If the interpreters have not been provided with a copy, I will send the exhibit to the interpreter's desk. I'd like to say, Your Honors, that this is a very long affidavit; because I did not know when we were going to get it, I did not have the opportunity to go through the affidavit for the purpose of excluding matter I wouldn't care to read. I don't believe that I wish to detain the court or counsel by reading the whole thing, which I would almost have to do since I have not edited it, unless defense counsel should fool that in view of the fact that they have waived the 24-hour rule, it would be of assistance to them if I didn't road the whole thing; otherwise, I would like to offer the whole thing as an exhibit. I offer and introduce into evidence, prosecution's Exhibit No. 67.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
MR. La FOLLETTE: At this time, I take it as proper that I express to defense counsel my appreciation for their cooperation in this matter. It helps us get along a little bit anyhow.
MR. KING: It has just been called to my attention that the last letter to be found on Page 187 of the English Text, Exhibit 63, which was Document NG-152, at least the English text has an error which we'd like to correct at this time. I understand that the German text does not have the error in it so this will not apply to the German books. In the second paragraph of that letter, the last line ends, "out of a, total annual number of more than 30,000." As the court may note from consulting the original which has been submitted, that stated, "300,000."
JUDGE BRAND: The correct figure is 300,000?
MR. KING: The correct figure is 300,000.
MR. KING: The Prosecution now desires to offer as Exhibit 68 the document NG 159, which is to be found in book 1-B, beginning on page 170, and in the German book, I believe it begins on page 157. This is a letter dated Berlin, 9 September 1942 and it is from Thierack to the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancery:
"Dear Dr. Lammers:
"I am sending you a copy of my letter to the President of the People's Court, Dr. Freisler, and beg you to take note of it. I considered this letter necessary, firstly, because I would like to help Party Member Freisler, who has never held office as a judge, and, secondly, because it is allimportant to me that the People's Court should continue in its present recognized position.
"Heil Hitler!
"Thierack."
And, on the next page of the English document book 1-B and 160 in the German text, a letter dated Berlin, 9 September 1942, to Dr. Freisler from Dr. Thierack. Do the interpreters have the correct letter?
INTERPRETER HAHN: Yes.
MR. KING:
"Dear Party Member Dr. Freisler:
"I would like to add a few words to my remarks at you inauguration as President of the People's Court. It is a personal concern of my own that with the People's Court and its Judges I handed over to you a Court that I have built up and conducted with pleasure, "It was clearer in the case of the People's Court than with any other that the judgement of this highest political court had to be in harmony with the leadership of the state. Thereby it will be for the mainly up to you lead the Judge in that direction. For this reason you must have every charge submitted to you and recognize those cases in which it is necessary, in confidential and convincing discussion with the Judge competent for the verdict, to emphasize what is necessary from the point of view of the state.
Thereby I again stress that this must be done by convincing the judge and not by giving him orders. For the judge has to assume personal responsibility for the sentence. Naturally this guidance to be given to the judges must be limited to what is strictly essential. If too much influence is brought to bear, the only result is that the judge gives an irresponsible sentence, the responsible judge feels it to be an intolerable burden. You must bring it about that the judge comes to you of his accord when necessary and that when this is superfluous you let him feel that this is so.
"As a general rule, the judge of the People's Court must get used to regarding the ideas and intentions of the state leadership as the primary factor and the individual fate which depends on him as only a secondary factor. For the defendants before the People's Court are only small phenomena of a larger circle behind them, which is at war with the Reich. That is especially true in war time. I will try to illustrate this with individual cases:
"1) If a Jew - and a leading Jew at that - is charged with high treason, even if he is only an accomplice therein, he has behind him the hate and the will of Jewry to exterminate the German people. As a rule this will therefore be high treason and must be punished by the death penalty.
"2) If after 22 June 1941 a German agitates in the Reich in favor of the Communists, or even if he only tries to influence the people in a Communist direction, he is not only preparing high treason but also favoring the enemy.
