"A Yes, I was one of ten permanent officials. We originally started with 52 but as the East Front receded the staff was finally reduced to ten.
I was in charge of the administration side of the labor and social policy. The head of the department was Landesbaurenfuehrer Peukert.
"Q Was the East Ministry in favor of voluntary recruiting of workers in the East?
"A Yes, of voluntary recruiting only, my instructions being that it should only be carried out on this basis.
"Q Are any results known?
"A Yes, but the results were not as great as anticipated, only some 300,000 to 400,000 volunteers andmost of these were from Ukraine, Lithuania and Estonia.
"Q Were there any negotiations about decreasing the quotas ordered by the GBA?
"A Yes, negotiations for decreasing the quotas took place but broke down owing to Sauckel demanding something like a million workers to be transferred to the interior.
"Q Who was responsible for the care and control of the East Workers (Ostarbeiter) in the Reich?
"A The German Arbeits Front and the Reichsnahrstand were responsible for the care of the East workers, the former for workers in munitions and heavy industry and the latter for agricultural workers.
"Q What was the point of view of the department, ASO, ---".
DR. THOMA: That, if I may interrupt, was the working social and political department of the East Ministry. (INTERPRETER CONTINUING) "Q What was the point of view of the department, ASO, concerning the treatment of the East Workers in the Reich?
"A The viewof my department ASO was that the voluntary recruiting of workers on a free movement basis, thus taking them out of the bashedwin enclosed factories, would be the best method of treatment. We also advocated the removal of the armbadges worn originally on the arm and later on the left wrist, which carried the word 'East' so as to distinguish them from workers from the West, who never at any time were badges.
The wording being later changed to 'Greater Russia', 'White Russia' and 'Ukraine', the people from the Baltic States did not wear the arm badge.
Certain Russians, small groups of Cossacks, Tartars and one or two others were not.compelled to wear the arm band, as they were anti-Bolshevistic and pro-German and a certain proportion of these were eventually called up into the German Army. Some 7,000 youths for Ruthania were called up by ASO and these were apprenticed at Junkers Works.
"Q. Is the Central Office (Zentralistelle) for the Eastern Peopl (Ostvoelker) at the East Ministry known to you?
How is this organized?
"A. Yes, it was considered to be a consulate for the East; members of the Staff were partly Germans and partly local employees from the East who were considered suitable for such employment. Some of the foreign employees were placed at the disposal of the County offices to look after the interests of their fellow countrymen working in the countries. At the Central Office were instituted offices for each of the Eastern States, each office being controlled by a German, some of whom had originally come from those States. There was also a Welfare Branch which was run by persons from these Eastern States, to look after the comfort, etc., of their individual countrymen; there was also a religious branch which was run by clergy from these countries, but this branch was not very successful as there was an insufficiency of priests.
"Q. Now, with the help of the DAF, were the complaints followed up?
"A. The interests of foreign workers were always looked after; missions were sent to the various concentration of East workers to find out how they were progressing and what kind of treatment they were receiving. These missions dealt with complaints submitted to them on their visists, but the Central office had to deal also with written complaints received through the post.
"Q. Is a printed circular to the authorities in the country known to you that ordered just treatment? Details? What was the story about the families who were evacuated by the Army Group Center and about the children 10-14 years old?
"A. Yes, there was a circular issued, dealing with this question, and it gave details at great length for the just treatment of the East workers. This circular was issued at the request of the Ministry of the East, through Saukel. A second circular was issued by Rosenberg dealing with the just treatment of workers from the East only.
I have no knowledge of this story, as this was dealt with entirely by the Army Group Center.
"Q. Does the witness know the pamphlet issued by the East ministry to the managers of enterprises concerning the nations of Eastern Europe and the attitude towards them?"
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, that affidavit does not seem to be short at all. It all seems to be cumulative. Every word of it is what we have heard before, and heard not only once, but over and over again.
