Court No. II, Case No. 4.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection is that the document is not shown to be authentic. I think the certificate of the Berlin Document Center shows that it was a captured document found in German Archives, which would make it admissible. Perhaps some questions from the witness will determine whether it's authentic.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q Can you make out the hand writing at the bottom of the first page, witness?
A It is very unclear. It is stated here, "To the files -- Service Instructions -- Standard Orders of Procedure." That is what is stated here, in the hand writing.
Q Can you tell us whose hand writing it is?
A It is possible that I wrote this myself; however, I cannot say that with certainty.
Q Do you remember seeing this document, witness; do you have knowledge of its contents?
A It is possible. I might point out that this note was not used in any way, otherwise it would have been signed and not have been put into the files.
Q Will you look at the third - the fourth paragraph, where it says that "the Office Chief is the deputy of the Chief of the Main Office as regards the management of the economic enterprises subordinate to his office" and "has the power and the duty to issue directives to them."
A Where is it? I can't find it.
Q The fourth paragraph on the first page. As a matter of fact, it's the fifth paragraph. "The Office Chief is the Deputy", it starts with.
A Yes, "The Office Chief is the deputy of the Chief of the Main Office." I found it now.
Q And I will read the last words of that paragraph: "...and has the power and the duty to issue directives to them." Does this paragraph represent the practice in Amtsgruppe W, as far as you know?
A No, this was a draft which the legal expert, Dr. Hoffmann, noted Court No. II, Case No. 4.down for himself.
Whether he did this with any purpose in mind, whether he just wanted to note down a thing which already existed, I cannot say. In any case, this note was not signed, and he probably did that himself as a legal expert. After all, it was included in the files, that is to say, it was not utilized in any way. No action was taken. These are just Dr. Hoffmann's views, and he is the author of this note.
Q Will you turn to the second page; you see the "Limits of Plenary Powers." Number 1, Military. Number 2, Economic.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Mr. Robbins, shouldn't the witness know whether this document represents the status of facts as they actually existed?
MR. ROBBINS: I understood him to say that it did not. Perhaps I misunderstood.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: He said, whether this document represents the office of the personnel views as to what should be done, or whether they represent the facts as they existed, he did not know. The latter situation, it seems, would come within the purview of his knowledge that it did not.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q Let me ask you again, witness, regarding the fifth paragraph. Does this represent the actual practice in the office? Does it represent the powers and the duties of the office chiefs?
AAre you referring to the paragraph which begins with, "The Office Chief is the deputy of the Chief of the Main Office as regards the management of the economic enterprises subordinate to his office." Is that what you are referring to?
A Yes; and the next sentence, also, that he "has the power and the duty to issue directives."
A He is the responsible leader not as regards commercial law, but as regards military law, and towards them he is obliged and authorized to give instructions and orders. With this, the author of this note apparently wants to indicate the military character.
THE PRESIDENT: We will recess now, Mr. Robbins.
(A recess was taken until 1335 hours.)
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, 24 July 1947).HANS BAIER - Resumed.
CROSS EXAMINATION - Continued.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q Witness, I just want to spend a moment on this document that you have in your hands, NO 3839, Exhibit No. 597. You had time to read from the document since we were discussing it?
A Yes, I read it through.
Q Is there anything in this document that does not correspond to the practice in an office, to the actual facts?
A Well, the practical use of the authority to issue a command as is being dealt with here, generally speaking, theoretically, according to my opinion, by the chiefs of offices were very restricted, and according to my opinion they could only give military orders when they referred to trips for soldiers, and for motions, or movements, and for similar things. As far as I was concerned, the business side of it, or the commercial side by law had to be decisive, because there they had to comply with legal regulations, so that any directive with economic influence could not be issued as an order if it was against the prevailing legal regulations. Then the other matter, the word "representative" on page 2 is correct, because the chief of office, let's assume of Amtsgruppe-A, was not a representative of the Amtsgruppen chief there. As an Amtsgruppen chief he had as his authority, his field of tasks, which were within his sphere. The word "representative" or "deputy" here does not seem to be correct to me.
Q Is that all?
A The letter said something here about restricting the authority for disciplinary power, or disciplinary authority. It can be seen from this that the chief officers did not have the authority to issue disciplinary orders, with the exception of W-1 and W-2.
