dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
DR.SERVATITJS: He deals extensively with the development of the Reich Food Estate and clarifies the question as to how far a farmers' leader can be active in the Party or to what extent he can belong to the Reich Food Estate and shows that the Reich Food Estate was entirely independent of the Party and was a separate professional organ-ization which until 1942 succeeded in retaining its independence of the Party. He expresses his views on various questions in detail, particularly as regards the attitude of the Reich Farmers' organ-ization toward the Church. Then I shall turn to the Office for Communal Politics. I have two affidavits, one made by Dr. Plank, of the Office for Communal Politics in Nuremberg. He says that the Party concerned itself with the so-called human leadership, whereas expert legal and adminis-trative questions ...
THE PRESMENT: Dr. Servatius, I do not know whether Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe was going to refer us to these passages in Göring's evidence this evening; maybe he was. Perhaps we had better break off now because we may not be able to finish the whole of this affidavit summary. Were you, Sir David?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I was going to inform Your Lordship of the fact that we had not been able to find any passages in the examination of the Defendant Göring. It extends over certain ones. I hoped we had not missed them, but we have been through them and cannot find them.
THE PRESEDENT: Well, then...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, that leaves the applica-tion of Dr. Stahmer in this position. The document that reference is made to is Number 008 (GB-586), which is a letter of the witness Sievers, and it contains the sentence: "As I have informed you, the direction for carrying out the experiments is in the hands of the Director of the Hygienic Institute of the Reich University of Strasbourg, Professor Dr. Haagen, Major in the Medical Corps, and Consulting Hygienist to an air fleet, who was commissioned with this task by the Reich Marshal, the President of the Reich Research Council..." That, My Lord, is the effect of it. The position is that when Field Marshal Milch was giving evidence, letters were put to him on Docu-ment Number 343-PS, the second of which, under date of the 31st of August, said that he had heard with great interest of the reports of Dr. Rascher and Dr. Romberg. "I am informed about the experiments. I shall ask the two gentlemen to give a lecture combined with the showing of motion pictures to my men in the near future." Then Your Lordship may remember that Field Marshal Milch said that he was only acting as the signatory for his own medical inspection in the air force when he signed these letters and he could not remember anything about them. My Lord, that was the way the evidence was left. As to the rulings of the Tribunal, there are two that seem to be applicable.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: One was that when the Tribunal decided what the order should be-final speeches of the defendants before the taking of evidence of the Organizations-the Tribunal stated on the 31st of May that the defendants will be allowed to call to the attention of the Tribunal any circumstances developed in the hearing of the Organizations which is thought to be helpful to their defense; and, My Lord, previously the Tribunal have laid down the general ruling that certain sub-paragraphs of their ruling of the 23rd of February do not limit the power of the Tribunal to allow a defend- and to be recalled for further testimony in exceptional cases if, in the opinion of the Tribunal, the interest of justice so requires. My Lord, the Prosecution feel naturally reluctant even to suggest to the Tribunal what is an exceptional case and what are the interests of justice in a particular case, but, My Lord, they do want to make two points-one particular to this application and one in general. The point peculiar to this application is that it was known, of course, when the Defendant Göring went into the witness box, that there were these letters in existence and that his second- in-command, Field Marshal Milch, had said that that medical inspection of the corps of the air force was dealing with these experiments and were in touch with the SS on them. My Lord, -as far as we can find, the matter was not pursued after that; therefore, at that time, the defendant had notice of the general position although not-I quite agree with Dr. Stahmer-with these particular experiments dealing with spotted fever. My Lord, the general point-the Prosecution desire to emphasize this-is that this procedure ought to be confined to exceptional cases where the interest of justice requires this course very clearly. It would be unfortunate if this procedure of recalling were to become common or were to be dealt with on any points which are not of primary importance.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Your Lordship, of course, remembers that the English rule is that the procedure is only used for matters which are strictly ex improviso. As I say, the Prose-cution here cannot say that the particular point of spotted fever is not ex-improviso, but the general position of experiments was brought to the defendant's attention before he gave his evidence and therefore does not arise as an unforeseen point. I do not think that the Prosecution can help the Tribunal further regarding this matter.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider the matter. On Monday the Tribunal will sit until I o'clock. After 1 o'clock they will sit in closed session.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I am much obliged. [The Tribunal adjourned until 19 August 1946 at 1000 hours.]
