MR. KING: The next document in Supplement Book VIII is tho document NG-790, which will become, when received in evidence, the Exhibit 452. This document is a letter dated Berlin, 22 August 1944, to the Presidents of District Courts of Appeal, concerning matters of hereditary hygiene in tho total war effort. It was issued, or circulated, on the orders of the defendant Alstoetter.
I would like to read the two last paragraphs of that letter, but before I do that I would like to point out that the particular copy of this letter which we are submitting also bears the initials of the defendant Klemm.
Reading from page 33 in the English document book, page 26 in the German, beginning with the second paragraph:
"I beg to advise the Hereditary Hygiene Courts that from now on the duration of the total war effort only such cases be handled that are now already pending and instantly determinable" -- we think perhaps that should have be n translated "for immediate decision" -- "or where the official physician expressly proposes the case to be carried through also during the total war effort. I beg to abstain at present from handling cases of appeal after the sterilization has taken place, since they are not urgent.
"It is necessary that the cases of hereditary hygiene which still must be treated hereafter, be handled also during the total way effort and whenever possible by experienced judges of hereditary hygiene. In order to guarantee this I intend a far-reaching centralization of the Hereditary Hygiene Courts during the total war effort. In most of the districts of a District Court of Appeal it will do if the Hereditary Hygiene Court residing at the seat of the District Court of Appeal takes care of all matters of hereditary hygiene of that district. Should you, Herr President of the District Court of Appeal, think it necessary to apply another method for your district, I expect your report until 10 September 1944.
"By order of Alstoetter."
We offer the document NG-790 as Exhibit 452. As soon as defense counsel has finished examination of the document, we will transmit it to the representative of the Secretary General.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted in evidence.
MR. KING: The next and last document in Supplement Book VIII is NG-900, found beginning on page 35 in the English text, and on page 28 in the German. The document contains several letters addressed to the Reich Ministry of Justice which we will read in part.
The first letter, on page 35, is dated Berlin, 3 May 1944. It is initialed by the defendant Klemm, and it originated in the Office of the Chief of the Security Police. It is addressed to the Reich Minister of Justice. We would like to read the first paragraph:
"In a number of proceedings for the checking of descent, the Lower Court of Vienna requested information about the whereabouts of Jews; in some cases it requested this information from the Central Office for the Regulation of the Jewish Problem in Bohemia and Moravia at Prague, and in some cases directly from here. These Jews were at some time either evacuated to the East or were sent to Theresienstadt. Although my local office drew the attention of the Lower Court of Vienna several times to the fact that such requests, as well as applications for the admission of such Jews as witnesses before courts or for hereditary biological examinations cannot be granted on account of reasons" -- that should be "on account of security reasons", rather than as is translated here, "reasons stated by the Security Police" -- "on account of security reasons, the Lower Court of Vienna renews its applications or requests continuously."
As I stated at the outset, the signature of the sender of the letter is not legible.
"The next letter, on page 36 in the English text and on page 30 in the German, is dated Berlin, 3 June 1944. It is addressed to the President of the Appellate Court in Vienna, and it originated with the defendant Alstoetter. It concerns the handling of cases concerning the descent of Jews or Jewish persons, or persons of mixed Jewish race.
We would like to read the letter, I think, in its entirety:
"The Chief of the Security Police and the Security Service pointed out that in cases concerning descent of Jews and Jewish persons of mixed race the offices of the police are frequently asked for information on the place of abode of deported Jews by the courts, especially by the Lower Court Vienna, or that their admission as witnesses or for the purpose of examination for hereditary biological export opinions is requested. Those requests cannot be granted for reasons of security.
"Even if the hearing of the Jews may in many cases help to frustrate the intentions to conceal their descent, reasons of security demand to desist therefrom.
"In the near future I intend to issue, in a circular decree, detailed regulations for the handling of cases concerning the descent of Jews and Jewish persons of mixed race. Already now I request to inform the Lower Court of Vienna of the following:"
Now, there has been a juxtaposition of the material that should come after the colon on page 36, and the material that should follow is to be found on the bottom of page 3, under the parenthetical enclosure about a third of the way up from the bottom of the page. The rest of that letter would continue, therefore, as follows:
"In cases of Jews who were deported to Theresienstadt or to other places, a hearing as witnesses or a hereditary biological examination is impossible for reasons of security, because persons to accompany them and means of transportation are not available. If the Resident's Registration Office or another police office gives the information that a Jew has been deported, all other inquiries as to his place of abode as well as applications for his hearing or examination are superfluous. On the contrary, it has to be assumed that the Jew is not attainable for the taking of evidence.