Q Do you know, however, that they did have such power, do you not?
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A I know they had no such power. We see here, however, that W-1 and W-2 have an authority which I did not know of before; that must have been an order prior to my time. Personally, I had nothing to do with the disciplinary matters, because personally I did not have any disciplinary authority either. So far as the remaining is concerned, the man -
Q You mean you, yourself, could not issue a military command to any one at all?
A I was speaking about the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority is the possibility to punish a person. If a person did something that was wrong, then I could issue a military order. The other question was whether my order would be complied with, because I would have disciplinary authority.
Q What kind of military orders were you permitted to issue, and to whom?
A There were no regulations about that. This was a matter of telling somebody just to see or do something. In my capacity as a deputy, with participation in the auditing department, I could only do what was contained in that law.
Q You are just referring to yourself as deputy or plenipotentiary. You were referring -
A Well, only so far as the question was concerned, in how far a soldier can issue orders. One can not directly control economy with orders.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: Witness, you were senior colonel in the Waffen-SS, were you not?
A No senior colonel.
Q Just a colonel?
A Yes.
Q You were Chief of Office of Staff-W?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q You had certain subordinates under you in your office, did you not?
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A Yes, indeed.
Q Now you do not mean to tell us that you as a colonel in charge of an office could not give orders and directives in a disciplinary way to those subordinate to you?
A I could give them disciplinary orders. I could tell them, for instance, when on a field task, what work they were to do, and I could also order them to do what should be done. I could do that as a supervisor, or as their superior.
Q You could discipline those, could you, who refused to obey your orders as a colonel?
A No, I could not do that. As a commander of the school, I did have disciplinary authority, but not in Staff-W, because that was an economic task; I had no disciplinary authority whatsoever in case an NCO would not have obeyed my order. I would only have been able to report that to the person who was his disciplinary superior. I could not do that.
Q Who was that you reported to?
A That was the man in charge of the staff company. It is contained in the document, The Disciplinary Authority of every man and a NCO was with the Staff Department. Therefore, I had to make a report to the Staff Department about the man who had done this and that, and that the man should be punished.
Q You reported that to a non-commissioned officer, and still you were a colonel?
A No, that is not what I said.
Q Then I did not get your translation correctly. Then give it again.
A If a NCO did not comply with orders, then I would still not have been able to punish him. All I would have been able to do was to report him to a man on the Staff who would have the disciplinary authority to punish him, because he was subordinate to me.
Q Any man? Who was it. Give the name of the man? You were Chief of Staff. You ought to know who it was?
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
A The man in charge of the Staff Department was the one who had the disciplinary authority in the WVHA.
Q Well, who was that?
A The man in charge of the Staff-W, was, I believe, Sturmbannfuehrer Bosen.
Q What was his rank?
A Sturmbannfuehrer Major. However, I could not be sure he was the man in charge of it then. It did change once and awhile. That applies to all members of the WVHA. Personally I had no disciplinary authority whatsoever.
Q. So your rank of colonel was just for the purpose of pay? You had no authority so far as discipline was concerned and your rank was just for the purpose of pay?
A. No, Your Honor, it was a little different. I already stated before that when I became commanding officer of the school I was with a military agency and there I had disciplinary authority. But I didn't have disciplinary authority in Staff W. I had no disciplinary authority. Disciplinary authority has to be specially granted.
Q. You want us to believe that you, a full colonel in the WaffenSS, if a subordinate disobeyed your orders or refused to obey your orders you couldn't punish him in any way at all except to report him?
A. Quite so. That is correct.
BY MR. ROBBINS:
Q. The document that we have just been discussing, NO-3829, Exhibit 597, in so far as the authority of the Amtchefs is concerned, conforms with that of the basic business order that was issued by Pohl, does it not? That's Exhibit--- You know the document I am talking about?
A. Mr. Prosecutor, you probably mean the business order, do you?
Q. Yes.
A. Well, I would like to state now that no details are concerned here in this particular document which is not signed. However, apart from this document a few points were taken over and included in the business order. That is correct.
Q. There is nothing in one order that conflicts with the other. There is nothing in the business order that conflicts with this unsigned memorandum? There is nothing in the business order that conflicts with the unsigned memorandum or vice versa, is there?
