(Laternser) I shall now further present List Document 33, as List Exhibit 8 -- I beg your pardon, - 33-A. This is contained in List Document Book 1, on page 3. This is an affidavit executed by Lt. Colonel Pfafferott, and I shall read a few excerpts from this document. I shall start with the second paragraph:
"I have been a professional soldier since 1921, from December, 1940 until spring 1942. I was a Major and Third Officer at the General Staff (1c) at the Army High Command 12; from spring until fall, 1942, I was Lieutenant Colonel in the Officer Reserve Corps of the AOK 12."
I shall continue with the third paragraph:
"Although it did not belong into my actual field of activities I know from my work with the staff of the Army High Command 12 that especially the subordinate military commanders (Serbia, Salonik; Aegaeis and South Greece) often, and evading the Army High Command, were in direct contact with the OKW or other agencies and vice versa. This went on usually through channels of the air force or the military administration and there were frequently questions e.g. from the OKW to the Army High Command without the latter having any knowledge of the matters in question. This was the case especially concerning Serbia, where the lines of communication as well (line OKW-Belgrad usually worked, BelgradAthens was frequently interrupted) as also the ambitions of individuals, among others of the Staatsrat Dr. TURNER to act independently were decisive.
After several controversies, which I don't know in detail, between the AOK and the commander of Serbia a long conversation between Field Marshal LIST and Staatsrat TURNER took place, at which, for a while, I substituted for the Ia in taking the minutes. The summary of my general impression of that conversation is as follows: At first in a polite way, later on more sharply, Field Marshal LIST reproached the Staatsrat TURNER, to have disregarded respectively trespassed the directives of the AOK; to have informed the AOK negligently or in a way that could lead to misunderstandings and thus to have worsened the situation in Serbia.
It was his, TURNER'S fault, if through his efforts the German soldier would now have to straighten out again what politics had spoiled. I think that I can also remember that Field Marshal LIST made the further assignment of the unit dependent on the absolute observance of the orders of the AOK. Staatsrat TURNER denied the reproaches made and referred to the necessity of having the liberty to make decisions according to the respective local situation. He also referred to the fact that the communication of news to the AOK did frequently not work. The conference ended unsatisfactorily and everybody was angry. In consequence of that I had to ask the police director Dr. LOOS to come to Belgrad. He was so to speak to be the counter-balance for TURNER for the authorized commander general in Serbia and had approximately the order, to inform the AOK concerning the actual situation in Serbia. Only on occasion of his personal and oral reports was he to inform the AOK about the police and political measures of the military administration of Serbia."
This conference of Field Marshal List with State Counciller Turner can also be found in the daily notes made by Field Marshal List of which we have a photostat, in Document 178, which I shall now offer as List Exhibit 10. It is List Document 178, and it will become List Exhibit 10. It is contained in List Document Book 3, on page 78. I said that this document is on Page 78 of Document Book 3, but for the moment, I shall only read from page 90.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor I object to the admission of this document. For all that it appears here, it is simply several pages of handwritten notes. We cannot tell who wrote them, we cannot tell from Dr. Laternser's statement because he is not a witness.
I further object on the ground that we have not been furnished with the total diary from which excerpts are being offered by the Defense.
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, I would briefly like to give my comments on this. First of all, I would very much like the Tribunal to look at the exhibit offered. It is a photostat of approximately 20 pages of this diary, which I have offered as an exhibit.
If the Court should hold the opinion that the Prosecution is entitled to see the whole of this diary, I am ready at all times to hand it over to the Prosecution. There are no reasons whatsoever to hold back this document. The only reason was that Field Marshal List himself was to retain the diary. The Prosecution is, of course, entitled to see the whole diary, and I am very willing to hand it over.
THE PRESIDENT: It is the judgment and ruling of the Tribunal that if it is the desire of the Prosecution, they shall be permitted to see the entire diary, and make such use of it as they may see fit.
I take it that the document will not be retained except for such purposes of photo stating if they should care to do so, and that it will then be returned to Field Marshal List.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: That is our understanding, Your Honor. That is what we will do.
One other point I had is as to the identification of the document. It is my opinion that Field Marshal List should be called to the witness stand to identify it, and in order also that we might have an opportunity at the appropriate time to cross examine him on the excerpts from his diary.
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, it seems very strange that this motion be now made by the Prosecution. The Prosecution is merely entitled to make a cross-examination concerning matters discussed during direct examination. I did not examine Field Marshall List about this particular point. How, then, can the Prosecution demand that Field Marshal List be cross-examined about this diary? I am not submitting it as testimony. I am submitting it as a document. There must be a difference made between testimony made by witnesses, and evidence made through documents.
