COURT III CASE III
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Thank you. I am now going back to Book 2, Document 27. This is another extract from "Deutsche Justiz". It is on Page 28. I offer this document as Exhibit 58.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: The documents I shall now introduce are in Book 3. The document numbers are 64, Exhibit 59.
THE PRESIDENT: Is that right?
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Volume 3? No, no, I was wrong. I made a mistake there. It's Book 3, Document No. 39, and I'm offering it as Exhibit 59. No 40, I offer as Exhibit 60.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment please.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Yes, certainly.
THE PRESIDENT: You're offering Document No. 40?
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: No, No. 40 I offer as Exhibit 60.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Document No. 41 I offer as Exhibit 61; Document 42 is Exhibit 62; Document 43 is Exhibit 63; Document 44 I offer as Exhibit 64.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment please. Nos. 62, 63, and 64 are received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Thank you, Your Honor. Document 44 I offer as Exhibit 65.
THE PRESIDENT: I understood you offered 44 as Exhibit 64.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: 44 was Exhibit 64. I offered 44 as 64, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: That is right.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: 44 as 64-and 45 becomes Exhibit 65. And Document 46 is Exhibit 66.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment. Exhibits 64, 65, and 66 are received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Thank you, Your Honor. From one document, and that is Exhibit 64, I should like to quote one sentence. It is characteristic for certain psychological contexts. Just a moment; I shall find the passage in a moment. The exhibit I am going to quote from is Exhibit 64, and I should like to read one of Schieffer's sentences The sentence is one Page 53 of Document Book 3: "We do not want the pharmacist's white ointment, but the surgeon's knife. The wound must not be smeared over and plastered over, it must be out, emptied and scratched out." In this connection I would remind you of a phrase which Dr. Rothenberger used.
THE PRESIDENT: We remember the phrase. It's almost identical.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: And now continuing with Document Book 3, the Document Book 3, the Document number is 33. There are several Rothenberger documents, and I shall offer them without any further comments. Document 33 is Exhibit 67; it deals with the position of the masters and registrars in Great Britain. From the same document book, I offer Document 34; that is the next document, actually and the exhibit number is 68. Document 34 deals with the establishment of a National Socialist Administration of Justice.
THE PRESIDENT: 67 and 68 are received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: From the last exhibit--Exhibit 68, I should like to quote on Page 18-A, one passage: "Italian Fascism has recognized the importance of this problem for the survival of its Empire by agreeing with me on the following thesis, during a GermanItalian conference held in Vienna, in March 1939. The following doctrines were agreed upon: The judge different from other people derives his function immediately from the leadership of the State. In the organization of both states the judge holds a position of a special nature among the servants of the state.
This same thought was expressed by the DUCE in an address hold on 6 May 1942 before the Italian judiciary when he referred to the 'truly sacred mission' of the administration of justice." I offer this--oh, no, I have already offered it. The next document is No. 35. It is also contained in Book 3, and it appears on Page 22 and the ff pages, and I offer this document as Exhibit 69.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: This is an account of reform matters. The next document is No. 36, which deals with the historical development of the German Judiciary. The account is by Dr. Rothenberger himself I offer this document, which appears on Page 27 and ff pages in Book 3, as Exhibit 70.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Document No. 37 is called "The Judge in the National Socialist State," from "Deutsche Justiz." It is more or less a philosophical thesis or this subject. And I am offering this document as Exhibit 71.
THE PRESIDENT: Deceived.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: I want to quote one page, and anyhow I should like to draw your attention to that passage, No, no, there's no need for me to comment on this document; it is superfluous. My next document is document No. 38. It deals with the problem of the Justice of the Peace. I offer this document as Exhibit No. 72.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: I am now passing on to the Supplement Volume Document 85. This is an extract from "Deutsche Rechts-Zeitschrift," August, 1946. It appears on Page 57 and following.
From this publication one can see that even after the second World War, concerning the Justice reform plans on which the Administrations of Justice of the various zones worked, Dr. Rothinberger is mentioned in connection with the legal developments as such. About the Godesberg Conference, which was held last year, it is said that Schetter pointed out that the spokesmen for the reform efforts in the last 25 years were Muegel in imperial Germany, Schiffer during the Republican era, and Rothenberger in the Rational Socialist Reich; and in spite of the difference in their political and ideological attitudes, those three men arrived at the same conclusions.
