THE PRESIDENT: There is nothing before the Tribunal at this time. If this document is reoffered, we can have a discussion of the matters that are now being discussed.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Turning now to Page 27 of the English book, which is Page 30 in the German, this is a short, two-page document appearing in the form of a typewritten memorandum to the files. It does, however, bear a number of original handwritten notes and remarks. The remarks do not constitute script, but rather official codes and the initials of various officials. This memorandum to the files indicates a proposed reprisal for retaliation measures to be undertaken by the Reich Minister of the Interior. This reprisal is to be directed against certain Czech landowners living near the Czech border. It is alleged that these Czech landowners had exercised some form of eminent domain over the property of German landowners near the border, who had been required to sell it within a three month period. The problem taken up in this document is the problem of what form the German reprisal or retaliation should take. The last paragraph concludes:
"After reporting to the State Secretary Schlegelberger on December 21 I informed the officials of the Reich Ministry of Justice was withdrawing its doubts."
Presumably, I interpolate, its doubts to this proposed measure were withdrawn. It is signed Berlin. 23 December, 1937, by one Kitzinger. Underneath Kitzinger's signature on the original document appear, spaced across the page, the Roman numerals III, IV, and V. Under each of these Roman numerals in column appear various initials of persons, all of which an undecipherable to our analysts with the exception of one, namely Ministerialdirektor Grossolwski, an official in the Ministry of Justice.
So apparently this memorandum to the files in the form in which it is offered in evidence was seen by a number of officials in the Ministry of Justice of the various divisions III, IV, and V of the Ministry.
On the second page or last page of this document appears the proposed draft of the form in which this real estate reprisal is to occur. The Prosecution offers as Exhibit 33 Document NG 420.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be admitted in evidence.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: On page 29 of the English book, which is Page 33 of the German, appears NG 186. On the top of the first page, handwritten in pencil, it is stated that this document was directed to the Minister. That that is the Minister of Justice is apparent from the fact that this document is a report of the work and division of labor in the People's Court and is signed by Freisler, who at the time that this report was prepared, namely 1 April 1844, was President of the People's Court.
This document is offered not because on its face it implicates specifically one of the defendants by stating his name, but because it takes each senate of the People's Court in 1944 and states the territorial jurisdiction exercised by each senate. We invite the Court's attention, far example, to the work of the first senate, found on Page 29, wherein it appears that the first senate will take up, among other things, a tax against Germans in foreign countries on the grounds of their Germandom to thereby injure the Reich. Further, it has jurisdiction over punishable act of Germans from Alsace, from Luxembourg, Lower Styria or Upper Carniola, Bohemia and Moravia.
Further examples are found on Page 31 of the English, which is Page 36 of the German, wherein we see that the work of the Fourth Senate involves jurisdiction over punishable offenses of foreigners from Moravia in case they were committed after the establishment of the protectorate; however, not high treason in favor of Russia or Poland. That, if I may interpolate, is handled by the Third Senate, as appears at the bottom of Page 30, which is Page 35 in the German book.
Further examples of the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the People's Court appear on the bottom of Page 31, which is Page 36 in the German, in that the Sixth Senate of the People's Court takes up Jurisdiction of punishable offenses, undermining of morale, and evasion of military service in Styria, Carinthia, Salzburg, and Tyrol-Vorarlberg, the latter three, at least, being in Austria, Styria and Carinthia being outside the Reich.
The Prosecution offers as Exhibit 340 Document NG 186.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: On Page 33 of the English book, which is Page 38 of the German, is found NG 227, which paralled to the previously discussed program of whether or not to incorporate provisions of the German Civil Code in the occupied eastern districts at about the same time, we find here discussions of whether or not to apply the German Criminal Code in the same incorporated eastern districts. 2508 In the note appearing on Page 33, from the original it appears to be an original signed memoranda initialed by Picker of the Reich Chancery, whose initial is merely indicated on Page 33 by the word "initials". This note bears the initial of Lammers and reflects discussions between Martin Bormann and the Ministry of Justice on whether or not Poles should be granted the benefits of the German Criminal Code.
