"Subject: Criminal Law for Poles and Jews in the Incorporated Eastern Territories."
This is a note dated Berlin, 22 April 1941. I shall being reading at the second grammatical paragraph on Page 23, which is found, I believe on Page 66 of the German text.
"The proposals, contained in the draft of the decree of the Minister of justice and explained in the letter accompanying it, are far reaching in compliance with the wishes of the Fuehrer's Deputy. The draft establishes a draconic special criminal law for Poles and Jews, giving a wide range for the interpretations of the facts of the case, with the death penalty applicable throughout. The conditions of imprisonment are also much more severe than provided for in the German criminal law. (Instead of imprisonment in jail or in a penitentiary -- prison camps and special prison camps). Beside this special criminal law, in a subsidiary way, the German criminal law is applicable.
(II). provisions of criminal law which might be used to obstruct the procedure, have been eliminated (the opportunity of the defendant for an appeal, compulsory indictment, the challenge of a judge, compare also article XIII, S.2.). The Minister of Justice differs only in two points from the suggestions of the Fuehrer's Deputy:
"a) The Fuehrer's Deputy considered it more appropriate to authorize the Reich Governors (and therefore also the two Provincial Presidents) to introduce the special criminal law, whereas the Minister of Justice provides for its introduction by a Reich decree.
"b) The Fuehrer's Deputy considers the introduction of corporal punishment, the Minister of Justice declines to do so."
I turn to page 24 which is probably still on Page 67 of the German Book. There is a paragraph entitled "2.)" in the margin.
"Submitted to the Reich Minister.
"This matter should be first discussed with Statssokretaer Schlegelberger. (In handwriting: Who would be ready to come to headquarters). On information of Minister Dr. Schaefer, Reich Air Ministry, Statssokretaer Schlegelberger will at this meeting also have some information of the Governor General's attitude."
Then on Page 68 there is a note "1)" which is on Page 24 of the English Book.
"A report to the Fuehrer is not to be considered. First of all, a discussion with Staatssekretaer Schlogelberger is necessary."
I offer to introduce in evidence as prosecutor's Exhibit Number 200, Document NG-130.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
MR. LaFOLLETTE: Turning to Page 25 of the English Book, NG-457, which if and when we introduce it, will be Exhibit 201. This found on Pages 70 to 74 of the German Book. I begin reading at the top of the page.
"Number 93-A. Copy, Rural police, Precinct Uffenheim, Uffenheim, 2 July 1942. To the Secret State Police, State Police Office, Nuernberg, Fuerth.
"Subject: Kabinska Sofie, Polish agricultural worker in Uffenheim for behavious detrimental to the State and other charges, here, and her arrest.
"The Corporal Anton Wanner of the 1st Cavalry Reserve Battalion 17, Bamberg, at present employed with the farmer Leonard Gundel in Uffenheim, Riedmuehle, reported the following at this precinct: The Polish agricultural worker Sofie Kabinska and the Ukrainian agricultural worker Wassyl Wdowen, who are employed together on the same farm and had a love affair, demanded money from the daughter of their employer, Mario Gundel on 1 July 1942, about 21 hours. When she explained that she would first have to inquire at the Labor Office, branch office, Uffenheim, what she would have to pay, the couple approached the farmer Leonard Gundel and again asked him for money in an insistent manner.
"Gundel, an old frail man requested me to call the couple to order. I asked the couple to go to the room. The Polish woman thereupon, with her hand, hit me in the face, whilst the Ukrainian seized me. I slapped his face.
"I drew my side arm and said. 'Go away chap.' Whereupon the Polish woman tore off the combat medal from my tunic and kept it in her had. Then she went to the house entrance, picked a hoe and tried to hit me. I quickly closed the door so that she could not hit me.
"The couple then supposedly went to the police and when I too rode on a bicycle in the direction of Uffenheim, in order to report this incident to my foreman, and overtook the couple on the Reich Road 13, the Polish woman took a stone and threw it in my direction without hitting me. No further acts of violence took place. I found my combat medal again. I was especially angry about the incident because the Polish woman had torn off my medal and thus expressed her loathing for a German soldier.