"3) If in the area of Bohemia and Moravia the Czechs, influenced by the London radio, continually try to undermine the Reich, even if they only use propaganda, that constitutes not only preparation for high treason, but also amounts to favoring the enemy.
"In case you should ever be in doubt as to which line to follow or which political necessities to take into consideration, please address yourself to me in all confidence.
I shall always be in a position to give you the help you need. I remind you of what I have already said. It was clear to me, too, at the time that the treaty with Soviet Russia in August 1939 did not change the views held by the leadership of the state on Communism, but I did not know whether it was expedient at the time to pronounce the heaviest sentences against Communists in the Reich. At the tine I had to do my best alone. Today I an at your disposal for such decisions which are often not easy.
"Dear Party Member Freisler, please do not consider my explanations as an attempt to lay down the law to you. I only wrote this letter because I realize the importance of your position and would like to help you.
"Heil Hitler.
"Dr. Thierack."
The prosecution desires to offer in evidence Exhibit 68 which is Document NG 159.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
MR. KING: The prosecution would next like to offer Document NG 176which will become, I believe, Exhibit 69. It is to be found on page 178 of the English Document Book 1-B, and I believe in the German text that is page 155. This is a letter dated Berlin, 16 October 1942, and it is addressed to the Reich Minister Banners:
"Dear Reichminister:
"I am especially grateful to you for the efforts you made to enable me to report to the Fuehrer personally that I had entered upon my office and for your kindness in handing to the Fuehrer my actual written report on my taking up of office.
"I am therefore enclosing this report.
"I have familiarized myself now with my duties. I have arranged the work of the People's Court in a manner that enables me personally to seize upon and combat by my own work as a judge - which I hope will serve to guide the Court - every kind of high treason and treason committed by both Germans and foreigners in the Reich, in their true nature, extent and danger.
"The high treason committed by Communists is at present far in excess of that committed by any other group of Germans. It appears to an unusually great extent in some districts of the Alps and Danube Gaus. Of course, during the war with the Soviets Communist high treason will be regarded as complicity with the enemy as well.
"Among the many trials concluded in the last weeks that of the former Czech General Homola deserves special prominence. He was the chief of the second team of the "narodni obrana", the Czech officers resistance movement. He was condemned to death.
"Among the trials to take place in the next two months the following deserve special mention:
"l) The trial of the former writer Dr. Klotz. who as an emigrant abroad has engaged in high treasonable and treasonable activities in the highest degree.
"2) The trials of some members of Communist sabotage organizations abroad which had as their aim terrorist attacks on German, Italian, and Japanese merchant vessels.
"On the other hand, by order of the Fuehrer, work on the Grynspan trial will not be started until further notice.
"I remain with my best thanks "Heil Hitler "Your obedient "Freisler."
On page 180 of the English translation, on page 187 of the German, in Document Book 1-B, a letter dated Berlin, October 15, 1942, from Freisler to Hitler. It begins:
"My Fuehrer:
"I beg to report to you, my Fuehrer, that I have taken up the office you bestowed on me and familiarized myself with it in the meantime.
"My thanks for the responsibility which you entrusted to me shall be expressed by my working faithfully and with all my strength for the security of the Reich and the inner solidarity of the German people by my own example as a judge and leader of the men of the People's Court.
I am proud to be responsible to you, ay Fuehrer, and the supreme justiciary and judge of the German people, for the justice pronounced by your highest political tribunal.
"The People's Court will constantly endeavour to pass judgments in line with the way it thinks the Fuehrer himself would judge the case.
"Heil to my Fuehrer; Faithfully; Your political soldier; Roland Freisler."
Your Honor, there has been a very slight delay on the Part of the prosecution in presenting the next series of documents, I should judge perhaps five minutes. Would the Court desire to recess for a short while?
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess for five minutes.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: May it please Your Honors, the prosecution will next offer Document Number 280. For the benefit of the interpreters, all of these documents are in Book 1-C. This is at page 16.
