DR. SERVATIUS: I refer to Affidavits Number 47 and 48. Both of them deal with the communal policy. It is an office of but little significance. I refer here to the contents.
Then there is the affidavit of a Gau economic adviser. The essential thing is his statement that during his two years of activity he had but one opportunity to speak to the Gauleiter personally.
Of particular significance, perhaps, is Affidavit Number 50, by the Plenipotentiary for Racial Policy. It sets forth that he had nothing whatever to do with the actual racial policy as we have come to know it during these proceedings.
Then follows the NSV; the affidavit of a Gauamtsleiter who points out the spatial separation of the various offices.
The last is an affidavit by a Gau department head for the care of war victims, which sets forth the position of these agencies.
Thus I am through with the individual affidavits. I should like to submit a few more affidavits.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean you got as far as 64?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. SERVATIUS: No, Mr. President, that is a mistake; up to and including Number 52. Number 53 begins the collective affidavits. Before I turn to those I should like to submit four single affidavits first, which are occasioned by subject matter which was mentioned rather late by the Prosecution. The first one is an affidavit by Gauleiter Hoffmann. It deals with the euthanasia program and what his Gau knew and thought about it. This is Affidavit Number 65. I submit this affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: Is this an affidavit which has not been submitted to the Commission?
DR. SERVATIUS: It was not submitted to the Commission, for at that time the Commission had already concluded its hearings.
THE PRESIDENT: You cannot put in any new affidavits. The Tribunal so rules.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, they were not dealt with in the Commission and in no other way have they, been a topic of the proceedings, but they are answers to new matters brought up by the Prosecution; I must surely have the opportunity of dealing with them. New documents were submitted in the course of the examinations of witnesses, and I have received permission to deal with them. I ask permission to have these four brief documents admitted for that purpose.
THE PRESIDENT: I suppose that is right, if they are dealing with new documents.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: There are only four affidavits. Is that it?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, only four.
The next 6ie deals with Document EC-265, which was a telegram of Ambassador Abetz dealing with the expatriation of the German Jews in France. He explains-this incident and defines his attitude. I submit this affidavit.
Affidavit Number 67 deals with the document which has been submitted as USSR-143, concerning the Styrian Home League, and affirms that this was not a part of a Party organization but a local association.
The last affidavit deals with Document EC-68. It is an affidavit, also Number 68, and it concerns the confidential letter of the Baden Farmers' Association and also deals thoroughly with matters which are known to the High Tribunal regarding the treatment of the Polish workers.
In the next affidavit I turn to the collective affidavits, which are 38,000 in number. On a previous occasion I gave a much greater number. I-am afraid I was misled by the description that was given to me, and the report which was presented by Colonel Neave, in which he also says that there are 155,000 affidavits, contains the same error. Out of 38,000 affidavits certain extracts were dealt with by experts, such as the Church question and the Jewish question, and the statements were then summarized.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh yes, now you are dealing with Number 53.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well now, on Page 3777 of the transcript before the Commissioners that affidavit is fully set out, I mean to say it is fully summarized.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President ' I just wanted to give an explanation so that a picture can be obtained as to how these summaries were arrived at. However, if the Tribunal does not consider it necessary for me to go into ...
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Dr. Servatius, we have got an enormous number of documents in this case, and surely to have the same thing done twice over at this stage is unnecessary.
Have you got Page 3777 before you?
DR. SERVATIUS: No, I have not.
THE PRESIDENT: As I understand it, 53 is a collective summary and report on the affidavits which follow, is that not so?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well then, in this transcript of the evidence before the Commission it says that the result consists of the group report by Karl Hederiech and of the following individual declarations: Jewish persecutions-that is 54; treatment of foreign civilian labor and prisoners of war-55; disassembling of trade unions-56; concentration camps, by-Richard MUller-57; operational staff Rosen-berg, by Richard Millier-58, and so on right down the list.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes. Then that has been read. However, I clearly did not receive this report. If it is contained therein, then I do not need to submit it.
THE PRESIDENT: It is already set down before the Commissioner and is in the transcript.
DR. SERVATIUS: The matter discussed was that certain of these main affidavits were translated and were to be submitted. That was the thing I wanted to do now, and I wanted in each case to cite the contents of the individual affidavits as they concern the various points. Now, the first affidavit, 53, only states how the entire thing was done. That was the guide to this inquiry, as I might say. Then comes the next one which deals with the Jewish question; that is Affidavit Number 54.
THE PRESIDENT: What I am pointing out to you is that what you are saying is set down identically in this transcript. What is the point of repeating it for another transcript?
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, I do not know how far this report went.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it sets out the contents of 53, 54, 55, 56, and there is Miffler, 57.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, is it possible that I should receive a copy of this report, and in case I find it necessary to make remarks that I be permitted to do so?
THE PRESIDENT: I am told you have got the German of this. It is the transcript of what happened before the Commissioner and your representative, Dr. Link, is the man who was doing it. It is on Page 3777.
DR. SERVATIUS: Because of the quantity of material I overlooked the fact that this was already set down. Therefore, I refer to it without dealing with the affidavits one by one.
As far as the Church question is concerned I should like to refer particularly to one point. There are two theologians who very extensively deal with all the internal circumstances, which seem to be of great significance to me.
Mr. President, I have concluded my submission of documents.
With reference to the statements during the last session concerning the number of active members, I had a statistical report prepared yesterday. Perhaps I may submit this for the benefit of the Tribunal-not as evidence-so that, on the basis of the statistical Party book which is in the library of the Prosecution, it can be figured out what is actually included in the Indictment. I should like to submit this as an aid to the Tribunal rather than as a piece of evidence, if I may. It is only in the German language for the time being.