A. I would have to compare the two but I believe that you could find those points in this. Five or six points were taken over from that. Not all the points were taken over but a few.
Q. Generally would you say that the two documents conform to each other?
A. No, that is not correct. There are certain deviations.
Q. Well, we won't take time now to go into them. I think the documents will speak for themselves. Do I understand your testimony to be as follows: that you were on the same level with the other office chiefs? Not superior to them or not subordinate to them? Is that your testimony?
A. They were not subordinate to me.
Q. You were on the same level.
A. The same level from a military point of view. I was, according to rank, higher than all those but according to the position as chief of Staff W you can't compare them.
Q. You were also considered office chief as far as the industries are concerned?
A. In my position as chief of Staff W I felt as if I were chief of staff.
Q. And you also were considered an office chief, weren't you?
A. You mean by my subordinates? Yes.
Q. And you were considered an office chief as far as the industries that were under Staff W?
A. Yes, as far as my work was concerned in that field.
Q. Well, will you look at Document Book 14 - the memorandum that sets out various SS industries. Page 16 of the German book, page 19 of English, Exhibit 384, Document NO-1039. You see the industries listed there under Staff W. This is the list of capital and turnover.
A. I have the list.
Q. You see the industries listed under Staff W?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. You were the office chief for these industries, weren't you?
A. No, I was not.
Q. Tell us who was - what office did they come under?
A. These industries did not belong to any office with the exception of Public Utility Dwelling and Homestead Ltd.
The Wiener Moebelwerke did not exist at least in my time. The GMBH was in the Staff but I never carried out any official function for it and as far as Osti is concerned it was not really under Staff W.
Q. Well, the three industries listed there were really under Staff W and very conveniently Osti was not. You heard Pohl's testimony that Osti was under Staff W and Hohberg said it was under Staff W. You wouldn't insist it didn't come under Staff W?
A. Osti never was subordinate to me.
Q. Look at Document Book 15, on page 48 of the German, page 37 of the English text, Exhibit 413, Document NO-515. This is a memorandum prepared in your office. You recognize this document?
A. Is it 415?
Q. It's NO-515, on page 48 of the German, I believe.
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. When was this prepared? This is the list of SS industries that employed concentration camp inmates.
A. I don't know that.
Q. You saw this before, didn't you? It was prepared on your instructions, was it not?
A. I don't know that.
Q. Look at the preceding document, the one immediately preceding - NO-529. It says: "By order of the Chief of Staff Baier. It is to be immediately determined which industries employ inmates." This was drawn up pursuant to that order, wasn't it? You know that.
A. The order had been given. I don't know but I can assume that according to this.
Q. This Document 515 - before I ask you that - it is your testimony, witness, that you didn't give instructions to draw up such a list as this? Didn't you tell us about that yesterday?
A. That I didn't give any instructions, you mean. Or do you mean that I did?
Q. Well, did you or didn't you? You are in the best position to know.
A. During my activity there it occurred several times that I gave instructions to compile a list. Of course, I can't remember if this is one of them.
Q. Well, can you remember giving instructions to draw up a list of industries employing concentration camp inmates?
A. In connection with the handling of wages of inmates it is quite possible.
Q. You don't remember it definitely?
A. I didn't handle that thing myself. I gave my colleagues orders to do so and it probably was done.
Q. You see on this Document 515, here again Osti is listed under Staff W. If you remember, the chart is--- You see that, don't you, 515, Osti listed under Staff W?
A. Yes, indeed.
Q. And you recall the chart from which the chart on the wall was drawn up which was signed by Pohl? On that chart the Osti was listed under Staff W, you recall that?
A. Well, the Osti had to appear some place on the chart but was really not subordinate to Staff W. It was simply a company that was not in Staff W. A business manager like Globocnik would never be subordinate to the chiefs of staff. I had nothing to do with that. And I can tell you with good conscience that was just that was on paper, not in reality.
Q. All these other industries were under the supervision of Staff W that were listed there except Osti.
A. No. These two companies were in the same building. That is the reason.
Q. Witness, you remember being interrogated on 14 October 1946 by Mr. Ortmann?
A. Yes.
Q. And you remember his asking you this question and your making this answer?
"From what time to what time were you Pohl's deputy in Amtsgruppe W?
"A. I was his deputy from the time I took office."
