THE PRESIDENT: Would you ask the witness if he remembers what the contents were, not putting it in a leading form.
DR. DIX: Yes, I shall certainly ask him. But I think he has answered that he cannot remoter the details accurately so I am trying to give him some aid for his memory by giving him the main points.
THE PRESIDENT: Ask him what he does remember of it. BY DR. DIX:
Q Well then, Dr. Lammers, without my presenting the main points to you, what do you remember? economy, both as to Germany and abroad, that now in the autumn of 1941 the most favorable moment had come to begin negotiations to end the war and I think he also explained the world situation but I cannot remember how. He sketched the political situation in other countries. He talked about America Italy, Japan and he compared the factors. The Fuehrer then looked at the memorandum and put it aside and lie said:
"I have already disapproved of that, I do not want to have it." stated that the dropping out of Italy was merely a question of time, since the opposition group around the king would not give in until Mussolini was brought down?
THE PRESIDENT: One moment. The Tribunal will adjourn now.
(Whereupon at 1710 hours the Tribunal adjourned to reconvene at 1000 hours on Tuesday, April 9, 1946.)
Military Tribunal in the matter of: The
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Dix. BY DR. DIX: soon after your answers and that you were replying to my questions too quickly.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I should like to take up a matter before the examination of the witnesses, if I may ask the indulgence of the Tribunal. its abuses to such an extent that I must close the document room to printing documents for German counsel. Now, that is a drastic step but I know of nothing less that I car do and I submit the situation to the Tribunal.
We have received from the General Secretary's Office an order to print and have printed a document book number one for Rosenberg. That document book does not contain one item in its 107 pages that by any stretch of the imagination can be relevant to this proceeding. It is violent anti-semitism and the United States simply cannot be put in the position even at the order, which I have no doubt was an ill-considered one, of the Secretary of the Tribunal to print and *---* to the press just plain anti-semitism and that is what this document is. Now, I ask you to consider what it is. would call, with the greatest respect to those who think otherwise, rubbish and this is an example of the rubbish we are required to print at the expense of the United States and I simply cannot sit silent any longer.
"The Philosophic methods suited to bourgeois society is a critical one. That holds true in a positive as well as a negative sense. The rule by the purely rational form, the subjegation of nature, the freeing of the autonomous personality, all that is contained in the method of thinking classically formulated by Kant.
At the sane time, though, it speaks also of the isolation of the individual, the near depletion of nature and community life, the connection with the secluded world of forms which all critical thinking is striving for."
Now, what in the world are we required to print that for?
THE PRESIDENT: Now, Mr. Jackson, this red light is on. I do not know why.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I suppose that I am going too fast, Your Honor. of this documents book. "actually, the Jews, as to the Canonites, the Phenicians and Carthaginians, represent a bastard race"; --- and it goes on largely upon the theme. Then it goes on "The Jews are arrogant in success, submissive in failure, shrewd and crooked wherever possible, greedy, of remarkable intelligence and not creative." I do not want to take this Tribunal's time, but last night we receive an additional order to print 260 copies more of this sort of thing and I have had to stop the presses, and we cannot accept the duty of printing this stuff unless it is reviewed by the Tribunal. rejected by the Tribunal and nobody pays the least attention to the Tribunal's rejection, and we are ordered to print. Now, with the greatest deference, I want to say that the United States will print any document that a member of this Tribunal or an alternate certifies, but we can no longer print these things at the request of the German counsel nor at the ill-considered directions which we have been receiving.
DR. THOMA (Counsel for defendant Rosenberg): To start with, I want to make the following statement, namely that on the 8th of Larch, 1946, I was granted expressly the permission that I could quote philosophical books in my document book.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Thoma.
DR. THOMA: Consequently, I have based my work on the assumption that Rosenb* ideology is an execution of the so-called new Romantic philosophy, and from seri* now Romantic philosophical works which have been recognized by scientific quotati* Secondly, gentlemen, I have attempted not to submit any anti-Semitic book, and what has just been read to me must be absolute mistakes of translation. work of a recognized Jewish scientist by the name of Isma Elbogen; and , thirdly, I have quotedfrom a book which had been written by a Jewish iniversity professor, Max Kreutzxtein, and I have deliberately refrained from making anti-Semitic propaganda today in this courtroom.