THE PRESIDENT: Document Book 1-C has not been laid before the Court.
THE MARSHAL: Here it is, sir.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: This is document Number NG-280, found at page 16 in the English text. It begins at page 19 of the German book. It will be, when offered, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 70:
"Pertaining to RK 4729. Berlin, 28 March 1941.
"Re: Sentences against Poles.
"1. Memorandum:
"According to information from Reich Leader Bormann, a sentence of the Lueneburg District Court - apparently in a rape trial - against a Polish farmhand has been submitted to the Fuehrer, in which the defendant is granted extenuating circumstances because it was felt that he did not have the same reticence in his relations to women co-workers as German farmhands have. The Fuehrer rejected this view of the court as totally erroneous. State Secretary Schlegelberger is to take the necessary steps to preclude a repetition of this conception.
"The Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancery.
"2. To State Secretary Dr. Schlegelberger "Reich Ministry of Justice, Berlin, 29 March 1941, forwarded 30 March "Dear Dr. Schlegelberger:
"The sentence of the Lueneburg District Court of 21 October 1940 on the Polish farmhand Wolay Wojcieck from Rolfsen has been transmitted to the Fuehrer. In it the court states:
"'The defendant is granted extenuating circumstances in respect to the crime. The court considered in the defendant's favor that as a Pole, he does not have the same reticence in his relations with women co-workers as the German farmhand has.'
"The Duehrer rejected the view of the court as totally misleading. The Fuehrer urges you to take immediately the steps necessary to preclude repetition in other courts of the view of the Lueneburg court. I should be obliged if you would inform me what steps you have taken in the matter "Heil Hitler.
Yours very truly (only by the Reich Minister).
"3. To Reich Leader Bormann.
"Dear Mr. Bormann:
"I transmitted the instruction of the Fuehrer as contained in your letter of 26 March 1941, concerning the consideration of extenuating circumstances in crimes committed by Roles, to State Secretary Dr. Schlegelberger with the request for information about what steps he has taken in the matter.
"Heil Hitler. Yours very truly, (only by the Reich Minister), initial: L.
"4. To be submitted again on 28 April.
"Handwritten initials: R and F."
We are now on page 19 in the German book.
"2 April 1941. Berlin, 1 April 1941.
"The Reich Minister of Justice. Entrusted with the management of Official Business.
"Your Excellency: Herr Reich Minister:
"Upon receipt of your kind letter of 29 March 1941, I immediately consulted the deeds of the criminal case against the Polish farmhand Wolay Wojcieck. In the statement of the court the passage quoted in your letter is indeed to be found. By means of a circular with the order for immediate transmittal to all judges and public prosecutors, I brought the mistake in the viewpoint, as it is show in this passage of the court statement, to the knowledge of the Penal Justice without delay. I consider it impossible that such an incident will occur again.
"I also had the responsible President of the Appellate Court and the judges concerned ordered to report here tomorrow with the intention of changing responsibilities at the Lueneburg District Court with a view to excluding the judges who cooperated in issuing the sentence from further employment in criminal jurisdiction.
"Heil Hitler. Yours very truly, (signature) Schlegelberger.
"1) Reported to the Fuehrer. Equally report on the letter of State Secretary Schlegelberger of 3 April 1941."
I turn to page 22 of the German book, 19 of the English book:
"The Reich Minister of Justice Entrusted with the Management of Official Business. Berlin, 3 April 1941.
"Your Excellency, Herr Reich Minister;
"In addition to my letter of 1 April 1941 I beg to inform you that the presiding judge of the Criminal Division which passed the sentence in the case against the Polish farmhand, Wolay Wojcieck, is no longer chairman and that the two associate judges have been replaced by other associate judges.
"Heil Hitler. Yours very truly, (signature) Schlegelberger."
And there are notations at the bottom which I shall not read.