Reading now from the middle of Page 33, which is the top of Page 39 in the German book, it is stated here that:
"The deputy of the Fuehrer thinks it best to rescind the application of the German Penal Code in the new Eastern provinces and to create a Special Penal Code and a special law of criminal procedure for Poles. The dominating principle of a Penal Code must be to deter by fear and there must be a possibility of pronouncing a sentence of corporal punishment. The law of criminal procedure must not allow for obstruction; here Bormann is stated as being in favor of police court martials rather than legal courts."
This letter concludes with an endorsement by Lammers addressed to the Deputy of the Fuehrer of the Party, namely Bormann, stating that with regard to criminal law of the incorporated eastern territories, that he-Lammers--has asked the Reich Minister of Justice for his opinion. The dates on all endorsements of this document are in November of 1940, which is within a month of the same time as that encompassed by the series of documents from the German Civil Code in occupied eastern territories, previously read. The prosecution offers as Exhibit 341, Document NG-227.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: On Page 35 of the English book, which is Page 41 of the German, appears NG-127. This document begins with the original of a letter sent to the Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancery, namely, Lammers, and also bears Lammers' initial "L" plus the date 27 of November 1940, written and signed personally by Freisler. The word at the bottom of Page 35, which is at the top of Page 42 in the German, which says that the signature is "Pfundtner" is a translation error.
The word "Freisler" appears on the original.
Freisler here, on the 20th of November 1940, tells Lammers that he is forwarding a letter addressed to the Ministry of Justice by the Chief of the Security Police and the SD for information. The question is to what extent discriminatory measures can be taken with regard to Poles and Jews in the occupied east. Freisler invites Lammers to a conference to discuss this matter which will be held in Freisler's office in the Ministry of Justice one month later. The document concludes with a copy of a letter dated a month previously to the one which Freisler wrote addressed by the Chief of the SD to the Reich Minister of Justice wherein the SD chief states that he does not agree with the proposals of the Ministry of Justice on this matter and suggests that the questions on which he does not agree be further discussed with a view toward making the measures more harsh. This document is also dated within the same three month period of time, namely, September, October, and November 1940, as that period encompassed by the preceding documents.
The prosecution offers as Exhibit No. 342, Document NG-127.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted into evidence.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: The next document, namely NG-144, appears in this book in its entirely, but it has already been introduced and accepted into evidence as Exhibit No. 199. We wish at this time to only refer in passing to the fact that this document is a letter by the Reich Minister of Justice to Lammers, Chief of the Reich Chancery, signed by the defendant Schlegelberger, and the subject is Penal Law for Poles and Jews in the Annexed Territories. Since that exhibit has already been offered, we propose not to offer it again.
On Page 43 of the English book, which is Page 53 of the German, is found NG-331. It appears both from the version in the document book and from the photostat of the original that this was a draft of a piece of legislation concerning the administration of justice regarding Poles and Jews in the incorporated eastern territories. We offer this draft of proposed legislation in evidence in its entirety, making plain the fact that it is only a draft, but we do in this connection invite the Tribunal's attention to the actual statute found on Page 49 of Document Book II which was the law actually promulgated and put into force concerning the special penal law as concerns Poles and Jews in the incorporated eastern territories.
We invite comparison between this draft and the law that was actually passed and that appears on Page 48 of Book II. We offer this draft in evidence as Exhibit No. 343, which is Document NG-331.
JUDGE BRAND: Do you connect the preparation of the draft with any defendant?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: We do, Your Honor. I don't know how far we can go into it without risking argument.
JUDGE BRAND: Is there anything in the face of the instrument to indicate any defendant, I should say.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: From the face of the instrument which I just offered, no. It would require linking by argument.
THE PRESIDENT: You may state, for my information at least, is there very much material difference between the draft and the actual law?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: No, Your Honor.
On Page 53 of the English book, which is Page 60 in the German, is found NG-278. This is a copy of a circular instruction letter or directive issued by the national peasant leader, which I might state for the Tribunal's information subject of course to any amendment by defense counsel, was a functionary appointed by the Party to supervise all members of the agricultural profession including all farmers and farm laborers.