"If in an individual case it is in the interest of the public to make an exception and to render possible the taking of evidence by special provision of persons to accompany and means of transportation for a Jew, a report has to he submitted to me in which the importance of the case is explained.
In all cases offices must refrain from direct application to the office cf the police, especially also to the Central Office for the Regulation of the Jewish Problem in Bohemia and Moravia at Prague, for information on the place of abode of departed Jews and their hearing or examination."
We turn now to page 3 again of the English document book, and note at the top of the page the statement that: "In the enclosure I submit a copy of my letter to the President of the Appellate Court Vienna for your information." That, presumably, refers to the letter which I have just read. That little note it initialed Alstoetter.
Then, further down, on page 3, is another note, signed by Alstoetter, which we wish to read. It is addressed to: "Herr Minister; with request to permit the dispatch of the above letter signed by me. The arrangement of the report could be settled in connection with the report on the decree concerning a general order on the handling of cases concerning the descent of Jews and Jewish persons of mixed race. It is intended to put into the draft of this official decree the directives in the above letter sent to the President of the Appellate Court Vienna for information to all Presidents f the Appellate Courts and General Public Prosecutors."
And that letter is signed by Alstoetter.
We offer the document NG-900 as Exhibit 453.
DR. SCHILF (For the Defendant Klemm): May it please the Court, in the case of the second document, that is the letter of 3 June, 1944, we are concerned with a matter which is not very clear, not very easy to discern. The letter is a draft, actually. The draft has been written on a typewriter and subsequently handwritten changes have been made. These are handwritten changes apparently made by two different people - two different handwritings.
The second paragraph is given in the German document book, as follows, and I quote:
"Even if the hearing of the Jews nay not infrequently help to frustrate the intentions to conceal their descent, reasons of the Security Police demand to desist therefrom."
In the original, written on a typewriter, this paragraph reads as follows; and I quote again:
"Even if tho hearing and examination of tho Jews may be an important piece of evidence for tho clarifying of the question of descent and may not infrequently help to frustrate the intentions of the Jews to conceal their descent, reasons of the Security Police demand to desist from this piece of evidence."
From tho comparison of the two texts it appears that the original contains many words, even half a sentence, which arc not contained in the copy. One has to remark, however, that those words which are in the original and which were left out of the copy, that they have been crossed out with a very thin line, a much thinner line than other things that have been crossed out, and the other lines are much more clear to see. Where these thin lines have been drawn through the words there is a remark on the margin in handwriting. I can not read it on the original, however. The question thus arises, since it is only a draft, in what form the final letter went to the person to whom it was addressed, the president of the District Court of Appeals in Vienna.
I only want to call the attention of the Court to this question of doubt.
THE PRESIDENT: May I ask what you contend for, Dr. Schilf? Which version do you contend is the correct one?
DR. SCHILF: Mr. President, unfortunately I can not decide that, which the correct version is. In the German document book the abbreviated version appears, and on the original document there is a longer version. I am convinced that the gentlemen of the Prosecution would have to toll us which version they consider the one which the recipient, the president of the District Court of Appeals in Vienna, received.
THE PRESIDENT: I think he has already answered that question because he read that part which had the interpolated matter stricken out.
MR. KING: I think perhaps the only answer that we can supply is actually supplied on Page 37 of the English translation, the letter that I read. It does appear that the letter from which Dy. Schilf has just been quoting is a draft, and on the note there on the middle of Page 37, Alstoetter is requesting permission to send the draft when it is put into final form out to the presidents of the Appellate Court and general public prosecutors. As to exactly what form the final letter took, we arc certainly not prepared to say, because we have, so far as we know, never seen a copy of the letter as finally circulated. However, we submit that the entire document shows state of mind and intention. As to what form the final letter nay have taken is not of paramount importance.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Court, it seems to me that decisive for purposes of clarification, is the handwritten remark on the margin which I have already mentioned, on the margin of this draft.