The prosecution offers to introduce into evidence the Prosecution's Exhibit No. 70.
THE PRESIDENT: It will re received.
MR. LAFQLLETTE: NG No. 505, which is at Page 14 of the English text and also at Page 14 of the German text:
"Der Reichsminister der Justiz.
"Berlin W 8, 24 July 1941.
"l) To the President of the Courts of Appeals and the General. Public Prosecutors (with the exception of Prague) "2) Through the Reich Protector in Bohemia and Moravia to the Presidents of the Courts of Appeals and the General Public Prosecutor at Prague "Concerns:
Mild sentences against Poles."
On the same page, the first grammatic paragraph:
"Despite my constant allusions to this matter during conferences and in individual decrees, I am time and again notified of sentences by which Poles, residents in the Reich, are given entirely insufficient prison sentences for sexual delinquency and other serious crimes. Such sentences reveal an incomprehensible, lenient attitude towards the Polish nation which confronts us with implacable enmity. They constitute a danger to the security of the German people and justify the reproach that the administration of criminal law has not proven adequate to the demands of war.
"To make this point clear the attachment lists a few of such sentences against Polish nationals, which had to be changed by special decrees or which I had to have altered by way of a nullity plea."
I next turn t the bottom paragraph of page 15 of the English text, which is found on pages, I understand, 15 and 16 of the German text:
"In addition to this, it must be considered, that Poles now are entering German as a result of the war-time shortage of German labor and that as a result of the decrease of police forces, also due to the war, the necessary police supervision over Poles, which would have been possible under normal peacetime conditions, is no longer guaranteed.
"Entrusted with the executive management of affairs, (signed) Dr. Schlegelberger.
"Certified: Bierwirth, Ministerialkanzleiobersekretaer."
The prosecution offers to introduce into evidence Prosecution's Exhibit No. 71, which is Document NG-505.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
MR. LAFFOLLETTE: Prosecution Exhibit No. 72, when offered, will be NG-508, found on page 5 of the English text and on Page 4 of the German text. Mr. Wooleyhan will carry on and introduce the next exhibit.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: "Reich Minister of Justice appointed to carry on procedure. Berlin W 8, 15 December 1941.
"To the Presidents of the Courts of Appeal and the Chief Public Prosecutors:
"An important factor in keeping up the morale of the German people on the home front is the prompt and purposeful administration of penal law.
"The Fuehrer was referring to this when, in his speech at the German Reichstag on 11 December 1941, he said:
"'The memory of those who have died for the existence and greatness of the German people even before our time makes us realize the extent of our duties.
"'He who tries to avoid this duty, however, has no right to live among us as a member of the German race.
"'We shall be equally unrelenting in our fight for the preservation of our race as we were in our fight for power.
"'At a time when thousands of our best men, fathers, and sons of our people are being killed in battle, nobody shall hope to live who attempts to deprecate at home the sacrifice which is being made at the front. No matter under which disguise the attempt is made to disturb this German front, to undermine the resistance power of our people, to reduce the authority of the regime or to sabotage production on the home front, the culprit shall die. But there is this difference: While death brings highest honor to the soldier at the front, the other who devaluates this sacrifice shall die in shame.'" That ends the quote from the Hitler speech.
The letter continues:
"If every judge and every prosecutor keeps those words of the Fuehrer in mind while he is doing his duty, it will enable him to fulfill the task which is set him by the Fuehrer.
"I beg to acquaint all judges concerned with penal law and all attorneys with this outline, and to bring it to the notice of all judges who will in future be concerned with penal law."
Signed: "Dr. Schlegelberger."
MR. WOOLEYHAN: The prosecution wishes to offer into evidence as Exhibit No. 72, Document NG-508
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: The next document which the prosecution will seek to offer into evidence as Exhibit No. 73 is Document NG-445, which is found on Page 59 of the German Book and Page 60 of the English.
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT No. NG-445 Office of Chief of Counsel for War Crime The President of the Berlin Court of Appeal.
