That is evident from the contents of the document. I offer this document as Exhibit 222.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received, and we observe that some of these exhibits, including this one, commence in the middle of a page, which is contrary to the practice we have had in all other document books. That is very inconvenient for us. We hope that the other document books will not start an exhibit in the middle of a page. Exhibit 222 is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 269 on Pages 30 and 31 of my document book contains extracts from a general order of the Ministry of Justice, dated the 30 of October 1942. It also refers to the extension of the opportunities to make the nullity plea. This order by the Ministry of Justice shows clearly that now, as before, the nullity plea can only be made in the case of decisions or judgments passed by the local court judge, or in the penal chamber by the Special Court. I offer this document as Exhibit 225.
THE PRESIDENT: It's received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 26, Page 32, gives an extract from the German Criminal Law by Grau-Krug-Rietzsch. This document in its last sentence shows clearly that the Chief Reich Public Prosecutor at the People's Court was never able to make the nullity plea. I offer this as Exhibit 224.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: The next document is 260, the exhibit number will be 225. This is an extract from an order by the Ministry of Justice. It deals with the question of the competency within the prosecution office. I offer this document as Exhibit 225.
THE PRESIDENT: That appears at the middle of Page 17?
DR. GRUBE: In my book, it's on pages 33 and 34. It gives Article 13 of the Third General Order of the Ministry of Justice of the 18 December 1934.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit 225 is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 126, Pages 35 through 44 in my document book, contains extracts from the ordinances by the inter-Allied Rhineland Commission during the time when the Rhineland was occupied after the First World War. May I remind you that the defendant Lautz, in the witness stand, mentioned those ordinances, and in particular, referred to the note by the Four Allied Governments of the 29 July 1919. That note appears on Page 5 of my document and I quote:
"The German courts in cases where they have to pass judgment will apply the German penal law; but in accordance with the principles of international law, military courts of the Allied powers can apply only those laws which were issued in their homelands."
From the note of the Four Allied Governments of the 29 July 1919. I offer this Document as Exhibit 226.
THE PRESIDENT: It's received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 540, pages 45 through 48 in my book, have comparative accounts of German and foreign penal law, which at the suggestion of the Reich Justice Office in 1906 was published as a preliminary to the reform of German penal law.
The document shows that it was found in the whole of modern foreign legislation in the case of high treason offenses that no difference was made whether high treason had been committed by a national of the country or by a foreigner, and whether it had been committed inside that country or abroad. The commissions found that modern foreign and German law had abandoned the opinion, according to which the essence of high treason is that a relationship of loyalty has been violated. On page 2 of the same document, it is shown that the commissions found that the crime of high treason in foreign legislation, as well as in German legislation, is always considered to be the most serious offenses and is always threatened with the most severe penalties. On page 3 of the document, we see that the commissions found the same at that time about treason. In connection with treason, too, it was found that foreign countries too punished a foreigner for treason, also if he had committed his offense abroad. I offer t is document as Exhibit 227.
THE PRESIDENT: It's received.
DR. GRUBE: The next document , which will have the Exhibit No. 228 is document 91, which in my document book appears on page 47 and following pages.
THE PRESIDENT: We don't find it yet. What page is it on in the English? Does anyone know? Some of these documents don't have your document number on them either.
INTERPRETER: Page 24.
THE PRESIDENT: Page 24 isn't even numbered.
DR. GRUBE: Your Honor, I have just found that this document begins half way through page 24.
THE PRESIDENT: Is that the one that starts, "Reichstag for the emergency period...."?
DR. GRUBE: This is an extract from the negotiations of the Pendlaw Committee of the Reichstag o in 1928, and it refers to the discussion on a draft for the German Penal Code.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute. We will name that for you: Document No. 91.
DR. GRUBE: Yes, 91.
THE PRESIDENT: Is that an exhibit of only about eight lines, or does it continue with the matter concerning the Reichstaf election period, 1928?