I want to request, therefore, that these documents be once more investigated to See whether this is a fact serious or trite I still maintain that the works which I have quoted from American, English, French and other recognized scientists are of value and the quotations which Mr. Justice Jackson has just made regarding that bastard race originate, as I know, from nonGerman scientists, but I have to look at that once more. so as to show that they are in any way non-scientific or not prejudicial.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson, the Tribunal thinks that there must have been some mistake in sending the translation division this book of documents without having it presented to counsel for the Prosecution first. The Tribunal made an order some time ago, saying that counsel for the Prosecution should have the right to object to any document before it is sent to the translation department. Some difficulty then arose because documents had been mostly in German. There was a difficulty about counsel for the Prosecution making up their minds as to their objections until they have been translated. That difficulty was presented to us a few days ago; I think you were not in court at the time, out no doubt other members of the United states counsel were here. We had a full discussion on the subject, and it was then agreed that counsel for the Prosecution should see counsel for the defense and, as far as possible, discuss with them and point out to them the documents which counsel for the Prosecution thought ought not to be translated, and, in case of disagreement, it was ordered that the matter should be referred to the Tribunal. So that, so far as the Tribunal are concerned, they have done everything that they can to lighten the work of the translation division Of course, in so far as documents have been presented to the translation division for translation, which the Tribunal had already denied, that must have been done by mistake because the General Secretary's office no doubt ought to have refused to hand ever to the translation division any document which the Tribunal had area already denied, But the general priciples which I have attempted to explain seem to the Tribunal to be the only priciples upon which we can go in order to lighten the work of the translation division. That is to say that counsel for the Prosecution should meet counsel for the Defense and point out to them what documents are so obviously irrelevant that they ought not to be translated.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: Well, if Your Honor please, I do not think it is a mistake. It arises from a fundamental difference which this Tribunal has not, I think, made clear.
That the issues here are: Counsel says that he thinks he should try the new Romanticism of Rosenberg. We are charging him for the murder of four or five million Jews. The question is of ideology here. The only purpose in over referring to the anti-Semitic sentiments is the motive. There is no purpose here to try the question of anti-Semitism or the superiority of races, the fundamental difference in viewpoint. They believe, and, of course, if they can try this issu* with this Tribunal as a sounding board, it forwards their purpose. They believe in trying that issue.
The first we get is this book with the order to print it. We cannot tell whe* they are going to present something in the document room. I simply must not become a party to this spirit of anti-Semiticism. The United States cannot do it, and the Tribunal's directions to counsel are simply being ignored. That is the difficulty here.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not know if you have in mind the order which we made on the 8th of March, 1946, in these terms:
"To avoid unnecessary translation, Defense Counsel will indicate to the Prosecution the exact passages in all documents which they propose to use, in order that the Prosecution may have an opportunity to object to irrelevant passages. In the event of disagreement between the Prosecution and the Defense as to the relevancy of any particular passage, the Tribunal will decide what passages are sufficiently relevant to be translated. Only the cited passages need be translated, unless the Prosecution required the translation of the entire document good, but the ruling seems, up to the present at any rate, to the Tribunal to be the best rule that can be laid down, and we reiterated it after full discussion a very few days ago.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I am calling Your Honor's attention to the fact that Your Honor's order is not being observed and that we are being fed these document to print without any prior notice. The boys in the press room are not lawyers; they are not in the position to pass on these things. I do not have the personn* My personnel, as this Tribunal well knows, is reduced very Seriously.
I cannot undertake it in the pressroom here after an order comes from the General Secretary's office, a review of what can be done.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, but did you -
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The order is not being carried out; that is the difficu
THE PRESIDENT: You mean that none of these documents were submi tted to the counsel for the Prosecution?