You remember that answer?
A. Yes, but I am sure I said something else at the beginning.
Q. Let me read you something:
"You were senior office chief in W?
"A. I was senior office chief.
"Q. That is, you were automatically Pohl's deputy in Office Group W?
"A. Yes.
"Q. This happened automatically in the WVHA as in all SS main offices?
"A. Yes, that is correct. It could be called automatic as such.
"Q. You were senior office chief in Branch W, that made you automatically Pohl's deputy?
"A. Yes.
You remember those questions and answers?
A.- I can only tell you that in any case, I was against admitting such a thing, and that something must have proceeded because I pointed out that Georg Loerner was Deputy and I can recall in connection with this that he asked if I held the highest rank I said yes to that.
THE PRESIDENT: Can't we keep away from the constant questioning about what deputy is. Every time anybody gets to it it leads to a long discussion. It is a loosely used world and I wish we could avoid it.
MR. ROBBINS: Very well, Your Honor. I shall go on to another matter.
Q.- Let me ask you, Witness, if you signed at any time on the part of Pohl, as Chief of the WVHA, I.A. by order of?
A.- I don't recall having done such a thing, because there was no reason to do so. After all, I was a Chief of Staff and if I signed an order had to sign it -- I simply signed it -- not i.A.
Q.- Witness, will you look at Document No. 19, pursuing the question of Osti, just a little further and turn to the first document in the book which is NO-1270. It is Exhibit 61 on the first page. This is the memorandum about the conference as to what should be done with the Jewish manpower and Jewish property in the East. Do you have it?
A.- Yes, I do.
Q.- Did you find this document in the files when you took over Staff W?
A.- I don't recall having seen the document.
Q.- Do you recall having seen the second document, NO-1265, Exhibit 482, which is about the financing of the Osti. That came within jurisdiction didn't it? Did you see this document?
A.- No, I don't believe I did.
Q.- You didn't find this in your files when you took over your job?
A.- When I took over this office, after all I couldn't go through ail the files. It was absolutely impossible.
Q.- Will you turn over to about the 5th document in the book, NO-1269 on page 16 of the German Book, Exhibit 484.
It's about Osti and financing. Do you remember seeing this document?
A.- Yes, I do.
Q.- And this was addressed to Mellmer. Did you have very many conferences with Mellmer?
A.- No, I didn't. I had only been there for a very short while and I didn't know all the connections and what the work was like and I only signed the things that had been drawn up by Dr. Horn.
THE PRESIDENT: You are talking about Exhibit 484?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Does that appear to be signed by this witness?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes, I think so. It's on page 15, the note to Hauptsturmfuehrer Mellmer.
THE PRESIDENT: The document that I have as Exhibit 484 is dated the 17th of August, it is from Horn addressed to the WVHA.
MR. ROBBINS: There are two letters, I see, Your Honor, that make up that exhibit. The second one is Baier's note to Mellmer.
THE PRESIDENT: Still a part of the Exhibit?
MR. ROBBINS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: All right.
Q.- You didn't try to inform yourself about this matter by reading the files on Osti, did you. You said you were completely unfamiliar with it.
A.- I had all those things reported to me.
Q.- Did anyone report to you a bout the utilization of clothing from the Ghetto in Warsaw?
A.- No.
Q.- Or about the utilization of foreign currency?
A.- Here they are speaking of foreign currency. They are speaking of Zloty.
Q.- You knew that these came from the East, didn't you? You knew that this was connected with the Reinhardt Fund, did you not?
A.- No, no, that was not known to me. After all, I had only been there for three weeks and I knew nothing about all those things and nothing is mentioned here about the Reinhardt Fund.
Q.- You told us that you discussed the Reinhardt Fund with Frank and Frank told us you asked him about the nature of the fund. You remember that?
A.- Yes, indeed, I do, in connection with the 30,000,000 RM credit.
Q.- What did Frank tell you when you asked him about the source of the Reinhardt Fund?
A.- I didn't have any conversations with Frank about the details. I didn't ask him about the origin. I only asked him if the name Reinhardt Fund was to be entered, and he said it has nothing to do with it.
Q.- I want to ask you if you saw Fischer's report, auditing report, on the liquidation of the Osti, which is -
A.- I don't know if I saw it or not.
