dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
DR. HORN: As the next document, which is on Page 57, I present to the Court for judicial notice: Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 31 (Document Number Ribbentrop-31). It concerns a copy of the Dokumente der Deutschen Politik , Volume 3, and shows the reply of the Reich Government of 14 February 1935 to the suggestion for an air pact. Germany's comments on this air pact include the following -- I read Paragraph 2 from this exhibit and begin the quotation: In the year 1935 compulsory military service was reintroduced in Germany. On this occasion the German Government addressed a proclamation to the German people. This proclamation is on Page 59 of the document book and carries the Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 33 (Document Number Ribbentrop-33). I request that this excerpt from the proclamation be given judicial notice. As Ribbentrop Exhibit 34 (Document Number Ribbentrop-34), I submit a communique of the German Reich Government of 14 April 1935 on Germany's attitude toward the Eastern Pact. It is on Pages 61 and following of the document book and I ask, without my reading anything from it, that the Tribunal take judicial notice of it. The introduction of compulsory military service was regarded by the signatory countries of the Versailles Treaty as an infraction of Part V of this treaty. The states protested against the reintroduction of compulsory military service in Germany. A protest was issued by the Reich Government against this decision of the Council of the League of Nations of 17 April 1935. This protest is on Page 63 of the document book. I have this document the Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 35 (Document Number Ribbentrop-35), and ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of it. In this document the German Government dispute the right of the goverments represented in the Council of the League of Nations, who approved the decision of 17 April, to set themselves up as judges over Germany. In this protest it is stated that this attitude is interpreted as a manifestation of renewed discrimination against Germany and consequently is rejected.
DR. HORN: I turn now to Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 36 (Document Number Ribbentrop-36) which is on Page 64 of the document book. This concerns the German memorandum to the Locarno Powers of 25 May 1935, and deals with the incompatibility of the Soviet Pact with the Locarno Treaty. The Defendant Ribbentrop participated decisively in the negotiations that led to the drawing up of this memorandum and to the presentation of the German point of view before the League of Nations and the Locarno Powers. I ask the Court to take judicial notice of the document because it contains Germany's legal attitude toward this problem. A further memorandum to the Locarno Powers is to be found on Page 68 of the document book (Document Number Ribbentrop-36) Exhibit Number Ribbentrop 36, and it again exposes briefly and clearly the incompatibility of the Soviet Pact with the Locarno Treaty. I ask that also this German memorandum to the Locarno Powers-it is dated 25 May 1935-be given judicial notice. The legal point of view which formed the basis for this memorandum was presented in a speech by Hitler, concerning the peace policy in the German Reichstag on 21 May 1935, in order again to prove German willingness for peace and disarmament. At the same time a peace and disarmament proposal was submitted in London by Ribbentrop. I ask that this document, this speech by Hitler, be given judicial notice as Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 37 (Document Number Ribbentrop-37). It is on Pages 69 and following of my document book. As the next document to prove that Germany made continuous efforts for disarmament and attempts at agreement, I submit Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 38 (Document Number Ribbentrop-38), for judicial notice, which is on Page 77 of my document book. This concerns the Anglo-German Naval Agreement of 18 June 1935, in which Ribbentrop played a decisive role, and for the ratification of which Ribbentrop exerted himself particularly. He induced the French Government in particular, by his own efforts, to agree to this treaty.
DR. HORN: That was necessary because this naval agreement made necessary a change in Part V of the Versailles Treaty, already cited -- it is the part that is concerned with disarmament instructions and armament stipulations. At that time Ribbentrop succeeded in persuading the French Government to give their approval to this agreement. I submit this document as Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 38, with the request for judicial notice. I may, in addition, say in this connection that this treaty was at that time considered, both by Ribbentrop and Hitler, as the cornerstone of a far-reaching proposal for an understanding and an alliance with England. During the succeeding years, as well as during the time he served as ambassador in London and also as Foreign Minister, Ribbentrop made constant efforts to bring about such a pact of agreement, in some form or other. As the next document I submit Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 39 (Document Number Ribbentrop-39), which is on Page 79 of the document book. Again, and in view of the reoccupation of the Rhineland, the German Government found themselves compelled on 7 March 1936 to present their attitude, through a memorandum, to the signatory powers of the Locarno Pact. This point of view is found in the document just mentioned and I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of it. The occupation of the Rhineland had led to a protest by the powers interested in it. Ribbentrop replied to this protest with a speech before the Council of the League of Nations in London and then delivered another protest before the Council of the League of Nations against the protest of the signatory powers of Locarno. This protest of the then Ambassador Von Ribbentrop, which I present as Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 40 (Document Number Ribbentrop-40), which is on Page 83 of my document book, I also submit for judicial notice. As the next document I present to the Court Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 41 (Document Number Ribbentrop-41), on Page 84 of the document book, with the request for judicial notice.