THE INTERPRETER: Dr. Thoma has just said that the last sentence is coming up.
DR. THOMA: Two short sentences.
THE INTERPRETER: "There were two pamphlets issued; one issued by Saukel, and the other issued in conjunction with DAF and Saukel and the Ministry for the East.
"Q. Has he one handy?
"A. I have not got a copy of this pamphlet.
"(Signed) Beil".
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Thoma, the Tribunal relies on Counsel, you know, and when you tell us that this is an important affidavit, we rely on what you tell us, in the opinion of the Tribunal, the reading of the affidavit was ah absolute wast of the Tribunal's time.
DR. THOMA: I should like to put another request to the High Tribunal. Reichhauptstellenleiten Dr. Oeppert, of the office of the Delegate of the Fuehrer for the Supervision of the Entire Ideologic al and Spiritual Enlightenment under Rosenberg. This affidavit has not been granted to me, but I already have it at my disposal and in my hand.
THE PRESIDENT: Has the Prosecution seen it?
DR. THOMA: No, Mr. President, I do not think so. I made my application with the Genenral Secretary. Whether this request has been submitted yet to the Prosecution I do not know.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, the only application that we have got so far as I can see, is an interrogatory to Dr. Keoppen in lieu of Dr. Stellbreacht.
Is that the one that you are speaking about now?
DR. THOMA: No, Mr. President, I was granted permission to interrogate Dr. Koeppen instead of Dr. Stellbreacht, and the interrogatory has already been sent off. This, however, is a new application regarding Dr. Oeppert, and that has not been decided THE PRESIDENT : You had better submit it to the Prosecution and see whether they have any comment to make on it, and we can take it up tomorrow.
DR. THOMA : Thank you very much, Mr. President.
DR. KUBUSCHOK ( Counsel for defendant von Papen ) : In the case of Papen, there are eight interrogatories which have not been disposed of. Three of them have just been returned in the last few days and are in the stage of being translated. I ask permission that when I receive my last interrogatory, I may submit all six at one time to the High Tribunal. foreign journalist, Rademacher von Una, in Milan, Italy. This affidavit at present is being translated. I gave this to the British Prosecutor, and he does not object. I ask to be allowed to submit this affidavit with the balance of my documents which are still outstanding.
THE PRESIDENT : Yes, certainly you may submit it. We shall then pass upon it as to its admissibility.
DR. KUBUSCHOK : Thank you, Mr. President.
DR. SEIDL (Counsel for defendants Frank and Hess) : On behalf of the defendant Frank, Mr. President, I ask permission to submit at this time the answers to the interrogatory from the witnesses which have not yet been submitted. interrogatory by the witness Dr. Ernst Boepple. Boepple was in the Government General. He was a State Secretary, and he has answered 41 questions. tory given by the witness Max Meidinger. Meidinger was chief of the Chancellory of the Government General. He has answered 43 questions. make out, has not been translated as yet, even though I handed these interrogatories in to be translated about ten days ago. However, an English translation is here, along with these interrogatories. witness Gassner, who answered 49 questions. Gassner was Press Chief in the Government General.
Dr. Stepp, last Oberlandesgericht President. In the main he deals with the efforts made by the Defendant Frank in the years 1933 and 1934, in his capacity as a German Minister of Justice for the dissolution of the concentration camp at Dachau.
I should also like to use this opportunity, Mr. President, to point out an error of translation which does not refer to a document of Frank but to a document which was submitted on behalf of the defendant Hess.
This was not applied to the personal guilt of Hess. However, it 2 July A LJG 23-1 is found in the document book, and the document concerned herewith is USA-696, 062-PS.
That is a directive of the 13th of March, 1940, the same directive which was mentioned last Saturday in the case of the defendant Bormann, on which occasion the President read figure 4 of this document, which was used. completely distorts the sense of the directive and, if I may say so, it can become very dangerous in its ramifications.
Under the figure 4 the words "unschaedlich gomacht" (made harmless) were translated "liquidated".
