THE MARSHAL: Military Tribunal Number 2 is again in session.
DR. BERGOLD: I will ask to call the Witness Brandt.
THE PRESIDENT: In this connection, the witness has stated to the Marshal, who has repeated the fact to the Court, that he will not voluntarily appear before this Court because of his physical condition. I think the following facts should be put on the record.
The Witness is a defendant before Tribunal 1. On February 13, through his Counsel, he made this statement to Tribunal 1.
"The accused, Rudolf Brandt, is according to my observation no longer fully capable of being tried. I consider him as being seriously ill. He has a dangerous cough that has deeper causes. His body weight amounts to 50 kilograms, Brandt feels bodily and physically weak and incapable of being present at the sessions. His mental elasticity has also considerably diminished. I feel the defense can hardly be appropriately carried out if a considerable improvement in his condition does not ensue.
"I, therefore, request that he be released from the sessions until a betterment of Ms condition sets in. I assume that the Tribunal doctor will immediately undertake a thorough examination."
That is signed by Dr. Kaufmann. Pursuant to that communication, Tribunal 1 directed that the Witness-Defendant be examined by the prison physician. This was done on the same day, and a report from the prison physician, Captain Charles Roska, was submitted to the Tribunal. That report is as follows:
"Physical examination of Rudolf Brandt done on this date reveals no organic diseases. The Defendant is underweight, but this is not due to any organic cause. At present he is weak and somewhat confused. This is ascribed to Ms depression and deep concern over Ms ultimate fate. It is planned to supplement Ms daily food ration and treat Ms depression. There is no contra-indication to Ms standing trial at the present."
This is signed by Charles J. Roska, Captain, Prison Physician."
On the basis of that report, Tribunal 1, entered an order, which after reciting the facts, determined as follows:
"The Defendant, Rudolf Brandt, will be present for all further sessions of the trial before this Tribunal, unless he be hereafter excused by the Tribunal from attendance at the trial. This order is dated 14 February. This order is entered without prejudice to the right of the Defendant, Rudolf Brandt, to again request the Tribunal to excuse him from attendance at the trial if in his opinion and that of his counsel, his physical condition becomes such that his attendance in Court would seriously endanger his health."
This is signed by the Presiding Judge of Tribunal 1. These are recent facts, Dr. Bergold, and I think your decisions as to whether you wish to call this witness should be made with these facts in mind.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Court: I talked to the witness at his request and he tells me that he is feeling very ill. He does not think he is strong enough to stand up to a real interrogation. I would be prepared in view of this state of affairs, not to call him today, if the Court will give me permission, in about a week's time when he feels better to obtain from him an affidavit. I am only interested in a cross-examination of his statement in which he stated he knew Milch had been well-informed on everything. He told me through his own counsel that he had no very precise basis for that statement at the time, as in the case of other witnesses.
I am prepared to take into consideration his state of health and call him in a few days' time and hear him before a Commissioner to obtain an affidavit, if the Court approves that decision.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, Mr. Denney, if you wish to take the alternative of conceding that he had no personal knowledge of the facts explained; with other words if you are content to accept the affidavit literally, it might not be necessary to call the witness at all. That is for you to determine, however.
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honor please, I am not in a position to make that concession. I submit that there is no difference between taking testimony before one member of the Court by way of an interrogatory and having the man come into court to testily. If he wants to get another affidavit from him, that is up to Dr. Bergold. I am not in a position to object to affidavits after the number we have submitted. But I think that he should either testify or prepare an affidavit for Dr. Bergold. I certainly object to his testifying more or less ex ca the final before a commission.
THE PRESIDENT: After all, this is a defense witness. I presume the defense has some choice as how the manner in which his proof will be presented.
MR. DENNEY: Certainly. They adjourned the first case so these men can come down here. They have a certificate from the doctor which I certainly think is proper that the man is all right. Now he says, "No. I do not want to come in and testily."
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Bergold has decided he will not call the witness in person at this time. What subsequent form his proof shall take it is to be determined by Dr. Bergold.
DR. BERGOLD: I would suggest that I would be satisfied with an affidavit before a Commissioner.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. You may adopt that procedure.
MR. DENNEY: I assume the Prosecution will have the same right to call the witness to cross-examine him about this affidavit?
