On the second page of this document I cannot see the references or the signature of the defendant Schlegelberger. Perhaps the Prosecution can make a further statement on this point, as it was said expressly just now that this letter had been submitted to the defendant Schlegelberger.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: We have here a very bad copy of the photostat of this document. However, it is my understanding that the initials appearing on the upper right-hand corner, very faintly I admit, are the initials of the defendant Schlegelberger, along with a date. Whether they can be deciphered from this photostat is questionable.
DR. BEHLING: The translation did not come through quite clearly, but as far as I understood the Prosecution just now, the date on the second page and Schlegelberger's initials are supposed to be. I cannot recognize that properly here. Therefore, I would like to ask the Tribunal to permit mo to submit the page once again to the defendant Schlegelberger.
DR. BEHLING: May it please the Court, a further examination by the defendant Schlegelberger, has shown that the defendant could not say that those initials were put there by his own hand. In case the Prosecution adheres to its own views, I would ask that an expert on handwriting be heard.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: May it please the Court, if in the Tribunal's opinion, an expert on this signature is necessary, we, of course, will call one, but before that is done we invite the Court's attention to the fact that page five of the document book is a certified translation. In the upper right hand corner appears the letters SCH. The text of that page stated the letter was to be shown to the defendant Schlegelberger. We submit that on its face there is no need for an expert to testify to those initials.
THE PRESIDENT: There is no question about the admissibility of the document. Its application to Schlegelberger might be a matter of further proof. On the face of it, it looks like a prima facie case, that it had been submitted to Schlegelberger. It is open to if he desires to disprove that fact in his own behalf.
DR. BEHLING: I will then give my views on that document in detail when we produce evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: It is permissible.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The Prosecution would like to be informed whether the Tribunal desires that an expert be called on this document's signature?
THE PRESIDENT: It seems to the Tribunal that there is a prima facie evidence of genuineness, and until something further is shown by the Defense, I think the prima facie is satisfied.
The document will be received in evidence.
It was said that the date appears thereon, and the date is not very clear on this copy.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The date of the original letter, 12/12/41, and it appears on the second page, page five of the document book -- the figures 26-1, which I presume means January 26.
The next document 660 P S, beginning on page 6 of the bottom of the English and German Books, is a letter dated 12 December 1941. It is signed by Keitel. It notes that prison terms in occupied territories are a sign of weakness, and that Hitler is of the opinion that an effective and lasting deterrent can only be achieved by death sentences, and by measures which will keep the relatives of the culprits and the population in suspense as concerns the fate of the culprit. This purpose is served by deportation to Germany. The attached directive sets forth the conditions under trial will be held in the occupied territories or prisoners transferred to Germany for trial.
Document No. 669 PS is offered as Exhibit No. 305.
DR. BEHLING: May it please the Court, the photostat which I have now before me of this exhibit contains not Keitel's signature, and a number of handwriting notes which in detail are only contained in the document book in fragments. A considerable part of the handwritten notes, which are to be found on page one are not legible for me, nor can I decipher it. I would ask the Prosecution to hand to the Defense the original of the letter of 12 December 1941 so that the necessary clarification and supplement without which a proper evaluation and placing of responsibility on the Minister of Justice cannot be made.
THE PRESIDENT: May I Inquire where the original documents are located?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: I believe it is here in the files, your Honor, in Nurnberg.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any reason they cannot be furnished to him for examination?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: I do not believe so, your Honor.
JUDGE BRAND: Does the Prosecution claim that this document was initialed by any of the defendants? We have not heard any such claim?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: We have not contended that the document is initi led by any of the defendants here. It is just given as background material, and we have not translated the marginal notes. They were indecipherable to our translators, as far as I know, and we have not used them in any way.
JUDGE BLAIR: Well it bears the date as to when Dr. Schlegelberger was the acting Minister of Justice, does it not?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: December 12, 1941.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: In answer to the Tribunal's question, the date is during the time the defendant Schlegelberger was acting Minister of Justice. However, the Prosecution has not attempted by this particular exhibit to link it with any one of the defendants. It is merely another aid to explain the program now under process of proof; and, therefore, we submit that whatever marginal notations were contained on the document were irrelevant, particularly insofar as they were indecipherable to us.