THE PRESIDENT: If there is an error in the translation, you had better apply to the General Secretary, and he will have the matter gone into by the Translation Division.
DR. SEIDL: Yes, Mr. President, but things do not seem to work that way. The translator obviously had the feeling himself that his translation was not reproducing the sense quite accurately, because in parentheses he added "unschaedlich gomacht". In my opinion this sentence would have to be translated as follows;
"Likewise, even the parachutists are immediately to be arrested or made harmless." The sense was obviously that the parachutists-
THE PRESIDENT (Interposing): I daresay, Dr. Seidl, but we haven't got the document before us and we don't all of us understand the German language. Therefore, it had better be referred to the Translation Division. It is no good referring it to us.
DR. SEIDL: Then I shall put a written application to the General Secretary, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Y es. which Dr. Seidl has been dealing with? Have the prosecution had the opportunity of putting cross-interrogatories if they wanted to do so?
COLONEL PHILLIMORE: My Lord, I am told that we think so, with the possible exception of the last one. Perhaps I could look into it ever-night.
2 July A LJG 23-2
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
COLONEL PHILLIMORE : I will look into that point and let the Tribunal know.
My Lord, the prosecution have a few documents to put in. I have eight, and I think my friend Mr. Dodd has three. I could do it quickly, but it might be more convenient to do it tomorrow morning.
THE PRESIDENT: We will go into all these documents tomorrow morning. There will be some others on behalf of some of the other defendants. We will also hear the witnesses Kempka and Walkenhorst, I believe it is, whom Dr. Bergold called.
The Tribunal desires Dr. Bergold to be here tomorrow morning in order to be able to examine those witnesses.
(A recess was taken until 3 July 1946, at 1000 hours.)
THE PRESIDENT: Has Dr. Bergold asked any of the defendants' counsel to represent him ?
(No response)
Has the Marshal been able to get in touch with Dr. Bergold ?
THE MARSHAL: No, Sir.
DR. STAHMER: Mr. President, Dr. Bergold had been advised yesterday that his presence would be required in the courtroom today. As far as I have heard -- and I have only heard this, however -- the General Secretary also got in touch with him regarding this matter. I am sorry I cannot tell you any more about that. As far as I know, he did not ask anyone to represent him in Court today.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you, Dr. Stahmer.
DR. STAHMER: Mr. President, I shall look into this matter immediately, to see whether he has arrived or whether I can contact him.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer, I think the best course would be for the Tribunal to consider the various applications with reference to interrogatories and documents, which I think you and other counsel have got that you wish to offer in evidence. The Tribunal will then examine these witnesses if Dr. Bergold is not here by that time, and they will of course expect him to be here if it is possible. Perhaps you will communicate with him, and the Marshal should also communicate with Dr. Bergold.
DR. STAHMER: Yes.
THE MARSHAL: Yes, Sir.
DR. JAHRREISS: Mr. President, I have learned that the son of Dr. Bergel returned yesterday, unexpectedly and suddenly, from a prisoner of war camp. Therefore, Dr. Bergold traveled to his home, a little bit outside of Nurnberg I asked his secretary to go to Dr. Bergold's home, and I assume he will be here within half an hour at the most.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer, you have some interrogatories, I think, which you want to offer in evidence, have you not ?
DR. STAHMER (Counsel for defendant Goering): Yes, sir. ding which had not arrived at that time. who was a General in the Air Force. He submitted an organizational study for 1950, which was completed on the 2nd of May, 1938. He was questioned about the purpose and significance of this study. In this interrogatory he stated that this was just a sketch which was based on theoretical assumptions. Then there was a second part to this sketch, which gave the deadline of 1942, and the solution for 1938. This was a positive proposal or suggestion for the organization of the Luftwaffe, the Air Force.
This study was compiled by the author on his own; the witness does not know whether it was actually submitted to Goering at any time. He does not consider it probable, but he does assume that he did suggest the positive organizational plan to Goering.