I am offering this document as Exhibit 73.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: The nest document is document 86, also in the supplement book. This too is an article from Deutsche Rechts-Zeitschrift. It is on page 60 through 63 of the supplement book.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: The exhibit number is 74. This exhibit is of importance only because it shows that under the Weimar Republic too the crisis in the Administration of Justice was a well-known matter.
The next exhibit from the supplement book is document 87. That is an article by Dr. Rothenberger from Deutsche Recht. It is on pages 64 through 68. I offer this document as Exhibit 75.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: The next document, again from the supplement book, is document 81. I beg your pardon, the number is 84. This is another publication in, Deutsche Rechts-Zeitschrift, August 1946, pages 56 and following of the supplement book.
It contains arguments against the guidance of justice, and I quote:
"The opinion which was directed against guidance of the Administration of Justice"--I am quoting from page 56-a at the bottom--"does not mean that the judge is to remain isolated in facing such difficult tasks. The point is that one must work against a difference in the practices and the sentences passed by the various courts."
I should like to point out that it is also said here that it is absolutely important for judges from various courts to have an exchange of opinions. I quote from page 56-b: "The Administration of Justice and, above all, the Presidents of the District Courts, will be please to help. Another way which is just as important is the speedy distribution of fundamental information concerning important decisions about important legal questions. Above all, the Presidents of the Courts of Appeal should immediately pass on such decisions to the lower courts."
I offer this document as Exhibit No. 76.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: I am now coming to document number 74 in the supplement book. It is on pages 1 through 17, and it is written by Dr. Segelken, who was an assistant of Dr. Rothenberger's for many years. This is a very detailed account, which is based on accurate knowledge of the actual events and of the personality and character of Dr. Rothenberger, and it is a critical evaluation. I am referring you particularly to the enclosure to the affidavit, the Appendix, which was not made out specially for the purposes of this trial by which is a memorandum which was written as early as February 1944.
He wrote it under the heading, "Why I went to Berlin to the Reich Ministry of Justice, and why I left."
I cannot possibly read all this out to the Tribunal and I trust the Tribunal will consider the matter thoroughly, but I should like to say a few words about it and point out that here Dr. Segelken, based on his excellent knowledge of Dr. Rothenberger, speaks of Dr. Rothenberger's hundred percent faith and good will; that because he did not have a good insight into other people's characters, and therefore not only lost the game but entered dangerous surroundings and therefore, today, has to face this trial here. This gives an account of his motives, and it perhaps also contains the reasons why he failed.
The matter is self explanatory and I do not want to make any further statements.
I have now come to the end of my presentation of documents for the moment, and I should like to reserve the right to introduce at a later time a small number of documents, and I am also expecting one or two witnesses.
THE PRESIDENT: May I ask, you do not propose to offer any more documents from the books which we have before us now, is that correct?
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: From these books. You have completed Book I, Book II, Book III, Book IV, and Supplement I. Am I right?
DR: WANDSCHNEIDER: Yes, I, II, III, IV, and the Supplement book.
THE PRESIDENT: Finished.
DR. WANDSCNEIDER: Yes, only I should like to reserve the right at a later time to introduce some other documents, but they are not contained in these books.
THE PRESIDENT: We will rule on them when you offer them.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Yes, thank you, Your honor.
THE PRESIDENT: May we ask who is next with more documents?
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: Your Honor, I have just been told that Dr. Schilf is about to come to the courtroom. He has been delayed because he has been attending a conference.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any other defendant who will have documents to offer today?
Will you have some?
DR. BODE: Your Honor, I was told that Dr. Haensel will continue presenting his documents for Dr. Joel after Dr. Schilf her completed his presentation of documents.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
DR. SCHILF (Counsel for the defendant Klamm:): May it please the Court, may I now continue with the presentation of my documents?
THE PRESIDENT: These are Klemm documents?
DR. SCHILF: Yes, Your Honor, Klemm documents.