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: The documents were not submitted to counsel for Prosecution. They came to the press room with an order to print from the General Secretary's office. That is what I am arguing, a grievance; one I shall have to remedy. We are in the very peculiar position, Your Honor, of being asked to be press agents for these defendants. We were ordered to print 260 copies of these stencils that I have. The United States cannot be acting as press agents for the distribution of this anti-Semitic literature which we protested long ago was one of the vices of the Nazi regime, particularly after they have been argued on and have been denied by the court. This, it seems to me, is a flagrant case of contempt of court, to put these documents through after the Tribunal has ruled or. them and ruled out this whole document book of Rosenberg.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly, so far as any documents are concerned, they ought never to have been submitted to the translation department.. Might not the Tribunal hear from Sir David Maxwell Fyffe because he was here on the previous occasion, the last occasion that we dealt with this subject?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE: May it please your Lordship, my understanding of the matter is that the Rosenberg documents had been processed -- that was what we were informed -- before our last discussion of the matter, and I therefore suggested to the Tribunal that the practical application of the proceedure should begin with the documents of the Defendant Frank. That is what I said to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Then my recollection is that after we made this rule of the 8th of March, 1946, Counsel for the Prosecution -- I think for all four of the Prosecution, and I rather think the document came in signed by the United States but I an not certain of it -- pointed out that there were great difficulties in carrying out this ruling of the 8th of March, because of the difficulty of Counsel for the Prosecution making up their minds about what documents were irrelevant, having regard to the fact that they had to be translated for them to do it. Is that not so?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: That difficulty arose with Dr. Horn over the Ribbentrop documents. But a written application was made to the Tribunal to vary this rule of the 6th of March 1946, and it was then after that that we had the subsequent discussion in open court when we came to the conclusion that we better adhere to the rule of the 8th of March, and I see about Rosenberg that the documents -
THE PRESIDENT: These documents had been processed already beforehand.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Since our last discussion of course we have been trying to get this procedure going. Dr. Dix has met Mr. Dodd and myself on the Schacht documents, and I understand that other learned Defense Counsel are making arrangements to meet various members with regard to theirs. But before this time, before the matter arose sharply on the Ribbentrop documents, there hadn't been any discussion'with Counsel for the Prosecution. That is the position.
THE PRESIDENT: But what I am pointing out is that that was because the Prosecution were not carrying out the rule of the 8th of March. It may have been impossible to carry out, but they were not carrying it out.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I don't know exactly how you mean "The Prosecutio* weren't carrying it out."
THE PRESIDENT: Both the Prosecution and the Defense, I suppose, because the application which came to us after the ruling of the 8th of March was made on behalf of the Prosecution, that they had such difficulties in getting translations fo the documents that they proposed another ruling.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I an sorry, my Lord, that we haven't carried it out. It is the first tine that anybody suggested to me -
THE PRESIDENT: I don't mean to criticize you.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I have taken immense trouble, cooperated in every way. I wasn't aware that we were at fault I am very sorry if we were.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't mean that, Sir David, but I think there was a difficulty in carrying this out, and I think there was a proposal that the rule should be varied. I will look into that and see whether I am right about it. I remember seeing such an application and then we had the subsequent discussion in open court in which we decided to adhere to this rule of the 8th of March, and no doubt this difficulty has arisen, as you pointed out, because of the Rosenberg documents having been processed before.
(Brief conference on the Bench.)
Mr. Justice Jackson, wouldn't the best course be for you to object in writting to all the documentary matter with which you take issue, and then such writtings will be dealt with by the Tribunal after argument.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: But, your Honor, the Tribunal has once rejected the documents, and yet we get an order to print. The Tribunal's orders are not being observed, and -- I don't want to criticize Counsel -- but we have had no opportunity to pass on these. These stencils that I stopped running last night are not anything that has been supplied to us. They have no possible place in the legitimate issues of this Tribunal and we will get nowhere talking to Dr. Thoma about it. He thinks their philosophy is an issue. Tribunal -- if I may make a suggestion, which I do with great deference; I may be a biased judge of what ought to be done; I never pretended to complete impartiality--that the Tribunal appoint a Master to pass on this.
We won't finish this by discussion between Dr. Thoma and anybody I can name. My suggestion is such an official pass on these documents before they are translated. If the Master finds a doubtful matter he can refer it back to you. We shouldn't be in the position of either agreeing or disagreeing with them in any final sense, of course. I realize it is too big a burden to put on the Tribunal to pass on these papers in advance and too big a burden on the organization to keep printing them. Paper is a scarce commodity today. Over 25,000 sheets have gone into the printing of a bookthat has been rejected. I think there is no possible way out except that a lawyer with some idea of relevance and irrelevance represent this Tribunal in passing on these things in advance, rather than leaving it to Counsel.
I wouldn't even venture to sit down with Dr. Thoma, because we start at odds. He wants to justify anti-semitism and go into its philosophy, while I assert that it is the murder of Jews that is an issue here, not whether the Jewish race is or is not liked by the German people. We don't care about that. It is a matter of settling these issues.