This interrogatory will be designated Goering Exhibit No. 54. I should like to submit this to the High Tribunal at this time. nates from Colonel General Kurt Student. This deals with the air attack on Rotterdam in May of 1940. It is an explanation of that fact.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you got copies of these interrogatories ? We have got this one you are now offering of Student, but we haven't got the one of Kammhuber.
DR. STAHMER: Mr. President, I submitted this material to the Translation Department and I was told that the translations had been completed. I had given this material to the Translation Department. I shall look into the matter and see whether anything has been done with it. At any rate, I did submit the originals to the Translation Department.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes; the Tribunal will expect you to look into it, then.
As to this one of Student, has that been applied for and granted ? It isn't on my list.
DR. STAHMER: Yes, Mr. President, it has been granted, and the prosecution has submitted a counter-interrogatory to this one.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. STAHMER: If I am not mistaken, this interrogatory of Student's was granted me on the 14th of February. May of 1940. He gives the necessary explanation as to how it came about that during capitulation negotiations bombs were still being dropped on Rotterdam. I believe I do not need to refer to this interrogatory in detail, but the situation was such that capitulation negotiations were in progress. An air attack had been planned, but the squadron which had been deployed could not be advised in time by wireless. The ground troops gave off signals, which the air squadron did not recognize.
THE PRESIDENT: It appears to cover the same ground as has already been introduced in evidence; does it not?
DR. STAHMER: It has been dealt with in the examination; yes, that is correct, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Then it should not be read under any circumstances now.
DR. STAHMER: Then I shall submit this document -
THE PRESIDENT: In evidence. I mean, you need not read it in detail.
DR. STAHMER: Very well, Mr. President.
Then, Mr. President, I have another interrogatory which I should like to submit, deposed by a general of the air forces, Koller. It shall be assigned exhibit number 55.
Mr. President, I ask the indulgence and the permission of the High Tribunal to read these questions, for there is a special significance connected with the testimony given by this witness as it relates to the defendant in this proceeding.
"Question 1: Did the former Reich Marshal Goering at any time issue an order that enemy fliers who had been shot down should be given over to the police or that they should be shot without a trial, or legal proceedings?
"Answer: As far as I know, no. Such an order's being issued by the Reich Marshal is not known to me, in any event.
"Question 2: Did the former Reich Marshal Goering participate in the formulation of an order on the basis of which all of the British flying officers who escaped from Stalag 3 at Sagan in March, 1944, were shot by the police or SD?
"Answer: General Korton told me that the Luftwaffe, the air force -meaning the Reich Marshal and himself -- did not participate in the issuing of this order.
"Question 3: Did the former Reich Marshal Goering learn of the fact contained in question 2 alter these decrees given by Hitler had been carried out? Did he learn about it only then?
"Answer: General Korton told me that he and the Reich Marshal, only had knowledge of this subsequently.
"Question 4: On what day was this order issued by Hitler?
"Answer: Not known.
"Question 5: On what day, or on what days, was this order carried out?
"Answer: Not known.
"Question 6: Do you know whether the former Reich Marshal Goering opposed the shooting of these fifty British Air Force officers very stronly, or very intensely?
"Answer: General Korton told no that the Reich Marshal had been very much upset and very indignant about this shooting.
"Question 7: Do you have any knowledge about the fact of whether the former Reich Marshal Goering and his deputies in the air force, the Luftwaffe, the chief of the general staff repeatedly protested with Hitler against the proceedings which were to be taken against the enemy 'terror' fliers who had been shot down?
"Answer: According to statements which General Korton made to me in June of 1944, that is correct. I remember that at a later time it was reported to me that the Reich Marshal complained to the Fuehrer on one occasion about the steps being taken by Party organizations and individuals among the population against so-called 'terror' fliers, the mason for this having been that our own air crows had suffered.
