I first turn to the Indictment in this case record, which in the English document is found on page 7, and in the German on page 8. This is dated Berlin; 3 March 1943.
"The Chief Reich Prosecutor at the People's Court --"
THE PRESIDENT: One moment, there is a little confusion in my files.
MR. KING: It is in book 3-B, your Honor, on page 7.
"The Chief Reich Prosecutor at the People's Court.
"Indictment" I will not read all of this, but I will attempt to make it clear to the Interpreters where I am reading.
"I hereby accuse the Polish laborers "I) Johann Gegler, born on 19 November 1921 in Rajza, district of Soybusch, last residence DAF (German Labor Front) collecting camp in Sagan, single, "No prior convictions.
"2)Josef Gegler, born in 17 February 1923 in Rajza, district of Seybusch, last residence DAF (German Labor Front) Collecting camp in Sagan, single, "No prior convictions.
Both temporarily arrested on 6 October 1942 in custody in the court prison of Liegnitz by virtue of the warrant of arrest of the Amtsgericht (lowe r court) of Liegnitz - 7. Gs. 360/42 of the same date, both as yet without defense counsel, of having jointly practiced in Sagan and neighborhood (1) during 1942 acts to further the enemy power's aim during the war against the Reich or to injure the war potential of the Reich. (2) As poles to have injured by their attitude the welfare of the German Reich and of the German nation.
"Crimes against paragraphs 91 b, 47 Penal Code and Part I paragraph 3, part II and part III of the Ordinance on the Administration of Penal Law Against Poles and Jews in the the Incorporated Eastern Territories of 4 December 1941.
"In the autumn of 1942 the accused jointly drew two plans of the environs of the prisoner of war camp of the Luftwaffe no. 3 of Sagan- Carlswalde for an English prisoner of war, in order to enable the prisoner to escape."
Now, turning to the next page, page 9, which is page 10 and 11 of the formant ext.
"As to the moral side of the fact ho admits indeed ..."
I will begin on the bottom of page 8 of the English text under Roman number II. I believe that is on the bottom of page 9 of the German text.
"The Appreciation of the Facts.
"The accused Johann Gegler admits the facts described in part 1 of the indictment.
"As to the Moral side of the facts he admits indeed, that he was a ware of he was aiding by his acts the escape of a prisoner of war. He declares, however, that at the time of carrying out this act he was not conscious of aiding the enemy and damaging the Reich by helping this English prisoner of war to escape.
"This statement of the accused Johann Gegler is not worthy of belief, considering his Polish extraction and with regard to the fact that he assisted in the escape of on English prisoner of war of Polish origin.
"The accused Josef Gegler denies having participated in the drawing of the two plans of the camp.
"The statement of Jesef Gegler and the depositions made by Johann Gegler in his assistance are however not worthy of belief. For Josef Gegler was not only daily in the DAF camp in Sagan with his brother, but he also shared with him the reward which his brother received from the prisoner of war for the maps.
"The accused are therefore guilty in the sense of the wording of the indictment."
And, that is signed by Lautz.
We turn new to the opinion cf tie Court. We only want to extract portions of that. We turn, in the English text, to page 12, which in the German text is on pages 13 and 14, and the portion I wish to read is approximately in the middle of page 12.
"The fact that the defendant's crime could have brought about serious consequences cannot be dismissed, because it was of a kind that would facilitate Pawluk's escape. Paragraph 2 of Article 91 b Penal Code therefore does not apply. As the accused resided in the former Polish State on 1 December 1939 as a Pole, he is subject to the Polish Penal Code Ordinance of 4 December 1941 (number XIV and XV of this ordinance). According to number III of the ordinance, only the death sentence contained in Article 91 b, paragraph I Penal Code, is to be recognized. The confiscation of the objects described in the judgment formula, which the defendant received as renumeration, is based on Article 93 a, paragraph 2 of Penal Code."
That is all of the opinion that we are going to read. We call attention to the fact that on page 13 of the text, page 15 of the German text appears a letter signed by Dr. Rethenberger, which is a denial of the clemency appeal by Johann Gegler.