THE PRESIDENT: Have the Prosecution any objection to the submission of this document?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, of course we have no idea what is in the document at the moment. But, My Lord, I think we shall make no objection to it.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you can look at it and we will have it handed to us later.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, if I understood Dr. Servatius correctly it is on the numbers of those who are to be included in the organizations. Colonel Griffith-Jones has prepared an exact statement of those whom the Prosecution asks to be included and their numbers, which he proposed to give to the Tribunal at the close of Dr. Servatius' speech, which may remove some of the difficulties which Dr. Servatius has in mind. But, My Lord, I make no objection to the document going in to assist the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well
DR. SERVATIUS: I did not quite follow as to when I am to receive these figures, after or before my final submission. It is surely of import to me to know that in advance.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you will receive the document to, which Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe was referring before you make your final submission, because after you have dealt with your documents the other representatives of the organizations will have to deal with their documents and their affidavits. We will have it during that time.
DR. SERVATIUS: May I submit this report?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then I conclude my statement herewith, Mr. President.
THE-PRESEDENT: Now which of the organizations shall we take next? I beg your pardon. Yes?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I do not know whether it would be convenient for the Tribunal if I submitted some particulars of the figures which we were discussing the other day.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you not put in or hand to Dr. Servatius this statistical summary and then deal with the rest of the matter in argument? I understood from Sir David that you have a statistical document showing the number of Political Leaders whom the Prosecution contend are involved.
Well, Dr. Servatius wants to see that and, therefore, if you will give him that, that will be all that is necessary, will it not?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: My Lord, yes, except simply to explain what the document is, which will take two minutes. I think it will be of assistance to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: If it will only take two minutes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: They are figures taken from the Organization Book. On Page I - the Tribunal will see the total numbers set out of all the Political Leaders whom the Prosecution are including in the organizations; the Hoheitstrager, the staff of the Reichsleiter, the staff of the Gauleiter, the staff of the Kreisleiter. For the information of the Tribunal I have also included the staff of the Ortsgruppenleiter of 340,000. The total is 940,000. You deduct again the Ortsgruppezi staff which I excluded and you get your figure of 600,000.
My Lord, in the subsequent pages particulars will be found of the officeholders on the Reichsleiter, Gauleiter, and Kreisleiter staffs. The Reichsleiter, I think, speaks for itself. The Tribunal perhaps will look at Appendix "C." There it will be seen that the offices on the Gauleiter staff are set out.
My Lord, those are all taken from the Organization Book and I would only say that those show the maximum establishment of the Gau and Kreis staffs and they were not by any means always up to strength, so that the figures, the total figure of 600,000, is to be the maximum that is possible.
THE PRESIDENT: Now we will deal with the Gestapo.
DR.RLTDOLF AMMEL (Counsel for the Gestapo): Mr. President, first of all I should like to have permission to discuss my document book. I have already introduced the various documents, with the exception of Number Gestapo-31, which I submit at this point.
Numbers Gestapo-1 and 2 deal with the concept and the aims of a political police system in general. I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of both these documents, and I request the same with reference to Numbers Gestapo-3 to 8. They contain the basic laws and directives dealing with the origin, the development and the aims and purposes of the Gestapo, first taking into account Prussia and finally the entire Reich.
Number Gestapo-9 is a -copy in extract of the law dealing with German police officials, dated 24 June 1937. 1 shall read Paragraph I from it. This is found on Page 28 of Document Book I.
"This law affects the executive officials of the Civil Police, the Criminal Police of the Reich and of the communities, the Military Police, and the Gestapo, as well as other police executive officials of the Security Police (police executive officials)."
From this we can see that police executive officials had a special position already in that they alone were subordinate to the law affecting police officials, not the other branches, such as, for instance, the administrative officials.
Number Gestapo--10 contains the temporary provision for execution of this law which we have just mentioned. It gives a definition of the executive police officials. I quote from Part 1, concerning Paragraph I of the law; and this may be found on Page 33 of the document:
"Police executive officials are, in the Reich Criminal Police, the Gestapo, and also in other branches of the Security Police: Criminal Assistants (Kriminalassistenten), Criminal Senior Assistants (Kriminaloberassistenten), Criminal secretaries (Kriminalsekretere)," and so forth.
By the law of 19 March 1937, the officials of the Gestapo became direct Reich officials. I quote from Number Gestapo-11, Page 36 of the document book, Paragraph 1:
"The following become direct officials of the Reich:
"(2) Officials of the Security Police (Gestapo and Criminal Police), but not the administrative police officials serving with the Criminal Police in the State Police Administrations."
I ask that judicial notice be taken of Number Gestapo-12. It is a copy of the law of 17 June 1936, dealing with the assignment of the chief of the German Police to the Reich Ministry of the Interior.
I also ask that judicial notice be taken of Number Gestapo-13, which concerns the employment of inspectors of the Security Police.
Number Gestapo-14 was already submitted, as Exhibit USA-266, as evidence that the Party was prohibited from taking action in matters which were a concern of the Gestapo. I quote from Figure 1, Paragraph 2, which is at Page 42 of the first document book:
"I forbid all offices of the Party, its branches and affiliated associations to undertake investigations and interrogations in matters which are the concern of the Gestapo. All occurrences of a political-police character, without prejudice to their being further reported along Party channels, are to be brought immediately to the knowledge of the competent offices of the Gestapo, now as before."