DR. HORN: It contains the last peace proposals by Germany in connection with the disarmament and peace proposals of that time. It is headed "Peace Plan of the German Government of 31 March 1936." In subsequent years Germany made repeated efforts to bring about the withdrawal of the war guilt lie. In the year 1937 German and Italian relations became constantly closer; and in connection with these relations Hitler, on 30 January 1937, on the fourth anniversary of the National Socialist revolution, made a proposal before the German Reichstag in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin, that agreements should be reached with other European nations in Europe on the same basis as between Germany and Italy, in order to attain harmonious relations. I ask that this document be accepted as Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 43 (Document, Number Ribbentrop-43), which is on Page 88 of the document book. In this document the withdrawal of the war guilt lie was clearly requested once more. I quote from the third paragraph of the above: As the next document I bring ...
THE PRESIDENT: I beg your pardon. Are you referring to 44?
DR. HORN: I was just referring to Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 43 (Document Number Ribbentrop-43), which is on Page 88 of the document book. Please pardon me if I left that out.
THE PRESIDENT: There was some passage you read in it which does not appear to be translated here.
DR. HORN: Did I correctly understand you to say, Mr. President, that there was no English translation in the document book?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I am not quite sure. I did not catch it myself. Did you read anything which is not in the document book?
DR. HORN: No, Mr. President, I have cited only what is in the document book. It is on Page 88, Paragraph 3 and it is specifically the paragraph that begins, "And fourthly..."
THE PRESIDENT: Thirdly, isn't it?
DR. HORN: Paragraph 3, and this paragraph is again divided into four subparagraphs and I have read the fourth subparagraph. I come now to Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 44 (Document Number Ribbentrop-44), which is on Page 90 in the document book. This document contains the German note on Belgian inviolability, dated 13 October 1937. This document is of importance in view of the events of 1940; and, in order to make clear the German view, I should like to read the last paragraph, which in my document book is on Page 91 and which is preceded by the Roman numeral II. I quote: I ask that this document be given judicial notice. With this I conclude the series of documents which are to serve me, in my final speech, as the basis for, expounding the conditions of foreign policy that Ribbentrop found upon his entry into office as Foreign Minister. I shall refer to these documents when the occasion arises.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you filed them in Court with the Secretary?
DR. HORN: Mr. President, in connection with yesterday's discussion I again untied these documents and handed them, signed, to the General Secretary. The next documents that I submit serve as substantiation of what I shall say later regarding Ribbentrop's participation in the policy that led to the Anschluss with Austria. I should like to refer, first of all, to Document 386-PS, already presented by the Prosecution, which is contained in my document book. I am unfortunately not in the position to read off the page numbers to the Tribunal because we ourselves have not yet received the files, that is, the document book which now follows. This document follows Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 44, which was on page 90 of the document book.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit Number 44 is the last document in the second document book. There are not any more, are there? There are not any more?
DR. HORN: I was informed today that the English Document Book was finished and had been presented to the Tribunal. We unfortunately have not yet received a copy, so I cannot compare the page numbers.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we haven't got it. We have only those two and the last exhibit in the second book is Number 44, which you have just read. But, Dr. Horn, as the document has already been put into evidence, it is not necessary for you to produce it. You can say that you rely upon it; that is all that is necessary.
DR. HORN: Yes, but I believe that we must immediately decide the question of the continuation of my presentation. I want to make clear again that, after the Tribunal had ruled on the way in which documents were to be presented, I at that time immediately submitted my documents to the Tribunal for translation in the prescribed way, in that I presented 6 document books bearing my signature. Unfortunately the Translation Division was unable to keep up with the pace of the presentation of evidence by the Defense and I am in the uncomfortable position of being unable to provide the Tribunal with the assistance of pointing out the pages in order to continue my delivery smoothly.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dr. Horn, we think you had better go on, just notifying us which the documents are and whether they are already in evidence or whether you are offering them in evidence now. You have told us Document 386-PS. We can make a note of that -- that is already in evidence. I do not know whether all your other documents are already in evidence or whether there are any documents which are not and which you are now going to offer in evidence.