"Road to, agreed to and signed:
"Signed: Corporal Wanner, Anton."
I next turn to page 27 which is page 73 of the German book.
" The Reich Minister of Justice, IV secret 24 1952/43 Please quote this file number and subject matter in further correspondence." I next go to about the middle of the page.
" In the criminal case against Sofie Kaminska and Wasyl Wdowen sentenced to death by the Special Court of Nuernberg Fuerth on 29 October 1943, I sent you herewith original and certified copy of the decree of 13 November 1943 with the request to take the necessary steps with utmost expediency." I now drop down to the last paragraph on page 27.
" Publication in the press and by poster should be refrained from. The Attorney General has obtained copy. By order, ( signature) Vollmer."
I now turn to page 28 which is page 74 of the German book and because this instrument is so obvious, I resort to that which I do not often do, to simply state what it is. It is the report of the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Court of Appeal, Nuernberg-Fuerth, that these two people were executed.
DR. SCHUBERT ( Counsel for Defendant Oeschey): May it please the Tribunal, here again we have some documents which were taken from a much larger, much more extensif file. May I point out that the page read first figures in the file as page 4 and 5 and then in the expert here presented there fellows the pages 48 and 49 of the original file. Therefore, the major part of the file is missing. Once before, a few days ago, I emphasized the difficulties which arise from the presentation such excerpts as far as the defense is concerned. Today I wish testate nothing else, but to maintain the reservation to ask for the presentation of the complete file, and I would like to emphasize once more that I do not move that the prosecution should have copies made of the entire file and present them here, but only that I, as defense counsel, should have opportunity to study the entire file.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: May I say that of course that seems to be a very reasonnable request and when it is made we will try to complete with it. In passing, though, I cannot fail to note that I have read only that evidence which appears to be most favorable to the prosecution and that the pages are included in the document only contain statements of this police officer and corroborating statement of the daughter of the farmer. There is nothing here by way of a statement of either of the defendant so that again I have no objections, but it seems that in this instance certainly where the State's case is largely stated in what is here and nothing is stated for the fense, that no great harm will be done.
THE PRESIDENT: It seems that Dr. Schubert desires to have access to the balance of it.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Yes, I have no objection at all.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you able to assist him in that?
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I will have to check with Mr. Wooley ham and Mr. King who originally, I think, obtained this information to see wether it is still available in either the jail of the records of the court, but certainly if it is I want Dr. Schubert to have it and will be glad to render assistance. We offer this evidence as prosecution exhibit number 201, Document NG-457.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I next turn page 30 of the English book, which is document number 672-PS. This is found on pages 75 to 79 of the German book and will be Exhibit 202 if and when introduced.
I would like to begin reading at the top of page 30 which is on page 75 of the German book.
"Der berlandesgerichtsprasident, Koenigsberg, Prussia, 23 January 1943, Schlosplatz 1, Post office 1, Telephone Number 34245, 317 - Ia352/42, this file number should be quoted in connection with all documents. Registered Mail, (stamped) Secret. To the minister of Justice of the Reich for the attention of Oberregierungsrat Ulrich or substitute: Subject: Defense of Poles before Tribunals in the incorporated Eastern territories. Decree of 3 December 1942 and 15 January 1943. I annex (my letter of 2l/l2/42 addressed to the Chairman of the Chamber of Attorneys of the Reich). The decree of 21 May 1942 states that in accordance with the order on penal justice in Poland of 4 December 1941, attorneys are not to undertake the defense of Polish persons before tribunals is in the incorporated Eastern territories. This decree has been received with satisfaction by all the judges and prosecutors in the whole of my district.
"We can disregard the question of the facts of the Poles when the war is over. Anyway it is already established, that compared with the Poles tho Germans will be the master." I now go to the bottom of the page 30 which is probably very close to the bottom of page 75 of the German.
"The Poles must feel the strong hand of the Germans; and sign of leniency would be interpreted as weakness. I may point out that, now that heavy fighting is going on on the Eastern front, the Polish resistance movement is again growing troublesome, even in the Zichenauer district which has remained quiet up to now."