To the State Secretary Dr. Schlegelberger in B e r l i n W. 8 RE:
Report about the general situation in the districts.
1.) When I paid a visit to the criminal court few months ago in order to attend proceedings of the Special Court, I heard from the representative of the president of the (district court), that "the Reich Ministry of Justice" was expecting 2 death sentences "in the criminal case being on schedule". My investigations produced the fact that the competent Public Prosecutor had informed the president of the special court prior to the session, that he had received a directive of the Reich Ministry of Justice to ask for a death sentence in two cases. The president of the special court had informed the representative of the president of the (district court) hereof. I consider it undesirable that officials of the public prosecution authority pass on such directives given them by a higher authority prior to the proceedings to the president of the court, as it has been done here. For I am afraid, that judge including those sitting in the special court, are in some cases much easier inclined to pronounce a given penalty, especially the death penalty, if they hear that "the Reich Ministry of Justice" has given a directive to the public prosecutor's office to ask for such a sentence or that "according to the "views of the Reich Ministry of Justice" this penalty be necessary.
I consider such a communication, given to the court by the public prosecutor, as undesirable also because the "opinion of the Reich Ministry of Justice" conveyed by the public prosecutor, might possibly, in an individual case, but represent the personal views of an auxiliary official of the Reich Ministry of Justice, about which he had informed the specialized official of the public prosecutor's office.
".) The President of the Berlin Landgericht (the Berlin District Court) according to what he reported to me recently, in the course of a visit to a criminal trial in Moabit observed the following:
"The trial was set for 9:00 hours. Punctually at 9:00 the president of the District Court had taken a seat on the witnesses' bench. The judges did not snow up at first. Instead, loud voices could be heard from the conference room behind the courtroom. The president of the Landgericht (District Court) got the impression of a heated debate, in which one voice could be heard above the others. According to what the Landgerichtspraesident" --that is the presiding judge of the district court--" could observe, the defendant's attention was aroused and he listened in the direction of the conference room. No actual words could be understood by the president of the Landgericht. But he thought it quite possible that the defendant, who was very much nearer to he conference room, could hear details. Therefore the president sent a justice sergeant to the conference room with the order to inform the court about that. Shortly afterwards the public prosecutor appeared first in the courtroom, then the members of the court and that through the same door which immediately leads to the courtroom from the conference room. After the beginning of the proceedings the president of the Landgericht soon could undoubtedly recognize that the extraordinarily loud voice he had heard before, had been the voice of the public prosecution's representative for that trial.
3.) Recently I learned from a complaint made by a Service Supervision Office immediately prior to the session the president of a special court had conferred with the public prosecutor.
Thereby the punctual beginning of the session was prevented, and the final results were that all other people, involved in the trial had to wait unnecessarily for the beginning of the session. The president of the Landgericht told the judge that if such talks seemed necessary they should be timed in away that the punctual beginning of the session would not be delayed thereby.
4.) It has been reported to me that repeatedly even after the beginning of the session, especially after the end of the producing of evidence and prior to the beginning of the pleadings, the public prosecution's representative repeatedly got in touch with members of the court in the conference room, during an intermission in the proceedings. In those talks, as I have been told, the question of guilt, but above all the sentence, had been discussed.
5.) I have been informed confidentially that a Gau office for legal affairs has "conveyed the following information to the Reich office for legal affairs of the NSDAP:
"According to a confidential ordinance of the Reich Ministry of Justice, details whereof I do not know, the public prosecutors have been requested to contact the judges about the sentence to be asked for before the pleadings for such take place. This request has caused extraordinary surprise, especially among the lawyers. The pleadings of the defense counsel practically have become a mere formality. Prior to the pleadings of the defence counsel the court and the public prosecutor have already agreed upon the penalty. In practice, the court in almost every case always agrees to the penalty asked by the chief public prosecutor.