DR. HORN: The following documents are new. As to Document 386-PS, I should only like to make clear that Von Ribbentrop, was not one of those present at that time. He has also learned here for the first time of this document and its contents -- it concerns the well-known Hossbach Document. The next document to which I shall refer in my final speech is Document Number 2461-PS, already submitted by the Prosecution. It is the official German communication regarding the meeting between the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor with the Austrian Federal Chancellor Dr. Schuschnigg in Berchtesgaden. on 12 and 15 February 1938. I refer to this document to prove to what extent Ribbentrop participated in this discussion. The next document to which I shall refer, and which I present to the Tribunal with the request for judicial notice, is Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 11 (Document Number Ribbentrop-11), which is in my document book. This document...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Horn, the Tribunal does not think it is really necessary for you to refer to any documents which are completely in evidence already unless you are going to read some passage in them and rely upon some passage in them which has not already been read. I mean, supposing that the Prosecution read a particular sentence out of a particular document and you want to refer to some other sentence in it, then it will probably be right for you to indicate that; but, if the document has been read in full, any further reference is a mere jnatter of argument and is not really a matter of evidence, and you will be at liberty, you see, to argue it whenever you come to make your speech. So that, I mean, as a matter of saving time, it would not be necessary to refer us to 386-PS or 2461-PS unless there is some passage in them which you rely upon and which has not been read by the Prosecution.
DR. HORN: I may then go on to Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 11 and present it to the Court for judicial notice. It concerns an agreement between the German Reich Government and the Austrian Federal Government on 11 July 1936. When, on 12 February 1938, Ribbentrop drove with Hitler to Berchtesgaden to have a conference with Dr. Schuschnigg, then Chancellor of Austria, he was not informed about the deviation of Hitler's plans from the agreement of the year 1936 between Germany and Austria, and he conducted his discussion with Schuschnigg also in the spirit of the agreement of 1936. One month later the Anschluss with Austria came about. As proof that this Anschluss corresponded to the wish of the Austrian population, I refer to Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 12 (Document Nuinber Ribbentrop-12), which I present to the Tribunal for judicial notice. It is the result of the national plebiscite and of the election to the Greater German Reichstag of 10 April 1938. From this document it is to be seen that at that time in Austria a total of 4,484,475 people had the right to vote, 4,471,477 voted, 4,453,772 voted for the Anschluss, and only 11,929 voted against it.
THE PRESIDENT: Have we got this document? We do not have it in our books. Does the clerk of the Court have it?
DR. HORN: It is in the document book as Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 12.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it goes from 10 to 14 for some reason. Let me look at it. There is some mistake, apparently. If has not been copied; that is all. It is not in our books, but here it is, so it is all right. Go on.
DR. HORN: Mr. President, it is to be seen from this document that the Austrian people at that time expressed themselves in favor of the Anschluss with 99.73 percent of the votes cast. As the next document I submit Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 13 to the Tribunal for judicial notice. I submit this document as proof that the Anschluss would hardly have come about by international negotiations, according to the opinion not only of the German Government, but also of the English Government. I should like as proof of this assertion to read the following from this document. It concerns a statement by Under Secretary of State Butler before the House of Commons, which reads as follows -- it was made on 14 March 1938: I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of this document. Subsequently to this the reunion of Austria with the German Reich took place as set down in the law of 13 March 1938, which also was signed by Ribbentrop. Herewith I end the submission of those documents of mine that are related to the question of Austria. I may now ...
THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute Dr. Horn, the only desire of the Tribunal is to save time, and we observe from the index in your document book that there are, I think, over three hundred separate documents upon which you wish to rely, and most of them appear to come from the various books, the German White Books and these other books, which the Tribunal provisionally allowed to you. Wouldn't the most convenient course be for you to put them in, in bulk, saying that you are putting in Exhibits 44 to 314, or whatever it may be, rather than simply detail each document by its number? If you have a particular passage which you want to read at this moment, you can do so; but it seems to take up unnecessary time, simply to give each exhibit number one after the other.
DR. HORN: Very well, Mr. President, I shall mention those numbers in this way which I should like only to bring to judicial notice, briefly mention from such and such to such and such, when it is a matter of several numbers; and I shall ask the Court to accept them then.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. HORN: I will now turn to the question of Czechoslovakia. The American Prosecutor stated in his presentation on this question that this marked the end of a series of events that struck him as one of the saddest chapters in human history -- the violation and destruction of the weak and small Czechoslovak people. As proof that there was no Czechoslovak people in the usual sense of the term either before or after 1939, I would like to read a few extracts from Lord Rothermere's book Warnings and Prophecies , which has been expressly granted me through a ruling by the Tribunal. This is Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 45 (Document Number Ribbentrop-45).