I now turn to page 35 of the English text, which is page 79 of the German, "(signed) Dr. Dreager, Certified Oberlandesgerichtsrat." The prosecution offers in evidence as Exhibit Number 202 Document 672-PS.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. LaFOLLETTE: We next come to page 37 of the English book, Document NG-296, which is page 80 of the German text. I would like to read all of this; it's short.
"From several parties the following circumstances have been reported to me coincidingly:
"Owing to a threatening enemy invasion, the functionaries and documents of the High Court at Koenigsberg had been removed to several places of safety. Together with the last important documents the president of the Court of Appeal, Draeger and the Chief Prosecutor, Szelinski, had gone to Stettin, I believe. From there they reported to the Reichs Minister of Justice and asked for further instructions. They were ordered by telephone to report to the Minister. There, Draeger was arrested by order of the minister. He was put on trial before the People's Court on the accusation of leaving his office, condemned to death and executed. Draeger was an excellent official to whom the jurisdiction of East Prussia owes a lot. Szelinski committed suicide, signed/ Schlegelberger."
DR. GRUBE (Counsel for defendant Lautz): Mr. President, I protest against the submission of this document and that for the following reason: The document has the date of 30/g. It cannot be seen therefrom from what year that document dates. From the remark in this folder one can see that the document allegedly dates from 30 August 1946. That is from, a time after the occupation. The document, therefore does not represent a captured document.
If this statement by Schlegelberger should be used in this trial as a valid, legal instrument, then, according to Ordinance No. 7 it has to be put into the form of an affidavit; and it can not be presented in the form of a pure statement.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I don't understand that Dr. Schlegelberger has denied his signature; I don't hear that. It is a signed statement of Dr. Schlegelberger which, in my opinion applies to Dr. Schlegelberger. I am perfectly willing to have it introduced subject to limitations.
THE PRESIDENT: This is dated 1946.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I don't think that makes any difference, Your Honor.
JUDGE BRAND: Was there a threatened enemy invasion in 1946? I asked was there a threatened enemy invasion in 1946.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: No, Your Honor. Here is a signed letter by the defendant Schlegelberger expressing his opinion as to the value of the services of a certain individual man whose name I have just read. As against Schlegelberger, his own statement as against Schlegelberger alone I think it is competent evidence whether there was a threatened invasion or otherwise. Obviously, there was no threatened invasion.
JUDGE BRAND: I referred to that merely as bearing upon Counsel for the Defendant's suggestion that the instrument was written in 1946.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I can't see that that is pertinent if it was written in 1946 and signed by Schlegelberger; I think it is competent evidence against Schlegelberger, and I am only offering it against him.
JUDGE BRAND: How could it be written in 1946 if it refers to a threatened enemy invasion?
MR. LA FOLLETTE: To me it is very clear, Your Honor. It is the same as though I were to write this last year in Washington about something that happened.
JUDGE BRAND: I see.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I offer NG-296 as Exhibit 203, and restrict it to evidence against the defendant Schlegelberger.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal thinks it has probative value, and it will be received in evidence.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I next turn to page 38 of the English book, which is NG-151. This document is found at pages 81 to 109 of the German book. This is not the worst, but it is one of the worst put-together documents that I have ever seen. In order for the Tribunal subsequently to get any benefit from attempting to read this document, I would like to offer a chronological order of reading of these pages, which I spent forty-five minutes working out first. I can offer a table prepared during the recess or at least during the afternoon and brought over, but you can not read this document with any degree of intelligence for example, there are fourteen different items in here; the first to be read is found on page 38, the next is to be found at page 65, and the last one is to be found on page 59. I will prepare this list so the members of the Tribunal will have it; I think they must have it, and I will furnish it to them.
THE PRESIDENT: I think that would be the better practice.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I am sure that Defense Counsel understand what I am doing; I am simply trying to make this thing intelligent.
I am at page 38. This is "Direct. Reich Chancellory, carbon copy, Berlin, 3 August 1942; Reich Minister of Justice; Urgent letter; to the Reich Minister of the Interior, Reich Leader SS," and I will not read the other persons to whom it is addressed. "Re: Restriction of legal rights for Jews in criminal cases. 1 Enclosure. Enclosed I submit the draft for an ordinance concerning the restriction of legal rights for Jews in criminal cases with the request to state your opinion in regard to it.