On the 7th of August, 1947, I presented my documents, out at that time some supplement books were still missing. I think I shall be in a position today to submit the remaining books. May I ask the Secretary General to hand to the Tribunal Document Book II Supplement? Supplement Document Book II contains only one exhibit, and it is number 16-A.
THE PRESIDENT: What was your last exhibit number, Dr. Schilf? Was it seventy - Numbers 74 and 75 were reserved, I believe.
DR. SCHILF: Yes, reserved. Your Honor, on the 7th of August I reserved quite a few numbers. With your permission I shall not start by offering my reserved numbers, and the first of those numbers is 16-A, in Supplement Book II. It is an affidavit - I shall wait until the texts have been made available. The Secretary General has Supplement Book II.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL: I don't have the book.
DR. SCHILF: I have the English translation.
THE PRESIDENT: That is an affidavit of Dr. Heinz someone.
DR. SCHILF: Heinz Kuemmerlein.
THE PRESIDENT: I think that was received. Haven't we had Klemm's book II supplement before?
DR. SCHILF: Just a moment, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: At first it was reserved and then it was later received.
DR. SCHILF: If you will excuse me for just a moment I will have a look at the transcript of the 7th of August. At that time the Tribunal ruled that 16-A was to be reserved for the Kuemmerlein affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: I have it marked "reserved", and then the word.
"reserved" was crossed out and it was marked "received", but the Secretary does not have any 16-A.
DR. SCHILF: In that case I would suggest to the Tribunal -- I still have the original here, but if it has been accepted I shall now simply hand the original to the Secretary General. I have the original here, and the Secretary General does not yet have it in his possession.
THE PRESIDENT: There is some doubt in our minds as to whether we have received the English on 16-A in Klemm Volume II of the Supplement. It seems to be the only reference to Volume II of the supplement.
DR. SCHILF: Your Honor, according to the German transcript - unfortunately, I can only cite the German page number, 6157 - according to that, the last decision made by the Tribunal was: "When we receive the affidavit we shall give it the exhibit number 16-A."
THE PRESIDENT: I think the fact is that we haven't received English copies on that probably. Our notes are in harmony, but I think we do not have the English translation of supplement book II. Suppose we let the Secretary General look that up and proceed with the next one.
DR. SCHILF: Yes, Your Honor. I am now passing on to Supplement Book IV. I am concerned now with six documents, and their numbers are -
THE PRESIDENT: I have just received Supplement Book II with my signature. I don't know where it came from. This is my copy. It will be received in evidence.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: What is received in evidence?
DR. SCHILF: No. 16-A.
THE PRESIDENT: There is only one exhibit in this book, isn't there?
DR. SCHILF: Yes, Your Honor, yes, that is right.
THE PRESIDENT: Supplement Book II is received as Exhibit 16-A.
DR. SCHILF: I now come to Supplement Book IV. I hope the Tribunal has the translation. It starts with Exhibit 34. It is an affidavit by Dr. Gerhard Klopfer. This affidavit is very lengthy and the reason is that Klopfer, who was the Under Secretary of State at the Party Chancellery, was there Klemm's superior.
He was the Chief of the socalled Constitutional Law Department. Klopfer worked there for a long time, and he was, therefore, particularly well qualified to describe the organization of the Party Chancellery in all details, as well as the relations between the Party Chancellery and Bormann, and also with the Ministries and the Party Agencies.
I should like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that we are concerned here with organizational matters which Klopfer describes in his affidavit. I believe that this affidavit will enable the Tribunal to understand the complicated structure of the Party Chancellery.
I am offering this document as Exhibit 34.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. SCHILF: The next document is an affidavit by Dr. Paul Enke. Enke also had a position at the Party Chancellery. He supplements Klopfer's statements on the organization of the Party Chancellery and deals in detail with the so-called Justice Group. That is the department to which Klemm belonged. He describes that department in detail and he explains the limitations set to the tasks of that department.
In connection with this exhibit I should like to draw the attention of the Tribunal in particular to paragraph 6 in the affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: The paging, I think, is all mixed up in this. It runs from 10 to 10-A to 11, 12, and back to 11, and then to 12. That is in Exhibit 34.