I, myself, however, can not clarify because in the photostat I can not decipher this handwritten note. Therefore it is my opinion that the Prosecution should be charged with producing a photostat or the original on which this marginal note can be read.
MR. KING: The Prosecution has a counter offer. When the defendant Alstoetter takes the stand we will ask him what he meant by it. We can't do any more than we have already done on this document.
THE PRESIDENT: The document would seem to be one that should be received in evidence, and these other matters will have to be determined as best they can. The document will be admitted in evidence.
MR. KING: At this time I would like to retrace my stops to Book 6 Supplement and offer the document NG-996 as the next exhibit 454. This is an excerpt from the German Criminal Code, Paragraph 234. We offer NG 993 as Exhibit 454.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Court, in regard to this document we are concerned only with determining a mistake in the translation. I do not have the English Translation in front of no. This paragraph 234 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure talks about the fact that a human being is exposed in a helpless position. We have found out that the translation into English does not report this faithfully. The English version is in such a way that it could mean to put him into a helpless position. That is, that the "helpless" applies to the exposing him to the helpless position and not to the situation in which he finds himself.
For that reason a very exact examination of the English translation seems to me to be necessary. My colleague, Dr. Brieger, who is an expert on questions of translation, perhaps can clarify this matter better than I can.
DR. BRIEGER: In the English text it says, "in order to render him helpless". The German translation of this accordingly would be "um ihn der Hilflosigkeit zu ueberantworten"--"in order to put him into a helpless position". If I understand it correctly, the meaning of the German text is supposed to be "to put him in a helpless position". As far as I can see, the translation in this place is correct.
JUDGE BRAND: In other words, the difference between Tweedledum and Tweedledee.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: If the Tribunal and Defense Counsel will please turn to Supplementary Book 5-- The first document in Supplementary Book 5, namely, NG 304, is a complete dossier with a fly sheet at the beginning bearing the tittle of the Reich Ministry of Justice, entitled, "The Transfer of the Prerogative to Grant Pardon to Jews and Poles; Treatment of the Death Sentences".
I might interpolate here a moment to remind both the Tribunal and Defense Counsel that this Rook 5, Supplement, has the same general subject matter as the original Rook 5, namely, the lowest common denominator of all documents to be found in this Rook is that of the extension of German law, both civil and criminal, to various occupied and annexed countries.
Reverting now to NG 304, under the fly sheet we find a covering letter from the General Public Prosecutor in Kattowice, which is in Poland, to the Reich Minister of Justice in Berlin, dated 28 October 1944. In this covering letter this General Public prosecutor to Poland, namely Dr. Haffner, tells the Minister of Justice that he is enclosing several lists of death sentences passed on Poles and the dates that such defendants were executed in Poland.
Turning to page 3, 4, and 5, we see the lists to which the General Public Prosecutor in Poland referred. In both cases, the lists contain but one name each, and in each case it will be noted that the crime briefly described was that of selling stolen bicycles, ranging in number from 13 to 30 having known than to be stolen, and that in each case the defendant was executed, and the dates are given; in other words, in both cases cited here, the Pole in question was sentenced to death and executed by the Special Courts of Bielitz and Kattowice, both of which are in Poland, for the crime of receiving stolen goods in these cases, namely, anywhere from 13 to 30 stolen bicycles.
These lists apparently were seen in the Ministry of Justice, and an endorsement was placed thereon and sent back to the place of origin, namely, the General Public Prosecutor in Kattowice and also in Koenigsberg. This endorsement which was returned to the senders in Poland state that the reporting of such cases of executions would no longer be necessary as far as the Ministry of Justice was concerned, but that each individual case should still be reported, with a copy also, to the governor in the Polish province concerned.
The bottom of this endorsement bears the pencilled notation "Before dispatching send to the State Secretary with the request to take notice of the contents," and to the right of that on the original document are found the initials of the defendant Klemm. On the English copy on page 6 of the document book that only appears in fragmentary form. For the benefit of the Tribunal, I might repeat that in the lower right hand corner on page 6 the following should appear, as it does on the original. In pencil it states, "Before dispatching the above to the State Secretary with the request to take notice of the contents," and to the right of that the initials of the defendant Klemm appear.