We call attention to the statement on page 25 of the English text, also 25 in the German text, indicating that Johann Gegler was executed. The last full paragraph on that page reads as follows:
"The death sentence passed by the 34d Senate of the People's Court on 21 April 1943 on the Polish worker, Johann Gegler from Rajza was carried out on 6 August 1943 in the proper manner.
The execution was carried out without any incident; from the time when the condemned was brought in until the moment the executioner reported the sentence executed it lasted 15 seconds."
We now formally offer in evidence, as Exhibit 135, Document NG 354.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be received in evidence.
MR. KING: As Exhibit 136 the Prosecution desires to introduce Document NG 595, which is found on page 29 in the English text and page 37 in the German text. The indictment appears beginning on page 30 in the English text and 33 in the German text. We call attention only to the fact that the indictment is signed by Lautz on page 32 in the English and 36 in the German. We wish to road a portion of the opinion of the Court which begins on page 33 in the English text and page 37 in the German text. We will begin reading on page 34 in the English text. The paragraph in the middle of the page.
"The defendant admits the facts with the one proviso that his sole motive had been to look for a job in Switzerland and that he wanted to get in touch with some Polish people known to him and living in Switzerland, whose addresses he had got in his home town as being able to get kin work.
"This defence cannot be given credit. The defendant held a job in German and got, as a Pole, such fair wages, that he was able to save 100 RM within a comparatively short period. He therefore did not have adequate reasons for leaving his post in Germany, only for the one reason of looking for a job. This, in addition, by way of illegally crossing the Swiss frontier, which is extraordinarily dangerous in wartime. How little, after all, he really did care for earned work, is shown clearly by the fact that he repeatedly and without authorization left his place of work.
It therefore must have been for other reasons that the defendant considered the idea of going to Switzerland. Based upon the experience collected by the first division in similar cases, the way which was chosen by the defendant, in order to reach the Swiss Frontier, was taken by many other Poles escaping from their employment in Germany in order to enlist in the Polish Logion in Switzerland. On account of the hostile propaganda from abroad, carried on everywhere amongst the Poles, it was generally known to the latter that in Switzerland, through the agency of the Polish Consul or of the Polish Puppet Government, or of the British Consul, there existed an opportunity to enter the Polish logion, whose aim, as the court knows, is to bring about the resotration of an independant Polish State including forced separation of the Incorporated Eastern district from the Greater German Reich, by rendering military service on the enemy side. According to the view taken by the first Division of the court, the defendant became informed about these circumstances while on leave in his home town.
Especially, all the more so, as he expressly admits to having acquired the idea of escaping into Switzerland from there. Furthermore it should be added that the defendant is a young and sturdy Pole, who was absolutely fit for military service in the Polish Region. Besides this, his general anti-German attitude which is shown by his breaches of contracts is comparable with his enlistment in the Polish Legion, hostile to Germany. Finally he makes the same statement for his defence as is always made by other Poles trying to join the Legion, who are arrested in the neighborhood of the Swiss frontier. Apparently this was recommended as pretend by the Polish propaganda from the very beginning in cases where the escape should fail. Taking into consideration all these circumstances the escape of the defendant to Switzerland leads to the only possible conclusion that he wanted to join up with the Polish Legion, to be sure to fight as a member of the latter a gainst the Armed Forces of the German Reich and to help to bring about the success of the treasonable purposes of the Legion, which in spite of his denial and according to the view of the first division of the court, were known to him. He therefore may be considered as convicted on charges of attempt at high treason according to art. 80, para. 1, art. 83, para. 2 and 3 of the Penal Code and of uncertaking to aid the enemy from inside our country according to the provisions of art. 91 b of the Penal Code.
At the same time he was made himself guilty of a crime according to article I para. 3, last half sentence, Because, being a Pole, he has intentionally inflicted damage to the interests of the German people by malevolently leaving his important agricultural job, above all during harvest time, in 1942, and through meaning to rob forever the German people of his own labor by escaping abroad.
In view of the lack of farm workers, each single farm hand is decisive for maintaining the food supply of the German people and, in consequence, for its victorious pulling through in the fight for freedom. Every deduction of manpower whatever is detrimental to the German interests in a total war. This was absolultely clear to the defendant who admits it as well.