"I have emphasized the importance in war of this ordinance, because it indirectly serves national defense." I should like to read that sentence again:
"I have emphasized the importance in war of this ordinance, because it indirectly serves national defense. The dissatisfaction which is apparent in wide circles of the German population with regard to the fact that legal rights in criminal acts are still afforded to Jews and that they are still given the right to appeal to the courts in cases of sentences inflicted by the police is liable to weaken the determination of the German people to defend itself in this contest which has been imposed on it."
Signed : "By Order: Dr. Freisler".
I now turn to pages 42 to 45 of the English book, which are 85 through 88 of the German book. "The Reich Minister of Justice commissioned with the management of affairs; Berlin, 13 august 1942; to the Reich Minister for Popular Enlightenment and Propaganda, in Berlin, and dated 13 August 1942; Re: Restriction of legal rights for Jews."
I have not read extensively this morning, and I hope the Tribunal will indulge with me while I read this:
"I thought of meeting at first the most urgent need within the compass of my sphere of activity, viz.
that of adjusting the administration of justice from a legal point of view, and moreover I had prepared a corresponding draft for the administration of justice belonging to my sphere of activity. However, I did not want to take the initiative to make suggestions concerning matters which are beyond the sphere of my department.
The draft enclosed in your urgent letter includes all supreme authorities of the Reich, especially that of the Reich Minister and all Ministers whose sphere of work is connected with matters of administrative law. Whilst, as far as the sphere of activity of these Ministers is concerned I still adhere to the opinion that I should refrain from making suggestions on my part, I declare that I have no objections against an extension of my draft to matters of administrative law and to decisions by administrative authorities.
II. On the assumption that an extensive regulation of the situation of the Jews with regard to legal and administrative decisions is desired, it seems necessary to me that the question of the admissicility for a Jew to testify on oath be legally regulated, too, and this regulation had best be included in the same decree. Therefore, I furthermore suggest that the decree should provide that the Jew is not admissible to testify on oath. Thereby the taking of an oath or the furnishing of an affidavit by Jews is in general impossible.
In my opinion however, the fact that the Jew is not permitted to take an oath should not make the Jew have a better legal position than the person who is authorized to take an oath. Therefore I further suggest to include a regulation according to which the testimony of a Jew, which could have been made under oath, - if it had been given by a person who is permitted to take an oath should be treated like testimony given under oath as far as criminal cases are concerned.
My idea in this connection is that the chiefs of the supreme authorities of the Reich should order administratively that it should be pointed out to the Jew that he could be legally prosecuted if he continues an offense against his duty to give true testimony, but I do not propose to make this a prerequisite of being liable to punishment.
In my opinion comprehensive settlement of the problem requires furthermore the exclusion, for reasons of foreign policy, of all Jews from the regulations of this decree, who are citizens of a foreign nation. Therefore, under the assumption that the persons participating in the comprehensive solution of the problem and those supreme authorities of the Reich which are in charge of specialized sectors agree, I would suggest the following wording to the decree: "I shall not read the wording.
I now turn to page 45, which is 88 of the German, and I read, "Signed Schlegelberger."
I now turn to page 65 of the English text, which is page 109 of the German. This is a "National Socialist German Labor Party; Party Chancellory, The Head of the Party Chancellory, Fuehrer's Headquarters, 9 September 1942; to the Minister of Justice; Re: Limitation of legal appeal for Jews.
"The limitation for legal appeal for Jews proposed by you extends in the sphere of Court decisions only to the legal appeal in a limited sense - that is to say to appeal, revision and complaint. This regulation does not represent a comprehensive solution of the problem, since the Jews will still be given the possibility of making use of legal aids in a wider sense.
"The considerations which are decisive for your draft also apply to almost all cases of "legal aids".
In criminal cases this applies above all to objections against penal rulings and to pleas for resumption of proceedings. In the sphere of Civil Law it would apply to remander, I believe it should read; remander of cost and execution matters, objections to execution orders and judgments by default as well as to nullity and restitutions suits."