From Page 2 of the same document, Page 43 of my document book, I quote the third paragraph:
"I particularly emphasize that all plots of high treason against the State coming to the knowledge of the Party are to be reported to the Gestapo without delay. It is in no way a task of the Party to make investigations or inquiries of any kind in these matters on its own initiative."
THE PRESIDENT: From which page was it that you were reading then?
DR. MERKEL: Page 43, Mr. President, of the German document book.
THE PRESIDENT, May I have the heading?
DR. MERKEL: Yes, the heading is "Reporting of Treasonable Activities to the Gestapo," and from that I read the third paragraph, starting with the words: "I particularly emphasize that..."
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I see.
DR. MERKEL: That the assumption of political offices by officials and employees of the Gestapo was not desired may be seen from Page 3 of this document, which is Page 44 of the document book, the last paragraph:
"Since it"-that is, the Gestapo-"is still in the process of organization and the available officials and employees are very much in demand, they are to take over positions in the Party only to the extent to which this is compatible with their official duties in the Gestapo."
From Number Gestapo-15, which is an excerpt from the Reich Administrative Gazette of 1935, 1 quote evidence of the fact that it was possible to enter a complaint against measures of the Gestapo through investigation channels. This is the first paragraph, Page 46 of the document book:
"Since the Law on the Gestapo of 30 November 1933 became effective, orders of the Gestapo Office can no longer be contested according to the provisions of the Law on Police Administration. The only remedy against them is a complaint through investigation channels."
Further, to clarify the legal status of the Gestapo and of the Gestapo Office, I should like to quote Page 3 of this same document, which is Page 48 of the document book. I shall quote Paragraph 2:
"In accordance with all this, the legal status of the Office of the Gestapo, since the Law of 30 November 1933 became effective, is the following: The office is part of a special government organization, the 'Secret State Police,' which forms an independent branch of the Administration of the Prussian State. It has, like the Secret State Police as a whole, a special field of duties: the management of affairs of the Political Police."
Of Numbers Gestapo-16 and 17 1 ask that judicial notice be taken. They deal with the introduction of the laws establishing the Gestapo in non-German areas. Number Gestapo-18 deals with the Border Police as a part of the Gestapo. It is the copy of a circular by the Reich and Prussian Ministry of the Interior dated 8 May 1937. 1 shall quote from Number III. This is Page 53 of the document book.
"The execution of police tasks at the Reich Frontier is entrusted to the Border Police Offices."
I shall omit the next sentence.
"The Border Police Commissioners' Offices, including the Border Police posts established by them, are as previously the border stations in Prussia and Baden, branch offices of the State Police Offices competent for their district."
Number Gestapo-19 is a copy of a circular issued by the Chief of the Security Police and the Security Service, dated 30 June 1944, in which the unification of the military and political police counter-intelligence machinery is ordered.
The responsibility for intelligence protection of the armament industry as well as of all other war plants and vital industries was henceforth the responsibility of the Chief of the Security Police and of the SD and the offices of the Gestapo subordinate to him.
The carrying out of intelligence protection as well as the direction and employment of the counter-intelligence organs within the plants were now exclusively the task of the Gestapo offices, in keeping with the instructions given by the Reich Security Main Office.
I ask that judicial notice be taken of Number Gestapo-20. It contains a directive issued by Himmler on 25 October 1938, dealing with the erection of a central office for registration for police service. Through the setting up of this office it was possible to order candidates to do service in the Gestapo against their Will.
I also ask that judicial notice be taken of Number Gestapo-21. It concerns directives for qualification tests for applicants for service in the Security Police. I make the same request with reference to Number Gestapo-22, which is a directive of 14 December 1936. It says that candidates for Criminal Police service' will have to meet the same tests as candidates for the regular Criminal Police.
Then I ask that Number Gestapo-23 should be given judicial notice, which is a decree of 2 June 1937, saying that civil police and military police officials were detailed for service in the Gestapo, and therefore, they did not come to the Gestapo voluntarily.
THE PRESEDENT: What you are doing now isn't assisting the Tribunal in the very least. Would it not be better to submit all these documents, that is to say, to put them in, and ask us to take judicial notice of them, which we shall do, because they are decrees, and then to refer to any particular paragraphs in them when you come to make your argument? I say that because this is meaningless to us to read excerpts; and it is confusing to read a number of them without making any submissions at all about them. When you come to make your argument, you can draw our attention to any particular passage you want to in order to explain the arguments, but this is not doing you any good at all.
DR. MERKEL: Yes, Mr. President, I have made provisions for that in my final summation. However, there I have naturally tried to be very brief, and only to refer to these documents, on the assumption that I might read them during the submission of documents. However, it will suffice me if the High Tribunal wish merely to take judicial notice of these documents.
THE PRESIDENT: It is much more informative, to our minds, than to have it separated between the reading of the documents now and your final argument. If we have to listen to the same sort of thing from all other organizations-why, it is beyond human ability to carry all these things in our minds.
Dr. Merkel, if there are any special passages in these decrees or documents which you wish to draw our attention to now, in order that we may read them carefully before you make your speech, well and good; but it is no good going through one after the other like this without making any comment at all. Do you follow what I mean?
DR. MERKEL: For that reason I only read brief sentences from the most important of these documents and asked that judicial notice be taken of the rest.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't know what you call a very few brief ones, but we have had about 15 or 20 already. That doesn't seem to me to be very few.
DR.NERKEL: Of course we must take into consideration that we have only three hours at our disposal for the final summation. For that reason it seemed suitable, first of all, to submit my documentary evidence in such a way that the documents could, as far as possible, be read to the Tribunal, and then, in the final speech be referred to in a summary way. For this documentary material must at some time be submitted to the High Tribunal in some form or another, and we considered it more suitable to separate the two, to submit the documentary material now, briefly, and in our final summation to restrict ourselves to an evaluation of this evidence which had been submitted.