Q.- It is on page 65 of your book. It's Document NO-1271, Exhibit 491. Do you have it in front of you?
A.- Yes, I do. I said before, I don't believe I saw it before, because this order quite apparently was issued by Horn directly to Fischer, who was in my Auditing Department.
Q.- This was during your time and you have been telling us for two days that you were just an auditor. Now this is something that comes within your scope of work. You mean to say you were the Chief Auditor here and did not see an important report like this on auditing? Do you expect us to believe that?
A.- Well, this is not an auditing report, which came from the Auditing Department. I read the reports from the Auditing Department, but this report is one that was drawn up by an auditor with whom I had nothing to do officially.
He was the one who drew it up.
Q.- You checked auditing reports from the Osti Industry, didn't you? That was part of your job, apart from this document.
A.- No, I didn't check the auditing reports.
Q.- Witness, I want to ask you if you recall this question and answer from your interrogation on the 14th of October, 1946:
"Question: When did you audit the balance sheets of the Osti for the first time?
"Answer: In 1943, that was the first key day set to draw up a balance sheet since my being in office.
"Was this the first, second, or third annual balance sheet of the Osti?
"Answer: It might have been the third or the fourth."
A.- Well, I assume it was the fourth.
Q.- Well, then, you did check the auditing, the audits and balance sheets of this industry?
A.- I am sorry, Mr. Prosecutor, but the balances are not auditing reports. The balance is nothing but a computation of figures and at that time it had been the fourth, I presume, according to my recollection. It was after the Osti had expired, so to say. That is to say at the time of the liquidation, I did see the liquidation balances. All the values were contained and the debts, in detail. That is correct.
Q.- I would like to show you a document and see if this refreshes your memory as to whether you received reports on liquidations. This is Document NO-1264, and I will mark it as Prosecution Exhibit 598. It is dated the 10th of March, 1944. Did you receive this letter, witness? And this is a report by Horn to you on certain phases of the liquidation of Osti, is it not?
A.- Yes, that is correct. It is a letter dated the 10th of March, 1944, and it deals with the liquidation and liquidation balances.
Q.- But you still say you weren't completely informed about the liquidation of Osti. How is it that you -- how can you explain the fact that you didn't receive Fischer's most important report on this matter. Do you have any explanation for that?
A.- I can only explain this matter by the fact that Herr Dr. Horn had probably passed on the order directly to Fischer, because Dr. Horn himself was an auditor; so was Dr. Fischer; so that actually he wanted to have him there personally.
Q.- Will you look at Paragraph 3 of this letter that I have just handed you. Didn't you tell us that the SS industries had nothing to do with the Litzmannstadt Ghetto? Will you tell us what this connection is that is referred to in Paragraph 3, tools and equipment of the Lublin plant are to be turned over by the Litzmannstadt Ghetto on the evaluations of the balance sheets, etc.
A.- From Paragraph 3 you can only see it was a regular sale of a business enterprise because it is stated there that they are taking over all the valuations of the balance sheet. Probably the purchase conditions or the terms had as yet not been fixed. It was nothing but a regular sale to the Ghetto administration.
Q.- I want to ask you about one other matter on this complex, and that deals with your trip to the Litzmannstadt Ghetto. This report is Document NO-519, Exhibit 490, on Page 44 of the German book. You told us that you opposed the conversion of the Litzmannstadt Ghetto into a concentration camp. Now, I ask you this, Witness, didn't you know at the time that the issue that was presented there was this, the following? I think it is perfectly clear from the document: First, whether or not the Ghetto was to be converted into a concentration camp or, on the other hand, that the Jews in the Ghetto were to be taken out, the Ghetto destroyed, and the Jews exterminated. It is perfectly clear that is what happened from the documents. I ask you, didn't you know that was the issue that you were asked to advise upon?
A.- Not at all.
Q.- Will you look at the document, the letter that was sent to you by Greiser from Posen, dated the 14th of February, 1944, on page 59 of the English text, and it is part of this same document. Do you have it?
A.- Yes, I do.
Q.- Do you see the paragraph marked "A"? Greiser says that he has arranged the following with Himmler after you and Volk had reported against turning the Ghetto into a concentration camp.