"In March of 1945, he very strongly and intensely turned down the suggestion, or proposal, that all enemy crews which were shot down and which would be shot down in the future and captured be turned over to the SD.
"Replying to questions 1 through 7, I should like to state in a supplementary fashion, generally, in the time concerned I was chief of staff of the Luftwaffe operational staff. In February, 1944, the Fuehrer headquarters was transferred, and the OKW was transferred, the Reich Marshal with his personal entourage and the chief of the general staff of the air force, General Korten, together with two or three ordnance officers, to Berchtesgaden. The Fuehrer headquarters transferred all of these to Berchtesgaden.
"As far as the supreme command of the Luftwaffe was concerned -- that is, the entire working staff in East Prussia, Robinson -- I was to remain in Robinson. Because we were counting on the rapid transfer of the Fuehrer headquarters, the entire signal command apparatus for the supplying and taking care of the Luftwaffe in those matters, were to be routed via Robinson.
And because of the separation which increased and became longer from week to week between the supreme command and the Luftwaffe on one hand and the supreme commanders of the general staff on the other hand, it came about that we in East Prussia did not have knowledge of things which were being handled and disposed of directly at Berchtesgaden.
"This applied to important decisions. Frequently we had no knowledge, and often we were advised very, very late of these matters. Only in the beginning of June -- I believe it was one week after Whtsunday -- I, together with some of my aides, was transferred to Berchtesgaden. And up until that time, beginning in early February, I had been present at Berchtesgaden only once for a conference.
"To questions 2 to 6, dealing with Sagan, concerning the shooting on the instructions of the Fuehrer of the fliers who escaped from Sagan, I heard from General Korten, and I believe from Colonel Christian, simultaneously about this matter. I rather believe I heard about it first from General Korten, who, as far as I recall, on the occasion of one of the daily, rather lengthy evening telephone conversations, advised me on this matter. General Korten on this occasion expressed an adverse view, quite unequivocally, and told me those things which I mentioned in reply to Questions 2, 3, and 6. The conversation must have taken place at the end of March or the beginning of April. However, I cannot fix the exact date.
"Dealing with Questions 1 and 2, concerning the 'terror' fliers, at perhaps the beginning of June, 1944 -- first I thought that it had been July, but I think now that it must have been June -- General Korten advised me that the Fuehrer intended to order that 'terror' fliers be given over to the wroth of the people.
"We discussed this matter repeatedly and we all agreed in our opposition. As far as the direct attacks by low-flying enemy aircraft was concerned, as directed against civilian population, against women and children, gatherings of civilians, passenger trains in public traffic, hospitals, school children who were out for a walk, our own crews which were parachuting to earth, farmers who were tilling their fields, we considered these attacks of hostile enemy aircraft in low-flying attacks against all of these people cruel and contrary to international law, but in the decree which the Fuehrer intended. to issue, we saw no real way and no solution of this very difficult problem. Our reasons, Articles of War, International Law, in opposition to soldierly principles, source of numerous misunderstandings through which these enemy flyers, as well as our own, could come to grief, and ramifications on the --"
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer, isn't this really going into argument and not dealing with facts? It really isn't necessary for you to read all this witness' arguments about it. He is not really dealing with facts at all now and it is in detail -
DR. STAHMER: Mr. President, they are these facts which he discussed with General Korten and facts which were decisive for them in rejecting the Fuehrer's order. These were the reasons discussed between him and Korten.
THE PRESIDENT: Some of what you have read no doubt is a matter of fact, but what you are now reading is a matter of argument.
DR. STAHMER: No, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Stahmer, surely you can summarize the rest of this.
DR. STAHMER: Mr. President, this document is of such great importance to the Defendant because this document deals with just those questions concerning points with which he is accused and which are very relevant.
THE PRESIDENT: You have been reading it and so far as it is statements of fact, it seems to me that there is some excuse for reading it in detail, but when you come to matters of argument, it seems to me there is no excuse for reading it because argument by a particularwitness is not really relevant for the Tribunal's consideration at all. Summarize the argument, if you like. I mean, you have read the factual part. Summarize the rest and maybe you can tell us , if you like, what the argument is.