Apart from that, I have almost concluded my submission of these individual documents. In the second volume of my document book there are but a few documents from which I wish to quote a few brief passages.
THE PRESIDENT: Go on, then.
DR.NERKEL: Number Gestapo-32, the first one in Document Book Number H, shows that the combating of partisan bands was not the concern of the Party or of Himmler, but of the Army. I refer in this connection to an affidavit deposed by a certain Rode, which has already been submitted as Exhibit USA-562.
Number Gestapo-33 shows that the orders regarding the execution of Russian prisoners of war in the concentration camps came from the Inspector of Concentration Camps and not from Department IV of the RSHA.
Numbers Gestapo-35, 36, and 37 deal with protective custody, and I ask that judicial notice be taken of them.
Number Gestapo-38 is a copy of a letter of the Inspector of Concentration Camps dated 15 October 1936. I quote from Figure 2, on Page 101 of Document Book Number II:
"Besides the Chief of the German Police, the following are authorized to enter concentration camps:
"a. The Chiefs of the three SS Main Offices,
"b. The Administrative Chief of the SS,
"c. The Chief of Personnel of the Reichsfuehrer SS,
"d. The SS Gruppenfuehrer."
Then also Figure 4:
"All other SS members, representatives of offices, and civilians desiring to enter premises in which prisoners are lodged or engaged in work for the purpose of visiting, will require my express written authorization."
Number Gestapo-39 deals with the same topic.
I submit Numbers Gestapo-40, 41, 42, 43, 44, and 45 as proof of the fact that concentration camps were not under the Gestapo but, instead, under the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office.
Numbers Gestapo-46 and 47 follow a similar vein. Number46 is a questionnaire addressed to August Eigruber of 26 March 1946; and Number 47 is a questionnaire addressed to Friedrich Karl von Eberstein, dated 26 March 1946. Both have already been submitted by defense counsel for the Defendant Kaltenbrunner.
Numbers 48 and 52 deal with the recruitment of foreign workers for the Reich area, and show that this was the sole responsibility of the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor.
The setting up of corrective labor camps may be seen from Gestapo-54 -to 57.
The seizing and securing of cultural articles in the occupied territories are matters contained in Numbers 58 and 59.
Number Gestapo-60 is the well-known decree about third-degree interrogations.
Number 61 is a copy, in excerpt form, of a letter from Heydrich to Göring, dated 11 November 1938, and shows that the Gestapo took steps against the excesses during the night of 9 to 10 November 1938.
Number Gestapo-62 is a copy, in excerpt form, of testimony given by Dr. Mildner on 22 June 1945. It refers to the deportation of the Jews, and the subordination of the concentration camps under the SS Administrative and Economic Main Office.
This concludes my documentary evidence.
As far as the affidavits are concerned, I submit to the Tribunal first of all the German copies of the transcripts taken before the Commission, which I did not have up until now. They are copies of the transcript of 9, 19, and 27 July, and 3 August. They are contained, in summary form, in Gestapo Affidavits 1 to 91.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Merkel, it isn't necessary for you t
o submit copies of the transcript of the Commission's evidence; it comes to us directly from the Commission, so you need not trouble about that.
DR-MERKEL: Very well, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: It is suggested to me that perhaps it would be better for you to offer it in evidence and give it a number in your list of numbers.
DR. MERKEL: Then I shall give the transcript of 9 July the Number Gestapo-63; 19 July shall be Number Gestapo-64; 27 July, Number Gestapo-65; and 3 August, Number Gestapo-66.
I should like to suggest that the submission of these affidavits be effected in the following way so that time can be saved. Twenty-two out of the 91 have been translated. I shall now summarize the most important of these 91 affidavits according to subject matter, and I shall also read into the record a few brief passages from the affidavits which have been translated and seem to me to be of especial importance. Of the remaining affidavits I ask that the Tribunal take judicial notice.
Besides 91 individual affidavits, a collective affidavit is at hand summarizing 1265 individual affidavits. This summary, in line with the resolution of the Court of 5 July 1946, was prepared by former members of the Gestapo who are now imprisoned, and the authenticity of this summary was certified by me. I ask your permission to read that brief summary into the record too.
I turn to the first group, and I shall summarize Affidavits Number 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 13, 71, and 90. They deal with the occupied countries. Jewish questions here were handled by a special detachment under the command of Dannecker. From 1940 to 1942 they were attended to by the French Government, in agreement with the military commander and the German Embassy. Detention camps in France were supervised by the military commander.
The recruitment of French laborers for the Reich area was undertaken by the military commanders. In May of 1942 the Secret Field Police were arbitrarily taken into the Security Police. Police executive power, up until April of 1942, lay in the hands of the French police and of the German military police units.
From Affidavit Number 2, which has been translated, I ask permission to read the following: Page 1, Paragraph 2:
"From October 1940 until October 1941, 1 was chief of the branch office of the Security Police and of the Security Service in Dijon, and from December 1943 up to the retreat from France I was commander of the Security Police and of the Security Service in Dijon.
"Composition of the Security Police Command Dijon:
"There were about 10 Gestapo members; 13 Criminal Police (Kripo) members, and 69 emergency draftees (Notdienstverpffichtete).
"As can be seen from the list, of the 92 male members of my command at the time, only 10 belonged to the Gestapo. In this connection it must be taken into account that of these 10 Gestapo members, the majority did not volunteer for the Gestapo but were transferred or detached to it, or joined it for some other reason, without those concerned having -been able to exert any influence on the decision or to resist it."