Where now, can the Prosecution demand to make a cross-examination about a diary, because I am just submitting an excerpt out of this diary. I ask for this motion to be rejected.
THE PRESIDENT: This witness is here who can identify it, and it should be identified, and it is the judgment of the Tribunal that as pertains to this particular document, the Prosecution shall have the right to cross-examine him on such matters as are disclosed by the document itself, and will be restricted to that matter alone.
DR. LATERNSER: I shall then call Field Marshal List immediately to the witness stand.
DIRECT EXAMINATION FIELD MARSHAL LIST BY DR. LATERNSER:
THE PRESIDENT: You need not be sworn the second time.
DR. LATERNSER: I would like to ask to be handed Exhibit 10.
Q Field Marshal, I shall now hand Exhibit 10 to you. I am merely asking you, is this photostat a photostat of pages of your diary kept during 1941?
A Yes.
DR. LATERNSER: I have no further questions.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, might I reserve my right to crossexamine until I have examined the total war diary, total personal diary?
DR. LATERNSER: Mr. President, if the Tribunal please, the Prosecution has had my document book for at least two months. The Prosecution will have to be prepared to make cross-examination immediately, such as we have done with every Prosecution witness. The Prosecution simply has to be in a position to do that.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honors, certainly of the missing excerpts from this diary will undoubtedly throw light upon the excerpts which have already translated, and it is for that reason that I should like to reserve my cross examination.
THE PRESIDENT: You are not raising any question at this time as to the foundation of the identification?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: No, I have no cross-examination on that point, Your Honor, at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: It seems to the Tribunal, Dr. Laternser, that as to the document itself, the entire document, - that the Prosecution has not had an access to that document, as I understand it, and if that is true, they should be given the privilege of a reasonable time to examine it.
DR. LATERNSER: If your Honor pleases, I understand what the Tribunal means. The Prosecution is entitled to cross-examination only about those points which I have made the subject of the examination, and these parts have been in their hands for several weeks now. Therefore, the Prosecution will now be obliged to make cross-examination immediately, if they want to make any cross-examination at all.
If your Honors please, in all instances that came up during this trial, the Defense was in a position, and was forced to make a cross-examination immediately. Why should there be any difference here now, where those parts which I have used in the examination have for several weeks been in the hands of the Prosecution?
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Laternser, the Tribunal required the Prosecution to present the entirety of certain documents, at some considerable trouble, and it took some time. Now they are entitled to observe and to have an opportunity to study, for a reasonable time, the entirety of this diary, and for the purpose of ascertaining from its entire study, whether or not it is information concerning the matters which you have here presented.
It will be the ruling of the Tribunal that the Prosecution shall have a reasonable time, perhaps until tomorrow morning, to examine this entire document, and to then cross-examine the witness at that time.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: If your Honor please, I do not know how lengthy this total personal diary is, but I wonder if our time might run for perhaps two or three days following its turning over to us for examination?
THE PRESIDENT: The ruling will be followed for the present.
Do you have the document here, Dr. Laternser?
DR. LATERNSER: If your Honors please, I have just been told that I have this little diary. It is just a pocket diary. During the course of the day I shall hand it over to the Prosecution, but I shall have to go to my apartment to fetch it. I have not got it here.
THE PRESIDENT: Would you do that during the noon-hour? Would you have time to do it during the noon-hour, - during the noon recess?
DR. LATERNSER: I do not think I shall have time enough just then, but at five o'clock, the document will be in the hands of the Prosecution. Let's say 1715 to be quite sure.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
(Witness excused)
The question being only as to the right of cross-examination and the later examination of the diary itself, in its entirety, by the Prosecution, there is no reason why you should not go ahead with the reading of this particular document.
There is no objection on that procedure is there, Mr. Fenstermacher?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: None at all, Your Honor.
DR. LATERNSER: This document is contained in List Document Book 3, and I shall read a part of page 90. On top, on the left hand side it says, "September". Then I shall skip a few lines, and it says, "15 Monday", and again I shall skip two lines, and then it says, "Afternoon". That is how the next line starts.
"Afternoon. At home wrote and worked. Waited in vain for the Chief of War Administration Turner".
I shall again skip a few lines, and I shall start, - I shall read from the entries for the next day:
"16 Tuesday". I am skipping again, three lines, and I am reading the next line, "Afternoon, 1845 hours. Chief of War Administration State Counciller Dr. Turner, reported about the situation.