We will receive the Enke affidavit as Exhibit 35.
DR. SCHILF: But I am anxious to draw the attention of the Tribunal to paragraph 6 in that affidavit.
The next document is an affidavit by Mueller. Unfortunately, I am not able to introduce it at this moment. That number has already been reserved for me. Will you please allow me to introduce the document at a later time?
The next document is Document 37. It is an article from Deutsche Justiz the official gazette of the Reich Ministry of Justice, which has been mentioned here a great deal.
The article was published in the year 1937; it was published on the 20th of April, 1937, and the author is the defendant Klamm. The article illustrates Klemm's attitude at that time concerning the fact that the Party should not be granted any privileges.
I offer this document as Exhibit 37.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received in evidence.
DR. SCHILF: My next document is another article from the same periodical, Deutsche Justiz, and again the author is Klemm. This article was published in 1938. The article points out that slogans such as "clarity of justice" are not to be used for the purpose of muddling the issues.
I offer this as Exhibit 37-A.
THE PRESIDENT: No. 37-A is received.
DR. SCHILF: The next document is another affidavit by Dr. Heinz Kuemmarlein. That is to say, I am introducing a second affidavit. Dr. Kuemmerlein was in the Reich Ministry of Justice, where he was the Referent for Juvenile Criminal Law. As Klemm, at the Party Chancellery in Justice Group III-C, also dealt with juvenile criminal matters, coordination was necessary between him and Kuemmerlein. Kuemmerlein describes the type of cooperation which occurred between the two agencies. He gives reasons as to why the problems pertaining to certain groups of juveniles, particularly foreigners, were not specifically dealt with in Reich law. I offer this document as Exhibit 37-B.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. SCHILF: I am now coming to supplement - I beg your pardon, Your Honor. I am now coming to Document Book VI. Document Book VI has a supplement. May I ask the Secretary General to let the Tribunal have both books at the same time, as Number 51 is in the main book, and later on I supplemented it.
May it please the Court, I wish to make an addition. Exhibit 40, which has just been handed to the Secretary General, is an affidavit by Baldur von Schirach.
To begin with, at the session of 7 August 1947 Mr. La Follette objected to this affidavit, but later on he withdrew his objection, and the Tribunal has already accepted this exhibit.
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct.
DR. SCHILF: It was only by mistake that it was not handed to the Secretary General on the 7th of August. I do it now.
THE PRESIDENT: Do we have English copies of that?
DR. SCHILF: Yes, Your Honor. It is contained in Document Book 5. All numbers in Document Book 6 and Supplement Book were reserved for me by the Tribunal. The first number is 42. May I say by way of introduction, Document Book 6 deals with the so-called Judges' Letters, the entire problem of the so-called guidance. As I did before, here again I mentioned the subject of the general defense every time on the first page of the document.
No. 4-2 is an affidavit by Dr. Erich Schmidt-Leichner. SchmidtLeichner at the end of 1942 became the Referent for Judges' Letters at the Ministry. Schmidt-Leichner is Professor of Criminal Law at the University of Berlin. Schmidt-Leichner, until the last moment, dealt with the editing of the Judges' Letters. He is in a position to give all decisive information about the way those Judges' Letters came about and also about the way they were edited. He can also speak about their purpose and about all details connected with the Judges' Letters. In particular he is qualified to speak about the confidential nature of the Judges' Letters. Schmidt-Leichner's specialized knowledge is very extensive --
THE PRESIDENT: Of course, counsel understands that without any disrespect for the statements made by counsel as to the value of these persons, their wisdom, and so on, that the Tribunal can only consider as evidence what is in evidence. If the document snows the wisdom and the experience of the witness, then it is before us. Otherwise it is not.
DR. SCHILF: I merely wanted to point out to the Tribunal that Schmidt-Leichner is an expert
THE PRESIDENT: If the exhibit shows it, we will understand it.
DR. SCHILF: I am offering this document as Exhibit 42.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. SCHILF: The next numbers, 43 through 50, are various extracts from the Judges' Letters.
I think I may abstain from making any references to the text, as these extracts speak for themselves. I wish to offer Nos. 43 to 50 as documents for Klemm and the general defense.