I shall skip the next sentence.
"The Security Police Command Dijon must be regarded as an average command in France in respect of its strength as well as of its composition."
On Page 3 of this affidavit, after the heading "Jewish Questions," I shall read the brief paragraph which follows. It reads:
,"Recaptured prisoners of war were in no case brought to a concentration camp or shot by the Dijon office, but immediately turned over to the nearest competent army office."
THE PRESIDENT: Where are you reading now?
DR. MERKEL: The second passage in Affidavit Number 2, at Page 3 of the German original; it follows directly after the brief heading, "Jewish Questions." It is the next paragraph.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. MERKEL: I shall skip the next four paragraphs and read on: "There were no special Security Police or Security Service prisons in the Dijon area. Furthermore, no arrestees in any prisons were ever executed by order of the Security Police (Sipo) or Security Service (SD) to prevent their liberation by Allied troops."
Dealing with Affidavit Number 3, 1 ask to read the beginning of the second paragraph:
"In September 1941 1 was transferred from the Infantry to the Secret Field Police and, without my having anything to do with it, in June 1942 1 was assigned to the office of the Commander of the Sipo and the SD in Poitiers."
"The Security Police Command at Poitiers was composed of about 5 officials of the State Police, about 5 officials of the Criminal Police, and some 80 former members of the Secret Field Police who, like myself, were discharged jointly from the Wehrmacht and were emergency draftees in the Security Police."
On Page 2 of this affidavit, under the heading "Commando Order," I should like to read the following:
"This order is known to me only in its basic outlines through Wehrmacht reports, the press, et cetera."-I shall omit the next sentence.-"This order was not carried out in the Poitiers region. I can mention two examples:
"In June 1942, in a joint operation by the Security Police and the Wehrmacht, a camp with 40 English parachute troops was raided, whereby during the short fight 3 Englishmen were killed, while all the rest were taken prisoner and handed over to the Wehrmacht, although it was established that the group had carried out sabotage on a railroad 3 kilometers from Poitiers, more than 200 kilometers behind the invasion line, and had provided French partisans with arms and organized them."
And the next paragraph as well ...
THE PRESIDENT: What does that mean, "200 kilometers behind the invasion line," in reference to June 1942?
DR. MERKEL: That is the town of Poitiers which is about 200 kilometers behind the invasion line.
THE PRESIDENT: There was no invasion in 1942.
DR. MERKEL: In June 1944. That is a typographical error.
THE PRESIDENT: Go on.
"Likewise, in March 1944, in the same territory, 5 American airmen, who were encountered wearing civilian clothes and in company of 40 armed partisans, were taken prisoner and turned over to the Luftwaffe."
Next I should like to summarize those affidavits numbered 5, 6, 7, 8, and 14. Mr. President, I beg your pardon that the numbers are not in consecutive order, but this can be explained by the fact that these affidavits, insofar as they came from camps, were received at very long intervals. Also the witnesses who deposed affidavits here in the Nuremberg prison arrived one at a time; therefore it is unavoidable that these affidavits are not numbered consecutively. I should like to repeat the numbers: 5, 6, 7, 8, and 14. They prove that the Gestapo not only did not take part in the excesses of 9 and 10 November 1938, but took steps against them and in numerous cases undertook arrests of members of the SA, the Party, and the SD. The 20,000 Jews who were arrested were largely released again after their emigration papers had been procured.
Numbers 15 to 21, 29 to 34, 72, 73, 76, 84, and 85 deal with the following: The offices of the Security Police and the Security Service in occupied countries were not made up of voluntary members. Administrative officials or technical officials of the Gestapo had nothing to do with carrying out orders, and in view of the strictest secrecy which was preserved, they could not know anything about details. Employees and emergency draftees cannot be considered as accomplices in, or as having had knowledge of, the possible criminal nature of the organization. New members were not brought in by voluntary recruitment but rather as a result of assignment, orders, and transfers.
I shall read the following into the record from Affidavit Number 15, the second paragraph:
"In May 1919, 1 was assigned to the Political Police, newly established as Department VI with Police Headquarters in Munich."
THE PRESIDENT: Wait a minute. Are you reading Affidavit Number 15?
DR. MERKEL: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: You say the second page, the second paragraph, and you begin something about 1919. 1 do not see that.
DR. MERKEL: No, Mr. President, it is the first page, the second paragraph, right at the beginning of the affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: On the first page, it begins, "On I January 1913."
DR. MERKEL: "On 1 January 1913." 1 had only omitted this first sentence and the third sentence begins with:
"In 1933 1 was transferred together with almost all other members of this office to the Bavarian Political Police which, with almost the same personnel setup, was in turn transferred to the Secret State Police in Munich. The entire personnel was screened politically by the SD, whereby a large part of the civil servants and employees of the former political department of Police Headquarters were judged negatively."
Then I shall read from Page 2 of the German text, under Number 2:
"While I was in charge of the office from 1933 to 1939 1 always pointed out to the officials under me that it was forbidden to maltreat prisoners. I did not hear of any of my officials laying violent hands upon a prisoner."
'Under Number 4 1 shall read the penultimate sentence of the first paragraph:
"I learned that persons frequently posed as Gestapo officials. These persons also committed criminal acts. Because of the increase of such incidents, Himmler issued a decree according to which all persons who impersonated Gestapo officials were to be put into a concentration camp."
From Affidavit Number 16 1 should Eke to read the following from Page 1, the fourth paragraph:
"On the basis of my activity with the Gestapo Office in Berlin I can confirm the fact that the Gestapo Office was made up almost exclusively of officials of the former general Criminal Police as well as of the Berlin Police Administration, who were all transferred to the State Police."