Views which do not always apply. Seems to lead in Belgrade. I must express myself clearly. Remains to dinner; pretends to be very militaristic and confidential".
I have not yet finished with this document altogether. In order to show the effects of the conditions of Command, I shall further offer List's Exhibit 144, which will become List Exhibit 11. This is to be found in List Document Book 1, on page 5. This is an affidavit executed by General Serini. I shall read parts of this affidavit, and I shall start with the second paragraphs "From 7 November 1939 until 5 May 1942 I was first as Lieutenant Colonel, and from 1 October 1940 on as Colonel First Adjutant of the XII Army.
I was witness to numerous extra-office conversations during which Field Marshal LIST mentioned to officers of his staff that a personality like Staatsrat TURNER was not suited to be chief of the military administration for Serbia. The reason for these sharp judgments was almost always the worry that TURNER'S incapability, on whom the AOK XII had no influence, was blamed by the population on the German Army. I myself made the observation that Field Marshal LIST did not only object to the way TURNER run his office, but also to his personality."
That is the end of this document.
I shall further offer List Document 164, and this will became List Exhibit 12. This can be found in List Document Book on page 6.
It is an affidavit given by Xenophon Switlick. I shall read from the second paragraph of this document:
"From September 1939 until the end of October 1941 I was assigned to LIST's staff as an ordnance Officer, first with the rank of a lieutenant and finally that of a captain.
It was known at LIST's staff that LIST and his chief constantly complained that they were not sufficiently informed about the happenings in Serbia which belonged to the field of activities of the Chief of the military administration of Serbia, Dr. TURNER. The relations to TURNER were always strained. The OKH often knew more and earlier about happenings in Serbia than did the Armed Forces Commander South East.
I remember that the Director of the Field Police, LOOS, suddenly traveled to Belgrad. I don't know what order was connected with that travel."
That is the end of document 12.
I further present List document 16 which will become List Exhibit 13. This is contained on page 7 of List Document Book 1. It is an affidavit given by Dr. Gruen, from whom I have already offered an affidavit. I shall read beginning with the third paragraph:
"There were rather strained relations between the Armed Forces Commander South East and the Chief of the Military Administration of Serbia, Staatsrat Dr. TURNER. There were complaints at the staff of the Commander of the Armed Forces South East that Staatsrat Dr. TURNER governed rather autheratically and that he did not notify at all or not in time the Armed Forces Commander South East even of important matters.
I also know, that in fall 1941 the Director of the Field Police LOOS was ordered by Field Marhsal LIST to go to Belgrade for some time, in order to repress the influence of Staatsrat Dr. TURNER on General BOEHME. I am not in a position to tell what were the details of the order for LOOS."
DR. LATERNSER: That brings me to the end of this document, which is List Exhibit 13.
In the same connection there are two further documents, first of all, List Document 30 which will become List Exhibit 14. This is also contained in List Document Book I, on page 8 of that document book. It is an affidavit executed by General Max Pemsel, and I shall start reading from the second paragraph of this affidavit. It says here:
"From the end of September until the end of November 1941 I was tactical chief with the rank of a Colonel, of the General Staff of General BOEHME as chief of the General Staff of the 18th (mountain) army command.
I had the impression that Staatsrat Dr. TURNER worked very independently and received his directives directly from HIMMLER and most likely also reported to him. I was never present when Staatsrat Dr. TURNER reported to General BOEHME. I only know that general BOEHME repeatedly gave vent to his dislike "of that man".
I don't know whether and to what extent Field Marshal LIST was informed about reports which belonged to the field of activities of Dr. TURNER.
I know that in October 1941 Police Director LOOS was assigned by Field Marshal LIST to the staff of BOEHME in order to act as a counterbalance against Dr. TURNER. I saw LOOS only once, when he paid his visit. I don't know the contents of Field Marshal's LIST'S order to LOOS."
This brings me to the end of this document, which is List Exhibit No. 14. Finally, concerning the same subject, I shall present List Document No. 153, which will become List Exhibit No. 15. This can be found on Page 9 of List Document Book I. This Exhibit No. 15 is an affidavit given by Lt. Col Faulmueller, and for the moment I shall only read the third and fourth paragraphs of this affidavit:
"From 12 January 1941 I was captain and quartermaster of the Corps Headquarters XVIII, which was under General Boehme's command.