DR. STAHMER: Very well, Mr. President. General Korten further stated that all of the documents which are important to the question of terror flyers and the shooting of Air Force officers, after looking over them he arrived at the conclusion that the contents of these documents is proof of the fact that OKW as well as the Reichsmarshal opposed these steps and did everything within their power to prevent such a decision as had been intended by Hitler being realized and put into effect.
Specifically, he points out that in one of these letters there is a marginal note to the effect that from the Supreme Commander of the Air Force there was no reply, and he concludes from that that the Reichsmarshal personally fought against any conclusive treatment of this matter.
Then there is a further incident dealt with in Question 8: "Did the Fuehrer, on the occasion of the situation discussion, in the presence of all participants, in an excited manner and tone, accuse the Luftwaffe that the German Air Force had made a coward's agreement with the Allied Air Forces?" This applies to Question 5.
"Answer: Perhaps in the first half of March of 1945, Bormann sent the Fuehrer a note taken from the Allied Press -- it had been a reporter's article and the sense of this note was that the crew of an American fighting plane, which just a little bit prior had been shot down over Germany, had been picked up by American troops. Its crew had testified thatundignified persons of the population had threatened them with death and in all probability they would have been lynched if it hadn't been German soldiers who had liberated them and protected them. Bormann, in a few words, called Hitler's attention specifically to the fact that this confirmed the fact that German soldiers, in cases of that nature, were taking steps against their own population; and he concluded his remarks approximately as follows: "'My Fuehrer, that is the way your orders are being followed and carried out. Thereupon, all of these participants of the situation report listened to a rather excited statement by the Fuehrer, and among other things the Fuehrer complained, saying: 'The reason why my orders are not being carried through is the cowardice of the Air Force, because the officers of the Luftwaffe are cowards and they are afraid that something might happen to them some day. The entire thing is nothing but an agreement between my Luftwaffe and the English and American flyers.' I reported on this to the Reichsmarshal.
Whether Hitler made the same utterance to the Reichsmarshal personally, that I am not able to say,but I consider this quite probable, because in eases of this kind,especially as applied to the Air Force, repeated himself in choice phrases."
"Question: On what day did this discussion take place?"
"Answer: I cannot fix the date."
Now we come to Question 10: "The Fuehrer repeatedly ordered the former Reichsmarshal to determine the name of that officer of the Luftwaffe who, in May of 1944 protected from the population an Allied flyer who had been shot down, but despite repeated inquiries on the part of the Fuehrer the Reichsmarshal gave no instructions to determine the name of this officer or to make the name known to the Fuehrer."
He says he cannot tell from his own experience; he had a report only that an officer of the Luftwaffe and an Ortsgruppenleiter had tried to use their influence on behalf of this American crew; that the Ortsgruppenleiter, who was known, was shot on Hitler's order; that Hitler then demanded to have the name of the Luftwaffe officer given to him; that he had not been told the name, and he said further that if the Reichsmarshal had actually wanted to determine the name of this Luftwaffe officer, he could have done so easily.
"Question 11: Did the Luftwaffe, at the end of the war, receive orders to destroy Dachau with bombs at the approach of the enemy, a nd in particular, was an order to that effect given by the Gauleiter in Munchen under the cue word "Wolke"? Could a Gauleiter give instructions to the Luftwaffe?"
I can summarize the answer by saying, the witness says: "I do not recall any order to that effect," and specifically, he does not know whether the Gauleiter in Munchen was competent to give an order in that respect and he does not believe that a higher officer of the Luftwaffe would have been willing to carry out such a decree.
"Question 12: What do you know about the attitude and the position of the Reichsmarshal and his Luftwaffe in dealing with hostile flyers who had been shot down?"