First the personnel of the Ghetto will be reduced to a minimum and retain only the number of Jews essential to the interests of the armament industry, and third, the reduction will be carried through by the Sonderkommando which already had prior activities in the Gau. The Reichsfuehrer-SS will give orders to withdraw this Sonderkommando from its mission in Galicia and again place them at the disposal of the Gau Wartheland. After removal of all Jews from the Ghetto and following the dissolution of it, the entire grounds of the Ghetto will go to the town of Litzmannstadt. You received this report, didn't you?
A.- This report is dated the 14th of February and is addressed to Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, the defendant, and not to me. That report came in after the trip to Litzmannstadt and our order had been taken care of, and our mission had been completed rather.
Q.- A copy of it was sent to you, wasn't it? You can see that from the document.
A.- As far as I can recall, after the conclusion of all these things all the matters, all the information was given me by Pohl so that we could put it in the files. I don't believe having read that, nor do I believe having taken notice of it. Furthermore, it was something on which I would not have been able to exert any influence oven if I had read it, and I don't believe that it actually occurred and happened.
Q.- I am just asking you, Witness, if you received a copy of this letter? It is addressed to Pohl, copy to Baier, and copy to Volk.
A.- I did receive a copy.
Q.- And what do you think that this referred to "Reduction of the Ghetto will be carried out by the Sonderkommando who will be withdrawn from Galicia."
A.- I don't know that.
Q.- Did you think about it at all?
A.- If I had read it at the time, which I couldn't tell you for sure, then I imagine I thought and I said to myself that in spite of that no change was to occur; in spite of the fact that no change would occur the Reichsfuehrer-SS had given orders to make the camp much smaller and to take the Jews somewhere else.
Q.- Witness, I want to go on through another matter. You haven't told us all that you know about medical experiments, have you, about inmates and about medical experiments being carried out on inmates?
A.- According to my opinion, yes.
Q.- Let me refresh your memory. Do you remember anything about hormone experiments? You haven't told us anything about that?
A.- One named Dr. Vaernet had made hormone experiments with the Deutsche Heilmittel G.m.b.h. That is known to me.
Q.- What else do you know about it?
A.- He was trying to find a technical way of manufacturing it, and in medical matters he was immediately and directly in connection with the Reichsphusician-SS.
Q.- But you didn't have anything to do with the experiments. Didnot you know anything about that, is that right?
A.- I had nothing to do with the medical experiments.
Q.- You didn't know that they were carried out on inmates?
A.- It was only known to me that the Reichsfuehrer had the intention to secure their homosexuality with the results of this hormone experiment. He carried out experiments for months and months in order to make those experiments.
Q.- You didn't know that inmates were used in these experiments?
A.- I can't recall having known that.
Q.- I would like to show you a few documents that I think will help you recall. First I would like to show you Document 2193, which I will mark as Prosecution's Exhibit 599. This is your signature on this note, is it not?
A.- Yes, it is.
Q.- And in this note you report to Pohl that Poppendick - that on the occasion of a conference with Poppendick at the office of Himmler about the research of von Kennel, Vaernet, who were engaged in hormone research, was introduced to you. I would like to show you another docu ment which I think will further refresh your recollection. This is NO-2193, and I will mark it as Prosecution's Exhibit 600. Is this letter of 23 February, 1944, signed by you?
A.- Yes, that is correct/
Q.- And who has signed the letter of the 17th of February, 1945?
A.- That was Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Hoffmann.
Q.- I want to show you another document in this series and ask you to identify it.
A.- This is Document NO-2195 which I will mark Prosecution's Exhibit 601. Have you seen this letter before from Reichs? Do you remember this letter, Witness? It talks about the experiments being carried out on the inmates. You don't recall this?
A.- I don't believe I do. I forgot about it, I believe, but now that I am reading it again, and I see the other documents also, I see it is addressed to me. It indicates -- I couldn't tell you if I actually received it or not.
Q.- Let me show you this handwritten note on the bottom of the document and see if that refreshes your recollection.
A.- Yes, I did receive the letter.
Q.- That is your handwritten comment on it, isn't it saying, "The points mentioned in the above letter were discussed in Prague between Dr. Vaernet and the two managers of the German Medicine Company.
A.- Yes, that is my notation, it is true?
Q.- Do you see the first part of the letter which was sent to you which says that inmates were being experimented upon?