BY MR. WOOLEYHAN:
Q. Father Wein, would you please describe for the court, briefly your professional career as prison chaplain at Amberg penitentiary.
A. My entire career just at Amberg? Do you want me to describe my entire career as chaplain of prisons or just at Amberg?
Q. I would like you to briefly describe your entire career as chaplains of prisons.
A. In the year 1928, on the first of August, as an auxilliary chaplain -- curate -- I came to the penitentiary at Straubing. That was a preparation period, intended as such. There was another gentleman there-- an older colleague of mine -- who was the president there. I came in his place. He had been curate before. I remained there until 1931, until the first of December-- that is, in Straubing. On the first of December, I came to Amberg because there the position of Catholic priest was vacant. On the first of February 1932, I became president there, and since then I am at that penitentiary in that position until now.
Q. Father Wein, in the affidavit which you gave sometime in the past, and which is now evidence before this court, you stated that at sometime during the war you were asked to screen certain files of the prison inmates as to whether or not they wore asocial. You further said in your affidavit that that work which you did later was immediate ly redone by an official of the Ministry of Justice names Engert who visited Amberg prison. Is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. Father Wein, from the way in which Engert rescreened the files of those prison inmates, were you able to tell what was Engert's definition of an asocial person?
A. I did not really hear a definition of asocial clement, but I could gather that from a remark which was told to me by Oberreigierungsrat Popp, on the occasion of a private conversation -who shot himself later. When these poor people, in spite of our objections, had been sent to Mauthausen, I put the question as to what really caused that commission to do so, or what the opinion of the commission had been about social and asocial.
I was told very carefully that one was afraid that in case there would be a revolution, that these people would take the lead, and that then there would be a tremendous scandal. Particularly one of the people who accompanied Engert, a D** Maier, told me that he was officially suspiciously afraid of the Bavarian slaughterers, and that is why he hated those knife throwers. That was, and I can't explain it in any way, the reason was that these people would act hostile later on or one could assume that there was a hostility in them against the national socialist state and all it stood for -- its program and s**en -- and that is why they had to be removed.
I spoke later about these matters with people who understand something about them, and they also said that that must be the reason, and they said that was correct. I spoke to an old gentleman -- an old official -- who for years, I believe for 40 years, was an official, and he said that was correct for one had to remove these people just as one has to remove the insane, as one has to remove the Jews -- and that is my conviction before God.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Witness, will you kindly be a little more slow with your speech. It's hard for the interpreter to follow you.
BY MR. WOLLEYHAN:
Q. Father Wein, at any time before this program of transferring prison inmates to concentration camps began, at any time before that, was there over a rehabilitation program in the prisons that you know about?
A. I do not understand the question. Would you please repeat it again?
Q. Before prison inmates began to be transferred tr concentration camps, before that, did the prisons ever have a rehabilitate program to restore prison inmates to society?
A. Yes. Bavaria had an institution, I believe -- and I could not tell the year accurately -- I believe since the year 1923. It began at that time by that Ministerial Director, Dr. Diegen in Munich. We had three steps in carrying out the sentences. When the people were brought into the institution, then for a while they stayed as prisoners. After having been there for a while, they could come into the Fuehrungs Klasse, in the group of those who were put there for good behavior. And after they had been there half a year -- that changed according to decrees by the Minister -- then they could come into Category 2. If they behaved well after that, after years, they came into Category 3. I don't know whether you want to know what that is and what the advantages were that they had in these different cate-gories. Do you want me to speak about that?
Q. Father, we first want to know what advantages accrued to a prison inmate after he reached this so--called Category 3?
A. After Category 3 -- Stufe 3 -- Category 3 such as Category 2 had an outward advantage. I believe they had one line on their sleeve. I don't know whether it was a yellow one or red one. That is Category 2. And Category 3, I believe, had a blue insignia on their sleeve. Category 3, contrary to the others, had very nice cells. They were whitewashed. They were permitted to have flowers in their cells. They also had more liberty. They could write letters more often than others and they enjoyed confidential positions among the inmates.
A. (Continued.) And besides that there are some more details; for instance they could walk, they could take walks with the priest; that was intended, but it was never carried out; it was on the program, but it was never carried out. But we had individual prisoners, such as one man, who on the basis of these rules could go out for hours with the priest in civilian clothes and then return; that was an advantage. Then another advantage, of course, a person who was in category three had the best chance to get a pardon within the reasonable time. That was always mentioned as the main reason, the advantage; in category three a man who was in category throe for years, who had good conduct, had the hope that in the future, sometime in the future, he would got out. That was on the basis of an expert opinion which was to the court and signed by the Chief of Prison.