The title in German was "Reichsbauernfuehrer". This was a directive by the NSDAP functionary to the various regional farm associations throughout the Reich, in which it is apparent that the decree to which I have previously referred, and to which is also referred in this document, namely, the law in connection with the application of criminal laws to Poles and Jews in the annexed eastern territories, issued on 4 December, 1941, Reichsgesetzblatt, page being 759, which by the way is the statute in Book II at page 48. As interpreted here, in very strigent terms, from the point of view of enforcement by these regional farm associations, this directive states by way of interpretation of that statute, "that pursuant to that law, Poles and Jews have no right to raise an objection; every sentence is to be executed immediately; solely and exclusively the public prosecutor has a right to appeal; furthermore, only the public prosecutor has the right to lodge a complaint."
Skipping a paragraph: "Consequently penalties against Poles in the annexed Eastern territories are valid when ordered. According to Section XIV, paragraph 1 of the above mentioned law, this applies to Poles who on the 1st of September, 1939 had had their residence or lived permanently in the territory of the former Polish state and have committed the criminal act in an area of the German Reich other than the annexed Eastern territories. Also, that range in application is valid by analogy."
We offer this document in evidence not in that it is -
THE PRESIDENT: You said "by analogy." The wording is "accordingly" in our text.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: The word "accordingly" is a mistranslation; that was corrected by our analyst. We offer this document not because on its face that it implicates any one of the defendants in this case, which it doesn't, but we offer it by way of illustration of how this law against Poles and Jews in the incorporated eastern territories was interpreted and put into effect by other divisions of the government after it was passed. 2512
DR. LINK: As Defense Counsel I would like to comply with the suggestion made by the Prosecutor and I would like to explain the position of the Reich present leader. I would like to say that he did not represent a party organization, nor a government authority, but that he represented a professional organization, that of the farmers. The farmers were represented by the Ortsbauernschaft, and in the main, farmer groups, the local farmers' groups, the state or district farmer groups and the Reich Farmer groups, at their head was the Reich Peasant Leader. The party organization for the farmers was the so-called Agrarian Political Organization of the NSDAP. I only made those statements to explain the matter. I wanted to point out that we here are concerned with a public corporation, that is to say, with a professional organization.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Your Honors, we are very grateful for that information; for that I mean for the purpose of the Prosecution the fact that this decree filtered down even below party ranks is of great interest. The Prosecution offers Exhibit 344, NG-278, in evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: On page 55 of the English book, which is page 61 in the German text, is found NG-130. This document was previously offered and admitted in evidence as Exhibit 200. We, therefore, do not offer the exhibit in evidence again, but merely refer in passing to the fact that NG-130 reveals the amount of discussion and responsibility concerning the promulgation and the passing of the law against Poles and Jews in the occupied eastern territories by the defendant Schlegelberger. On page 57 of the English book, which is page 65 in the German, is found NG-136. This document is concerned with the setting up of special police court martials operated by the Gauleiters in Poland and other provinces of the occupied east in place of the regular courts of law. At the beginning we find a typewritten memorandum containing a number of authenticating initials of which only one is legible, namely, that cf Ficker in the Party Chancery, which initials should appear on page 58 directly above the letterhead Reich Minister and Chief cf the Reich Chancery, FHQ, 27 May, 1941.
In that memorandum, prepared in the Reich Chancery, and initialed by Ficker, we find the following: "The Reich Fuehrer SS, Himmler, agrees to the Special Penal Code for Poles in material matters as provided for in the draft of the decrees submitted by the Minister of Justice, but in addition he asks for police court martial jurisdiction and requests that this be presented to the Fuehrer when the Reich Minister makes his intended report. The introduction of court martials in the incorporated eastern territories is an old desire of the Reich Fuehrer SS."