According to art. 73 Penal Code the penalty can be drawn from the penal decree concerning Poles which loc. cit. demands exclusively the death penalty as a rule, this being raken from the most severe penal law appliable here."
MR. KING: That is all of the opinion of the report proper that we wish to read. We do call attention to the fact that on page 37 of the English text there appears a letter signed by Barnickel for further information concerning the defendant and on page 39 there appears an affidavit signed by the defendant which was taken in response -- apparently in response to Dr. Barnickel's request. We would like to read a portion of that affidavit. That is to be found on page 41 of the German text. I would like to begin reading in the English text five lines down in the first full paragraph beginning: "I am a Pole by birth." This affidavit was taken on 19 December 1942:
"I am a Pole by birth. Neither had I a military training, nor was I ever drafted into the Army. During the Polish-German campaign I was at home and on 23 November 1939 I volunteered for a workers' transport to Germany. I came to the farmer Grunwald in Metschlau. Since I was ill-treated by him, I left him after 10 weeks without authorization and went back home. Riding back in the train I was arrested by the police in Glogau and handed ever to the labor -office there, which assign ed me to the farmer Schalau in Buchenhang.
There I worked more than a year, but was also badly treated, especially by the farmer's wife and therefore wanted to go back home. Once more on riding back in the train - during the middle of October 1941 - I was arrested by the police in Kostau (district Kreuzburg) and was imprisoned there for 3 months. Then I was taken back the farmer Schalau where I worked again until 6 September of that year. As I did not want to stay there because of tho ill-treatment and since the Pole Ladislaw Betnasch, also employed at the farmer Schalau, told me, that work would be better in Switzerland. I decided to escape to Switzerland and to work there, where conditions would be better for me. On 6 September 1942 I rode to Munich, where I was arrested at the station on 8 September. I was than taken into the camp Mosach, in Munich I were a HJ (Mr. King: Which is Hitler Youth insignia.) insignia, which I had found in the street near Buchenhang some time ago already, in order not to make myself conspicious as a Pole. On 10 September 1942 I escaped from outdoor work in Mosach together with 2 Poles, whose names are not known to me, who also wanted to work in Switzerland. But we lost each other in Lindau and I never saw them again.
MR. KING: That's all that document which we wish to road although we do call attention to the fact there are several letters of request for further information growing cut of this affidavit, each of which request is signed by the defendant Barnickel. The prosecution now offers as Exhibit 136 the Document NG-595.
MR. GRUBE: Mr. Grube for the Defendant Lautz; the prosecution has just said Bradek had made an affidavit. I consider that statement of such importance that I believe that at this moment I will have to make a corr action here. In German criminal proceedings there is no affidavit made by the defendant.
We are simply concerned with an interrogation by the German official but not concerned with an affidavit. The document itself does not indicate that an affidavit has been desposited. As I said, I consider it necessary to point out the state of affairs, now, because important conclusions could be drawn if one took the view that Bradek's affidavit on that date was in fact an affidavit.
MR. KING: The Prosecution has no objection to substituting for the form of affidavit which I used in the term of a signed statement. So far a the facts in the opinion it would be the same, perhaps, of an affidavit in view of the German practice is a misnomer in such a case, and we will be glad to substitute such a statement.
THE PRESIDENT: No. 36 will be entered and used in evidence. So the will be no mistake, if I referred to it as Exhibit No. 36, I meant to say of course, Exhibit No. 136.
MR. KING: The Prosecution will start by introducing at this time the Document No. NG-596, which will become Exhibit No. 137 when formally offe**
THE PRESIDENT: Before you proceed further.
MR. KING: Yes, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it would be desirable to have them be given a page number so we can all have a uniformed record from the Bench.
MR. KING: Yes. That appears in the index. I might say for the purpose of the record this document has been circulated separately since it was not ready when Book 3B was distributed. It has now been circulated, a* copies for the convenience of the court have been distributed just a few moments ago.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
MR. KING: The document appears in the index as being at page 50 in the English Text, and page 49 in the German Text. The first page, therefor would be page 50, and since it is a 64 page document, I think we have no alternative to run through the alphabet twice, giving it fifty letters, I mean, pages of fifty letters give us the next document 613, given in the English Text on page 51, then the first page will be fifty. I have marked these previously, the first page will be 50 in the English, the second pa* will be 50-A -
THE PRESIDENT: Wouldn't it be better as 50-1, then you can make a many numbers as you would like?