Q. Father Wein, did this system of rehabilitating prison inmates and giving them increased advantages eventually point toward restoring them to society; did that program continue until the end of the war?
A. No. I could not stake the year any more when it ended, but when a prisoner was sentenced in 1935 this system continued also in the penitentiary as in the prison, but in 1935 there came a decree that people who were sentenced for the first time should enjoy that system and it continued for a while, but I do not know for sure any more how long: I believe that only during the letter years it was discontinued because in the year 1943 my assistant came to Mauthausen, I believe it was in October, October 18th; he was in category two; he was only thirty-five, and had been put into category two in the prison, so that still existed at that time. He could not get into category three any more, as much as I know because this had been stopped from Berlin; because Berlin didn't want any more of that system and ridiculed it.
Q. Do you know any actual examples of prison inmakes who could and would have been rehabilitated to category three, but instead were transferred to a concentration camp?
A. Well, I could not remember a name at this moment. May be I can talk about Crahilsheim who I was very sorry for; he was the best one I had in thirty-five years, which means a lot, and I have seen quite a lot; and I would have intervened for him to get him into category three I am sure; I am convinced that his conduct would be good; there were many others who would have been eligible for category three, but I do not remember the names now.
Q. Apart from the fact that you can't remember their names, what happened to them?
A. Well, these people, this is the way it happened. When Engert and his two associates left, it was very quiet; nothing was said; people asked what was going to happen now; what is going to happen to these people; are they going to be transferred to the other places, may be to Straubing, to protective custody; nobody could tell where these people were supposed to go. There was something there -- something bad, and then finally the decree came; I haven't seen the decree; everything was very secret; it was kept very secret, but I saw in the office a list, and on that list there was a number of names, something like twenty or thirty -- I didn't count them; some of them I copied, and these people, about those people it said opposite the top -- to be transferred, the following to be transferred. They didn't say where to; it didn't say what would happen to them; it was very secretive -no noise about it -- the way, the manner in which these people wire transferred. There was the first shipment on 26 July, 1943 -- that is what my diary shows, the diary which I kept at that time; the second shipment, among them also was my dean, by a coincidence -- may be it wasn't a coincidence ---- the Protestant at the same time also was sent away. At that time, if I am not mistaken, on the 18th of November, of the same year, 1944, or 1943, I couldn't say for sure not. I cant remember the year precisely now; I could look it up, but these people however were transferred. I do not know who came for them. I said goodbye to these poor people, and throughout my entire life I shall not forget the sad expressions on their faces which expressed terror, and in their eyes when they shook hands and said goodbye to me, and said where are we going to be sent.
I had to remain silent: I couldn't say anything, because otherwise I would have been among them one hour later and sent to a concentration camp in the same way as thousands and thousands of our colleagues. I had to keep silent; I did not lie; I just shrugged my shoulders. And then a transport came for these people; I heard it was the Gestapo who came for them; they were not brought away by our people. Later I was told that -- I was told yesterday by the witness who was in charge of these lists, that later in December another shipment went out; and then in January of the next year there were approximately, it may have been one hundred people, but among them not only such of those who had life sentences, but also people down to eight years of penitentiary, who had terms down to eight years in the penitentiary, and in order to show what the caliber of those people were, I should like to describe that also, among those people, there was, for instance an inn keeper by the name of Thicsay from Draxelsried in Bavaria. The man had a big sentence, he was a good follow, only he was excitable; he was a butcher and an inn keeper; he had children; he had lived well with his wife, only as I say he was irritable, and one day in his excitement he killed his wife with a knife; everybody said, the poor chap; he couldn't hold his temper, as we say in Bavaria, but a criminal in the true sense of the word he is not. Then from the prison he was brought to a farm, after a short time, and he didn't run away; his conduct was first class, and beyond a doubt he would have gotten a pardon, that is after serving a large portion of his sentence, but that man also was transferred; that man died in the concentration camp, as I have been told, but there were much better people among those who were transferred, who for years had the best conduct. We have to imagine that men in the penitentiary, where one is serving a life sentence, have never been there before, never eaten from a tin cup.