THE PRESIDENT: Of course.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Dr. Bergold, if ho can summon the necessary physical strength to appear before, as Hr. Denney well said, before one member of the Tribunal or if he submits his affidavit, I do not understand why he could not come into court unless there is some mental element involved.
DR. BERGOLD: I believe in view of his poor health, he is afraid to appear in a big court which might confuse him.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: This is not a very big court.
DR. BERGOLD: Quite so, Your Honor. I can only pass on what he told me.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well.
DR. BERGOLD: I would like to add this, c have to hold a brief meeting anyway with a Special Commissioner for the witnesses Neurath and Raeder. This hearing will be fairly brief. On that occasion perhaps one could hear Brandt. You could do all this in one day. Would that be better? That would 1 ok after Mr. Denney's right completely.
MR. DENNEY: I have no objection to that, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Wednesday would be a very convenient day for that.
MR. DENNEY: I wonder if at that time, we might have the Witness Speer brought up, too. I have one or two questions I would like to ask him.
THE PRESIDENT: Any witnesses you wish.
MR. DENNEY: I did not ask him any questions the time before.
THE PRESIDENT: Any witness you wish to examine can be examined at that one session. That applies to either side.
DR. BERGOLD: The witness may be taken away now.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may be taken back, Marshal.
DR. BERGOLD: May it please the Court, I shall now read from Document Book 2, the reading of which was interrupted on Thursday night, I stopped when Karl Wolff s statement was read. Exhibit No. 35. I stopped at page 5 of the original. I can shorten this considerably because I have heard that Wolff has arrived as a witness and Mr. Denney's wish to examine him himself is now possible. I can therefore concentrate on the essential points of that document and I will leave out everything else. This is page 7 of the original.
"5. I do not remember anything of the negotiations between Milch and Himmler in May-June 1942, on the strength of which the previous decision to discontinue the experiments was reversed."
Then I come to a figure 7: "I do not know who was the first in the Luftwaffe to grant the permission for the high altitude and freezing experiments.
"8. I have no direct knowledge why the Reichsfuehrer-SS directed, according to document No. 1607, that all information should go to Milch, for Himmler has not talked to me about it. I can only presume that he wanted to do a favor to the hard fighting Luftwaffe and to collect thanks and acknowledgment for it from Goering.
"9. Unless I could see the service diary, Himmler's and my own, in which the conference, or better , the meeting at the dinner or coffee table must be marked, I cannot, to the best of my knowledge, answer the question whether I had attended, during the indicated period, a conference between Himmler and Milch.
"10. As far as I recall, I had a short talk with Milch on the low pressure experiments when we happened to meet in the summer of 1942 in the Fuehrer's headquarters. No matters except these mentioned in my above statement (see also my answer to question 4) were dealt with, concerning the concentration camp experiments, on that occasion.
"11. Who took the initiative of presenting the films at Milch's office, I do not know.
"13. I do not know from my own experience what Hippke's position towards the experiments was, for as far as I know I have never talked to Hippke personally, I have already dealt with Milch's position under questions 4 and 1.
"15. I do not know, nor do I believe, that Milch knew Dr. Rascher personally.
"Signed: Karl Wolf."
Then as Exhibit No. 36, I submit an excerpt from the records of Military Tribunal No. 1 of 13 January 1947. I shall read this. I believe it's on Page If of Your Honors' book.
"Excerpt from the Transcript of the Military Tribunal No. 1, Nurnberg, Germany, 13 January 1947."
JUDGE PHILLIPS: That is your Exhibit No. 36?
DR. BERGOLD: Yes, 36.
"Session from 9:30 to 12:30, pages: 1551-1552 of the German version.
"Mr. Hochwald:" I presume he is a member of the prosecution on the first trial. I do not know the gentleman myself, but this is what I have been told. "I turn now to Document NO-1312, Prosecution Exhibit 338:
"The Director of the Mental Institution of the District Association Upper Bavaria Eglfing-Haar, Contract.'
"I have been instructed by the director of the mental institution Eglfing-Haar, Obermedizinalrat Dr. Pfannmueller, with regard to the kind of work and my duties in the special ward of the children's ward of the mental institution Eglfing-Haar, in which children of the Reich Committee for the Scientific approach to severe Hereditary and Constitutional Diseases are confined." I leave out one sentence and go over to the next page.