THE PRESIDENT: They are received.
DR. SCHILF: The next is Document 51. It is contained in the Supplement Book. May I ask the Tribunal to turn to the Supplement Book. This document is an affidavit -
THE PRESIDENT: I don't believe we have the supplement book. Is it all in one bound volume?
DR. SCHILF: According to the English text that I have before me the affidavit by Link is contained in Supplement Book 6, and the number is 51.
THE PRESIDENT: I have no 51. This book runs from 50, Exhibit No. 50, as it is marked, to Exhibit 52 as next. 51 is omitted.
DR. SCHILF: In the main book, and therefore a supplement book was produced. I am just having one copy sent to the Tribunal for the information of the Tribunal.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL: I don't have a supplement book.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, 51 appears to be the affidavit of Hans Link.
DR. SCHILF: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: And in the index Exhibit 51 appears to be the affidavit of Hans Joachim Lehmann.
DR. SCHILF: That index is incorrect, and because of the mistake that was made there a supplement hook was produced and the index in that supplement book is correct. Please take out 51 because 51 doesn't belong in the main book.
THE PRESIDENT: Then I understand that Document Book 6, Supplement, contains 51 and that only.
DR. SCHILF: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. SCHILF: In the main book this collection of documents continues with No. 82.
That contains a clipping from a newspaper of March, 1946. It is relevant in connection with the conditions prevailing in Germany at that time and that under the sovereignty of the Control Council the same situation continued. The Judges' Letters which were issued by the Reich Ministry of Justice wished that such attacks on the judiciary were to be prohibited and to show the contradiction here I am offering this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 52 is received.
DR. SCHILF: 53 is another clipping from a newspaper, 12 May 1947. It is all from Document Book 6.
THE PRESIDENT: 53 is received.
DR. SCHILF: The next document is 54. It also contains extracts from a newspaper, the newspaper of Saxony, and the date is 14 June 1946. I offer Exhibit 54.
TEE PRESIDENT: '47, isn't it?
DR. SCHILF: No. 54.
THE PRESIDENT: 14 June 1947?
DR. SCHILF: Yes, yes. I beg your pardon. 1947. The next document belongs to the same series. It is also an extract from a newspaper from the year '47, 12 May 1947, and the exhibit number is 55.
THE PRESIDENT: These exhibits are received for such, if any, probative value as they may have. Note the date.
DR. SCHILF: The last document from this book is 56 and it is very illuminating. The date is the 5th of October 1942, and it is a letter, a so-called circular decree from the Reich Ministry of Justice to all General Public Prosecutors at the District Courts of Appeal and to all the higher justices, and that is to say the judges at the Reich Supreme Courts and the District Courts of Appeal, or rather only their presidents. The matter deals with the subject of the so-called guidance, that is to say, cooperation between the prosecutors and the courts. This letter of October 1942, this letter by Thierack, already contains instructions to the effect that no influence Bust be taken on the judges due to such cooperation.
I offer this document as Exhibit 56.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. SCHILF: May I now ask the Secretary General to produce Supplement Book 8 and give it to the Tribunal. Book 8 has two documents. Would you kindly make a change in the index. It should be 69 and not 68-B. I apologize for the mistake. These two documents deal with lynching. The first document 68-A contains Pimmler's secret decree of August 1943. That date 1943 is important. According to that decree Himmler at that time had already instructed his police not to interfere when the population committed acts of lynching enemy airmen who had bailed out. I offer this document as Exhibit 68-A.
THE PRESIDENT: 68-A and 69 are received.
DR. SCHILF: 69 is an affidavit and it has already been received, and the Tribunal has stated that it will receive it and I need not give any further explanation. 69 has been received.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess until 1:30 this afternoon.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 5 Sept.
1947)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: The question concerning Exhibit Klemm 16-A has been solved. It was duly received and is in evidence.