THE PRESIDENT: You are reading 16, are you? Which page?
DR. MERKEL: The paragraph from which I was reading is on Page 1. It begins with "In 1935" and the fourth sentence is: "On the basis of my activity ...
THE PRESIDENT: "In 1935, without being consulted, I was ordered and transferred..."
DR. MERKEL: Yes, quite, Mr. President, that is the paragraph. And in this paragraph the fourth sentence reads: "On the basis of my activity with the Gestapo Office in Berlin..." Then I shall read the following paragraph:
"As in the Gestapo Office in Berlin, so the great majority of the police personnel of the State Police offices throughout the Reich consisted of old professional police officials who, had been transferred from the old I-A section of the Criminal Police and the other branches of the Police to the State Police, or had been assigned there without their personal wish being taken into consideration."
Then I shall skip a paragraph:
"Transfers back were entirely out of the question, because there existed an order which absolutely prohibited this. If, in spite of this, requests were handed in for transfer back or transfer from the Gestapo to another branch of the Police, such requests were usually answered with disciplinary transfer. Such requests were not made because the Gestapo was considered a criminal organization, but mostly for purely personal reasons."
From Affidavit Number 18 1 should like to read the following, on Page 3 of the German original:
"1 Officers: There were 50 or 60 officers' positions in the whole Security Police Force.
"2. Administrative Officials: The administrative officials were engaged exclusively in office work for the entire police administration. They were strictly separated from the executive officials by different regulations concerning their career, by different titles, and different duty passes. Above all they had nothing to do with executive work. A change in their position and activity never took place.
"3. Executive Officials: They executed the real tasks of the Gestapo as laid down by law. In this connection it should be noted, however, that a number of these officials also were engaged in pure office work, as is the case in every office.
"4. Civilian Employees: The civilian employees were mainly typists and other office personnel and personnel for subordinate work.
"5. Emergency Draftees."
Here I shall read only the end of this paragraph:
"No right whatsoever to complain existed if an emergency draftee was assigned to the Gestapo instead of some other governmental office or some private enterprise."
I shall omit two paragraphs and shall read the third one which follows:
"I estimate that the Gestapo had about 10,000 emergency draftees by the end of 1944.
"6. Men detailed from the Waffen-SS: In order to meet the personnel requirements of the Gestapo, members of the Waf-fen-SS who, due to wounds and other physical handicaps, could not be utilized at the front any more, were detailed to the Gestapo in increasing numbers during the war."
THE PRESIDENT: I think we had better break off now.
[A recess was taken.]
DR. MERKEL: From Affidavit Number 18, 1 should like to read Section 7, relative to the members of the former Secret Field Police.
"With the transfer of the tasks of the Secret Field Police to the Security Police, at first in the occupied territories in the West, the members of the Secret Field Police were also taken over into the SIPO, or into the Gestapo. This transfer was done by order, so that none of the transferred men could have done anything against it."
And then the final sentence of that:
"Altogether approximately 5,500 men were taken over."
And the first sentence of the following paragraph:
"Particular importance was attached to secrecy in the Gestapo."
I skip the following sentence, and continue:
"Particularly by means of the Fuehrer order of 1940, which was extended immediately by the Reichsfuehrer SS to include the Security Police, the keeping of secrecy was pronounced the supreme duty of all members of the Security Police, and thus of the Gestapo. All members of the individual offices were now and then reminded of this secrecy pledge which they had signed. In that connection it was pointed out time and again that any offenses against the secrecy regulations would be severely dealt with and, in important cases, even be punishable by death."
From Affidavit Number 20, the second paragraph:
I beg permission to read from Page 1,
"The members of the administrative service in the lower, middle, and higher grades were, at the request of the Gestapo, and after 19P7 of the Main Office of the Security Police, selected from the civil service staff of all offices, especially the police administration, and were transferred to the Security Police or the Gestapo."
From Number 30 1 shall read the following, on the first page under the heading "Organization and Composition of the Gestapo in Bielefeld," the second sentence:
"When this Gestapo office was founded in 1934, about eight criminal investigation officials and two police administration officials of the Bielefeld State Police, and about 5 criminal investigation officials from branch offices were transferred to the Bielefeld Gestapo. The transfer was made without previously obtaining the consent of the officials."
Then, from Page 3 of the same affidavit, I beg to be allowed to quote one example of the composition of a fairly large Gestapo office.
"Organization and composition of the Gestapo in Brno. In the spring of 1944, the personnel comprised about 800 persons, distributed approximately as follows: administrative officials, about 35; executive officials, about 280; drivers and employees, about 110; frontier police officials, about 65; criminal investigation employees, for instance interpreters, about 90; prison supervision personnel, about 80; female office personnel, about 90; other auxiliaries, about 50."
And then the second paragraph after that:
"When the Gestapb office in Brno was created, about 400 officials were transferred from offices in the Reich proper, without their consent, to Brno or to the branch offices connected with Brno. More than half of
the personnel consisted of emergency o7 labor draftees."
From Affidavit Number 31, 1 shall read on Page 2, at the beginning:
"At the end of 1944 the Gestapo consisted of approximately the following: administrative officials, 3,000; executive officials, 15,500; employees and workmen, including 9,000 emergency draftees, 13,500. Grand total, 32,000. These members of the Gestapo may be considered to be the permanent ones inasmuch as they made up the normal staff. In addition to these persons, there were the following groups: detailed from the Waffen-SS, 3,500; taken over from the Secret Meld Police, 5,500; taken over from the military counter-intelligence of the OKW, 5,000; personnel of the former military mail censorship, 7,500; members of the customs frontier guard, 45,000."