GENERAL RUDENKO: With the Tribunal's permission, I would like to add a few words to what Mr. Jackson has said. has already expressed a supposition that there is a mistake. And I would like to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that this mistake took place too often. I will permit myself to remind you about the documents in connection with the Versailles Treaty, which were denied by the Tribunal, the Tribunal will remember that a considerable amount of time was spent on listening to the reading of the documents which were presented by Dr. Stahmer and Dr. Horn, and I would like to remind the Tribunal about another fact, when another decision of the Tribunal was violated. Perhaps it was done by mistake; perhaps not. It took place when one of the documents was presented by Dr. Babel, before it was accepted by the Tribunal as evidence. And it seems to me that it would be very useful if the Tribunal would find it possible, for the purpose of saving time, to guarantee in more decisive manner the compliance not only by the Prosecution but also by the Defense Counsel of the rules set out by the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Thoma?
DR. THOMA: I am most concerned with the accusation that I didn't obey the instructions issued by the Tribunal. During discussions regarding which documents were admissible, I had explained in detail just which philosophical books I was going to quote from and why I wanted to quote those passages. It has been stated during the case for the Prosecution that Rosenberg had invented his philosophy, invented it for the purpose of preparing an aggressive war and for the committing of war crimes. I have considered it my duty to prove that this so-called national antipathy-
THE PRESIDENT: Will you tellthe Tribunal where the Prosecution states that he invented his philosophy, whether in the indictment or in the presentation?
DR. THOMA: Yes, I can prove it. It appears in Churchill's speech, that Rosenberg's philosophy had been used for that.
THE PRESIDENT: You say it appears in Churchill's speech?
DR. THOM: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: What have we got to do with that? I asked you whether the Prosecution alleged it in the indictment or alleged it in the course of the presentation of the Prosecution, and you answer me that Mr. Churchill-
DR. THOM: That is the evidence here, that he repeatedly stated -
(A short pause).
I didn't say Churchill. I said Mr. Justice Jackson. In his presentation he said things which in their sense meant about the same thing. Consequently I felt that it was my duty to present thatphilosophy which had been in existence before Rosenberg and raised similar arguments, which is the philosophy of the entire world.
Regarding the presentation of the document book, here is what happened: The translator's department asked me, because they had a little free time just then, to submit my document book as soon as possible, in fact before it was handed to the Tribunal, and so it is a fact that the translation department received it before the Tribunal.
But the Tribunal in its resolution of the 8th of March, 1946, had granted me permission that I could use quotations from these philosophical works, only that anti-semitic works of Elbogen were not granted.
Consequently I immediately informed the Tribunal that documents were contained in my book which had not been granted by the Tribunal.
that the quotation which Mr. Justice Jackson has just quoted originates from a French scientist, Mr. Labouche passages which were to be translated, and the quotation which Mr. Justice Jackson has quoted was not marked in red and was not meant to be included in the document book. This is a regrettable error. clue, that the expression is, "Rosenberg has developed the philosophical technique of the conspiracy and has thus created an educational system for an aggressive war." That is the expression in Mr. Justice Jackson's presentation, and it was for that reason that I wanted to point out that this philosophical problem is an important one and is necessary for my case. I do not think, therefore, that I could be accused of not obeying any ruling of the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Dr. Thomas, were these document sent to the press room or were they sent to the translation department?
DR. THOMAS: In my opinion, they were sent to the translation department, since this department had told me that they were having a little free time and this would be a great onslaught on material and they would like to translate it then.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson stated apparently that they had been sent to the press room and were being disseminated to the public in that way, but on the outside of each document book there is this notice: That they are not to be publicized until they are presented before the Tribunal in open court and then only that portion actually submitted as evidence. Therefore, any documents which are sent to the translation room are not disseminated, or ought not to be disseminated to the press and ought not to be publicized until they are presented before this Tribunal. have arisen principally from the fact that you submitted your documents to the translation department before they had been submitted to the Tribunal, and therefore some of them got translated which were subsequently denied by the Tribunal.
Is that right?
DR. THOMAS: No, My Lord, that is not right. To start with, this was an internal process and a request Prom the translating authority. I had given them the document book because they asked me to do so.
THE PRESIDENT: I did not say who had asked whom. I said that the translation department got the documents for translation -- they received them before they were submitted to the Tribunal, and, in consequence, they translated certain documents which were subsequently denied by the Tribunal.