Also, a limitation of tho admissibility of suits protesting against executions and suits filed by a third party will have to be taken into consideration, as in these cases too the result will be in legal aid against a judicial decision. I think it necessary to include all those cases too into the regulation.
I further request you to include into the draft a regulation declaring inadmissible the declining of a judge by a Jew.
I have no objections against the provisions of the draft relative to the disqualification of Jews to take an oath.
Heil Hitler!
(signed) M. Bermann
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I now turn back to page 55 of the English text which is page 98 of the German. This is on the 8 March 1943:
The Chief of the Security Police and the SD TO The Reich Minister of the Interior Party member Dr. FRICK My dear Reich Minister:
At my requests I have been informed by department I that you have stopped the passing of the ordinance concerning the legal restrictions to be imposed on Jews, as in view of the development of the Jewish question, you no longer consider this ordinance necessary. May I therefore point out the following views taken by the Security Police, which are in favor of an immediate passing of the ordinance."
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I now turn to the next page 56, which is page 99 of the German text:
"3. The provision according to which the application of criminal law against Jews is transferred from the judicial authorities to the police, is based on an agreement between the Reich sfuehrer SS and the Reich Minister of Justice, Dr. THIERACK.
This agreement has been approved by the Fuehrer. For if it is to be put into practice it should be embodied in the form of a law, as the present competence of justice, which is based on criminal procedure, can only be modified by a legal provision."
Heil Hitler!
Yours obediently Dr. WALTENBRUNNER"
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I would now like to turn to pages 57 and 58 of the English which are on pages 100 to 101 of the German. This is a note:
Secretary of State STUCKART asked me over the telephone to obtain the opinion of the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery as to the draught of the ordinance which had been sent him with the accompanying letter of April 3rd. As Secretary of State STUCKART informed me, the Reich Minister of the Interior himself has his doubts as to whether the ordinance is still necessary. When STUCKART approached the party chancery on the question, Reichsleiter Bermann suggested that he should obtain the opinion of the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancery.
On 5 April I discussed the affair with Secretary of State KLOPFER. The latter is of the same opinion as myself, that with the exception, perhaps, of Articles 6 and 7 of the draught, the ordinance can be dispensed with. As regards Article 7 of the draught, Secretary of State KLOPFER took my point of view that the possibility must be considered of directing the heritage of deceased Jews either in part or in its totality to their non-Jewish relatives.
The Reich Minister, to whom I reported on 6 April, is of the opinion that we should repair as far as possible from any settlement of the matter by an ordinance.
In order to help on the affair I came to an agreement with Secretary of State KLOPFER and suggested to Secretary of State STUCKART that the question of the further consideration of the draught should be raised at a discussion in which, in addition to myself and him, Secretary of State KLOPFER and Secretary of State ROTHENBERGER and the Chief of the Security Police KALTENBRUNNER should take part. Secretary of State STUCKART agreed to this and suggested that the conference should take place on Wednesday, 14 April, 11 o' clock."
MR. LAFOLLETTE : I now turn to page 59 which is 102 of the German:
"The State Secretary conference which was suggested here about the draft which was at that time completed in the Reich Ministry of the Interior of an Order concerning the Limitation of the legal Rights of Jews, took place today in the office of State Secretary STUCKART. State Secretary ROTHENBURGER, State Secretary KLOPFEIR, SS Gruppenfuehrer KALTENBRUNNER and I were present as well as State Secretary STUCKART.
The discussion showed that only art. 6 and 7 of the provisions of the draft of the order are considered necessary, in this connection art. 7 is to be supplemented by a regulation which makes possible, in the case of a confiscation of property, a settlement in favor of non-Jewish heirs and legal defendants.
It was furthermore considered suitable to have the regulation issued as a supplementary ordinance to the Reich. Citizens Law.
The regulation would accordingly approximately take the form as shown in appendix 11."
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Appendix 11. Those follow in pages 60 and 61. I shall not read them but I think the reading would be helpful. Is defense counsel finished with the exhibit? Prosecution offers to introduce into evidence Prosecution Exhibit No. 204, which is Document NG-151:
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR LAFOLLETTE: I now turn to page 71 of the English book which is page, either 114 or page 114-A of the German book. I am not sure whether there is an "A" there or not. This is Document NG-283 which, when introduced , would be Exhibit NO. 205. This exhibit is very short. The document reads:
"NATIONAL SOCIALIST GERMAN WORKERS' PARTY "11 September 1943.