Naturally this does not only strike the defence counsel but gradually also the population. In this connection a change must take place immediately. If a conference between the public prosecutor and the court concerning the degree of the penalty is considered necessary at all, at least it can be asked that defense counsel too be present at these talks and be permitted to clearly state his point of view.
It is my opinion that as soon as the trial has begun, any contacts be tween the public prosecutor and members of the court are undesirable, because, as the events discussed above prove, misunderstandings are provoked hereby.
The public prosecutor's getting in touch with the court, as requested in the decree of 27 May 1939 - and as it has also been suggested in the concluding speech of the late Reich Minister of Justice at the conference held in the Reich Ministry of Justice on 24 October 1939, therefore will have to be limited to the time before the beginning of the trial. It seems practical to have it take place already the day before the trial or even earlier. At any rate I do not think it desirable that the contacts are made but immediately before the beginning of the trial and that in addition they happen in the conference room of the court, because then occurences, as I have described some of them under 2 and 3 of this report, cannot always be prevented. I consider it as an illicit contact when the latter takes place after the end of the producing of evidence or, even more, after the pleadings have been concluded. Therefore the president of the Landgericht in Berlin, upon my request, has conferred with the Chief Public Prosecutor of the District Court. The latter had instructed the public prosecutors within his area of jurisdiction to get in touch with the president of the court - as far as this is necessary- already the day before the trial or still earlier, at any rate, however to refrain from making contacts after the beginning of the trial. The presidents of the courts have been notified by the president of the Landgericht accordingly and have been instructed to refrain under all circumstances from any getting in contact in the conference room, immediately prior to the beginning of the session. The prevention or limitation of discrepancies between the penalty demanded by the public prosecution and the sentence passed in court, which has been the purpose of the decree of 27 May 1939 and of the detailed arguments of the late Reich Minister of Justice, should be safeguarded by a timely and comprehensive contact prior to the trial.
Moreover and as stated above, I consider it as undesirable in the interest of the administration of justice and in order to remove any fears con cerning influence exerted upon the judges, that officials of the Public Prosecutor's office communicate "the opinion of the Reich Ministry of Justice."
, in the case on hand or any orders which may have been issued to them concerning the penalties to be asked, to the court outside of the ceedings. pro In view of the general importance of the matter, I thought it advisable to report about it.
The prosecution offers into evidence as Exhibit No. 73, Document NG445.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence.
Mr. WOLLEYHAN: the next document which the Prosecution will later offer is found on Page 65 of the German Document and Page 64 of the English Document Book, NG-395.
It is from the presiding officer of the Court of Appeal, Hamm, Westphalia, 27 February 1942, to the Reich Minister of Justice in Berlin. Subject, General Situation, Decree from December 9, 1935.
"1. From the judges, officials and employees at the court of the District Court of Appeal 2134 are at present drafted to the Armed Forces; 107 of whom have been killed in action."
I skip now to Paragraph Number 3, Page 66 of the German Document Book; Page 65 of the English Document Book.
"3. On 2 February 1942 the newly appointed Gauleiter of south Westphalia, SA-Gruppenfuehrer Giesler payed a visit to the Court of Appeal. On this occasion there was a roll call for the employees of the Court of Appeal and prosecution in the Court of Appeals, plenary-session room, during which an address was delivered by the President of the Court of Appeal, the Prosecutor, and the Gauleiter following performance of music by Haydn and Mozart by the Gau-orchestra. The edition of the 'Deutsche Justiz' of 20 February 1942 brings a report of the proceedings.
"Following the roll call the Presidents of the Senate, the Presidents of the Court of Appeal, the Chief Prosecutors and others present were introduced to the Gauleiter.
"The General Prosecutor has been appointed Director of the Gau Legal Office for south Westehalia in place of Prosecutor Justizrat Dr. Roesner, at present Oberkriegsverwaltungsgerichtsrat, against whom proceedings have been instituted by a party court.