THE PRESIDENT: We are unable to locate the place where you read last.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: On page 6 of the document book, Your Honor, just above the Certificate of Translation, you see the phrase "Pencilled note". That has been translated only in a fragmentary form.
The original document reads as I just explained.
JUDGE BRAND: Would you read that once more?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Certainly, sir. "Pencilled Note: 'Before dispatching the above, send to the State Secretary with the request to take notice of the contents", and to the right of that notation are found the initials of the defendant Klemm.
The initial just above that which is found on page 6, namely, you find the parentheses initialed also, and under that an "M". We have been unable to decipher that "M".
The Prosecution offers as Exhibit 455 Document NG 304.
The next document in this book, beginning on page 7 of the English, page 8 of the German, is NG 326. This is a copy of a circular originally classified as "Secret", but with the classification scratched out by handwriting and several authenticating initials placed in the margin. It also bears the statement, "Annulled 28 August", plus an initial. However, it does appear from the dates that this circular was in effect from 12 June 1937 until 28 August 1937. It was issued by the Chief of the security Police in Berlin, who was, as the signature indicates, Reinhard Heydrich, who, if I may interpolate, was the same man who later became the Reich Protector of Bohemia and Moravia in Czechoslovakia.
Heydrich here orders certain protective custody measures with regard to Jewish race defilers. As we have seen from cases already in evidence, namely, the Katzenberger Case and others, "race defilement" moans the intercourse of a physical nature between a Jew and a racial German. Heydrich appears to be alarmed from statistics to the effect that such race defilement is on the increase.
JUDGE BLAIR: Just a minute, Mr. Prosecutor. My book does not have these documents in it. They are left out of my book. I wonder if we might be furnished one that has it.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Does the Secretary have an extra copy?
THE SECRETARY: I don't have an extra copy. I have one. This might have the document in.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: It is a single page document on page 7 of Book 5, Supplement.
Do you have it now, Your Honor?
Court No. III, Case No. 3.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Having evinced some alarm about the statistical evidence of an increase of this so-called "racial defilement", Heydrich directs all his State police offices to make a short report concerning every prison inmate one month prior to his discharge from prison to sec whether or not protective custody will be necessary after the sentence inflicted by law has been served.
Prosecution offers as Exhibit 456 Document No. NG-326.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted in evidence.
We see an initial on the upper right-hand of that document: "Ku".
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: What name is that initial?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: "Ku" obviously refers to some official in the Security Police in Heydrich's organization. The connection between this document and the present case does not appear from any initials on this document, but rather appears from the fact that Heydrich hero orders reports to be made on prison inmates concerning their fate after they are scheduled for release from prison.
I have here an extra copy of Book V supplement, if it is needed. On page 8 of the English book, which is page 9 of the German, is found NG-666. This single-page document is a directive bearing the letterhead of the Reich Minister of Justice, Berlin, 28 December 1944; is sent to the Chief Public Prosecutors which, we presume to mean, the Chief Public Prosecutors throughout the Reich, for their information-or rather, let me correct that. It is sent to the Chief Public Prosecutors throughout the Reich for their action, and for the information of the presidents of the various courts--Supreme Courts--and it concerns charges and actions by Public Prosecutors concerning the contesting or denial of the legitimacy of Jewish children. The directive is signed "By order of the defendant Altstoetter", and in this directive Altstoetter directs the Chief Public Prosecutors throughout the Reich that he, Altstoetter, reserves the right to approve the filing of all such Court No. III, Case No. 3.charges or actions involving the legitimacy of Jewish children.
He requests that notice before the charge is filed-
THE PRESIDENT: Where do you see Altstoetter's connection with this in the document?
MR. WOOLEYHAN : The directive was published by order of the defendant Altstoetter.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I see.