DR. SCHILF: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary's record shows it.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Court, in my main volume 8 there is Exhibit 68, which I still have to deal with. That is an affidavit by Friedrich Wilhelm Kritzinger. On 7 August this exhibit was not accepted and it had not yet been settled as to whether Kritzinger was in tho prison here or not. I have contacted Mr. LaFollette and we have agreed that I am now to submit this exhibit 68. The Tribunal has already got the English translation in its possession, and it is contained in main volume 8. I now offer this affidavit. It is concerned with the establishment of tho summary court, tho civilian courts martial. The exhibit number is 68.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the Prosecution withdraw its objection?
Mr. LAFOLLETTE: Yes, Your Honor, with this understanding, that if Kritzinger is here in the jail, he will be produced as a witness and then the affidavit may be disregarded. I don't believe he is any more in the jail.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. That will be received. Tho former action of the Tribunal was that tho exhibit was rejected.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: That action is rescinded, and by agreement of the parties the exhibit is now received.
DR. SCHILF: I am now going to submit Supplement Book 8. I beg year pardon. I mean I have now finished with Supplement Book 8. I am now coming to Supplement Book 9. This volume contains two documents; one is the affidavit by Dr. Friedrich Preiser. Preiser, who was at the Reich Ministry of Justice, was able to observe Klemm at work. In particular he was able to make observations about his relations with Thierack. I offer this as Exhibit 74.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 74 is received.
DR. SCHILF: The last document I wish to introduce, Your Honor, is No. 75. This is an affidavit by a Dr. Hans Wogatzky. He deals with Klemm's work in Department II, the department which dealt with personnel matters and training matters. Wogatzky gives a detailed account of Klemm's work.
I offer this document as Exhibit 75.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Court, for the moment I have no further documents to offer, but I have to ask you to allow me to reserve the right to submit such documents later which have not yet been translated and I also have three affidavits by three Dutchmen who are at the Dutch Ministry of Justice. One of them wants to supplement his affidavit, and I have not yet received the supplement. Therefore I ask to reserve the right to introduce at a later date these few documents which I do not have available at the moment.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will rule upon matters of that type when they are presented. However, counsel must realize, all of you, that documents which have not even been presented for translation and processing and which are so presented after this time are entirely within the discretion of the Tribunal, whether they should be received or not. We will pass on that when it comes up.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Court, should use this opportunity to say something about these proceedings at the latest stage. The defense case is now nearing its end and there are still a few open questions which have to be discussed. Concerning the Klemm case as early as June and July I made motions to examine two witnesses under cross examination. The are affiants whom I intend to examine under cross examination. The people whom I wish to cross examine are a Frau Leppin and a Dr. Franks.
THE PRESIDENT: Spelling, please?
DR. SCHILF:L-a-p-p-i-n. That woman witness' name was contained on a list which I submitted to the Tribunal when the Prosecution had finished its case. My second witness is F-r-a-n-k-e. The Prosecution at the end of its case brought an affidavit by Franks and I asked for permission to cross examine that witness. Further, the Tribunal has already agreed that I may examine three more witnesses, and the Tribunal agreed to that in June. One is H-a-r-t-m-a-n-n. The second is M-o-e-l-l-e-r.
May I point out that Mr. Schaefer of the Defense Center want to a great deal of trouble to produce the witnesses Hartmann, Moeller, and Franke, who are at a British camp and to have them moved to Nuernberg. A few days ago I heard that Hartmann and probably Moeller, too, are still at Camp Eselsheide near Paderborn. Repeated applications have received no attention. I submitting my evidence for Klemm at the beginning of July I asked the Tribunal, according to the rules of procedure in the version of 1 April 1947, Paragraph 12, Section d, to make a ruling. May I now recall ruling -
THE PRESIDENT: What citation were you giving us? I didn't understand that. What rules?
DR. SCHILF: The rules proceeding of the Military Tribunals at Nuernberg, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you give that again? I didn't understand what you were referring to. What section were you referring to again?
DR. SCHILF: Article 12, Section d. May I quote that article 12 d? May I read it out?
The PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. SCHILF: "If the witness is not within the territory which is under the jurisdiction of the occupation authorities of the United States in Germany the Tribunal, through the prescribed channels, may approach the Allied Control Council with the request concerning the measures for the summoning of such a witness to take these measures, such as the Tribunal may consider necessary for a proper conduct of the defense."