DR. GRUBE: Your Honor, may I just have a look at the Prosecution's copy ? ... Your Honor, it continues through Page 27. This document shows that the German Reich Government in 1928 already had intended to have a draft made of a penal law, according to which high treason, treason, offenses against the Armed Forces, against the people or against the bearer of a German office, were to be punished even if a foreigner committed the offense abroad. At the end of that document we see that the representative of the Social Democratic Party said at that time that the Social Democrats had no misgivings about making those offenses part of an International penal code. I offer this document as Exhibit 228.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 142 is an excerpt from the Reich Law Gazette of 1934, Page 27. The whole of this document 142 4 refers to the development of the question whether the prosecutor, and that included also the Reich Public Prosecutor at the People's Court and the Reich Supreme Court, is competent , without the Reich Ministry of Justice being involved, to file an indictment when a foreigner has committed an offense abroad.
The first page of this document is an extract from the law for the amendment of the penal law, of 24th April 1934. The last paragraph shows that in 1934 Article IV of the Penal Code was amended to the effect that the indictment of a foreigner for an offense committed abroad could only be filed with the approval of the Reich Minister of Justice.
THE PRESIDENT: You are referring to Paragraph "C" of Article II?
DR. GRUBE: In the heading it says Article II of the Penal Code will be amended as follows:
THE PRESIDENT: I see; all right.
DR. GRUBE: The next page of this document contains extracts from the penal code for the German Reich with notations by Frank. It contains the version of Article IV of the penal code such as was in force from 1934 until 1940. Then, on the same document, there is an extract from the decree concerning the competency of penal law, the areas over which it extended, of 6th May, 1940. That decree, Article IV of the Penal Code, was amended insofar as the provision according to which indictments of foreigners could only be filed with the approval of the Reich Minister of Justice, was removed from Article IV of the penal code and incorporated in Article 155-A of the Penal Code of Procedure. May I quote the decisive section in this new law, Article 153-A of the Penal Code of Procedure: "Offenses committed by a foreigner abroad may be prosecuted by the prosecutor only upon order of the Reich Minister of Justice." Then, in the same document there is an excerpt from the book Penal administrative Provisions. That excerpt contains a quotation from the general ordinance of the Reich Ministry of Justice of 21st May, 1935.
Article VII and VII appear in the document. Article VII, quite independently of the fact whether the offenses have been committed by foreigners is of general importance for the work of the prosecutor; that article contained the provision which has been mentioned again and again at this trial here, and from which it was resolved that the prosecution and the Reich prosecution too in all important cases must continuously report to the Ministry of Justice, to which it had to send copies of the indictments, etc. May I refer in particular to the end of Article VII, the sentence before the last says: That in general it is sufficient for the referents to communicate what decision was to be taken and to state that they would make their decision final if within a fortnight they had not received any instructions from the Ministry. That article further states that in connection with more important cases the instructions from the Reich Ministry of Justice must always be obtained first. Article VIII deals with the prosecution of foreigners. If refers to No. 300 of the Rules for Criminal procedure. Those rules appear on the next page, those directives. Under Section II of numeral 300 of the general decree by the Ministry of Justice, of 13th April, 1934, it orders: That in cases where foreigners are prosecuted for offenses committed abroad, the public prosecutor from the moment when proceedings are instituted, must continuously make reports to the Minister of Justice and unless there is any danger involved, he has to wait for instructions before he makes any important decision, for instance before an arrest warrant is issued.
I offer this Document as Exhibit 229.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 109 which follows is an extract from the book by Niethanmer which has teen mentioned here several times. Here, too -
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute. What page is that on?
DR. GRUBE: Page 65 of the English book. Niethammer also points out that prosecution of foreigners for offenses committed abroad can only be instituted at the order of the Minister of Justice.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 230 is received.
DR. GRUBE: The next document, 111, on page 66 of the English text, also contains excerpts from the book by Niethammer. May I direct the attention of the Tribunal to the last sentence of this document which shows that the court at every phase of proceedings was under obligation to pay attention to the fact whether the Reich Minister of Justice had actually ordered that a foreigner should be prosecuted for an offense committed abroad.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 231 is received.