"Answer: The attitude of the Reichsmarshal always remained correct and chivalrous, quite in line with the Air Force tradition which he gained in the First World War and which he emphasized frequently."
Of course, in time of indignation about great difficulties in their defense and pressed by the Fuehrer, perhaps on occasion he used harsh words.
These words, however, soon were forgotten and I do not know of a single case that such spontaneous utterances made by the Reichsmarshal ever translated themselves into incorrect or harsh measures or oders, dealing with the members of foreign air crews and the attitude and position maintained by the entire Luftwaffe was always correct and humane. To fight in a chivalrous manner, that was a manner of honor with the German flyers --- only a few examples out of many, even though the attacks of enemy aircraft were used against German flyers who were parachuting to earth, these things which were disliked intensely --
THE PRESIDENT : This is all you are reading now aren't you; and this is all comment, not a statement of fact. It is comment and argument.
DR. STAHMER : Now, Mr. President, he is coming to an example in which he reports about those things.
THE PRESIDENT : Well, let us come to it.
DR. STAHMER : Very well. The use of the sea emergency service meant the entire English Channel, the Bay of Heligoland and Brest, and the Bay of Biscay, and the sea rescue service applied in the same manner to the Germans as well as to the enemy. The rescue service crews in their aircraft and the rescue service couriers in a most tireless manner and in a manner of willingness to sacrifice, tried to assist friend and foe in distress.
THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Stahmer, these weren't particular instances. These weren't particular facts; they are just general statements which are really comments and argument about the chivalry of the German Air Force; That is all.
DR. STAHMER : Mr. President, he is trying to prove in that way.
THE PREDISENT : He doesn't prove it by making a general statement.
DR. STAHMER : No, of course not. He is going over to the point of how many were rescued, how many of those were enemies and how many were their own people. I believe this fact, Mr. President, has significance for the judgment of individual people and of the Luftwaffe.
THE PRESIDENT : As I said just now, if you will get down to the facts, if you have the numbers, well, no doubt that will be a matter of fact.
DR. STAHMER : It amounted to thousands in distress who were rescued at sea --- in various branches of the German Luftwaffe; on the other hand, the members of enemy crews -- Without my being able to give exact figures at the moment, I would estimate -- according to my memory I would say that from seventy to eighty percent were saved by the enemy --- a correction --- who were enemies.
And in continuing. In the use of our services and through our reconnaissance or other means, crews who were in distress at sea, who were found near hostile coasts or who were beyond the limits of our own sea-air rescue service, people who were in distress who were sighted, immediately the enemy was notified and was asked to rescue. Then there are several questions put by the prosecution. The first question is --
THE PRESIDENT : It is for the prosecution to read their questions if they want to read them.
DR. STAHMER : I am not interested in these questions, Mr. President; that is quite all right.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE : The prosecution do not want the questions read.
THE PRESIDENT : The Tribunal will read them. Do you mean you want to put them in evidence ?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE : We will put them in but we do not want them read.
THE PRESIDENT : Right.
DR. STAHMER : I have already stated that this is Goering Exhibit 55. Then I have one more interrogatory, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Stahmer, you realize that the Tribunal proposes to read all the evidence and therefore these interrogatories will be read and considered even though they are not read now in open court. You offered them in evidence and the Tribunal will be grateful if you will out short the reading of these affidavits and interrogatories as far as possible.
DR. STAHMER : I shall be guided accordingly, Mr. President. Now, we are turning to the interrogatory of von Hammerstein which I shall submit as Goering Exhibit No. 52. Mr. President, this interrogatory is not at my disposal in the original. I can only submit it in a form attested to. It has been submitted to the prosecution; it has been translated but it is inaccessible at the moment, I shall assume that I shall find the original very soon and the British prosecution is advised and, as I have stated, this document has been translated.
THE PRESIDENT : You mean the original has been mislaid or something.
DR. STAHMER : It has just been mislaid, Mr. President, and I am unable to find it at the moment.