MR. DODD: Mr, President, I would like to be heard very briefly this morning on the application of Dr. Stahmer for permission for the Defendant Göring to take the stand. I made no objections Friday, but I feel that I should make one so that the Tribunal will know what our attitude is. I do not want it to be understood that I am in any conflict with my distinguished colleague, Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, but I do wish to add a few comments on behalf of the United States. I would like to point out to the Tribunal that the reasons given by Dr. Stahmer, as we understand them, are the evidence or the testimony of the witness Sievers and the document which was offered during his examination, wherein there is some indication that the Defendant Göring had authorized or ordered a Dr. Haagen to institute these medical experiments. Now, it seems to me that the reasons which I called to the Tribunal's attention at the time of the Funk application apply here. Of course, I accept the ruling of the Tribunal with respect to the Funk application with good grace. I do not want to have it appear that I am raising objections against a matter that has been ruled on.
THE PRESIDENT: Which application did you say?
MR. DODD: The Funk application. It seems to me that there is a similarity in these matters, and particularly the Funk experience now would seem to have some bearing on this Göring application. It is my own judgment, which I respectfully offer for the Court's consideration, that Funk did not really add anything pro or contra to the proof in this case by his reappearance on the stand. He only succeeded in taking up a little of the Tribunal's time. Now I suggested at the time of the Funk application that he had already denied really the heart and soul of the Pohl affidavit and that he could not do much more than reaffirm it on the witness stand, and that is, I respectfully suggest, almost precisely what happened. I think the same will be true with respect to Göring, and I would like to call to the Court's attention that, long before Göring took the witness stand, the Prosecution had offered its proof concerning these Luftwaffe medical experiments, so that he knew about them; his counsel knew about them, and if his counsel had cared to inquire about them, he could have done so on Göring's direct examination; but he chose not to do so. He did not raise the question at all. He passed it by and preferred, as was his right, I assume, to rest the matter with Göring's witness Milch and we cross-examined, through our chief counsel, Mr. Justice Jackson, the witness Milch on that question. If Göring wishes merely to deny that he had any knowledge or participation in these Luftwaffe medical experiments it is a very simple matter, and there is some precedent here for it now in view of the Frank affidavit. I suggest he might file a very brief affidavit that would be no more than a few short sentences saying he did not have knowledge and that he did not participate in these experiments. The Tribunal allowed Frank to do that. He went pretty far, if I may say so with great respect. His affidavit took 20 minutes. I certainly would not think it would be necessary for Göring to take anywhere near that time.
MR. DODD: As an alternative, and I have not had time to talk with my French and Russian colleagues, Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe and I agree, and I think they will, that the record might showwe would quite agree that the record showed-that Göring denies that he had knowledge of or participated in the Luftwaffe experiments. That would be satisfactory to us. In any event, what we would like to avoid is any kind of a procession to the witness stand by these defendants. They have had such a full hearing. This Tribunal has been so patient that I think it is imposing on the Tribunal if they take the stand for these purposes which can be accomplished in a much more simple manner. I must say to the Tribunal that I have very grave doubt that Göring really wants to take the stand for this simple purpose. I think he wants to filibuster against judgment here. I think I would be remiss in my duty if I did not so advise the Tribunal this morning. Therefore, we object very strongly, if I may say so with great respect, and ask that either he submit his denial in the form of an affidavit or that the stipulation in the form we suggested be accepted by the Tribunal, and in any event that he and any other defendant who filed a similar application be refused at this stage of these proceedings the opportunity again to get on this stand and again take up time with matters that really do not go to the heart of the proof. I would be the last man here to try to cut out of this very important trial anything that I thought was really vital or important. I would not cast any shadow of unfairness, or any suspicion of it, upon this splendid record the Tribunal has compiled in matters of fairness to these defendants. I do not believe any prejudice will be evidenced if we ask Göring to fill out a brief affidavit or if we ask his counsel to agree to our offer to stipulate. Thus we will save much of the Tribunal's time and we will get on further with these proceedings.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will consider the matter. Dr. Servatius, you were going through these various affidavits, with great ability, as I said on Friday, were you not?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Is it not the case that all these affidavits are summarized in the proceedings before the Commission and we therefore have before us, in the evidence before the Commission, a summary or a reference to each one of these affidavits?
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, that is only partially true. I, personally, was not able to attend all the sessions of the Commission. I do not have an exhaustive picture. The affidavits which I wish to submit now I shall characterize quite briefly before turning to the collective affidavits which were not dealt with before the Commission. There are but a few left.