"I have been instructed that I have been ordered absolute secrecy as to the incidents which will become known to me during the treatment of the children of this ward, and that the law provides that any breach of secrecy will be punished with the death sentence," I leave the rest.
Signature: "Eglfing, 26 April 1941." Three names follow:
"Dentlmoser Emma, Spindler Maria, Lang Emma."
"The next document, No. MO-1311, which will be Prosecution Exhibit 339, another document swearing to secrecy one of the officials of the insane asylum: Obligation:
"I, the undersigned, have been obligated by handshake instead of by an oath, on the part of the director, to receive and to copy matters concerning the Reich which have to be kept secret. I herewith undertake to keep all papers which should become known to me under the heading 'Top secret' strictly secret, and never to give anyone knowledge of them without Specific order from the director of the Institution, Dr. Pfennmueller. My attention has been called to the fact that if I should not keep this oath of secrecy, I will face prosecution by the Gestapo, and that I will have to count with the possibility of the death penalty if I should either carelessly or deliberately divulge matters which have become known to me as 'Top Secret'.
"Eglfing-Haar, 20 february 1942. Signature: Erich Frank."
The next page follows, 1557. Mr. Schiller is speaking, another official of the prosecution team.
"Now, turn to the next Document on page 126 of the Document Book. I offer in evidence Document No. 1143 as Prosecution Exhibit No. 343. This consists of eleven letters of inquiry as to the whereabouts of former inmates of Eglfing-Haar Institute. It is interesting to note that these inquiries are not made by private individuals, but by Government agencies, that is Reich Government agencies.
"From page 1559, No. 182 V.k.H. back inclusive one document.
"To the Supreme Prosecutor in Nuremberg with information that Sofie Sara Wiesengrund, in accordance with a decision of the Reich Minister of the Interior was transferred in a collective transport of Jewish patients on 20 September 1940 to an institution unknown to us. Eglfing, 9 January 1941.
"The Director:
"Initialled."
The prosecution continues: "This clearly shows that the secrecy of the program at this time was such that even other Reich government officers and ministers were not being informed as to the exact disposal of the patients."
Your Honors, here we have heard from witnesses that were in Dachau that they had to sign secrecy orders and obligations. They are of the same manner -- you can see they are the same type -- how careful they were and how they threatened people with death, and these experiments were kept secret even from ministers and Reich agencies. This was the rule Himmler observed, which may be objectionable but it did exist.
I now turn to the next document, the affidavit of Freiherr von Kruedener, born 15. 6. 1906, of 30 January 1944. This will be Exhibit No. MI-37. It's the last document, but one in my document book. It's on page 44 of my document book. I submitted the original to the Secretary-General.
"I, Hans Joachim Freiherr Von Krubdener, born 15 June 1906 at Sitienka, residing in Braunfels on the Lahn, have been told that I shall be punished if I make a false statement under oath. I declare on oath that my statement is true and that it was made to be presented as evidence to the Military Tribunal No. 2 at the Palace of Justice, Nuernberg, Germany.
"I state as follows:
"One day in 1944 Milch met me in the corridors of the Reich Air Ministry on the way to the conference room and, passing me hurriedly, said to me, 'How aro you?'. In reply to my brief answer that on the previous day I had been called to the building site of a mineral oil plant to see for myself the untenable conditions in the concentration camp there and that I was worried about it, Milch, already half inside tho conference room, turned around, drew me into the opposite window seat and asked me to give him full particulars of the matter, although about 40 men were waiting only for him. Milch did not interrupt my report which went on for several minutes. When I had finished, he asked simply 'What did you do about it?'. When I told him that I had assumed responsibility for interrupting the construction work without any regard to the dates reported to the superior authorities, until the necessary work in the prisoners' quarters was finished, he thought for a short while and then turned towards the conference room. In the door he turned around once again and said, 'All right, all right. I cannot catch the guilt persons either., and disappeared. As far as I was concerned the incident was closed. About four hours later, immediately after the end of the conference, Milch summoned me and informed me that during tho conference he had had occasion to talk to Reich Minister Speer (or Commissioner General Geilenberg) about my report.