If a man has to be for many years in the penitentiary, then it is not surprising that the unexpected happens, but there have been people who for twenty years and longer, who showed excellent conduct, always examined by the personnel and reports were given every three months about the kind of work they did, and then from time to time they, their personnel files, were brought before the conference; but dozens of times these files were scrutinized and studied time and again until one got a clear picture of these people. I have a very clear picture of them, and I could describe them in great detail; many of them had been subject for pardons already; I could name one of them now by the name of Haag, not Hach the man who was in Mauthausen, another man by the name Haag; he was an old man, beyond sixty; he was a Protestant, and as a Catholic priest I wished to care for this man; I got him clothes, a coat; he was happy as a child; I can still see him; he asked me, please help me get out; I told him to have patience, but certainly you will get out. And then suddenly under Thierack, then it started; and then under Dr. Guertner; he was an old man, but I believe misery killed him, when he suffered a stroke, as we were told, but under Thierack everything changed; there were no more pardons; and that man who already had been promised from Nurnberg, that man whose son would have taken him into his house, was transferred. I have heard, I can't believe it, that he also died; and many others who also had been eligible for pardon, who would have been suggested for pardon, because during the latter years before the Nazis came into power we had quite a number who would have been let out of the prison, and let go free. I can say that I took care of about five or six in one year, to place them again with the help of the Caritas organizations; in Munich there is a very nice old lady who took care, special care of those people, and found positions for them where we could place them. We placed one in the firm of Frey as a tailor, and another one with a Doctor Mueller in Munich. There was a male nurse who had been doing very good work in Straubing, and I got him a job there And, the prosecutor to whom he had to go first is supposed to have said, as I was told by the doctor, and he asked him:
"Doctor, how are you satisfied with the man?" And, the doctor personally said, "I am happy -- I am not only satisfied, I am happy to have gotten that man. The man did not disappoint us. The first one did not disappoint us."
Q. Father Wein, you have stated that you have had some success in the placing of prisoners who were pardoned. Now, you also started to say, I think, something about others of a similar character who would have been pardoned at a later time. Were any of those persons transferred to concentration camps?
A. Yes, I have just stated that Haag would have been pardoned for sure, and others with him who were there who had the best chance, and were transferred. I cannot mention any names, but it should be sufficient if I say quite a number of these people whom we thought capable of improvement would have have been pardoned because anyone who was considered capable would have been pardoned. Generally, the people who were not pardoned, were those who according to their conduct and previous manners, or according to their specific crimes, and according to outward signs, showed that they could not be trusted, and that soon after they were pardoned would commit another crime. Only these were the people not subject to be pardoned, but there were very few of those-- as much as I know, very few.
Q. Father Wein, you spoke a moment ago about, at least, two cases that were personally known to you of prison inmates who after they had been transferred to Mauthausen, died there?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, to your knowledge of the prison inmates that were transferred from your prison at Amberg to concentration camps, wore there many that did not return?
A. That is very hard to answer. I am not in a position to give you that information. What I know, I only know from prisoners who escaped -- who ran away, as we say, and then came to me. It was the prisoner Hach, who was here as a witness, and whom I also named to the Tribunal as a witness Then, there was a protestant who came one day to see me -I do not remember his name any more. And, another one wrote me a letter from Erfurt. I believe he had a sentence of 15 years for manslaughter. I cannot give you any accurate figures on this now, I do not know where they are now -they all disappeared, but those who survived -- I do not know
Q. Father Wein, after the files of the prison inmates at Amberg prison were rescreened by Engert and his associates, and after these prison inmates were transferred to Mauthausen, how many were left in the prison?
A. There were approximately eight or ten. I could not say that for sure because I did not have any accurate information about that, but I spoke to a gentleman yesterday just about this question -- somebody who could really say for sure because he was in charge of those lists, of keeping these lists -- there may have been eight or ten; they were people who, for the moment, could not very well be transferred on account of the work they were doing. For instance there was an excellent carpenter, cabinet maker -- two cabinet makers who were amongst the best in the workshop, and if they would have been transferred, of course, the work shop would have had difficulties -- they would not have had to stop work but it would have been difficult; another one was a very good bookbinder; another one was a very good man in the stock room -- that man, however, was transferred later. And, I believe that these people certainly would not have been saved if it were not for the Americans who liberated them; and that in the end they also would have gotten in the gas chambers.
Q. Father Wein, in your prison at Amberg, particularly toward the end of the war, say in late 1944 or early 1945, did you ever see any significant number of Polish prisoners?