DR. GRUBE (For the Defendant Lautz): May it please the Court, I want to ask for a correction of the transcript. We were told by the sound system that this letter contained an order to the Oberreichsanwelte (the Chief Public Prosecutors). The document itself merely contains an order to the General Public Prosecutors (Generalstaatsanwalt). Moreover, it was sent for information to the Chief Public Prosecutor at the Reich Supreme Court--but not at the People's Court.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: May it please the Court. I can answer Dr. Grube. It is not the Oberreichsanwelte that the translation refers to, but just what it says: General Public Prosecutors (Generalstaatsanwalt).
THE PRESIDENT: What is the year that that document is dated?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: 1944, Your Honor.
DR. ALTSTOETTER (For the defendant Altstoetter, assistant to Dr. Orth):
The representative of the Prosecution is explaining this document has just stated that Altstoetter reserved the right to make a decision himself in every case before a charge is filed. In order to prevent an erroneous interpretation of the document--I only want to point out that Altstoetter expressly signed by order of the Reich Minister of Justice.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: If I remember correctly, Your Honors, I read "By order." The document is translated as reading "by order."
THE PRESIDENT: That is what the English translation reads anyhow.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: It doesn't read by order of anybody but Alts Court No. III, Case No. 3.toetter.
I am looking at the original document.
Prosecution offers as Exhibit 457, Document NG 666.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted in evidence.
MR. KING: In connection with the introduction of document NG606, as Exhibit 450, a few moments ago we stated that the first six pages had previously been introduced with another document. I agreed at that time to supply the information to the Court as to what document number it was, and what exhibit number. It was document number NG-213, Exhibit number 286, and that was introduced on the 18th of April.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: On page 9 of the English book, which is page 10 of the German, is found NG-769. This is a one-page memorandum to the files bearing several authenticating remarks; handwritten at the top of the page in pencil was written "Remarks" parenthesis "Death sentences". From this memorandum to the files dated 31 January 1942, which, we would like to point out, was after the death of the Minister of Justice Dr. Guertner, and during the time that the defendant Schlegelberger was acting minister, it appears that Dr. Schlegelberger was presented with the request to decide upon the execution of three defendants named Lesewiki, Stelmasinski, and Nowak. These three defendants are not identified on the face of the document, but the Prosecution, risking a modicum of argument, contends that the three names definitely appear to be Polish. However, that is argumentative. The decision of the UnderSecretary, Dr. Schlegelberger, was that of execution, that the three defendants should be executed and were, and that this decision could be communicated by telephone. Further information on the defendants is interesting but doesn't designate their nationality with certainty. Without further remarks, the Prosecution offers that document as Exhibit 458.
THE PRESIDENT: The document may be admitted in evidence.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: On Page 10 of the English book, which is page 11 of the German, is found NG-880. This is a rather bulky collection of drafts of proposed governmental decrees. Three such drafts of proposed decrees are contained in this document as enclosures (A), (B), and (C), and are so labeled between pages 13 and 25. These three proposed drafts were enclosed together with a covering letter and sent from the Reich Minister of Justice to the Reich Minister of the Interior and also to Hitler's deputy in the Party Chancellery on the third of February 1940 in Berlin. The covering letter was written and signed by the defendant Schlegelberger personally. In this covering letter, the defendant Schlegelberger indicates that he has drafted the enclosed three proposed directives and describes then generally in his covering letter indicating a clear knowledge of the contents of the three enclosed drafts.
The third draft, namely draft (C) is the most interesting, for purposes of the prosecution, in that draft (C) envisages the extension of German criminal law and German criminal procedure to the Annexed Eastern Territories, and from various parts of the documents as a whole there appears that those Annexed Eastern Territories mean the usual, namely, Poland, Ukraine, etc.
In his covering letter, the defendant Schlegelberger makes certain remarks which we wish to refer to briefly. On page 11, which is page 13 of the German, with reference to this third draft, draft (C), Schlegelberger states that: "The modification in his draft of the regulation of the Special Court of a previous date would, if adopted, now entitle the Special Courts in the Eastern Territories to temporarily assume the character of courts martial to a still greater extent."
Further on that page, ho further states that: "In addition there is a necessity to carry out anew legally closed Polish criminal proceedings in cases which have to be given special consideration."
At the bottom of the page, he states that: "Actual German criminal law is also declared applicable by his draft to those crimes which were committed before the taking effect of the decree in these Annexed Eastern Territories.