That's when it was received at the Reich Ministry of Justice. It was dated at the Party Chancery, Munich on the 7 September 1943. I am not going to read the various notations on this document but I will read the substance where it starts "Concerns" followed by a colon:
"Criminal proceedings against foreign juveniles. Your letter of 5 August 1943.
"Your letter of 5 August 1943 is agreed to. No objections are raised to applying the German Criminal Code for Juvenile to foreign Juveniles unless they are Jewish, Polish and Gypsies. Regarding juvenile gypsies and those of mixed gypsies descent you are asked to see to it that simultaneously with the earning into force of the now law concerning Reich juveniles, a special regulation will come into effect which will prevent the German criminal code for juveniles from applying to gypsies and these of gypsy descent merely because definite regulation is lacking.
"Heil Hitler "By order:
(signed) Klemm."
MR. LAFOLLETTE: The prosecution offers in evidence Exhibit 205 which is Document NG-283.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence. The time has arrived for our usual morning recess. We will taka a fifteen minute recess at this time.
(a recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I turn now to Page 75 of the English book, which is Page 117 to 118 of the German book, Document NG-686. I read at the top of the page:
"Special Court for the Region of the Court of appeals Nuremberg, at the District Court Nuremberg-Fuerth, Nuremberg, 20 January 1943. Received 20 January 1943, Prosecution, Nuremberg Fuerth. 1 b S.C. (Special Court) 2051042.
"To the Senior Prosecutor of the District Court Nuremberg-Fuerth, Nuremberg. Subject: Important case, here: Kleinlein, Emil, single, painter, of Fuerth and one other defendant. Charged with a crime against Paragraph 2 of the Decree against Public Enemies."
I now turn to Page 76, which is Page 118 in the German book, I read the last paragraph -- the last sentence, rather.
"I have set the trial for Monday, 25 January 1943, 8:30 A.M. , Court Room 600. Signature, Rothaug, District Court Justice."
DR. KOESEL, do you care to look at the signature?
DR. KOESSL (Counsel for Defendant Rothaug): The signature is not very clearly legible. I admit that it is probably the signature of the defendant Rothaug. However, I don't like to state so definitely, and therefore I reserve the right for my own presentation of evidence to make some declarations to the contrary.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: That is entirely agreeable. The Prose Prosecution offers Exhibit No. 206, Document NG-688, into evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will he received in evidence.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I next turn to Page 77 of the English book, which - my cross numbering ends here, because this document had to be prepared and added later into the book.
It would probably, or should be Page 119 in the German book. The Court will also notice that the first page is marked 77, and that thereafter my paging in the English book is separately numbered 1,2,3,4,5, up to and through 29.
THE PRESIDENT: It is narked both ways in the books that that are on the bench.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: Mine was early and I have no complete document book paging number.
THE PRESIDENT: I take it you are referring to NG 751.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: 751, yes, Your Honor. I will not read too extensively. In any event I will go slowly so that we may find the German pages. At Page 77 I read tho beginning with the words:
"Minutes of the public session of the Special Court for the District of the Appellate Court of Nuremberg at the District Court of Nuremberg-Fuerth on Monday, 25 January 1943.
"Present l) The Presiding Judge: Landesgerichtsdirektor Dr. Rothaug. 2) The Associate Judges: Landesgerichtsraete Dr. Gross and Groben. 3) For the Public Prosecution at the Special Court: Public Prosecutor Markl. 4) The Official Registrar of the Office: Wittle, Senior judicial secretary."
I now turn to Page 4 of the document numbering, which would probably be Page 80 of the English book. I assume no one will object to my interpolating that this is the process dealing with the trial of Emil Kleinlein and Pauline Schaller, nee Heller. Just a very short paragraph about the center of the English page. I believe the interpreter can follow me even if he doesn't have it.
"When the defendants were asked whether they had anything to state yet for their defense they declared themselves in ac 1505 accord with the statements of their defense counsels.