He said literally, 'Speer will phone the competent SS general. It will be more effective than if I do it.' Then Milch bade me goodbye and callod after me, as I was already going through the door, 'If anybody bothers you about the building dates, see me immediately.' Actually, an SS Obergruppenfuehrer, who was in charge of these camps, went there two days later already, inspected the camp thoroughly, and ordered a change in conditions which exceeded by far the measures taken by me, and succeeded.
1131 a "In order to be able to appreciate this incident fully, I must add that during these weeks and months Milch worked 14 hours and more daily, that he took his meals at his desk, often standing up, and that he was more than overburdened with work.
Since the incident described had nothing whatsoever to do with him, I appreciate it all the more that, in his own impulsive way, he used his personal position and the possibilities it gave him to do something humane entirely outside of his normal duties, just as a good deed.
"I am therefore deeply convinced that the atrocities mentioned in the press with which Milch is charged are not true.
"(Signed) Hans Joachim Freiherr von Kruedener "I herewith certify that the above signature of Hans Joachim Freiherr von Kruedener, residing at Braunfels on the Lahn, was given in the presence of the undersigned.
"Braunfels, 30 January 1947, the Local Court, signature, Inspector of Justice as recording official in the office of the Local Court."
Then there are statements on the left about the costs.
I shall now submit the next affidavit by Dr. Lotte Mueller of 7 January 1947, the last document in my document book. It will be given the Exhibit Number MI 38. I shall hand it to the Secretary General. It consists of a letter and an affidavit. The letter reads as follows:
"Dr. rer. pel Lotte Mueller, Berlin-Halensee, 20 January 1947. Kurfuerstendamm 154 a. To the International Tribunal in Nuernberg for the Defense Counsel of former Field Marshal Milch, Nuernberg, Palace of Justice.
"Attached please find an affidavit concerning the case of the former Field Marshal Milch to be used at your convenience. I would like to point out that I have made this declaration voluntarily and without being in any way influenced by others.
"Respectfully yours, (signature) Dr. Mueller."
The affidavit reads as follows:
"My deceased father Dr. Karl Mueller, was Oberstudiendirektor i.R. (retired) in Potsdam, and previous to 1933 leading Social Democrat in Potsdam.
On account of his political activity he was arrested by the Gestapo in July 1933 and brought to a concentration camp.
"Upon the request of my brother, Dr. Martin Mueller, who was killed in action in the meantime, the (later appointed) Field Marshall. Milch used his influence to have my father released from the concentration camp although he knew that my father was arrested for his activity as a Social Democrat. Herr Milch, in spite of considerable resistance from those around him, at last succeeded in having my father released from the concentration camp at the beginning of December 1933.
"I further certify that I have not been a member of the NSDAP nor of any of its affiliated organizations.
"Berlin, 7 January 1947 (signature) Dr. Lotte Mueller.
"I certify that the above signature is that of Miss Lotte Mueller, Berlin-Halensee, Kurfuerstendamm 154a, in charge of the deportment for food of the magistrate of Greater Berlin. Berlin, 7th Jan. 1947. The Notary (signature) Dr. Erich Trost."
Then there is the charge, of course, which is usual in Germany.
This is as far as my document book goes. I shall now, if it please the Court, read the interrogation of the witness Speer.
THE PRESIDENT: Before you do that, Dr. Bergold, will you give us two dates: first, the date on which the film was shown in Berlin, at which Milch, it is claimed, was not present; second, the date of the report of Rascher, Romberg, and Ruff to Himmler -- the one we were talking about this morning.
DR. BERGOLD: The date of the film is 11 September 1946. I beg your pardon, 11 September 1942. The report is dated 28 July 1942. It is probably the letter to Reichsfuehrer SS of 22 September 1942, refers, as the witness stated, to copies 2, 3, and 4 of the report of 28 July 1942.
THE PRESIDENT: The report was actually transmitted on September 22, 1942?
DR. BERGOLD: I think only the copies 2, 3, and 4. It is probable that copy 1 passed on to Himmler before and Himmler on 25 August 1942 sent it on to Milch.
That, in my opinion, is connected. Himmler also received copy 1 and passed it on to Milch.