TRE PRESIDENT: It has been suggested here an the bench since there is nothing that appears in the document, so far as shown, that is identified with any particular defendant; that Counsel might be taking some risk in having those notes deciphered. It might react against him.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: The question goes to the probative vnlue of the document, which I attempted to indicate.
THE PRESIDENT: I think the document is admissible. If the Defense Counsel still wishes to see the original, I think then he should be able to see it. Do you still want to see the document?
DR. BEHLING: I would suggest that you allow me to see the original which might enlighten me on the subject of the marginal notes?
THE PRESIDENT: We will receive the document in evidence, but we will ask the Prosecution to accomodate him, if possible, within a reasonable time, and he can bring the subject up again if it seems important to him.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Arrangement will be made to furnish the original for clarification.
TRE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The next document, NG 077, sometimes identified as 665-PS, appearing on pages 13 to 17 of the English book, and 11 to 14 of the German book, contains correspondence and a draft decree concerning the carrying out of the Nacht and Rebel order by the Ministry of Justice. This decree or the draft of the decree reads:
"Regarding the execution of the afore-mentioned order I decree:
"1. I reserve to myself the decision on which court is materially and formally competent to deal with a case.
"2. The public prosecutor shall base his decision for an indictment on his conception of duty.
"3. The order, execution and termination of the imprisonment on remand are at the discretion of the public prosecutor.
"4. The main hearing will be conducted behand closed doors.
"5. The admittance of evidence of foreign origin depends on the preceding consent of the public prosecutor.
"6. Prior to the verdict the public prosecutor may revoke the indictment or move for a temporary stalling of the proceedings. The motion of the public prosecutor to stall proceedings temporarily must be granted by the court.
"The public prosecutor must be given an opportunity to state his attitude, should the Court decide on making an exception to his motion."
Document 077 is offered as Exhibit No. 306.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Document No. NG-484, appearing on purges 18 and 19 of the English Book, and 15 to 17 of the German Book, is the sworn affidavit of Lt. General Rudolf Lehmann, of the Legal Department of the OKW, concerning the treatment of "Nacht und Nebel" cases. In that affidavit Lt. General Lehmann states, on page 18, near the middle of the page, that: "Freisler said that the Ministry of Justice could handle thess cases and promised to speak with Schlegelberger on the matter. Schlegelberger, who was then acting Minister of Justice was, in my opinion, the only person who could consent to take over these 'Nacht und Nebel' cases by the Ministry of Justice. Lehmann also mentions in his affidavit that defendants Mettgenberg, von Ammon and Joel worked on the "Nacht und Nebel" matters in the Ministry.
THE PRESIDENT: What were those three names again?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Mettgenberg, von Ammon, and Joel.
Document NG-484 is offered as Exhibit 307.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Document NG-232, which appears on pages 20 and 21 of the English Book, and pages 18 and 19 of the German Book, is the Ministry of Justice decree dated 6 February 1942, setting out the manner in which these cases are to be handled. I would like to read this decree:
"1. Competent for the handling of the cases transferred to the ordinary courts including their retrial are:
as far as they originate from the occupied French territories, the Special Court and the Chief Prosecutor in Cologne; as far as they originate from the occupied Belgian and Netherland territories, the Special Court and the Chief Prosecutor in Dortmund; as far as they originate from the occupied Norwegian territories, the Special Court and the Chief Prosecutor in Kiel; for the rest, the Special Court and the Attorney General at the District Court, Berlin. In special cases I reserve for myself the decision of competence for each individual case.
"2. The Chief Prosecutor will inform me of the indictment, the intended plea and the sentence as well as of his intention to refrain from any indictment in a specific case.
"3. The choice of a defense counsel will require the agreement of the presiding judge who makes his decision only with the consent of the Prosecutor. The agreement may be withdrawn.