THE PRESIDENT: Up to the present, I am only pointing out to you with reference to the past. Up to the present you have drawn our attention to a number of affidavits. I find in the record before the Commission that nearly all of these affidavits have been literally and expressly summarized by counsel on behalf of the Corps of Political Leaders. The Prosecution has stated its position with reference to those affidavits.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, Mr. President, a very brief compilation was made, and it was submitted at the beginning of the presentation 6f evidence. Perhaps I can briefly treat the last ones so that I can pass on to the collective affidavits.
THE PRESIDENT: I hope you will be very short, then, and confine yourself only to these affidavits which have not been summarized before the Commission.
DR. SERVATIUS: I refer to Affidavits Number 47 and 48. Both of them deal with the communal policy. It is an office of but little significance. I refer here to the contents. Then there is the affidavit of a Gau economic adviser. The essential thing is his statement that during his two years of activity he had but one opportunity to speak to the Gauleiter personally. Of particular significance, perhaps, is Affidavit Number 50, by the Plenipotentiary for Racial Policy. It sets forth that he had nothing whatever to do with the actual racial policy as we have come to know it during these proceedings. Then follows the NSV; the affidavit of a Gauamtsleiter who points out the spatial separation of the various offices. The last is an affidavit by a Gau department head for the care of war victims, which sets forth the position of these agencies. Thus I am through with the individual affidavits. I should like to submit a few more affidavits.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean you got as far as 64?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. SERVATIUS: No, Mr. President, that is a mistake; up to and including Number 52. Number 53 begins the collective affidavits. Before I turn to those I should like to submit four single affidavits first, which are occasioned by subject matter which was mentioned rather late by the Prosecution. The first one is an affidavit by Gauleiter Hoffmann. It deals with the euthanasia program and what his Gau knew and thought about it. This is Affidavit Number 65. I submit this affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: Is this an affidavit which has not been submitted to the Commission?
DR. SERVATIUS: It was not submitted to the Commission, for at that time the Commission had already concluded its hearings.
THE PRESIDENT: You cannot put in any new affidavits. The Tribunal so rules.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, they were not dealt with in the Commission and in no other way have they, been a topic of the proceedings, but they are answers to new matters brought up by the Prosecution; I must surely have the opportunity of dealing with them. New documents were submitted in the course of the examinations of witnesses, and I have received permission to deal with them. I ask permission to have these four brief documents admitted for that purpose.
THE PRESIDENT: I suppose that is right, if they are dealing with new documents.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: There are only four affidavits. Is that it?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, only four. The next 6ie deals with Document EC-265, which was a telegram of Ambassador Abetz dealing with the expatriation of the German Jews in France. He explains-this incident and defines his attitude. I submit this affidavit. Affidavit Number 67 deals with the document which has been submitted as USSR-143, concerning the Styrian Home League, and affirms that this was not a part of a Party organization but a local association. The last affidavit deals with Document EC-68. It is an affidavit, also Number 68, and it concerns the confidential letter of the Baden Farmers' Association and also deals thoroughly with matters which are known to the High Tribunal regarding the treatment of the Polish workers. In the next affidavit I turn to the collective affidavits, which are 38,000 in number. On a previous occasion I gave a much greater number. I-am afraid I was misled by the description that was given to me, and the report which was presented by Colonel Neave, in which he also says that there are 155,000 affidavits, contains the same error. Out of 38,000 affidavits certain extracts were dealt with by experts, such as the Church question and the Jewish question, and the statements were then summarized.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh yes, now you are dealing with Number 53.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well now, on Page 3777 of the transcript before the Commissioners that affidavit is fully set out, I mean to say it is fully summarized.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President ' I just wanted to give an explanation so that a picture can be obtained as to how these summaries were arrived at. However, if the Tribunal does not consider it necessary for me to go into ...
THE PRESIDENT: Well, Dr. Servatius, we have got an enormous number of documents in this case, and surely to have the same thing done twice over at this stage is unnecessary. Have you got Page 3777 before you?
DR. SERVATIUS: No, I have not.
THE PRESIDENT: As I understand it, 53 is a collective summary and report on the affidavits which follow, is that not so?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Well then, in this transcript of the evidence before the Commission it says that the result consists of the group report by Karl Hederiech and of the following individual declarations: Jewish persecutions-that is 54; treatment of foreign civilian labor and prisoners of war-55; disassembling of trade unions-56; concentration camps, by-Richard MUller-57; operational staff Rosen-berg, by Richard Millier-58, and so on right down the list.
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes. Then that has been read. However, I clearly did not receive this report. If it is contained therein, then I do not need to submit it.
THE PRESIDENT: It is already set down before the Commissioner and is in the transcript.