DR. GRUBE: The next document No. 110, in the English text on page 68, is an excerpt from the decree on the competency of penal law, a territorial applicability of the criminal low. The document shows that in 1940, as Article VIII of the Penal Code of Procedure, the following provision was introduced, "The court of the district in which the accused is kept in custody at the order of the authorities at the time of the filing of the indictment is also competent to try the case."
I offer this document as Exhibit 232.
The PRESIDENT: The next document, No. 59, on page 71 in the English text, is an affidavit by Najork. In this affidavit Najork gives an account of his son Horst after the Gestapo agent had denounced him; was arrested by the Gestapo in Carlsbad in 1943. Najork goes on to say that the matter was brought before the Reich Prosecution with the People's Court. The defendant Lautz, when Najork came to see him, had the Gestapo report re-examined by the Chief Reich Prosecutor Burkartz at Egar. As a result of that, it was found that the statements were untrue and proceedings were discontinued. I should like to point out that the defendant Lautz on the witness stand mentioned thin case. This document I offer as Exhibit 233.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, may take this opportunity to perhaps get some indication from the Tribunal and Defense Counsel as to the proceedings tomorrow. I had in mind that there are still some Klemm document books which might be put in if Dr. Schilf is in a position to do it after Dr. Grube has finished, and I would like to know what the status is with reference to the defendants Petersen and Nebelung.
THE PRESIDENT: That has already been reported to your associate.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Has the Klemm matter been reported?
THE PRESIDENT: No. Petersen and Nebelung will not take the stand according to cur information. We are ready to receive document book as far as the defense will present them.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: That would apply to the Klemm document books if they are available?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. The Tribunal will recess until tomorrow morning at 9:30.
(The Tribunal aljourned until 29 August, 1947 at 0930 hrs).
Official Transcript of American Military Tribunal III in the matter of the United States of America against Josef Alstoetter, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 29 August 1947, 0930-1630, the Honorable James T. Brand, presiding.
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal III. Military Tribunal III is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain if the defendants are all present?
THE MARSHAL: May at please Your Honors, all the defendants are present in the courtroom with the exception of the defendant Rothenberger, who is absent due to illness, and the defendant Rothaug, who has been excused by the Tribunal at his own request.
THE PRESIDENT: Let proper notation be made.
For the convenience of counsel, the Tribunal has decided to continue with the taking of document books until noon today. At 1:30 this afternoon we will commence with the testimony of the defendant Cuhorst, this being in part, at least, for the personal convenience of the attorney for the defendant Cuhorst who has urgent business commencing next week.
Proceed.
DR. GRUBE: May I continue with my presentation of documents. Yesterday I presented documents from my Book IV-A, and I had gotten as far as Document 59, Exhibit 233. The next document from that book which I offer is Document 84. It is on pages 73 through 82 in the English text. That document contains first an affidavit by Bishop Dr. Dietrich of Wiesbaden, and the same document also contains papers which deal with case of undermining military morale against a clergyman in Wiesbaden.
The document shows that the assertion that that clergyman had made statements undermining military morale was based on the testimony of Gestapo witnesses, and that it was due to the attitude which the defendant Lautz took that the credibility of those witnesses and their testimony was shaken. Furthermore, the document shows what difficulties and struggles there were with the Gestapo when the defendant Lautz began to play a part in this matter.
I offer this document as Exhibit 234.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: The next document is No. 64, on page 83 through 85 of the English book. It is an affidavit by the clergyman Dr. Borngaesser, who in Exhibit 234 was mentioned as the person against whom proceedings had been instituted. Clergyman Borngaesser in his affidavit says that Chief Reich Prosecutor Lautz was helpful in every way and that he, the clergyman, wanted to say that he owes to Lautz' intervention that he is still alive.
I offer this document as Exhibit 235.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: The affidavit Wolcker also deals with the case of clergyman Borngaesser. It is on page 86 through 88 of the English document book.
I offer this document as Exhibit 236.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 117, on pages 89 through 92 of the English document book, contains an affidavit by Professor Dr. Richard Lange, of Jena. Dr. Lange, who at present teaches at the University of Jena, in Thuringia, that is to say in the Russian zone, is the nan who drafted the new penal code for the land of Thuringia in the Russian zone.