MR. KING: Perhaps that is a good idea. We will make the first page then 50-1, the second page 50-2, and so on, until the last page is marked 50-64.
We call attention first to the indictment which begins on page 34 the copy as circulated. We do not wish to read any portion of the indictment. We do, however, call attention to the fact that Lauts who signed th* affidavit -- or the indictment, I am sorry, his signature appears on page We also call attention to the fact that there is a circulation lis which actually is the first page on copy circulated, which is signed and initialed by a number of officials in the Reich Ministry of Justice, incl* ing the defendant Barnickel, whose initials appear on the original.
On page 2 the opinion of the Court begins, and we note it at the bottom of page 2 that with the defendant Engert was the vice president of the court hear in the case.
Continuing in the opinion on page 3 under the heading "reasons", * read that paragraph: "No fact of importance to the question of guilt and not guilty were forthcoming at the trial in connection with the accused themselves, who, according to their national descent, all are Poles. In lation to the case the following was established on the basis of admission of the accused, and of the evidence supplied by the witnesses Senior Secretary for criminal affairs of Braun and Bninski."
In Roman I, continuing: "The Organization and aims of the 'Stronni* Narodowe." The accused were all active in connection with an organization called "Stronnictwo Narodowe.' The 'Stronnictwo Narodowe' (abbreviated SN "in German 'Nationalistic Party', was a parliamentary party in the formed Poland, which aimed at an authoritarian form of government and a Greatpoland on a national basis. They consequently attacked the former democra government in Poland, which had been under the influence of Jews, Freema* and Marxists. Organisationally the SN was divided into three groups corr ponding to the western, central and eastern parts of Poland, There was operations staff at the head of each area: the central Headquarters of the SN, was situated in Warsaw. The accused Wolniewicz *was a member of the operations staff for the western territory as from 1937, to begin with as representative of young students, later as Head of the propaganda depart We turn now to the pages in the Opinion, page 16 in the English, and I am sorry I do not have the German page number.
It is the first full pararaph on page 16 of the English: "In their statements concerning the aims of the organization of which they were members, all defendants lied. They assert that the SN aspired to seize the power only at a date when there would again exist an independent Poland, namely, when the Germans would either, after having been defeated by the Western powers, have evacuated former Polish territory, or, after their victory, would have re-establish an independent Polish state, although within more restricted limits. The state that on the contrary, it had not been the aim of the SN to use force against the Germans at a given time in order to expel them from the count and to re-establish the old Poland. The defendant Piotrowski has adduced this connection that such violent measures would have been foolish in vieof Polands situation, as her future only depended on the result of the was and could not be influenced in any form by the Polish population."
Skipping the next paragraph, beginning the English with the last pa** graph on the page, at page 16: "It was apparent that the SD desired to wa for a favorable moment when Germany would be weakened by expected defeats France and England. For this moment, however, the use of force was planned as is clearly shown by the fact that arms had already been partly stored the organization, and detailed plans of all important buildings, especially of those occupied by the Germans, had been drawn up on order of the organzation's leader. The latter measure could only have had the purpose of pr paring for the occupation of these buildings by force. Against the earnest intention of the SN to start a revolt among the Polish population for the elimination of the German reign at a suitable date, no arguments founded reason can be adduced to the effect that such an endeavor would be condem to failure in advance, in view of the strength of the German Reich, and the fact that a hope for a defeat of the Reich was delusive in view of the fa able war situation."
The Poles have frequently shown an astonishing want of sense of reality i* the course of their history. When their national passions were released, these and not reason have always guided their action. Thus, at the end o* the 18th century, they repeatedly started revolts against Prussianand Rus* although the final failure was certain from the beginning. The Poles, then fore, do not possess any sense for practical politics, so that such considerations are not a proof against the plans of force of the SN. The his tory of the Polish revolts, however, is an essential proof for the fact that in the situation in which the Poles found themselves after their defeat, the SN, too, aspired, in accordance with the historical patterns to turn the destiny of the Polish people by means of armed revolt.