"On 18 September 1941 the Staff of the Corps Headquarters XVIII AK was transferred from Athens to Belgrade. The High Command of the Armed Forces appointed General Boehme Plenipotentiary Commanding General in Serbia."
I shall now skip one paragraph, and I shall continue reading towards the bottom of the page:
"While we were stationed in Serbia, Dr. Thurner was Chief of the Military administration. In the Staff of the Plenipotentiary Commanding General people had the impression that relations between General Boehme and State Councillor Thurner were strained for two reasons, as far as I can remember:
1. Staatsrat Dr. Thurner tried to influence General Boehme to resort to considerably sharper measures than his predecessors in fighting the bands. I was never informed on details of his suggestions to this effect.
2. General Boehme was upset, that owing to Thurner's "autocratic methods" things happened in his area of command, of which he received no official or only insufficient information. In this connection I remember, that Staatsrat Dr. Thurner repeatedly mentioned in conversation, that he received immediate instructions from a large number of superiors and Agencies. He names as such.
General Boehme Quartermaster General in the High Command of the Army Reichsfuehrer SS Foreign Office Goering's Staff (I believe, in matters of War Economy)".This brings me to the end of this document, which is List Exhibit No. 15.
If Your Honors please, the Prosecution attaches particular importance to the method of occupation. How this occupation actually looked around the middle of June 1941 -
THE PRESIDENT: My attention has just been called, Dr. Laternser, to the fact that the Prosecution was to be given an opportunity to check a certain page -- Page 86. Perhaps we shouldn't proceed too far until the Prosecution is given an opportunity to do so -- if you have completed that particular matter, Dr. Laternser. Is it the wish of the Prosecution to make any comments concerning that page to which I have made reference? Are you through with that portion of the document, Dr. Laternser, to which I'm making reference?
DR. LATERNSER: If Your Honors please, I always add now if I am finished with one document or if I am not finished with it.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, I have nothing to add to this complex of things.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. LATERNSER: I mentioned just now, Your Honor, that the type of occupation was given particular importance by the Prosecution. How this occupation actually looked around the middle of June 1941 -- that is at the time when the insurrection in Serbia flared up -- I would like to prove with Document No. 500, which document will be offered as List Exhibit No. 16. I would like this chart to be added to List Document Book I, as Page 113. If Your Honors please, in the top section of this sketch there is an area marked in red and in blue pencil, and, further, joining the blue-sketched area, there is an area marked in green color. These three areas together show Yugoslavia before the beginning of the Balkan campaign.
The three other sections which are also colored show Greece. That part of the map which is not shown in any color presents Albania, which, at that time, was still part of the kingdom of Italy. Those parts marked with red are areas held occupied by the Italians, whereas those areas marked in blue pencil are the areas held occupied by the German forces. Those areas which show two colors -- that is, blue and red -- had German as well as Italian occupation forces. The areas marked in green stripes are areas hold occupied by Bulgarian troops. Into all these areas I have had marked the occupation forces which could be found in the area concerned around the middle of June 1941. I did that so that from this sketch as a whole one can observe that in the middle of June -- that is, around the time when the insurrections started -- there were altogether thirty-three divisions in the Balkans, in which connection we have to observe that a number of independent units such as coastal batteries, units guarding air fields, garrison H.Qs. etc., are not mentioned under these units here. I shall try to get some information about the strength of the present occupation of the western zones, which, in my opinion, is below the strength just mentioned here.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, I think the chart ought to be identified in some way insofar as its authorship is concerned. I assume that Field Marshal List drew it up. If he did I would be satisfied with Dr. Laternser's statement to that effect.
DR. LATERNSER: The original which I have offered as the exhibit is signed by Field Marshal List and General Foertsch. The authenticity of these signatures could not be made on the documents handed over to the Prosecution, because these signatures had not been made at the time when the Prosecution was given these copies.
THE PRESIDENT: Does that meet your objection, Mr. Fenstermacher?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Yes, I only wanted to make that clear in the record, Your Honor.
DR. LATERNSER: Concerning the evaluation of many events it seems to me of importance that Field Marshal List could not take care of his office because he was absent at the time. In order to prove such periods of absence to which I shall have to refer back at later dates I shall now offer List Document No. 175, which will become List Exhibit No. 17. This document can be found in List Document Book III, on Page 77. This is an affidavit given by Field Marshal List himself, the contents of which I may recommend to the attention of the Tribunal without reading this document.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: Your Honor, according to the best evidence rule Field Marshal List's Pay Book, in which all his absences from headquarters are recorded, should be produced rather than his affidavit. I believe Dr. Laternser told me on one occasion that Field Marshal List does have in his possession his Army Pay Book.