"4. Warrants of arrests will be suspended only with my consent. If such is intended, the Prosecutor will report to me beforehand. He will furthermore ask for my decision before using foreign evidence or before agreeing to it being used by the Tribunal.
"5. Inquiries concerning the accused person or the pending trial from other sources then those Wehrmacht and Police agencies dealing with the case will be answered by merely stating that (black space - John Doe, if you like) is arrested and the state of the trial does not allow further information." This Document NG-232 is offered as Exhibit 308.
THE PRESIDENT: I note that while this appears to emanate from the Reich Ministry of Justice, and from my recollection it seems to be a period during which Schlegelberger was Under Secretary, nevertheless the document is signed Freisler, who is thought to be identified with that document.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: I believe that that will be explained in a later document, in which, if I remember correctly, it shows that Freisler, or rather, it is explained, too, in the Lehmann affidavit which states that Freisler was in the Ministry at that time, and was instrumental in preparing the decrees in connection with the "Nacht und Nebel."
THE PRESIDENT: In other words, Schlegelberger had gone out of office?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: No, he was still in office, sir, as appears in NG-484, which was the Lehmann affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: Who is responsible for this; whether Schlegelberger is identified with it.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Schlegelberger is not identified with this particular document, but he was still acting Secretary of the Ministry at that time, as is explained in the Lehmann affidavit which I read a short time ago, on page 18 of your Book.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Your Honor, at the time this letter under discussion was written, both Freisler and the defendant Schlegelberger were, it appears from dates of documents already in evidence, technically under the titles of Under Secretary. They were both Under Secretaries at that time. But, the defendant Schlegelberger was acting in the capacity of Minister until later in 1942, when Thierack was appointed, and the relation between Freisler and Schlegelberger, in that dual capacity, is explained with regard to "Nacht und Nebel" in the Lehmann affidavit which has already been introduced.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. BEHLING (Counsel for the defendant Schlegelberger): May it please the Court, the question as to who was responsible and competent for the decrees which bear the designation Nacht und Nebel --as to whether it was the responsibility of Freisler or the defendant Schlegelberger--would be explained by the fact that Schlegelberger at that time was in charge of the Ministry. However, such an explannation will have to be reserved until a later date. For the monent, I think what matters is to establish as to whether the various documents can be used as evidence against Schlegelberger.
I have already voiced my misgivings when Exhibit 304 was submitted, but I withdrew those misgivings in the end when the prosecution told me that Schlegelberger's name did appear in the enclosure to that letter.
I must now again put forward my objection, in particular with regard to the document which is under discussion at this moment, NG-232. Of that document, it is certain beyond doubt that it is signed, not by Schlegelberger, but by Freisler. At that time Freisler was the competent expert, Referent, for the Division for Penal Matters, whereas Schlegelber, first of all, was in charge of civil law as a whole. Therefore, it is natural that the circular decree of 6 February 1942 should be signed by Freisler, and not by Schlegelberger. I consider it probable, and now more than ever, that the defendant Schlegelberger--concerning Document 276, Exhibit 304--had no knowledge of that document, all the more so as the note of 9 February, 1942, is merely a note by Undersecretary Freisler saying that the defendant Schlegelberger should be informed about this letter. As to whether Schlegelberger actually was informed about the letter, that, in my view, is not proved thereby.
JUDGE BRAND: I wonder if I may interrupt. Isn't this fairly clear to all of you?
First, that NG-232 is the document in issue.
Second, that on its face it does not purport to be connected with or to bind the defendant Schlegelberger.
Third, that if it is found to be evidence against Schlegelberger, it will be by reason of some other evidence, either verbally given or some other document, and there is no use arguing about that at all. If it is connected up against him in another manner it will be considered against him. If it is not connected up by some other evidence, it will not be considered against him.
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct. The document will be received in evidence for what it is worth. But what has already been said as to whether it is connected up with Schlegelberge, it will have to be admitted on all sides that that has not yet occurred.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The document was being offered at this time merely as another portion of the back round of the Nacht and Nebel procedures. I think that in future documents it will be connected up with the defendant Schlegelberger.