Skipping down now to the bottom of page 58, which is page 66 in the German, we find a second part of that same document, which takes the form of an endorsement. This endorsement was prepared and initialed by Lammers, and is sent immediately, underlined "immediately" to the Reich Minister of Justice. In this endorsement, with regard to the administration of criminal law, in the incorporated eastern territories, and it apparently is referring to previous correspondence with the Ministry of Justice, Lammers states in part the following:
The Gauleiter and Reichsstatthalter," which means Governor, "Greiser reported to the Fuehrer that an increasing number of acts of sabotage were committed in his Gau by Poles, In the Landkreis Litzmannstadt it even happened a few days ago that a while the Reichsstatthalter was speaking in an old Swabian settlement German policeman was stoned to death in a neighboring village. In this case the Governor, according to his report to the Fuehrer, gave orders that not only the culprits but 12 hostages as well should be executed on the spot and under the eyes of the entire village population, who were assembled at the spot."
Skipping down to the next to the last paragraph, "I beg to inform you of these decisions, and to ask you to take the necessary steps to put them into practice everything necessary for them without delay." It will be noted from the date of this correspondence that it occurred after the death of the Reich Minister Guertner, and during the time when the defendant Schlegelberger was Acting Minister of Justice.
This last letter I read was written by Lammers to the Reich Minister of Justice.
DR. BEHLING: (Attorney for Defendant Schlegelberger) The present document is concerned with a number of file references, or drafts of letters, of which the Prosecution assumes that they were addressed to the Reich Minister of Justice or to other officials.
The photostat which I have before me does not show clearly that these letters were ever dispatched. We are concerned with the document which on the first page shows the three letters "FHQ". That was an abbreviation for Fuehreqnauptquartier, or the Fuehrer's Headquarters; that means that the matters must have been discussed at the Fuehrer's Headquarters, and later lead to a discussion which can be seen now in the letters which we have before us. Whether these letters were ever dispatched, and whether concerning the defendant Schlegelberger, my client, whether they ever reached their address that is in no way shown by these documents. Quite aside from that, I would like to say on principle that the defendant Schlegelberger, after the death of Guertner, the Minister of Justice at that time, was only put in charge as an Acting Minister, but was never appointed Deputy Minister of Justice.
The Prosecution has several times spoken of him in that version deputy occurred several times in the documents today. I have not objected to that word because I thought that we were merely concerned with a wrong expression being used; but I would ask you that in the future, my correction should be given consideration. The introduction of this document, I have to raise an objection on account of the reasons I have stated before.
THE PRESIDENT: We are not impressed by those objections, and we will admit the document in evidence.
We will take our usual recess at this time.
(The Tribunal then took a recess.)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their scats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, I believe that tho last Document NG-136, which was admitted, was not given an exhibit number; that was offered as Exhibit No. 345.
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: Document Book 5 B. The first document which is on page 62. In this Book, which has four parts - A, B, C and D, the numbering is different than that which we have been accustomed to. For some reason or other the Document Room numbered those pages conservatively through four subdivisions. I think the German is numbered the same way.
Document NG-131 is at page 62. There is a notation here, and I think it is correct, that it is identical with Document NG-136, Book 5 A, pages 58 and 59, so we will pass that Document.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean you arc not offering it?
MR. LAFOLLETTE: we arc not offering it, Your Honor. I am sure that I am correct, that for some reason or other there is a duplication of Documents.
Document No. 665 is a photostatic copy from tho Reichsgesetzblatt, of January 1942. If defense counsel want to look at it they may come now. That is an extension, an amendment to, or a supplement to, tho law against Poles and Jews, which is found in Book 2 at page 48 and 49, which amends Section One of the Act of December 4, 1941; 1941 Reichsgestzblatt, part One, page 759, which is Document Book 2, page 48; and also Section Three of the Act of December 4, 1941 is amended and Section Three is found on page 49 of Book 2. The prosecution offers as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 346, Document NG-665.