DR. LATERNSER: If Your Honors please, since the Defense is coming towards the close of its case we now arrive at the problem of best evidence. When the Prosecution carried out their activities we frequently pointed to this problem, and if one really applied the principle that only the best evidence may be submitted, then the Prosecution, in my opinion, could scrap nine-tenths of its total evidence submitted. The Prosecution themselves, even for the very fact that Field Marshal List was on the Balkans at all, submitted an affidavit executed by Field Marshal von List. Now, I want to establish the period of his absence from the Balkans in an affidavit executed by Field Marshal List, and all of a sudden this is not to be accepted because it does not present best evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has been conscious of this question from the beginning of the trial, and we have discussed it among ourselves, and the question was not particularly raised here before which is now raised. It seems to me that the objection is sound. Perhaps this question night be taken care of by checking with the Pay Book which if it went into evidence would probably stay there.
MR. FENSTERMACHER: We made no objection to the Pay Book being introduced when it was offered on behalf of the Defendant Foertsch, Your Honor, and that's simply the rule which I'm asking Dr. Laternser to follow here.
DR. LATERNSER: If the Tribunal please, may I add something to this statement? A fact can be proved from several means of evidence. For instance, the absence from a theatre of war can be proved by the Pay Book -- also by the Pay Book. It is a more statement of the Prosecution that the Pay Book is the best evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: Does your client still have this Pay Book?
DR. LATERNSER: I don't know. I haven't discussed it with my client, but I am ready to do that immediately. I'll ask him.
If Your Honors please, General List just tells me that he no longer has his Pay Book.
THE PRESIDENT: Under the rules, then, the affidavit will be acceptable, subject to cross-examination on the particular question.
The Tribunal will adjourn at this time until 1:30 this afternoon.
(The Tribunal adjourned at 1217 to resume session at 1330)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 5 January 1948)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. RAUSCHENBACH: Dr. Rauschenbach on behalf of the Defendant Foertsch.
Your Honor, I should like to ask that the Defendant Foertsch be excused from the sessions tomorrow--the whole day--as I have to have a consultation with him about my final plea.
THE PRESIDENT: The request is granted.
You may proceed, Dr. Laternser.
DR. LATERNSER: Shortly before the recess I offered Exhibit No. 17 to the Court. This exhibit contains the times in which Field Marshal List was either absent from the Balkans or was prevented from attending to his duties.
I now want to show for what reason the dates stated in Exhibit No. 17 are correct. In this connection I wish to read various passages from an exhibit which has already been submitted. That is from Exhibit No.10. Your Honors, will you please refer to Page 78 in Document Book III?
Above is June. Then, for Friday, the 13th: "Upset stomach. Departed by plane at 0700 - 1100 at Belgrade - 1140 departure - 1400 at Wiener Neustadt."
Then, the last line for that day reads: "Telephone call from Berlin have to see Supreme Commander of the Army."
I'm now turning to Page 79, under June 15th, Sunday, Vienna: "very nice All day in the garden, which is in full bloom. Left at 1805 with Camps, Kuebler and Hannstein, who had arrived from Athens in the afternoon to Berlin."
I'm now turning to Page 80, June, 22nd, Sunday, Vienna. Then the 23rd, Monday, Vienna/Athens: "1000 departure by plane, 1215 at Belgrade 1300 left Belgrade, arrived Tatoi 1545."
Then, on the 24th of June, Tuesday, Athens/Ekali: "Much work, orders for reorganization, etc.
Took care of reports and mail."
Then, to Page 81, about the middle of the page, the first line above June/July-- 1st, Tuesday, Athens/Crete; the next line: "At 0700 from Tatoi to Maleme - Report by General of the Luftwaffe Student, Reports by Jaeger and Parachute troop officers."
Then, I turn to the second, Wednesday, Crete-Athens, reading nothing but the words: "Flew back at 1400."
I am now turning to Page 82, July 4th, Friday, Athens/Ekali: "All day in bed."
July 5th, Athens/Ekali, Morning: In bed - Arose at noon, rather weak."
Then, on the 6th of July, on Page 83, Athens/Ekali, "Serious relapse during night."
July 7th, Monday, Athens/Ekali: "In bed."
July 8th and 9th, Tuesday and Wednesday: "In bed and up."