THE PRESIDENT: For the purpose you have just stated, of course, it will be received, and that only.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The next document, NG-708, which appears on pages 22 to 40 of the English book, and 20 to 41 of the German, is a case record of two Poles arrested in Paris and held for trial under the Nacht and Nebel order. It appears from this that one of these Poles was shot on the 11th of August, 1942, apparently before he was tried, and that the case against the other Pole, a woman by the name of Masza Lew, was concluded because of her prior death in the concentration camp at Auschwitz.
The correspondence concerning the Lew case was carried on by the Chief Public Prosecutor's office at the People's Court in Berlin, the defendant Lautz being the Chief Public Prosecutor at that time.
In the correspondence particular stress is laid on compliance with the Nacht and Nebel order, concerning secrecy of the whereabouts of the defendants, and stressing also the fact that no information should be given to anyone inquiring concerning these defendants.
For example, on page 36 of the English book and 37 of the German book, in a letter from the People's Court to the Secret State Police, the last paragraph, it is stated there:
"The prisoner, who came to Germany in accordance with the Fuehrer Decree of 7 December 1941" -- and this decree, as you know, is the Nacht and Nebel decree -- "is to be kept strictly segregated and in solitary confinement during the transfer and all possible intermediate stops. The prisoner must under all circumstances be prevented from contacting the outside world by letter or by any other means during the transport."
DR. GRUBE: May it please the Court, the prosecution has connected the defendant Lautz with this document. In the whole of the document, not even in the photostat, does the name of the defendant Lautz appear even once. Concerning the correspondence of the Chief Prosecutor, it is always Parrisius who signs the letters; but the last letter which was just quoted by the prosecution was signed by Volk. None of the defendants is therefore immediately affected by this document.
I doubt, therefore, that this document has full probative value for this trial, and I therefore object to it.
MISS AHBUTHNOT: The prosecution believes that this document does have probative value in this case. The letter-head in this correspondence is of the Chief Prosecutor's Office, the People's Court in Berlin, and the letters are signed by persons in the Chief Public Prosecutor's Office, so that the responsibility for the correspondence could be directed to the defendant Lautz.
THE PRESIDENT: I suppose that is so. However, the same ruling would apply here that applied to the other, but with a little more force, because this has been traced to Lautz' office. That would be the only thing additional. At any rate, we think it comes under the ruling that has heretofore been made, that the document has some probative value on some issue. Therefore, it will be admitted.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: I don't believe I gave that number; it is to be Exhibit 309.
THE PRESIDENT: That is correct.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The next document, No. 2521-PS, pages 41 through 43 of the English book, and pages 42 through 44 of the German book, is a letter from the SS Chief of the Branch D Concentration Camps to the commanders of the concentration camps listed on page 41. It even encloses an extract from the Nacht and Nebel decree.
It is pointed out on page 42 that after transfer of Nacht und Nebel prisoners to the Reich, if it is not possible for the Special Courts to take care of them they will be placed in concentration camps under protective custody until the end of the war, and no information concerning these prisoners is to be given out even in the case of death.
This document is, again, just background material on the Nacht und Nebel procedures. It is offered as Exhibit No. 310.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted in evidence.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The next document is NG 250, which appears on Pages 44 throught 47 of the English Book and Pages 45 and 46 of the German book. It contains correspondence addressed to the Reich Ministry of Justice concerning the prosecution of Nacht und Nebel cases in Essen/Wuppertal, in which cases the death sentence was to be expected. It appears that the defendant Von Ammon initialled this correspondence when it came into the Ministry of Justice.
THE PRESIDENT: On what page of the document does Von Ammon 's name appear?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: It does not appear. I believe that is one of the illegible handwritten notes that appear on Page 46 of your book, Your Honor, but the photostat here has the initial of von Ammon.