THE PRESIDENT: Did the Tribunal allow Lord Rothermere's book?
DR. HORN: The Tribunal has granted it to me and even put at my disposal an English copy, which I herewith hand to the Court.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Horn, the question of admissibility was to be finally determined when each book is offered in evidence, and I think you will remember that the Tribunal stated in one of its orders that the opinions of particular authors upon matters of ethics, history, and events would not be admitted. Lord Rothermere is apparently an author and was not a member of the British Government; and therefore, unless there is some very particular reason, it would not appear that his books -- or statements in his books -- are in any way evidence.
DR. HORN: The paragraphs to be presented are concerned entirely with matters of fact; and I therefore request that the Tribunal take judicial notice of these facts. There is no question of any polemic discussions.
THE PRESIDENT: The distinction which exists is this: The Tribunal under Article 21 is directed to take judicial notice of official government documents, reports, et cetera . This is not an official government document. Therefore -- you say it is factual evidence -- it is not evidence, for the purpose of this Tribunal, of any facts stated in it. So far as it is facts, it is not evidence of the facts, and so far as it is opinion, it is Lord Rothermere's opinion. Well, Dr. Horn, can you tell me what you want to prove by it?
DR. HORN: I should like to prove by it, first, a few historical facts; secondly that the difficulties of a state composed of many nationalities, of which Czechoslovakia is an example, led to this conflict with the German minority and consequently with the German Government. I want to provide you with the reasons and motives that led to the incorporation of the Sudetenland into Germany.
MR. DODD: If Your Honor please, on behalf of the United States I wish to object very strongly to this offer for the reason given by Dr. Horn -- the first reason -- and for the reason given secondly. If I understood the translation correctly, I understood him to say in the first place it was offered to prove that there was no such thing as a Czech people. I don't think that is a matter that can properly be raised certainly here before this Court. We object that it is out of place to offer such proof. We object furthermore for the reason given in the second explanation by Dr. Horn.
DR. HORN: May I again point out that I wish to demonstrate by this means, the motives that led to the separation of the Sudetenland in the year 1938? If I wish to adopt an attitude toward some international offense with which someone is charged and adjudge it, I must also be in a position to judge the motives underlying it. Otherwise it is impossible for me to conduct a legal investigation. I may also point out that I had first of all asked the Tribunal for documents of the League of Nations as evidence and I would have referred to these official documents if this evidence had come into my possession in time; but as I am not yet in possession of them, I have resorted to presenting facts to the Tribunal instead.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you repeat that, about the League of Nations? I did not catch what you said.
DR. HORN: I have asked the League of Nations' Library for the appropriate documents regarding minorities which are in the possession of the League of Nations, in order to submit them as evidence. The office of the General Secretary is obtaining this evidence for me, but so far I have not received it. Consequently I had to refer to this weaker source of evidence in connection with documents which are comparable to the government reports of Article 21, or which are themselves such reports.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you specified the passages in the book to which you wish to, refer? I mean, have you marked them somewhere in some copy of the book?
DR. HORN: I have requested documents regarding minorities in Czechoslovakia, as far as these questions have been decided by legal proceedings conducted by the League of Nations and by the International Court at The Hague. This is a collection published by the League of Nations regarding minority matters and constantly brought up to date. It is an official collection of documents.
THE PRESIDENT: I was only asking you whether you had specified the particular passages in Lord Rothermere's book which you want to put in.
DR. HORN: I am sorry. I did not understand your question. Could I request you to repeat the question?
THE PRESIDENT: The question I asked was whether you have specified the particular passages in Lord Rothermere's book which you want to use.
DR. HORN: I have marked these passages, and they are on Pages 137, 150, 138, 151, 161 ...
THE PRESIDENT: Not so fast, I want to get them down. 137, 138 ...
DR.HORN: Pages 161, 162, 140, 144, 145, 157. They are in each case just short paragraphs.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Horn, it is an appropriate time for us to break off. [A recess was taken.]
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Horn, the Tribunal will rule upon the admissibility of these passages from Lord Rothermere's book when they have had the translation submitted to them. In the meantime, will you go on presenting your documents in the way that I suggested, and not stopping to detail any of them except those that you particularly want to.