In his affidavit Dr. Lange described Lautz' character. I may point out that Dr. Lange states "Lautz generally and by myself too, was considered a very able, efficient, conscientious and correct civil servant. He was by his nature against National Socialism." Dr. Lange further says "Lautz tried to put up with National Socialism by adhering strictly to formal law. He carried out the instructions which he received from the Ministry of Justice correctly, but as far as I was able to observe, he never went beyond those instructions; nor, did he ever take any initiative in that direction." He further describes cases of undermining of military morale and of the witnesses heard, which if it hadn't been for Lautz, would have come to a fatal end for the defendants, in particular because witnesses had been called which had been interrogated by tho Gestapo, were carefully examined for their credibility. I think it will be of interest to know that Lange points out that Lautz expressed to him his wish to become a professor at a university to avoid to have anything further to do with the Reich Prosecution office.
I offer this document as Exhibit 237.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document No. 134, on pages 93 and 94 of the English book, is an affidavit by Professor Doctor Hildegard Brouwer of Stuttgart. This deals with a case of undermining of military morale; a case which was also mentioned in the affidavit by Prof. Dr. Lange of Jena.
I offer this document as Exhibit 238.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 154, on pages 95 through 100 of the English document book, is an affidavit by Ernst Breidenbach.
In his affidavit he describes the Both case. Both was the director of the Evangelical society in Frankfurt on the Main. He was arrested by the Gestapo because he was alleged of having sent leaflets undermining military morale to young men who were members of the society and who were fighting at the front. In his affidavit Broidenbach states when he heard of that case he approached Ministerial Director Sack; that is the same Sack whose name has been mentioned here several times and who was a friend of the defendant Lautz. Breidenbach states that Sack referred him to Lautz. Breidenbach says that Lautz made every effort to have the case thoroughly examined. The result mas that the case was not tried by tho People's Court, but in Frankfurt; and the outcome was a minimum sentence passed for purely formal reasons. I believe it is of interest that Breidenbach states that Lautz had told him that in effect there was no alternative for him but to remain at his post. He believed it was his task to pretend that he were a good National Socialist. In that way he was able to help a great many people and he had already saved the lives of many people, including officers. Breidenbach adds that Dr. Sack confirmed that to him later.
I offer this document as Exhibit 239.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Your Honor, in my Document Book IV-B there mas an affidavit by Roinecke. The other documents in Volume IV-B have already been introduced. The Roinecke affadvit at that time was rejected because the prosecution objected to its receipt for the reason that Roinecke was available as a witness, as he mas at the prison here. Now, my colleague Dr. Aschenauer pointed out yesterday that Reinecke is not available as a witness because at the moment he is in the hospital.
May I ask the Tribunal to make a ruling whether in view of the situation it is not possible for me to offer the Reinecke affidavit in Volume IV-B and have it accepted as an exhibit.
THE PRESIDENT: Was it given a number when we were handling Document Book IV-B?
DR. GRUBE: Not to my knowledge. It is Document 116 in Volume IV-B. The exhibit number would be 240.
THE PRESIDENT: What page of Book IV-B?
DR. GRUBE: Pages 63 through 65. My document number is 116.
THE PRESIDENT: In view of Counsel's statement, we will receive the affidavit. Let it be marked Exhibit 240.
DR. GRUBE: I now offer documents from my Document Book V.
THE PRESIDENT: Book V?
DR. GRUBE: Book V. The documents in Book V deal with the assertion of the prosecution here that the German courts and the German prosecutors have applied laws which were inhuman, and which were contrary to the general principles of the penal law, such as they are laid down in the penal codes of all civilized nations. Document 162, on pages 1 through 3 of this document boom, contains extracts from an essay by Thomas Paine from an essay on the rights of man.
I offer this document as Exhibit 241.
THE PRESIDENT: I am very familiar with that old essay. It will be welcome. That is Exhibit 241.
DR. GRUBE: 241.-Document 121, an pages 4 and 5 of the document book V, contains extracts from the book by Professor Gustav Radbruch "Initiation to Jurisprudence."