DR, SCHILF (Counsel for Defendant Mettgenberg): The document, or rather the photostat of it, is so difficult to read that here again I would like to ask permission to see the original As in the previous case, I would like to ask the prosecution, if this document should be in nuernberg, to let us see it and compare it with the copy.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: I am afraid, Your Honor that the original of this document is in the Berlin Document Center and is not available here in Nuernberg at the present time.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the Prosecution claim there is enough in this document as already shown to identify it with any particular defendant?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: If so, I would like to have that part of the document pointed out to me.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The only identification on this document as to any of the particular defendants that I have been able to decipher is the initial of von Ammon. That does not appear on the mimeographed copy in your book, Your Honor, but only appears on the photostat.
THE PRESIDENT: Can you tell me where it appears on the document?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: It appears on the last page of the document approximately under the name of Engelmann.
DR, SCHILF: May I add the following remark. In the German document book there is a note which has been copied. That note says, to be submitted, among other things. That means to say, for information, Dr. Mettgenberg. That apparently only appears in the German document book, I cannot find it in the English document bock, but the photostat is so bad that I cannot decipher that passage from the German document book to be read Dr. Mettgenberg. In that respect Dr. Mettgenberg. In that respect Dr. Mettgenberg had been connected with this document, but it cannot be identified. That is due to the fact that the photostat is so bad.
THE PRESIDENT: It appears clear to one of us, at least that if the document is so bad that the people who prepared these documents books put it down as being illegible, that the prosecution should not expect the Tribunal to indulge presumptions as to who signed it unless there is expert testimony as to who signed it.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I don't think that is involved here, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, it appears to me to be involved if they claim that von Ammon has his initials on it and if we can't find it in our document book. If his initials do appear on the original and you claim that they are decipherable, I think that you will have to present evidence which will satisfy the Court of that fact.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honor, will turn to page 46 of this document book let's dispose of von Ammon first. There is nothing that I see on page 46 of the document book that says that it is illegible. It says handwritten for those signatures 4/9. In the photostat the name of von Ammon is clear.
They don't say there that they can't read the document. As I understand it, they simply say they don't put it in.
THE PRESIDENT: Our document book doesn't show his name at all.
MR LAFOLLETTE: Neither does ours.
THE PRESIDENT: Then there is something wrong with the document book.
JUDGE BRAND: If it is in the document and it is clear, then the court can read it. If it is not clear, you will have to put evidence in to show who signed it.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: You mean if it is in the document book and it is clear?
THE PRESIDENT: It is not in the document book.
JUDGE BRAND: Obviously, the document book ought to be like the photostat.
THE PRESIDENT: First of all, we notice that Dr, Schilf is at the microphone, and if he can see the name von Ammon on the photostat, that will satisfy us, but if he denies that, we are not satisfied.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Well, as far as I can see in this document I don't see any reference to von Ammon. I think Dr. Schilf is reading from another document-- I mean to Mettgenberg.
THE PRESIDENT: I have heard no claim that Mettgenberg is connected with it.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: There has been no claim here by us.
DR. BEHLING: May it please the Court. I believe that we are concerned here with a regrettable error. Concerning the defendant von Ammon, I can state here that he does admit that the initial which is entered on the photostat in his own. My colleague Dr. Schilf probably meant to say something different. I suppose he wanted to say, and as far as that is concerned I agree with him, he wanted to say that the handwritten note on that photostat is altogether illegible.
But as we are probably concerned with very important references, I should like to join Mr. Schilf in his motion and I would like to ask that the defense should have the original made available to them so that we can examine these handwritten notes. The other statements by Dr. Schilf, if I understood him correctly, referred to another document within the framework of this exhibit, which is not part of his photostat but is contained in the document under Number NG 250. I assume that the Prosecution intends to submit those two separately.
THE PRESIDENT: I have heard no one connect Mettgenberg with this document, except Dr. Schilf who represents him.
DR. LA FOLLETTE: If Your Honor please, if Miss Arbuthnot doesn't mind, at the bottom of page 36 you see that handwritten notations on the left side are illegible. That is what Dr. Schilf is talking about. Since he thinks maybe that Dr. Mettgenberg is in, we will let his statements stand as reading this for us which we couldn't read. We certainly offer it as having the signature of Von Ammon now identified.