A. I could not tell you the number of the Poles positively because I only had occasional contact with these questions. We received quite a number of people from Schiratz -- I do not know how that name is spelled in Poland. There was a factory of the Zeiss Works of Jena, and captured Poles worked there. This plant was removed at the end of the war and came to Amberg because that was safer. They did not only bring the machines to Amberg but also the prisoners were transferred there, to Amberg. How many there were? At any rate, there were several hundred -- two or three hundred or there may have been more. That was the main group of Poles that were transferred there. There was also clergy amongst them -- because I could not take care of them at that time, I could have been sent to prison.
Q. Father Wein, please tell us what sort of labor these Polish prisoners did?
A. These Poles were, as I said, first and primarily in that plant -- the Zeiss Works, because they were specialists, they were skilled, all those that had been transferred there. And, they worked in the fields or in the mines, transporting ore, and were also used for work as any other prisoner of the penitentiary. There was no difference in the type of work between them and other prisoners.
Q. Father Wein, did any one of those Polish prisoners ever tell you whether or not he had left Poland voluntarily?
A. They did not leave Poland voluntarily. They were prisoners, and I knew that for sure from the clergyman who was amongst them. That man had only a very short sentence -- I think about a year. He was a prisoner for crossing the border illegally, and that man was never released.
Later he was transferred to Bavaria, to Amberg, although he had served his sentence for a long time, and from that you can see quite clearly that it did not matter how great the sentence was, but the main thing was they were sentenced and brought away from home.
Q. Father Wein, it is correct then, I take it, to say that in Amberg prison, during the latter stages of the war, there were housed several hundred Polish prisoners who had been forced to leave Poland for labor in the Reich? Is that correct?
A. Yes, I had that impression. I did not ask them specifically about that, but I had the impression that these people had not come voluntarily to Amberg. They were all prisoners; there were no volunteers amongst them; they were forced. There were some very young fellows amongst them who told me that at the age of 15 or 16 they had been taken away from their homes. They certainly did not come voluntarily at least, one could not assume that.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: I have no further questions, your Honors.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY DR. JUBOSCHOK:
Q. You said before, during the time of Guertner, he was humane and then Thierack came and the trouble started. About the time of Guertner's death when Schlegelberger was in charge of the Ministry of Justice, during that period was there any change in the prison?
A. After the death of Dr. Guertner, it was quite for a while, and we wondered, not merely myself, but the late popular Hopp with whom I worked, wondered whether changes would be made. Schlegelberger liked Guertner very much, and we were already afraid and wondered what was going to happen Who was going to some after him.
There was a time when nothning happened, as long as Dr. Schlegelberger was in office, his name was mentioned frequently. He did not make any changes in the prison. Everything was quiet during this entrim period. He probably thought he did not want to make too many changes, but then when Dr. Thierack came one noticed it quite strongly that it was going down hill and then, mercy had died.
Q. Then, let us summarize, under Schlegelberger, there was a continuation of the same area that was under Guertner?
A. Yes.
BY DR. LINK:
DR. LINK: May it please the Tribunal, statements made by the witness go beyond that which has become known to the defendant Engert, from the affidavit. That is a considerable pressure, and, therefore, I want to make the suggestion and the request to be permitted to report to the defendant, who is still in the hospital, about the statements made here, to which the witness testified, and then to conduct my cross examination after having done so, provided that now another witness could be called for whom I do not have to be present. I should be prepared and would submit that I conduct the cross examination of this witness after the noon recess.
THE PRESIDENT: There seems to be no objection on the part of the prosecution, and the Tribunal sees no reason why that is not a reasonable request. I am wondering whether any other--I am wondering whether any other defense counsel would like to crossexamine this witness at this time, or whether they care to crossexamine this witness at any time.
DR. KOESSL (for defendant Rothaug):
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY DR. KOESSL:
Q Witness, in your capacity as prison clergyman, did you see anything of the files?
A Yes.
Q Do you remember that the Poles frequently stated how they came into Germany?
A I did not speak to the Poles. I do not speak Polish.
Q Could you see anything from the files about that - as to how they came into Germany?
A No, really, I didn't.
Q You said before, that the Poles did not come to Amberg voluntarily?
A Those boys who were there didn't; we had prisoners in the penitentiary, and from that you can assume they had been forced to come there. I told you how it had happened. That was the way I was told by the clergyman who was with them. His sentence was for a quarter of a year for illegal border crossing, he was in difficulty for over a year, and that would seem he did not come voluntarily. Many of them died.
Q The Polish clergyman, whom you mentioned, apparently until he was sentenced - had been in Poland, and then he was brought to Amberg-
A --From Schiratz.