That book points out that actual law changes from nation to nation, from generation to generation, from period to period, it is interpreted differently by every human being according to his class and political views and ideology. The views on law are in fact just expressions of the class struggle of the time.
I offer this document as Exhibit 242.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 189, on pages 6 through 10, contains extracts from speeches by Lenin and Stalin on the state. I should like to quote the first sentence from the speech by Stalin in the year 1919. He says, and 1 quote: "The state is a machine for the maintenance of the rule of one class over another." On page 8 of the document book there is an extract from a speech by Stalin which he made in the year 1939. Stalin points out what was the first function after the October revolution, and he says "The first function was to suppress the classes which had been overthrown in the country. In that way our state, in a way reminds one of the former states whose function it was to suppress these that offered resistance; but it was the basic difference that our state suppressed the minority of the exploiters in the interests of the working majority which had been exploited, whereas former states suppressed the exploited majority on behalf of the exploiting minority." Stalin then deals with the second phase of Russian policy, particularly the liquidation of capitalist elements. I offer this document as Exhibit 243.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 159, on pages 11 through 14 of the English document book, contains extracts from the declaration of the rights of the working and exploited people, confirmed by the Third Soviet Congress on 23 January, 1918. It is interesting to note that on page 14, of this document book there is a statement to the effect that this declaration of the rights of men in the Soviet Union says that power must belong exclusively to the working masses.
I offer this document as Exhibit 244.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 160, on pages 15 through 21, contains extracts from the Constitution of the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic in the version of 1925. May I draw your attention to numeral 14 of the document that is on page 19 of the document. There it says: "guided by the interests of the workers, the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic denies the individual and the individual groups the rights which conflict with the interest of the Socialist Revolution.
I offer this document as Exhibit 245.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 93, on pages 22 to 25 in my document book that is in the English text, contains extracts from the conference of the committee for criminal legislation of the Reichstag for the draft of the penal code in the year 1928. That conference dealt with the efforts of the communist party, among other subjects. It is shown that those efforts of the communist party were in accordance with the exhibits contained in Document Book V, and it also shows that already at that time, that is to say in the year 1928, the work of the communist party was considered as constituting high treason. I offer this document as Exhibit 246.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 161, on pages 26 and 27, again contains extracts from the work by Thomas Paine, the Rights of Man.
May I draw your attention to the last sentence of this document where Paine states "What is considered good and right in one century may be considered wrong and unsuitable in another century."
I offer this document as Exhibit 247.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 65, on page 28 of my document book in the English text, is an excerpt from the book, The Com an Law of England and North America, by Holmes, member of the Supreme Court of the U.S. in Washington. Holmes says, and I Quote: "The first requirement for a stern, sound legal system is that it be in accordance with the sentiment and demands of the community, whether these be right or wrong."
I offer this document as Exhibit 248.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 69, on pages 29 and 30 contains extracts from an essay by reisler. He points out that particularly in time of war, penal law has a preventive character.
I offer this document as Exhibit 249.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 66, on pages 31 to 33, also contains extracts from the book bv Holmes -- Comman Law of England and North America. Holmes, too, takes the view that the purpose of penal law is a preventive one. May I refer you to a quotation oh page 43, that is on page 32 in the document book.
THE PRESIDENT: We regret that there is a gap. The last page is 30; the next page is 34. The Holmes' document apparently is missing.
DR. GRUBE: I shall withdraw it for a moment, and I will introduce it later on, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: You save Exhibit No. 250 for that Exhibit.
DR. GRUBE: Thank you, your Honor.
On page 36 of the English text, you will find Document 153. That is an excerpt from the paper published by the American Military Government, Die Neue Zeitung. It is the issue of 10 February 1947. It contains a report from Washington and this report emphasizes that President Truman said that an international law on human rights is needed. Until such international law had been established, there could be no peace. I offer this document as Exhibit 251.
THE PRESIDENT: The Exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 151 also contains a newspaper report. It shows that under the presidency of Mrs. Roosevelt, a Commission for human rights had been set up. That Commission had the task to lay down human rights in the shape of laws which are to be ratified by all member states.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you give us that again? What document number?