Now, to Page 85, July 20th, Sunday, Ekali: "Last preparations for the departure by plane."
Now, the last line for this day: "Flight to Salonika - by train to Nisch."
Monday, the 21st: "Billeting etc. with 717th Division." The next line: "Present at the same time was General of the Artillery Bader Higher Headquarters 65 - Flight to Belgrade- Conference with Stahl, Commander of the 714th Division."
Now, passing to the 22nd, Belgrade-
THE PRESIDENT: I wonder if it could not be assumed that these diary entries will substantiate the statements made in the affidavit, unless otherwise shown. It might save some record and some time. Any objection to that suggestion, Mr. Fenstermacher?
MR. FENSTERMACHER: No objection at this time, Your Honor. I, at first, cannot anticipate what the other diaries, which are missing from these excerpts, show and may prompt me to ask on cross-examination.
THE PRESIDENT: I'm merely making that suggestion, Dr. Laternser. I do not want to direct the manner in which you should present your case, but I'm merely suggesting that.
DR. LATERNSER: I merely wish to read a few other notes.
Under July 23rd, Wednesday--that's on Page 85 at the bottom, the last line: "2000 departure by special train from Topcider."
Then, on Page 86, July 24th, Thursday, Maribor-Vienna.
Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Then, I have one more quotation in this connection on page 87:
"August, Saturday 23rd, Vienna - Belgrade."
Your Honor, I attach importance also to the statement on page 93 at the bottom. That is:
"October 8, Wednesday, Ekali-Crete. 0900 departure from Tatoi."
And then on page 95, October, Saturday 11th.
"Crete-Ekali."
Then the third line.
"Departure 1040 - 1120 arrival in Tatoi. Foertsch at the airport."
And then on page 97 at the bottom:
"October 15, Wednesday. Ekali. Entry only on Tuesday the 4th/X1."
Last Line:
Further Pains at noon. In bed in the afternoon."
And on page 98.
"October 16, Ekali. Intended flight to Belgrade cannot take place."
And then:
"Afternoon: Transfer to the army hospital Sismaneglion."
Then:
"Friday, 17th." I am just reading "1517 operation by Assisting physician Dr. Haist."
On the 15th of October then the activities of Field Marshal List in the Balkans were concluded as it appears from this document. What he himself thought about his reassignment can be seen from page 99 of the document book 3 - No. 3. That is at the bottom:
"December 24, Wednesday, Vienna. Morning physicians - Olbright called, knows nothing that something new could be intended for me; believe that to be very good."
Your Honors, you know that Field Marshal List was only reassigned in the summer of 1942. How this reassignment came about is shown by document List 181, which I submit as exhibit 18. That is List 181, exhibit 18. It is in document book 3 on page 100. It is the affidavit of General Franz Halder, the former chief of staff of the German Armed Court No. V, Case No. VII.
Forces, which I wish to read from the 3rd paragraph:
"From 1 September 1938 to 24 September 1942 I was as General of the Artillery and later Generaloberst with the High Command of the Army in the capacity of chief of the General Staff of the Army.
"I can state the following about the assignment of Fieldmarshal LIST as commander in chief of Army Group A (South flank of the Eastern front) in 1942:
"To execute the attack in the South of the Eastern front in the summer of 1942 (42) as ordered by Adolf HITLER, a new army group command had to be erected. HITLER had to select the commander in chief. At one of my daily reports, I remember that it was in March 1942, I noted that the selection would now have to be made. Then HITLER asked: "Who could be considered?" I named Fieldmarshal LIST and I gave as a reason the fact that he was the senior ranking officer among these officers under consideration and that I was of the opinion that his experience in mountain warfare was particularly valuable in view of the task which was to be handled. The reason most important as far as I was concerned, however, I could not express that openly--was List's inner opposition against Hitler which was well known to me. Hitler at first did not reply to this suggestion. That was a sure sign that he did not favor it two days later when I was again urging Hitler to make a decision with regard to the assignment and when asked again I once more mentioned List. Hitler decided -- grudgingly as it occurred -- for Fieldmarshal List. When I met the Fieldmarshal after he had been appointed Commander in Chief of Army Group "A" - I cannot remember the exact date he very plainly expressed to me his displeasure at his appointment. He used words to the following effect: By my suggestion I had rendered him an ill service. He did not wish to be reassigned and had been hoping to be left in peace."
Franz Halder.
Your Honor, I just wish to deal with one point. The extent of the knowledge as to the events, as far as Field Marshal List could have Court No. V, Case No. VII.