THE PRESIDENT: The Document will be received in evidence.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Document NG-548 is a legal opinion prepared by the defendant Lautz, sent to the Ministry of Justice, dated 23 February 1942, and discusses a proposed amendment to paragraph 91, Section 2 of the German Penal Code to make it applicable in the East. This document runs from pages 66 to 71 in the English Book; 73 to 78 in the German. I would ask the court to indulge me in the desire not to have these documents road, to the extent, at least, of permitting me to read from page 68 in the English Book which is page 75 of the German Book, and would be the ninth line - at least as far as the English translation is concerned - and the beginning of page 3 of the original. What I an going to read, for the benefit of the interpreters, follows wording which roads as follows: "protection of racial Germans does not prove that paragraph 91, art. 2 Criminal Code should not be applied in every case." Can you follow me? Now, I read for the purpose of the record:
"On the contrary, I sec here a task for the courts, an opportunity to fill a gap in the law, a gap caused by state political reasons, by creating a law in the appropriate cases."
The prosecution offers as Prosecution Exhibit No. 347, Document NG-548.
DR. GRUBE (For Defendant Lautz): May it please the Tribunal. In order to clarify this matter I should like to state the following: The representative of the prosecution has stated that this Document was a legal opinion of the defendant Lautz.
As can be seen from the introduction to the document, the essential contents of the Document arc a letter of the Reichsfuehrer-SS, that is Himmler; the legal opinion by the Reichsfuehrer-SS, as can be seen from the document in our Document Book, can not be seen clearly enough in our Document Book as well as in the English Document, until page 76 of the German Document Book - that is, until the paragraph which begins, "I agree with the Reichsfuehrer-SS and the president of the People's Court."
I believe the prosecution will agree that only from this paragraph on the legal opinion by the defendant Lautz begins. All remarks made before that are from the Reichsfuehrer SS, and so is the quotation which has just been read by the prosecution.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, I am sorry if there may be some mistake on my part as to the interpretation of the document. I don't bare to quarrel about it. That is the difficulty we get into when we attempt to interpret documents. The document speaks for itself in whatever it says, and I offer the document as an exhibit. Certainly my opinion doesn't control what the document says.
DR. LINK (Counsel for the defendant Barnickel): I do not have any objection against the submission of this document. However, I should like to clarify a mistake which occurs in the address of the letter under discussion, the letter from the Reichsfuehrer SS to the Chief Reich Prosecutor at the People's Court. It says there: "To the attention of the Chief Reich Prosecutor, Dr. Branickel." The letter, as usual, was sent to the chief of that particular office. However, by mistake Dr. Branickel was mentioned as such. Dr. Barnickel was never Chief Reich Prosecutor at the People's Court.
I ask to be permitted to clarify this and will prove it further in my case in chief.
JUDGE BRAND: Just a moment. Is it your position that the letter went to the Chief Reich Prosecutor, or that it went to Barnickel?
DR. LINK: It is my opinion that the letter went to the Chief Reich Prosecutor at the People's Court.
JUDGE BRAND: You are net claiming that the name "Barnickel" was improperly placed on the document, are you? I mean, in fact Barnickel's name appears, doesn't it?
DR. LINK: Yes. By mistake, in writing the address, Dr. Barnickel was put down here as Chief Reich Prosecutor, or he was considered to be Chief Reich Prosecutor at the People's Court. However, that was a mistake.
JUDGE BRAND: Whether the mistake was in calling him Chief Reich Prosecutor or the mistake was in naming the Chief Reich Prosecutor as Barnickel still is ambiguous and uncertain.
DR. LINK: By mistake the defendant Dr. Barnickel was mentioned as the Chief Reich Prosecutor at the People's Court.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I don't know whom it meant, but I would like to offer it.
The prosecution offers as Prosecution Exhibit 347, the document NG-548.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted in evidence.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, I would respectfully request the Tribunal to take, for one exhibit, book V-C at this time, and I would like to have the witness Lorenz Eitner sworn.
LORENZ EITNER, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE BRAND: Will he be sworn in English?
MR. LA FOLLETTE: He will be sworn in English, and he will testify in English.
This relates to document 664-PS, for the benefit of counsel and the Tribunal.
BY JUDGE BRAND:
Q Do you solemnly swear that your testimony in the issue now pending shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
A I do.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: The document 664-PS is found at page 160 of English bock V-C, and is found at pages 162 and 163 of the German book.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LA FOLLETTE:
Q Will you state your name please?