MR. DENNEY: I don't think we are interested in Dr. Bergold's opinion on what happened to the first copy of the report. All that Your Honors asked was about these three copies that are mentioned here and these are 2, 3, and 4. There is nothing to show where the first one went. It certainly does show that these three went to Himmler and it is just possible that he did not get the first one or that he did. I don't know.
THE PRESIDENT: In any event it was in September when these three went and it was in August when the first one went, if it went.
DR. BERGOLD: On 25 August Himmler sent a report to Milch.
THE PRESIDENT: All right. How about the date of the film?
DR. BERGOLD: 11 September 1942.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
DR. BERGOLD: I shall now read from the record of the interrogation of Albert Speer.
THE PRESIDENT: What Number are you going to give to the interrogation of Speer?
DR. BERGOLD: That is the next number.
THE PRESIDENT: 39?
DR. BERGOLD: 39, yes.
"4 February. Interrogation of Albert Speer. Nuernberg, Germany. Present: The Honorable Judge Musmanno, Mr. Denney, Dr. Bergold, the Marshal."
Do I have to read it word by word?
MR. DENNEY: If Your Honor please, I see no reason to read all the preliminary. Let him just read in what he wants and I will concede that the witness Speer was present, that Judge Musmanno was present, that the prosecution was present, and that he was administered an oath, and then Dr. Bergold can read in whatever parts of it he wants to.
DR. BERGOLD: I only want to point out that he was under oath.
THE PRESIDENT: That is conceded, Mr. Denney, is it not?
MR. DENNEY: I conceded it, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: I might say that what you are about to read I have already read, Dr. Bergdld, almost entirely. The members of the Tribunal have a transcript of what the witness said and we have read it.
DR. BERGOLD: Very well, then I can do without all this. I only thought I had to read it into the record here.
DR. BERGOLD: I, therefore, submit the Exhibit No. 39, Speer's interrogation under oath of 4 February 1947, and would ask the Court to take official notice of this.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. The exhibit has been marked and will be admitted in evidence and considered a part of the record. Has the Secretary-General a copy of this? Will you mark it as an original exhibit M-39? The Document Division is directed to include this transcript in its compilation of the testimony so that this will appear as part of the testimony taken. The transcript is numbered from Page 1 through Page 51. Now this has already been mimeographed, and it merely calls for including it in the daily transcript as it is prepared. It needn't be recopied of course. That is done.
NOTE: The transcript mentioned above now numbered page 1 through page 51, will hereinafter be referred to as page 1136 through 1186.
INTERROGATION OF ALBERT SPEER held on 4 February 1947 at Nurnberg, Germany.
PRESENT: The Honorable Judge Musmanno Mr. Denney Dr. Bergold
MARSHAL: All persons in Court II, rise.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: We are now about to discuss what are technically known as interrogatories, but we will proceed as if the witness were testifying in Court; the same latitude in examination and cross examination will be permitted.
DR. BERGOLD: I suppose, Your Honor, that I shall first ask the witness his name. Will he be questioned under oath?
JUDGE MUSMANNO. Mr. Denney, what has been the practice in interrogatories? Has the witness been sworn.
MR. DENNEY: Frankly, Your Honor, I don't know.
DR. BERGOLD: The witnesses have been sworn.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Yes. Will you please rise and be sworn? Do you swear by Almighty God, to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in this proceeding: that you will withhold nothing and reply directly to all questions which are put to you and for all of which you will answer to on the day of the last judgment?
WITNESS: I do.
DR. BERGOLD: Your Honor, may I also be seated, please?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Witness, please state your name and previous occupation.
A. My name is Albert Speer. From 1942 to 1945, I was Reich Minister for Armaments and Munitions, from 1943 on, Reich Minister for Armaments and war Production.
Q. Are you acquainted with the defendant Milch, who is not present here? 1136
A. Yes; I worked very closely with him.
Q. How long have you known him?
A. I have known Milch, personally, for certain, since 1938, but had no closer contact with him before 1942.
Q. Do you know that, before the outbreak of this war, Milch had charge of all technical matters of the Luftwaffe, and informed you of them?
A. This become known to me in the year 1942 or '3, when Hitler told me that Milch, before the outbreak of the war, when western European cities were reviewed or visited, showed the technical and secret apparatus.