DR. KOSSL: Thank you.
BY THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE BRAD):
Q Mr. Witness, were you informed, as to the purpose for which you performed the screening of the prisoners, before the time when Engert rescreened them?
A It was stated -- it was at the end of 1942 or the beginning of 1943 -- I was told in a conference by Oberregierungsrat Hopp -- not only I was told, but it was stated, that only the files of those with life sentences, and long sentences down to eight years, had to be screened -- that is to say, a later day included those down to eight years. First they said only the life-long sentences, then they included those down to eight years -- they had to be screened as to the asocial attitude of these people. That was the assignment. Then he told me, -- I have to ask you, and we could do that because the Ministry had given us the assignment to take part in the asocialogical screening; some weeks we had to do two screenings, apart from our normal work, -- and I said, -- Yes, I will help. But I had a certain feeling that that whole affair was not quite clean, and I said, -- I should like to ask you, that those who are questionable, or to be considered asocials, according to the principles which would be laid down, that you take those, and you take care of those. I refused to have anything to do with that. I took the rest. I could do that easily because I knew the people whom I had in Straubing, and I knew that among those I would not have to declare anybody as asocial without doing anything against my own conscience; and another official, selected the files, and from that entire file I took about fifty whom I was sure they were not dangerous, and I screened them, and I considered by my own knowledge, and before God, that I did not write anybody asocial, and if there were any, I put them aside; I divided the work; I had to work because the other official, Director Woerth, was physically and mentally unable to do it -- that is, to render a judgment. That was the reason why I was also asked to help. Then we screened the files.
I did not declare anyone asocial; Oberregierungsrat Hopp picked out about six of them, and told me again yesterday, that I was told yesterday, by the man who had to do the clerical work at that time. In other words, from the major number of files, only six of them had been marked as asocial. That was how it happened. And if it weren't for that commission that came afterwards, nothing would have happened. That commission only changed matters completely. Throughout all the work we had done, regardless whether they had been marked social, or asocial, - regardless whether they had twenty-five, or five years -- one could only guess what principles they applied; but one could not recognize it right away. From the very beginning one could not imagine - one did not know - any of them had to be sent to Mathausen. We thought maybe they would be sent to Straubing, in protective custody, or to Crailsheim, where - shortly before that time - a group of politicals -- political prisoners -- had been sent. One could not assume that these people were to be "removed" - in that cruel way, as it was done in Mathausen. Nobody among us know that. We only had a certain suspicion - a certain feeling:there is something wrong; we have to be careful. That is the truth.
Q I understand your answer. Then, the classification in which you took part resulted in about six persons being classified as asocials? Did I understand you to that effect?
A Yes; yes.
Q To what extent was the asocial list increased by the rescreening under Engert? Merely briefly.
A That is difficult for me to say. The first shipment, there were about twenty, or more -- I could not say that for sure - I did not make that list. I only saw it superficially. The second list, there were twelve or fifteen. About the later shipment, I could not say. They went very fast. Suddenly, we were told that some more had been transferred.
Yesterday the gentleman who made them prepare the list at the time, told me that about one hundred of them were transferred. I could not say anything more about that.
Q And the transfer of about one hundred was the result of the classification which took place under Engert -- is that correct? That is all I want to know.
A Yes, yes; and contrary to the first classification. By the first classification nobody would have been sent to Mathausen at any rate.
Q Did you receive any statement from Engert as to the reason for the increased number of persons so classified as asocials, and transferred?
A No; I neither saw Engert, nor met him officially; nor did I ever see any signature of his. I only heard that these things care down without signature - these instructions. That was what I was told.
JUDGE BRAND: Thank you.
WITNESS: (Continuing) -- Mostly, there were no signature, because they were secret instrctions, and we did not have any information, any opportunity, to see this.
JUDGE BRAND: Thank you.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: If any other of defense counsel expect, at any time, to cross-examine this witness, other than Dr. Link, they will be required to conduct that cross-examination now. (Pause.)
Father Wein, you will be requested to return at one--thirty this afternoon for another questioning on the part of Dr. Link; you will be back at that time please.
WITNESS: Yes.
MR. WOOLEYHAN: Can the witness be excused?
THE PRESIDENT: The witness will be temporarily excused.
(Witness temporarily excused.)
THE PRESIDENT: I wonder if Dr. Link has something he could proceed with at the moment?