Then I come to Affidavit 34, where I shall read from the first page, under the heading "Professional career," the last quotation. "I April 1933; transfer, that is, assignment to the Gestapo Department of Berlin. I received at that time a letter which ran as follows:
44 'By virtue of the authority vested in me by the Reich Minister of the Interior, you are hereby as of ... transferred to the Gestapo Office.'
"I had nothing to say in the matter of this transfer. The endeavor of my superior in the Police Presidency to save me from this transfer, failed."
I now beg to be permitted in connection with the relationship of the Gestapo to the Frontier Police, to read the following from Affidavit Number 22; this is on Page 2 of the German original: "The members of the Frontier Police were taken over from the Frontier Police, which existed in Bavaria already before 1933, into the Frontier Police of the Gestapo. Later on, after the annexation of Austria, the Austrian Frontier Police were added as well. The incorporation of the Frontier Police officials in the Gestapo was not voluntary either ;in Bavaria or in Austria. On the contrary, the officials were transferred as a group when control of the Gestapo was transferred to the Reich or when the annexation of Austria took place."
I skip the following sentence.
"The officials could not object against their transfer to the Gestapo on the grounds of legal regulations concerning civil servants. They had to obey this transfer."
Then the second paragraph further on:
"The tasks of the Frontier Police consisted mainly in the supervision of the traffic of persons across the frontier, the carrying out of police instructions with regard to passports, and in the supervision of the traffic of goods in connection with the customs authorities. Political tasks, such as those of the Gestapo in a stricter sense, were not the business of the, Frontier Police."
I skip the next sentence and go on to quote:
"I know from my own experience that the tasks of the Frontier Police and its activity did not change after 1933." Then the last paragraph:
"I must also draw attention to the fact that the same tasks as those of the Frontier Police were 'performed at many small frontier passages by members of the Reich Finance Administration and the Customs Administration. In this the customs officials were bound by exactly the same instructions as members of the Frontier Police."
Numbers 23, 24, 35, and 39 deal with the question of secrecy. "No department within the State Police knew anything about orders issued by any other department. Even private conversation was forbidden. In view of the strict secrecy only the few persons of the Reich Security Main Office immediately concerned knew the individual measures taken."
From Number 35 1 read the following; and this is on Page 8 of the original, the second paragraph:
"Discussion of the subject matter was centered in personal conferences between the department chief and group chief or their deputies on the one hand, and as hitherto between the department chief and his department heads on the other."
Then the beginning of the following paragraph:
"In view of this form of personal co-operation it follows that only the persons actually and directly taking part in a matter were informed about it, the more so as, due to the directives which had been issued, the principles of secrecy were strictly observed in Department IV."
Then the beginning of the next paragraph:
"Still another decisive fact must be given consideration in this connection. During the course of the war up to September 1944-and particularly in the course of aerial warfare-Department IV in Berlin was decentralized in an increasing measure to various quarters of the city."
Then also on Page 12 of the affidavit, the second paragraph in the German text:
"In view of the practice of absolute secrecy and isolation of information prevailing in all fields, it should be clear of itself that a problem which had as little to do with general tasks and activities as the physical extermination of Jews was, if that is possible, kept even more strictly secret. All plans and measures in connection therewith could of necessity have been discussed only within the closest circle of persons directly involved, for all other members of Department IV never received knowledge of it."
And then the beginning of the next paragraph:
"The same must have been true with regard to knowledge about the reports concerning mass shootings in the East, as quoted by the Prosecution. It is not known in detail who could have had knowledge of such reports besides the Reichsfuehrer SS and some individual department chiefs. If such knowledge should, at the most, have extended even to the competent group chiefs and specialists, it is still far from being the case, as asserted by the Prosecution, that the bulk of the personnel in Department IV, or even in the Reich Security Main Office or in the Offices throughout the Reich, were informed."
From Affidavit Number 39 1 beg to be permitted to read the following from Page 3 of the original:
"Upon my assuming office in the Reich Security Main Office in August 1941, Mueller declared to me that in his sphere of activity he placed great value upon observing the stipulations for secrecy and that he would proceed without clemency and with the severest measures against violations thereof."
And then the last sentence of the same paragraph...
THE PRESIDENT: We have heard about this secrecy over and over again, not only in your affidavits, but throughout the Trial. Surely it isn't necessary to read the paragraphs of these affidavits about secrecy. We quite understand that everybody alleges that.
DR. MERKEL: Affidavit Number 25 contains an opinion about Exhibit Number USA-219. It deals with the transfer of 35,000 prisoners capable of work to armament plants attached to concentration camps.
The affidavit originates from a local office chief of the Gestapo and I shall quote from the third sentence of the third paragraph:
"As another case, the order by the Chief of the Security Police and the SD of 17 December 1942, according to which at least 35,000 persons capable of working were to be transported to concentration camps to work in the armament plants there, was not carried out by many Gestapo offices. These persons were to be recruited from, the prisoners in the corrective labor camps of the Gestapo offices. This was at variance with the practice applied until then, and by many office chiefs known to me was interpreted as an arbitrary measure. At conferences in the Reich Security Main Office, I learned that the office was unable to comply with the request of the Reichsfuehrer SS to provide prisoners, because the Gestapo refused to provide prisoners from their corrective labor camps and hid behind pretexts."
The summary of Affidavit Number 36 states that in the spring of 1944 the bulk of the members of the Department of Foreign Intelligence (Amt Ausland Abwehr) in the OKW were forcibly transferred into the Security Police.