4. The report on the activity of the 3 special courts (Dortmund, Essen, Bielefeld) for 1941 signifies a further increase of cases brought before the special courts in 1941. In 707 verdicts 933 persons were tried of whom 41, i.e. 5% were acquitted. The number of malicious cases does not amount to one half as before, but only to one-fourth or one-third of the total number of cases handled. The special courts primarily deal with the more extensive and complicated cases against public enemies and with such war economic cases which mostly are particularly involved.
"It is by the large percentage of foreigners who have been tried, 11 per cent, that the use of foreign labor in agriculture and industry is most apparent. In particular this applies to the Poles, who in general are unwilling to work, insubordinate and who even commit acts of brutality."
I skip now the first complete paragraph on Page 67 of the German Document Book and Page 66 of the English Document Book.
"The time between the receipt of the indictment and the judgment passed amounted, in general, to approximately three days only. It was possible to pass the death sentence on a Polish woman on the same day on which the indictment had been received by the court. In a number of cases, the judgment was passed already 2 or 3 days after receipt of the indictment.
"The trials took place, for the most part, at the place of the crime or near it. This expedited matters to a great extent. Only in this way could the witnesses appear on time and immediately produce such evidence as proved to be necessary during the trial. In many cases, it was necessary to make a local inspection. Furthermore the effect of the sentence is much more impressive, as proved by experience, if the judgment is passed at the place where the crime has been committed and where public interest has been aroused. I shall strive against hampering the function of the Special Court due to scarcity of petrol."
I skin to the last paragraph on Page 67 of the German Document Book; Page 66 of the English Document Book.
"Altogether in 1941 the Special Courts of my district passed 47 death sentences; the criminal chambers, in addition, five death sentences.
"Of these are:
"a) capital crimes 11 sentences "b) sexual offenses 7 sentences "c) property delicts 32 sentences "d) war economy crimes 2 sentences "The time between passing of judgment and execution amounted during the last months to approximately six weeks.
"I have submitted the reports regarding the activity of the Special Courts on 3 February 1942 - 3234 E. 1,69.
"The work accomplished by the Special Courts deserves full recognition. In addition to the mental and spiritual burden there is the great physical exertion, since there are often more than three hearings weekly and often require travelling."
I skip now to Paragraph 6, found on Page 69 of the German Document Book, and Page 68 of the English Document Book.
"The Bishop of Muenster was reported to me to have stated in one of his sermons: that the property of the monastery Vinnenberg (District of Warendorf) was seized and handed over to the Reich on the claim that the owners were enemies of the State; according to him this property belongs to the episcopal estate and that, the Bishop, does not consider himself an enemy of the State. In the Land Register the Bishopric at Muenster is registered as the actual owner of the estate of the monastery -- so far no application for amendment has yet been submitted to the Land-Registry-Office."
The remaining half of Document Number 395, if the Court is willing, shall be read following introduction of two other documents which seem to make the chain of evidence a little more coherant. Would that be permissable?
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Then we will withhold temporarily the introduction of 395 for the moment.
The next document sought to be offered into evidence as Exhibit Number 75 is Document NG 102 which is found on Page 43 of the English Book, Page 46 of the German Document Book.
MR. LaFOLLETTE: With Mr. Wooleyhan's permission, I would like to address the Court for a minute. This Document, NG-102, is quite a long document. It involves correspondence between the Defendant, Dr. Schlegelberger and many people what is a proposed decree. I think I am fairly stating that this document was calculated to carry out the objections of Hitler to the administration of justice.
An intelligent reading of it requires a good deal of skipping around and will take at least 15 or 20 minutes. Unless the court desire to sit longer than 4:30, I think it would be much more orderly to present this first in the morning.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it is better to adjourn at the usual time.
MR. LaFOLLETTE: We would carry over quite extensively if we went into this document.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30 o'clock.
(The Tribunal recessed at 1630 hours 10 March 1947 to reconvene 0930 hours on 11 March 1947)