The Nuremberg Trials (Vol.10). International Military Tribunal. Читать онлайн. Newlib. NEWLIB.NET

Автор: International Military Tribunal
Издательство: Bookwire
Серия:
Жанр произведения: Языкознание
Год издания: 0
isbn: 4064066380953
Скачать книгу
of the war and 3 days before the planned attack on Poland, these two nations made another secret agreement. This secret agreement essentially contained the definition of the spheres of interest of both nations within the European territory lying between Germany and the Soviet Union.

      THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, you are not forgetting, are you, the Tribunal's ruling that this is not the opportunity for making a speech, but simply the occasion for introducing documents and calling witnesses. You will have the opportunity of making your speech at a later stage.

      DR. SEIDL: Yes, indeed. I do not intend to make a speech, but I intend to say a few- introductory w~rds on a document which I shall submit to the Tribunal. Germany, in the secret documents, declared herself disinterested in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Finland.

      THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, we have not yet seen the document. If you are going to put in the document, put in the document.

      DR. SEIDL: Yes. indeed. I can submit the document at once. It is an affidavit of the former ambassador, Dr. Friedrich Gaus. In the year 1939 he was the Chief of the Legal Department of the Foreign Office. He was present at the negotiations as the assistant of the then German plenipotentiary in Moscow, and it was he who drafted the non-aggression pact which has already been submitted as an exhibit, as well as the secret agreement, the contents of which I want to submit now to the Tribunal as fads which are important as evidence.

      THE PRESIDENT: Well, will you hand in the document?

      DR. SEIDL: Surely. However, I intend to read parts of this document later.

      THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, the Tribunal does not quite understand what this document is, because it is not included in your .document book and it does not appear that you made any application for it or made any reference to it, end it is in German; it is not translated.

      DR. SEIDL: Mr. President, when I prepared the document book for the Defendant Hess, I did not as yet have this affidavit in my possession. It dates from 15 March 1946. At that time, when the relevancy of the applications for Defendant Hess were discussed, I had as yet no definite knowledge of the context which would have enabled me to make a proper application. The excerpts which I intend to read from this document are short, and it will be possible to have them translated immediately by the interpreters present here in the courtroom.

      THE PRESIDENT: Have you a copy for the Prosecution?

      DR. SEIDL: Surely, a German copy.

      THE PRESIDENT: I am afraid that would not be any use to me. I do not know whether it is to all the members of the Prosecution. Have the Prosecuting Counsel any objection to passages being read from this document?

      GENERAL R. A. RUDENKO (Chief Prosecutor for the U.S.S.R.): Mr. President, I did not know about the existence of this document, and I therefore strenuously object to having it read into the record.

      I would wish that the procedure established by the Tribunal be observed by the Defense. The Prosecution, in the past, when presenting its evidence invariably presented copies of these documents to the Defense Counsel. Counsel for Hess is now presenting a completely unknown document, and the Prosecution, with every reason, would like to familiarize itself with this document beforehand. I do not know what secrets or what secret agreements Counsel for the Defense is talking about and on what facts he is basing his statements. I would therefore, to say the least, define them as unfounded. I request that this document should not be read into the record.

      DR. SEIDL: The Prosecutor for the Soviet Union states that he has no knowledge of the existence d this secret document which shall be established by this affidavit. Under these circumstances I am compelled to move that Foreign Commissar Molotov of the Soviet Union be called as a witness, so that it can be established, firstly whether this agreement was actually concluded, secondly, what the contents of this agreement are, and thirdly...

      THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Seidl, the first thing for you to do is to have a translation of this document made, and until you have a translation of this document made the Tribunal is not prepared to hear you upon it. We do not know what the document contains.

      DR. SEIDL: As to what the document contains, I already wanted to explain that before. In the document there is...

      THE PRESIDENT: No, the Tribunal is not prepared to hear from you what the document contains. We want to see the document itself and see it in English and also in Russian. I do not mean, of course, you have to do it yourself, Dr. Seidl. If you would furnish this copy to the Prosecution they will have it translated into the various languages and then, after that has been, done, we can reconsider the matter.

      DR. SEIDL: Very well. I turn then to another document, the reading of which can certainly raise no objections, because it is a document which has already been submitted by the Prosecution. It is the address made by the Führer to the Commanders-in-Chief of the Armed Forces on 22 August 1939. It was submitted by the Prosecution of the Soviet Union as 798-PS and as Exhibit Number US-29. I quote from Page 6 of the German photostat: "Thereupon Hitler declared . . ."

      THE PRESIDENT: Have you got it in your document book or not, I mean just for convenience?

      DR. SEIDL: The document was already submitted by the Prosecution in full.

      THE PRESIDENT: You mean it is not here. I have not got the document before me. It is not in your document book?

      DR. SEIDL: No, it is not in the document book because the Court has already ruled that each defendant's counsel has the right to refer to any document which has already been submitted by the Prosecution. I quote:

      "...I have gradually brought about a change in our attitude towards Russia. In connection with the trade agreement, we got into a political conversation., Proposal of a non-aggression pact. Then came a general proposal from Russia. Four days ago I took a special step which had as a result that Russia answered yesterday she was ready for settlement. Personal contact with Stalin has been established. Von Ribbentrop will conclude the treaty the day after tomorrow. Now Poland is in the position in which I wanted her to be." End of the quotation.

      Mr. President, Gentlemen: I had now the intention to call the witness Bohle 'who has already been approved by the Tribunal. The Defendant Hess, however, has asked me to forego the personal appearance of that witness and read an affidavit concerning the facts of evidence in reference to which the witness was to be heard.

      I have prepared such an affidavit, and undoubtedly it would accelerate the proceedings if the Tribunal would permit the reading of this affidavit. If however, the Tribunal should have the opinion that. . .

      SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I have not had the opportunity of seeing the affidavit. As previously advised, if the witness covers the ground for which he was asked, I should want him for cross-examination.

      THE PRESIDENT: Where is the witness?

      DR. SEIDL: He is here. With the permission of the Tribunal I would like to call the witness Bohle now.

      THE PRESIDENT: Do you mean to call him or to read his affidavit?

      DR. SEIDL: Yes, indeed; since Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe apparently protests against the reading of the affidavit, I would like to call the witness.

      SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I have not seen the affidavit, of course, My Lord, so at the moment, as I say, if the affidavit covers the ground that the witness should speak upon, then I shall want to cross-examine him.

      THE PRESIDENT: Unless the Prosecution are agreeable that the affidavit should be put in, the witness must be called, but if the Prosecution are agreeable to the affidavit being read and then the witness presented for cross-examination, the Tribunal is quite willing that it should be done.

      SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I do not mind that in the least, my Lord. Of course, I am in slight difficulty not knowing what is in the affidavit.

      THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps the best course would be for the Tribunal to have a 10-minute adjournment now, and you could perhaps just see what is in the affidavit.

      SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: It is a pleasure, My Lord.