Affidavit Number 40 states that the order for the evacuation of Jews from Hesse in 1942 came 'directly from the Chief of the Security Police, not from Department IV of the Reich Security Main Office. Commitment for work in the East was given as the reason for the evacuation.
Affidavit Number 42, and to some extent 91, deals with the decree that the crucifixes should be removed from schools. From Affidavit Number 42 1 shall read the second sentence on the first page:
"Approximately in 1942, as I remember, Gauleiter Adolf Wagner, in his capacity of Bavarian Minister of Culture, gave the order to have the crucifixes removed from all Bavarian schools."
I skip the following sentence:
"Enforcement (of this ruling) met with the greatest difficulties due to the attitude of the population, so that the departments of the Party which were dealing with the execution of that order called upon the Landräte and the district police offices for assistance. Since the affair had a political character, the Landräte approached the State Police department in Nuremberg with a request for advice or assistance. As an expert for Church matters, I stated to the first Landrät approaching me that the Gestapo in Nuremberg would not help with this decree unless directly forced to do so, and that he would not receive any assistance from the State Police in the execution of the order. Even in the case of unfortunate complications for Political Leaders, the State Police would not introduce any police measures."
I shall skip the following sentence.
"I then reported the matter to the Chief of Police who without any reservation shared my point of view. In agreement with him, I then informed the other Landräte concerned by telephone to the effect that they should act accordingly in this matter."
Affidavit Number 43 says that, upon objections raised by the competent commander of the Security Police, the intention of the Landräte to turn the Protestant church in Welun into a cinema was thwarted.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Merkel, you heard what I said to Dr. Servatius, did you not?
DR. MERKEL: Yes, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Isn't the state of affairs exactly the same in your case, that all these affidavits have been summarized in the transcript before the Commission, which we have got before us in writing, and therefore what you are doing is simply cumulative?
DR. MERKEL: I had merely thought that in order to support these summaries in the record, short extracts from these affidavits ...
THE PRESIDENT: It is no use telling me what you merely thought. You heard what I said to Dr. Servatius, that the Tribunal did not want to hear the same thing over again that appears in the transcript of the proceedings before the Commissioners. It was all gone into perfectly clearly with Dr. Servatius, and it was explained to , him in your hearing that we cannot carry all these things in our minds and that it is useless to go over them twice unless there is some matter of very great importance which you want to draw our attention to before you make your final speech; and I said that before and I don't want to have to say it again.
DR. MERKEL: In that case, if I may, I shall refer to the summaries of the transcripts of the Commission with reference to the numbers following up to 91, and shall assume that the Tribunal will take notice of the contents of these summaries. I shall then have only one collective affidavit left. If the Tribunal wishes me to do so, I can read the summary contained in that affidavit; as far as I know, that has not been translated. There are six pages of this summary of 1,276 individual affidavits which do not appear in the Commission report.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, go on.
DR. MERKEL: Regarding the question of compulsory membership, 665 affidavits are available. They state that when the Gestapo was created, the requirements for personnel were for the most part met out of the existing Political Police. Regarding forced membership of emergency draftees, there are 127 affidavits which deal with the same subject.
785 affidavits state that they had no knowledge of the crimes of which the Gestapo is being accused.
39 affidavits deal with the difference in organization between the Gestapo in the Reich and the Security Police in occupied territories.
195 affidavits state that the writers had no knowledge of inhuman treatment and atrocities in the concentration camps. A few ,officials who had entered concentration camps on conducted visits failed to notice any irregularities there; nor did released detainees speak about concentration camps in a derogatory manner.
133 affidavits state that no p9rticipation or supervision of the excesses of 9 and 10 November had taken place.
67 affidavits state that the looting of private or state property was expressly forbidden to members of the Gestapo.
135 affidavits state that a large number of Gestapo members knew nothing about the existence of the Einsatzgruppen or of atrocities committed by them.
218 affidavits state that the "Bullet Decree" was unknown to the majority of the Gestapo officials, and that recaptured prisoners of war were turned over to Wehrmacht offices.
168 affidavits state that enemy parachutists were turned over to the Air Force by the Gestapo, and 23 affidavits state that the Reich Security Main Office was responsible for the imposition of protective custody.
181 affidavits speak of punishment of members of the Gestapo by SS and Police Courts for misconduct during, and off duty. ,
With that, Mr. President, I have come to the end of my submission of documents and affidavits.
LIEUTENANT COMMANDER WHITNEY R. HARRIS (Assistant Trial Counsel for the United States): May it please the Tribunal, I have just two short comments to make concerning documents which were presented here on matters regarding which I think he was in error, and I respectfully request the Tribunal to turn to his Number Gestapo-33.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
LT. COMMANDER HARRIS: Dr. Merkel has cited this document as evidence that the executions in concentration camps were ordered by the VFVHA, but I would respectfully invite the attention of the Tribunal to the sentence in the center on the first page, and I quote: "For this measure permission of the Chief of the Security Police must be obtained."
THE PRESIDENT: Commander Harris, the Tribunal thinks that this is a matter which can be dealt with in argument and not at this stage.
LT. COMMANDER HARRIS: Very well.
THE PRESIDENT: Now, the Tribunal will hear the case of the SD. Is counsel for the SD not present?
DR. STAHMER: He is being called and will be here any moment.
THE PRESIDENT: Marshal, have you made any effort to get-to obtain the presence of this counsel? Have you communicated with him?
THE MARSHAL: We got in touch with his office, and we are looking for the defense counsel right now.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn now until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.
[The Tribunal adjourned until 20 August 1946 at 1000 hours.]