THE PRESIDENT: We will take the document as only applying to Von Ammon until a further evidence appears.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Document NG-250 is offered as Exhibit 311.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: The next document NG-228 appears in the English book, pages 48 and 49, and in the German book on pages 47 to 49. These are notes signed by the defendant Von Ammon and addressed to the defendant Rothenberger, with a copy to the defendant Mettgenberg. It sets out the number of Nacht und Nebel cases pending in various courts; the changes in procedure including transfer of certain cases from Special Courts to the People's Court are also set out in these notes. The Document NG-228 is offered as Exhibit 312.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Document NG-226, which appears on pages 50 to 54 in the English book and also 54 in the German book, is correspondence concerning the transfer of jurisdiction in Nacht and Nebel cases from the Special Courts to the People's Court. In connection with this transfer of jurisdiction, new procedures are outlined, partially as follows - appearing at the bottom of page 52 of the English book and 53 of the German - we find that:
"The hitherto valid regulation whereby the accused who could not be sentenced to death or to long-term imprisonment were to be detained under arrest for an unlimited time by the courts is herewith cancelled. From now on they will be under custody of the State Police for the dura tion of the war.
"a) if there is no sufficient suspicion of a crime so that no charge can be made.
"b) if a charge has been made and the accused has been acquitted.
"c) if the accused has been sentenced to and served a short-term imprisonment."
Further on page 53 we find that second paragraph:
"The regulation according to which a charge is to be brought only if the death sentence or imprisonment of a certain minimum duration are to be expected is herewith cancelled. In future sentences of minor punishments and, in certain cases, even orders of acquittal can be passed. The regulation in No. 6 of the executing ordinance dated February 6, 1942, according to which the court has to approve of the proposal of abandonment brought by the prosecutor and, furthermore, has to grant the prosecutor the opportunity of stating his views in case it wants to divert from the prosecutor's proposal, has therefore been cancelled as unnecessary.
"The regulation in No. 4 Par. 1 of the order dated February 6, 1940, according to which a warrant of arrest can only be cancelled with my consent, has been cancelled. In all cases of cancellation of a warrant of arrest the accused has to be handed over to the Police, on principle, for further custody."
It appears on page 54 that a copy of this correspondence was sent to the defendant Von Ammon.
Document NG-226 is hereby offered as Exhibit 313.
THE PRESIDENT: Can you explain the language on page 53, the socalled "porto cases"?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Yes, I think so, Your Honor. There will appear in further documents in this book other references to the Porto cases. Those were cases which arose in France and in which many persons were arrested. It was for some reason - I don't know the connection or the history of the name "Porto" but they were treated as Nacht and Nebel prisoners in the same way that other Nacht and Nebel prisoners were treated.
THE PRESIDENT: They were French nationals, you say?
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Yes, they were so.
DR. BEHRING: May it Please the Court, the last page of the photostat of this exhibit does contain the reference that a copy was to be handed on to the defendant Von Ammon. I cannot see from the photostat before me whether the defendant Von Ammon did in effect receive a copy or whether this was merely an instruction which was given on paper and which nay not have been carried out. I would ask, therefore, to be afforded an opportunity to see the original so that I can see whether a corresponding note or marginal note by the defendant Von Ammon can be recognized. As long as that point has not been cleared up, I object to the submission of the document with respect to the defendant Von Ammon, and I would ask that this document should be submitted merely as general evidence to describe the Nacht and Nebel affair.
THE PRESIDENT: The fact that his name appears in the document is some evidence that it was brought to his notice. If as a matter of fact he did not receive it, he can so testify when it comes to the defense, but the document is admissible in evidence purely on all of our rules.
MISS ARBUTHNOT: Thank you, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The document is received in evidence. There will hardly be sufficient time to take up another document today so we will adjourn until nine-thirty tomorrow morning.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal will recess until nine-thirty tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 0930 hours, 22 April 1947.)