On page 12, he concludes with the remark that: "In consideration of the fact that the introduction of German law in Annexed Eastern Territories is imperative for reasons of legal security, he requests that the affair, namely the adoption of his drafts, be expedited."
Signed: Dr. Schlegelberger.
On the ensuing pages, namely from pages 13 to 25 of the English Book, which is pages 14 through 27 of the German, these three drafts are set forth in their entirety. On pages 19 and 20, we refer in passing to the fact that this draft (C) on criminal law envisages putting into effect in Poland and the Ukraine and various other eastern countries, most, if not all, of those pieces of Nazi legislation to be found in Document Book II. All three of these drafts, as it appears from page 25 of the English Book, which is page 27 of the German, were submitted to the Minister of the Interior and presumably to members of the various Chancelleries because the initials of Lammers in the Reich Chancellery appears, dated the 16th of February, and the initial of the defendant Klemm appears, dated the 14th of February 1940, at which time it is presumed the defendant Klemm was in the Party Chancellery, one of the addressees of this whole correspondence.
The prosecution offers as Exhibit 459, Document NG-880.
THE PRESIDENT: Where do you say the initial of Klemm appears in this document?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: It appears at the bottom of page 25, Your Honor, opposite endorsement No. 3.
DR. KUBOSCHOK: I do not raise an objection to the document. However, I wish to point out a statement made by the Prosecutor. He mentioned "Annexed Eastern Territories" -- that they also include the Ukraine. In regard to this, I would like to remark that "Annexed Eastern Territories" was a technical term which included merely a small part of the territories of the former Republic of Poland and these were territories which had belonged to the German Reich before 1918. These territories had a special legal status because for the most part different laws prevailed in those districts than in the rest of the Republic of Poland, the so-called "Congress Poland." In these Annexed Eastern Territories: Posen, Upper Silesia, the former German laws were still applied for the most part and the former Austrian-Hungarian laws.
I only wanted to point this out so the impression docs not arise that the Annexed Eastern Territories are identical with the Occupied Eastern Territories that were occupied by the German troops.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: We are satisfied with calling the Occupied Eastern Territories any territory not part of the Reich before the first of September 1939.
THE PRESIDENT: It nay not be important, but I have always had the notion that Bohemia and Moravia were called Annexed Eastern Territories, although I don't claim to be very well versed on that.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: In any event, Your Honor, it's a matter of proof.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Court, in regard to this document, the gentleman of the Prosecution stated that on the last page, that is page 25 of the English Document Book, that the initial of Klemm appeared on that page. The defendant Klemm denies that these initials that appear there arc his own. Actually, it is not possible that Klemm could have signed this document. The initials also are accompanied by a date, and that is 14 February, and that as the proceeding page shows, 14 of February 1940 - on this day Klemm was not in the Party Chancellery. He did not hold an office at all, but he was a soldier. As far as we can decipher these initials, they are the ones of Kritzinger. Kritzinger was an Unterstaatssecretaer Assistant Under Secretary - in the Reich Chancellery under Lammers. In any case, this initial can not be brought into connection with Klemm. A comparison with the collection of pieces written by the defendants and of their initials also shows this very clearly. This initial here is "Kr" and not "Kl' as Klemm's initials were "Kle". I therefore ask the prosecution to examine their statement again. An expert on handwriting has to be heard if this is to be maintained.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: May Your Honors please, without saying immediately what we would prefer to do, we would like merely to get this matter straight as far as procedure is concerned. Now, I offered this document in evidence, reading from a certified translation; the initial Klemm appears on the certified translation. Now, so far as the Prosecution is concerned, that absolves us of the burden of further proof, and if the Defense denies that the translation is as it is stated here, it's their job to prove otherwise.
However, with regard to this particular document as to the defendant Klemm, we will withdraw it and have it looked at again by one of our analysts as to the defendant Klemm, but we do not want by that action, to assume a burden of proof regarding signatures on certified translations which is not ours.
THE PRESIDENT: Each case can be decided as it comes up. For the moment we will withdraw any attempt to connect Klemm with this document. On that basis it nay be admitted.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: All right, Your Honor. We will do that with the understanding that we can re-offer it to the defendant Klemm.