DR. SERVATIUS: The matter discussed was that certain of these main affidavits were translated and were to be submitted. That was the thing I wanted to do now, and I wanted in each case to cite the contents of the individual affidavits as they concern the various points. Now, the first affidavit, 53, only states how the entire thing was done. That was the guide to this inquiry, as I might say. Then comes the next one which deals with the Jewish question; that is Affidavit Number 54.
THE PRESIDENT: What I am pointing out to you is that what you are saying is set down identically in this transcript. What is the point of repeating it for another transcript?
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, I do not know how far this report went.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it sets out the contents of 53, 54, 55, 56, and there is Miffler, 57.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, is it possible that I should receive a copy of this report, and in case I find it necessary to make remarks that I be permitted to do so?
THE PRESIDENT: I am told you have got the German of this. It is the transcript of what happened before the Commissioner and your representative, Dr. Link, is the man who was doing it. It is on Page 3777.
DR. SERVATIUS: Because of the quantity of material I overlooked the fact that this was already set down. Therefore, I refer to it without dealing with the affidavits one by one. As far as the Church question is concerned I should like to refer particularly to one point. There are two theologians who very extensively deal with all the internal circumstances, which seem to be of great significance to me. Mr. President, I have concluded my submission of documents. With reference to the statements during the last session concerning the number of active members, I had a statistical report prepared yesterday. Perhaps I may submit this for the benefit of the Tribunal-not as evidence-so that, on the basis of the statistical Party book which is in the library of the Prosecution, it can be figured out what is actually included in the Indictment. I should like to submit this as an aid to the Tribunal rather than as a piece of evidence, if I may. It is only in the German language for the time being.
THE PRESIDENT: Have the Prosecution any objection to the submission of this document?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, of course we have no idea what is in the document at the moment. But, My Lord, I think we shall make no objection to it.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you can look at it and we will have it handed to us later.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: My Lord, if I understood Dr. Servatius correctly it is on the numbers of those who are to be included in the organizations. Colonel Griffith-Jones has prepared an exact statement of those whom the Prosecution asks to be included and their numbers, which he proposed to give to the Tribunal at the close of Dr. Servatius' speech, which may remove some of the difficulties which Dr. Servatius has in mind. But, My Lord, I make no objection to the document going in to assist the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well
DR. SERVATIUS: I did not quite follow as to when I am to receive these figures, after or before my final submission. It is surely of import to me to know that in advance.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you will receive the document to, which Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe was referring before you make your final submission, because after you have dealt with your documents the other representatives of the organizations will have to deal with their documents and their affidavits. We will have it during that time.
DR. SERVATIUS: May I submit this report?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
DR. SERVATIUS: Then I conclude my statement herewith, Mr. President.
THE-PRESEDENT: Now which of the organizations shall we take next? I beg your pardon. Yes?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: I do not know whether it would be convenient for the Tribunal if I submitted some particulars of the figures which we were discussing the other day.
THE PRESIDENT: Could you not put in or hand to Dr. Servatius this statistical summary and then deal with the rest of the matter in argument? I understood from Sir David that you have a statistical document showing the number of Political Leaders whom the Prosecution contend are involved. Well, Dr. Servatius wants to see that and, therefore, if you will give him that, that will be all that is necessary, will it not?
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: My Lord, yes, except simply to explain what the document is, which will take two minutes. I think it will be of assistance to the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: If it will only take two minutes.
LT. COL. GRIFFITH-JONES: They are figures taken from the Organization Book. On Page I - the Tribunal will see the total numbers set out of all the Political Leaders whom the Prosecution are including in the organizations; the Hoheitstrager, the staff of the Reichsleiter, the staff of the Gauleiter, the staff of the Kreisleiter. For the information of the Tribunal I have also included the staff of the Ortsgruppenleiter of 340,000. The total is 940,000. You deduct again the Ortsgruppezi staff which I excluded and you get your figure of 600,000. My Lord, in the subsequent pages particulars will be found of the officeholders on the Reichsleiter, Gauleiter, and Kreisleiter staffs. The Reichsleiter, I think, speaks for itself. The Tribunal perhaps will look at Appendix "C." There it will be seen that the offices on the Gauleiter staff are set out. My Lord, those are all taken from the Organization Book and I would only say that those show the maximum establishment of the Gau and Kreis staffs and they were not by any means always up to strength, so that the figures, the total figure of 600,000, is to be the maximum that is possible.
THE PRESIDENT: Now we will deal with the Gestapo.