Q. Can you remember any details or any special events that aroused his attention; and details about the order or the communication system that aroused his attention.
A. I must first recapitulate, or rather, state, that Hitler was very excited at that time, and told me that this lack of secrecy in these matter was a very great threat to the German security at the beginning of the war. At this time he mentioned mainly the demonstration of the new radar equipment which made it possible to detect enemy planes through fog; in other word radar. Hitler at that time assumed that the enemy did not at that time have such equipment at his disposal. Consequently his efforts to develop modern radar equipment, which had their source in this inspection.
Q. Thank you. Did you know that Milch conducted the same demonstration for the leaders of the Polish air Force?
A. No; there was no talk of that at that time.
Q. Did you know, during the beginning of the war, that Milch was Inspector General of the Luftwaffe?
A. Yes, that I knew.
Q. Did you know what the sphere of activity was of an Inspector General.
A. I don't know that from my own experience closely enough to (Continued) say anything definite about it, but let me add, I know only of Milch, that perhaps in 1942 or '3, that Milch said to me, "Goering does not wish that he occupy the position as Inspector General of the Luftwaffe.
Q. But this was only in 1942 or '3?
A. Milch could not tell me that before then, because I was not in such close contact with him before then.
Q. Do you know whether the previous Generalluftzeugmeister Udet was subordinate to him in his capacity as Inspector General of the Luftwaffe?
A. From my own experience, I do not know that either, since that was before 1942; I know only of having heard of it from Milch later; that Milch said when Udet and Goering worked very closely together and that the relations between Milch and Udet were not so good.
Q. Did you know that at that time, namely, when you became Reich Minister the relations between Milch and Goering had become tense and poor.
A. I don't know whether there had been bad relations between then previously. At any rate, after the first few weeks of my activity it was clearly to be seen that the relations between Milch and Goering were not good.
Q. I come now to the Central Planning, witness. Whose thought was it first to create the Central Planning Board?
A. That was my idea. I spoke about it to Milch and then we spoke of it together to Goering.
Q. Is it not correct to say, witness, that you went first of all to Hitler and received his permission to create such a board, and then went to Goering?
A. The pre-history of this is a little bit longer than that; shortly after I was named Minister there was a meetng in the Air Ministry. In this conference Milch held the chair. The representatives of the various divisions of the army, a few representatives of the Four-Year-Plan, Funk and others were present. During this conference, everyone was unanimous that it was necessary to create some sort of common planning and arbitrat office. Funk suggested (Continued) that Milch, as the eldest present, should occupy that position.
Thereupon, I laid emphasis on the point that I should occupy that position. Subsequently there was a meeting with Hitler in the Reich Chancellery, in which hitler defined to me my tasks, and most of the 1138 (a) participants in the previous meeting were present.
As a result of this conference there took place under my chairmanship, in my ministry, at another meeting at which the participants in the meeting were shown a document from which it was to be seen that all common interests and problems would, in the future, be decided by myself. The Plenipotentiary General for the Four-Year Plan was concerned in this document, and originated in it. In a few weeks, I came to the point of view that it would be better if I had a joint position with Milch, in order to introduce some responsibility for many letters, and consequently, at that time it was that I suggest the creation of the Central Planning.
Q. During your talk with Goering which you had after the intention was formed to create the Central Planning, did not Goering then say that you should not interfere in any way with the Four-Year Plan, and is it true that he then explained that the Central Planning would concern itself only with the distribution of raw materials, etc?
A. In that what you have stated is not entirely correct. I believe I have to relate this to the whole picture. In this meeting that took place at my ministry, and that is the document that everyone signed that was present, Goering, as representative of the Four-Year Plan, felt himself to have been offended. He told me at that time that under these conditions he could not continue as Deputy for the Four--Year Plan. In particular, he was upset because many Plenipotentiary Generals of the Four-Year Plan had signed this document without having informed him of their intention previously. Both the creation of a Plenipotentiary for Armaments and for the Central Planning were steps that attempted to fix more firmly Goering's position of power on the outside.
Q. Was this also the reason why Goering suggested that Koerner be taken into the Central Planning?
A. Yes; that is true. Milch and I had the intention of carrying on the Central Plannings alone; Goering asked that Koerner be taken into the Central Planning as third member.