DR. LINK (for defendant Engert): May it please the Tribunal: It is not quite clear to me whether another witness will be called now. I would have to be present. I am just wondering who will be the next witness?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: May it please the Court, the prosecution is prepared, in the face of deferred cross-examination of this witness, to proceed with documentary evidence, for the rest of the morning.
THE PRESIDENT: This documentary evidence will not refer particularly to defendant Engert?
MR. WOOLEYHAN: It will not, your Honor. It is Document Bonk 8.
MR. KING: May I ask the Court and defense counsel to turn to document book VIII-A.
The first five exhibits in Book VIII-A have previously been introduced in connection with other document books. They are included here in the index only to show that they have some relationship to the general subject to which this document book pertains. Those documents which previously have been introduced, together with the book in which they were introduced, are as follows:
NG - 293 was introduced in Book I NG - 346
THE PRESIDENT: Are you able to give the exhibit numbers at this time, Mr. King?
MR. KING: One moment. I may not be able to give all of them at the moment, Your Honor. I will, however, supply those. On the first one, 293, I am not able to at the moment. On NG-346, also introduced in Book I, it was Exhibit No. 101. NG-275, also in Book I--I am sorry I do not have that exhibit number at the moment. NG-392 was introduced in connection with Book V, and it was Exhibit 373. Exhibit NG-410 was introduced in connection with Book III. I do not have that exhibit number. Those exhibit numbers will be supplied, however, probably in the next few minutes. I would like to turn first to document 630-PS, which appears on page 8 of the English document book VIII and on page 9 in the German. This is an order dated 1 September 1939 to Reichsleiter Bouhler and Br. Brandt, signed by A. Hitler. It gives Bouhler and Brandt the responsibility for setting up a euthanasia program and a note at the bottom on this copy which we are presenting shows that a copy of this order was handed to Dr. Guertner on the 27th of August 1940, almost a year later. We introduce at this time the document 630-PS as Exhibit 383.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR: KING: The next document, NO--833, is to be found on page 9 of the English document book, and on page 10 of the German book.
This letter, dated Berlin, 27 July 1940, is a note from Schlegelberger to Lammers, enclosing a letter from Guertner to Lammers, who, apparently because he left town on a vacation for a brief period, was not able to send the letter to Lammers himself. We introduce, as soon as defense counsel has completed his examination of the original, document NO-833 as Exhibit 384.
DR. BEHLING (Counsel for the defendant Schlegelberger): Only for purposes of clarification, may I say that this letter is addressed to Reichsleiter Bouhler and not to Lammers.
MR. KING: I am perfectly willing to accept Dr. Behling's explanation of it. It would appear, therefore, that a copy of the letter which Guertner did. in fact send to Dr. Lammers was sent by Schlegelberger to Reichsleiter Bouhler.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. KING: I have now the exhibit numbers of those exhibits introduced in connection with other books. NG-293 is Exhibit 59. NG-275 is Exhibit 25. NG-410 is Exhibit 147. That is 142, instead of 147, Your Honor. The next exhibit, which will be 385, will be NO-832, which is to be found on page 10 of the English document book, and page 11 of the German. NO-832 is the letter, a copy of which was sent to Reichsleiter Bouhler by Dr. Schlegelberger, as indicated in NO-833. I might point out a certain deficiency which apparently appears in the German text. If Your Honors will note, on the left-hand margin in the English text of the document NO832, there are certain handwritten marginal notes. I am informed that those handwritten marginal notes do not appear in the German version of this document. For purposes of clarification and expediation, we will not rely upon those notes. However, the Court should be aware that the German copy does not have them on.
THE PRESIDENT: You stated that it was signed by Schlegelberger. I notice this copy indicates it was signed by Guertner.
MR. KING: I am sorry, Your Honor. I meant to say, if I didn't say, that NO-833 is signed by Schlegelberger, and the document NO-832 is the copy of the letter to which Schlegelberger refers in the letter which he signed. The document NO-832 is this letter to Lammers from Guertner, in which he says, in effect, that since Hitler refuses to issue a law authorizing euthanasia killings, all such killings should cease at once, and I would like to read the third paragraph in that letter. Dr. Guertner says:
"It is extremely difficult to reply officially"--he is referring to these inquiries about what has happened to certain people who have been victims of mercy killings--"for reference neither to the fact nor to the content of a Fuehrer order can be made. It is impossible to pretend that the Reich Justice Administration knows nothing of this matter."
We offer as Exhibit 385, the document NO-832.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence, and we will take the morning recess at this time for fifteen minutes.
(A recess was taken)