DR. THOMAS: Of course, the only rejected works were the three antiSemitic works. That those documents reached the press is something that I did not know. I was only trying to alleviate the position of the translating department, and I have subsequently informed the General Secretary that I submitted the document book and have pointed out the facts to him. and I want to point out again that I was always of the opinion that this was altogether an internal process and that such documents could roach the press I did not know. So far, all I knew was that quotations that were not read in Court were not allowed to roach the press, and, of course, I have adhered to that rule, and nothing of that type has been stated in Court and could not have reached the press.
THE PRESIDENT: As you no doubt know, the first granting of documents when they are applied for is expressly provisional, and afterwards you have to submit your documents in open Court, as Dr. Horn did, and then the Tribunal rules upon their admissinility, and this other rule was introduced for the purpose of preventing undue translation. It was decided then that after the Tribunal had given its provisional ruling as to what was provisionally relevant, that you should then submit the passages you wanted to quote to the Prosecution to give them an opportunity to object, so that the translation department should not be unduly burdened. That, as you have explained and as Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe has said, was not carried out in your case, partly, possibly, because as you say the translation division was prepared to undertake certain work. Therefore, documents were submitted to them which the Tribunal subsequently ruled to be inadmissible.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: May I make a correction which seems to lead to misunderstanding? I did not mean to say that Counsel had sent the documents to the press in the sense of a newspaper press. They were sent to the press, the printing press. They were, of course, printed. The 206 copies we were ordered to print contained the usual release notice that they were not to be released until used. They have not reached the press, and I did not mean to say that they had been sent to the newspaper press, they were sent to our printing press.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Dix?
DR. DIX: (Counsel for defendant Schacht): Mr. President, Gentlemen of the Tribunal: Before a resolution is made on the strength of the discussion which we have just heard, may I make just a few remarks, not referring to the case of Rosenberg but to the defense in general?
Very serious accusations against the Defense have been raised. The expression was used that the Prosecution was not the press agent of the Defense and the accusation was raised that the Defense were trying to make propaganda, and then these accusations reached their peak in the most serious one of all, the most serious that one could possibly make in such a trial as this; namely, that there is supposed to be contempt of Court on behalf of all the Defense Counsel. one can raise; namely, that we have an absolutely clear conscience in this respect. Anyone who has listened to the debate of the last 30 minutes must have recognized that those differences of opinion which have occurred here and on the basis of which the Tribunal will have to announce a decision, are in turn once more due to misunderstandings which have occurred within this courtroom.
Mr. Justice Jackson has kindly stated that he was not talking about the newspaper press when he waid press but the printing press, and my colleague, Dr. Thoma, has stated that the only reason why these documents reached the translation department was that the translating department,very industriously and reasonable from their point of view, had said, "We do not have very much work at the moment.
Please let us have it, and we can start to translate it." that both parties, the Prosecution and the Defense, are working with the best wish and loyalty, and that any thought that we should deliberately disregard an order from the Tribunal never exists. Errors and mistakes can always happen. things were sent to the press before they were actually the subject of the proceedings here in Court. That was something that at the beginning of the trial happened quite frequently. I do not want to quote examples since the Tribunal knows them.
It is quite certain that it wasn't the defense who originated it; I don't know who, but not the defense. Far be it from me to reproach anybody. Things like that do happen, and such an instrument as this trial must have a running-in period. person, who quite definitely stated that only such matters should reach the press as were introduced into the record here in the public sessions; and it was after that that the Tribunal passed its ruling. Previously it had been different. as human error. For instance, it was impossible for me to get the Charter at the beginning of the trial, but eventually it was kindly placed at my disposal. started, then there must be errors and mistakes. with documents in the best practical manner. In other words, first of all, I talked to the prosecution -- and that was when we only had the German text -- regarding which passages the prosecution was proposing to object to. We realised the language difficulties, and we realised the problem regarding the different languages of the other signatories. However, even that could be overcome, as has transpired in my conversations with Sir David, since we managed to find an interpreter and the whole thing appeared an extremely useful and practical system. secondly, we were saving the Tribunal from having to make unnecessary decisions, and it was working beautifully. I want to claim for the defense -and I am sure that Sir David will not contradict me -- that by means of our official talks we were, in fact, the leading party and we cooperated to the best of our ability. is in a very difficult position. I think every one of you will grant that human ability is practically not enough to produce the necessary political tact which is necessary for the defense during this trial, without making some small mistake or other.