DR. GRUBE: The Exhibit No. will be 252.
THE PRESIDENT: The document number?
DR. GRUBE: The Document number is 151. On page 38 of the English book.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you skipping your Document 153?
DR. GRUBE: Yes, I am leaving that out.
THE PRESIDENT: 253 was received as Exhibit 251, Document 253?
DR. GRUBE: Document 253 becomes Exhibit 251.
THE PRESIDENT: That is right.
DR. GRUBE: Your Honor, I believe we have had a misunderstanding.
I have skipped document-
THE PRESIDENT: You skipped Document 153.
DR. GRUBE: No, Document 253, is the one I have skinped. That is on pages 34 and 35, and I am introducing Document 153 as Exhibit 251.
THE PRESIDENT: I understood you to make a statement concerning something from the New York Times. Isn't that Document 253?
DR. GRUBE: No, I said that I was skipping 253 and I have just been talking about Document 153.
That is the report in Neue Zeitung that international. law was required. That document is on pages 36 and 37.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment now. Your Document 253 we eliminate?
DR. GRUBE: Yes, that is the one I am skipping.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment. You are offering Document 153.
DR. GRUBE: I am offering that with the Exhibit No. 251.
THE PRESIDENT: Document 153 is received in evidence as Exhibit 251.
DR. GRUBE: Yes, Your Honor. The next document has the number 151. On pages 38 through 41. I had already spoken about that document.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received as Exhibit 252.
DR. GRUBE: Document 152 on page 42 also contains a newspaper report about the UNO-Commission of human rights. This newspaper report shows that at a meeting of the Commission, the Russian delegate opposed several suggestions which he considered to be unnecessary, off the point, or not in conformity with the international law. I am offering this document as Exhibit 253.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 190 on pages 43 to 45 contains extracts from the periodical, the Amerikanische Rundschau, American Review. It contains extracts from an article by Dexter about a UNESCO meeting and I quote:
"The depth of the abyss between the Communist point of view and the Western point of view on cases such as concerning freedom of speech was then illustrated if possible even more definitely than ever before." Dexter then says: "the gulf in respect of human rights between the Western powers and the East is considerable."
I offer this document as Exhibit 254.
THE PRESIDENT: The Exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: The last document from book V is number 67. The prosecution orally has made statements on the term "murder" in the sense of penal law and in making its statements, had referred to Holmes and James Stephen.
Document 67 contains extracts from Hilme's book. It deals with the question of the meaning of the term "murder." I offer this Document as Exhibit 256.
THE PRESIDENT: What did you do with your document 293?
DR. GRUBE: Your Honor, Document 293 contains a verdict by the Military Court in Strasbourg. I introduced that when I introduced other document book. O only mentioned it again in the index here because it belongs into this contex, just as the prosecution has done in some other cases.
THE PRESIDENT: Your Document 67 is not in our book. The quotation from Holmes is not in our book.
DR GRUBE: All right, your Honor. I will produce it later on.
THE PRESIDENT: You will reserve Exhibit 255 for that document.
DR. GRUBE: Thank you, your Honor. Your Honor, for the moment I have finished my presentation. I have another four or five affidavits which I shall or sent later in a supplementary volume.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there other document books which can be presented this morning?
I think a word of comment upon an old subject may be helpful. I refer to the extent to which counsel explains and summarizes the documents as they are received. The Tribunal has no disposition at all to limit counsel in any way which could in any effect the fair presentation of his case. I merely want to point, out that the mechanical difficulties of keeping track of all these exhibits as they are introduced are so great that unless you have supermen as members of the Tribunal, which you have not, it is physical impossibility for us to direct our thought carefully and earnestly to the substance of the exhibits when they are thus hastily presented to us.
Now some of these exhibits merit very careful and very thoughtful consideration. We simply can't get the substance of them from the brief statements that you make, so I am sure that I am doing you no injustice in suggesting that the briefest summary, in other words a description of what the document is, is about all that we can grasp on the moment as you introduce your exhibits, and you will have to depend upon our good faith to examine them with great care when we have time to absorb their contents.