A Lorenz Eitner.
THE PRESIDENT: Hill you have that spelled for us, please?
MR. LA FOLLETTE: E-I-T-N-E-R.
BY MR. LA FOLLETTE:
Q What is your present position, Mr. Eitner?
A I am head analyst for the Ministries Division of the Office of Chief of Counsel.
Q You are thoroughly conversant with the German and English language?
A I am.
Q Do you have in your possession there at the witness stand a copy of the photostatic -- I withdraw that -- one of the photostatic copies of the signature book which was used in the Ministry of Justice?
A No, I have that downstairs.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I will interrogate the witness, but I believe I would like to have it.
BY MR. LA FOLLETTE:
Q You are acquainted with that document which has previously been admitted in evidence in this case?
A Yes, I am familiar with it.
Q And how long have you been employed in your present capacity?
A I have been employed in my present capacity since the beginning of August 1946.
Q And before that, were you employed in connection with the Chief of Counsel for War Crimes, or with the office prosecuting the case originally prosecuted before the IMT?
A No; prior to July 1946 I was not connected with the IMT.
Q All right. In your capacity you have examined a good many documents that came out of the Ministry of Justice, have you not?
A Yes, I have.
THE PRESIDENT: Will the witness raise his voice slightly?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
BY MR. LA FOLLETTE:
Q And you have compared these signatures and initial signatures with the basic document which has been admitted as an exhibit and which I believe you new have in your possession, is that correct?
A Yes, I have frequently made such comparisons.
Q Now, with reference to the document NO. 664-PS, do you have a photostatic copy of that document in exhibit form in your possession now at the witness stand.
A I have before me a photostatic copy of document 664-PS.
Q I will ask you whether or not, in addition to the typewritten material there, you find on that document a stamp of the Reich Ministry of Justice.
A In the upper right-hand corner of the photostatic copy of FS-664, which I have before me, there appear two stamps: One, the square date stamp of the Reich Ministry of Justice, bearing the label "Reich Ministry of Justice," and the date, 17 March 1944, in addition to an indication that the document was submitted to Departments VII and IV; and besides this square stamp, there is the secret stamp.
Q On the document you have?
A Yes, on the document.
Q At the bottom of the document, do you find Roman figures? I mean, following the printed material?
A Yes.
Q Will you tell the Tribunal what those are?
A Following the typed signature on this document there are four Roman figures, III, V, VI, and VII. They are in the position of the document in which the departments of the ministry to which the document was to be routed are usually indicated.
Q Do you find, nearer the stamp of the Reich Ministry of Justice, initial signatures which you can identify?
A Yes. Immediately above and partially overlapping that stamp there are the initials of Thierack, and to the right of that initial, the initial of Klemm.
Q And when you used the language a while ago "secret stamp", I ask you whether or not you refer to the stamp which indicates that the document is secret.
A Yes, I do.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: At this time the Prosecution offers as Prosecution Exhibit No. 348 Document NG664 PS, and as part of the evidence in this case the identification of markings found on the original document testified to by the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: While the document is being examined it is not clear to my mind what connection is shown with Klemm in this document.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: He initialled the document, Your Honor. He couldn't hove initialled it if it hadn't come to him.
THE PRESIDENT: The initial is near the top of the document, as I understand it.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: That is correct, Your Honor. I think the witness testified it goes through the stamp of the Ministry of Justice.
I have concluded my examination of the witness if anyone wished to cross examine. If there is no cross examination I have finished now and I again offer this document as Prosecution Exhibit 348.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be admitted in evidence.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: All right. May the witness be excused?
THE PRESIDENT: The witness may be excused.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: Now if we may return to Book 5-D ---- I appreciate the Tribunal permitting that interlude.
JUDGE BRAND: I wonder, Mr. LaFollette, if this is an appropriate time to suggest that you communicate to the appropriate party that a number of these document books are bound together in a very bad manner--in fact, not bound at all. There is no reason why they shouldn't come to us in one piece.