At any rate, I for myself do not claim that I am absolutely sure of myself in this respect and won't become the perpetrator of a small error in one case or another. I am finding myself in a very difficult situation, difficult so far as the world is concerned, difficult so far as the Tribunal is concerned, and difficult so far as the German public is concerned.
May I urge Mr. Justice Jackson to appreciate our difficult task and not to raise accusations and emphasize things upon his part which, unfortunately, have been raised by the German press frequently. We can't always react to every unjustified article which appears in the press, and we can't always approach the Tribunal saying "please help us." The Tribunal has more important tasks than to continuously protect the defense. propaganda was being made here or that anti-Semitic propaganda was being made here, about that I think I can say with a clear conscience that none of the defense counsel, no matter what his own philosophy or what his political views -- none of the defense counsel has ever dreamt of trying to use this court room to make propaganda for the dead world of the Third Reich. That would not only be wrong, it would be worse than a wrong; I would say that it would be an incredible stupidity to do a thing like that. defend ourselves, and because we don't want to trouble the Tribunal on every accusation, I am asking Mr. Justice Jackson to somewhat clear the atmosphere and to state to us that these serious accusations -- contempt of court, anti-Semitic propaganda, or National Socialist propaganda, and so on and so forth -- that they weren't really meant to be raised seriously. with the prosecution so far, should continue; and I must openly confess that I am remembering that cooperation gratefully, that I am gratefully remembering the extremely good service and the comradeship which I have found on the part of these gentlemen, and I am anxious that this should be retained and that there should not be a state of belligerency.
Where would it lead us to, since we are all pursuing the same aims? my request -- that is, that he, Mr. Justice Jackson, make some statement so that this awkward matter, which is probably not only depressing upon the defense but the whole court room, should be clarified somehow. listen to me for so long, but I believed that the matter was sufficiently significant and I wished to aim at a further clear and perfect cooperation between the prosecution and the defense.
DR. THOMA: Gentlemen of the Tribunal. May I just very briefly, for factual rectification, be permitted a few words for one moment? Rosenberg is being held solely responsible for the mistaken ideology. It says in the American indictment, or case for the prosecution, at page 2254, that Rosenberg has reorganized the German educational system and has exposed the German people to the will of the conspirators so as to psychologically prepare the German nation for a war of aggression. accusation raised by Mr. Justice Jackson personally, and I must state something which I would not normally have said in this court room, namely, that I have told Rosenberg repeatedly, "Mr. Rosenberg, I cannot defend your antiSemitism; that you have to do yourself." For that reason I have limited my documents considerably, but I have considered it my duty to place at Rosenberg's disposal every means necessary for him to defend himself on this point. passage which has been quoted by Mr. Justice Jackson was not marked in red in the document book, and has been included in error.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I certainly don't want to be unfair to our adversaries, I know they have a very difficult job. However, I hope the Tribunal has before it -- and I shall withdraw all characterizations and let what I have to say stand on the facts-- the order of the 8th of March, 1946, paragraph 3 thereof.
I call the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that that reads:
"The following documents are denied as irrelevant. Rosenberg" -and then follows a list of documents -- "Kunstmark; History of the Jews in Germany; History of the Jewish People." Those are the only three that I shall take time to call to your attention.
Two days after that order Rosenberg's counsel filed with this Tribunal, on the 10th of March, 1946, a rather lengthy memorandum in which he renewed his request for quotations from the books listed. as irrelevant. order of 8 April 1946, to print. They are a little difficult to read. The first is a quotation from the History of the Jewish people, one of the prohibited books. The next is a quotation from Kunstmark, another of the prohibited documents. And the third is from the History of the Jews in Germany, the third of the books that I have mentioned. hurried examination of them indicates that they are very largely, if not entirely, quotations from the prohibited documents.
I will make no characterization of it; I simply rest on those facts.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Justice Jackson, doesn't the whole point turn upon the date at which those documents were submitted to the Translation Department? Because what Dr. Thoma says is that in consequence of the Translation Department being ready to accept documents, he handed them in before they were actually denied by the Tribunal. And if that is so, it would be obvious, would it not -
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: My Lord, I didn't get when he said. That is, I did not understand that they were handed in before the 8th of March, 1946. But in any event, even if they were translated, the order to us to print is dated the 8th of April , 1946, and was delivered with then on the 8th of April.