That this was the aim of the SN can be clearly seen from the contents of the pamphlets which were regularly issued at short intervals. T* speak openly and bluntly of the planned use of arms, saying "that the cha* of HITLER'S occupation would be burst" and "the moment for vengeance had be waited for, in order to knock down the oppressor and turn him out and drive him behind the Oder for ever."
The resounding plan of a Greater Poland is clearly expressed by the following sentence: "The historical justice toward Poland which has waite for its realization since Boleslav CHROBRY, will be accomplished. He has planted the boundary-posts of Poland in the Oder, the Oder has been our Polish river and the Oder will also be a Polish river in the future. To Poland will return the old Silesian land, Breslau and Ratibor, Stettin wi* return, the Pomeranian princely castle." The following passage speaks ope of the use of arms: "We must be prepared for an armed conflict, if that necessity presents itself. The collection for the purpose of the national fight which we have announced shall serve this end." The quoted passages the writings of the SN will be enough to show that the efforts of the SD were not only aimed at a violent expulsion of the Germans from the Polish territories, but beyond this, at an establishment of a Greater Poland, ann ing large German regions, including Breslau and Stettin."
"All defendants therefore, have been guilty of the crime of planning of high treason. As they directed or were leading members of an organization which aimed at forcibly seizing the Eastern territories annexed to the Rep and beyond that even old German regions, they planned high treason to the disadvantage of the Gorman Reich in the sense of the paragraph 80, sub-pa 1 of the Penal Law (paragraph 83, sub-par. 2 of Penal Law)."
May we turn to Page 19 in the English text, approximately in the middle of the page, with the sentence beginning: "For reasons of national self-preservation." Page 21 of the German:
"For reasons of national self-preservation it is necessary, there to proceed with the most severe measures at our disposal against the defe* ants, as leading heads of this organization which aims at the annihilation Germanism in the East, in the present struggle which the German people is leading for its life. No differentiation can be made whether they have been active as leaders of the entire organization or as its advisers, as leader of sections or districts, or as couriers. All functions were equally important for the success of the plans and therefore equally dangerous for the German people. In an organization which was not still in the stage of develing but which was already organized to the last detail, even a somewhat subordinated function was of great importance for the achievement of the organization's goal. For reasons of the atonement, as well as in order to discourage any desire of like-minded elements in the future to revolt aga the German Reich, therefore, the death-sentence of all defendants is the only adequate and just punishment. This punishment, therefore, has been m out to all defendants by the senate.
At the same time according to paragraph 32 of Penal Law all defendant had to be deprived for life of honorary civil functions on account of their anti-German activities. All the defendants, however, are racial Poles. However, the constitutional position of the Polish population in the Eastern territories is not clear, as yet. As it is possible that it will be in a similar constitutional position as the German population, as a precaution civil rights had to be denied."
The Opinion is signed by the defendant Engert.
We now turn to Page 22 of the text as distributed, which is a Petition for a new trial or a new hearing, which was made on the basis of the newly discovered evidence. We wish to read a portion of that Denial, which appears on Page 22, beginning in the middle of the page under Roman "To the President of the 2nd Senate of the People's Court:
According to Item 10, Paragraph 1 of the Penal Ordinance for Poles, dated 4 December 1941, and since the coming into force of this Ordinance, protectorate subjects of Polish blood can no longer file requests for a n trial of their case. This rule should doubtlessly apply to those cases wh have been prosecuted before the People's Court since it cannot be assumed that the Penal Ordinance for Poles does not purport in anyway to place th Poles sentenced by the People's Court in a more favorable position.
"Since, in my opinion, there is no reason whatsoever to" -- the ne word is not clear in my copy. We will just have to leave that blank.--"Si in my opinion, there is no reason whatsoever to (blank) a judicial decisi in the present case, I propose to inform the condemned Pietrowski to the effect that he cannot avail himself of any right to file requests for a n trial, and that I, for my part, have found no motive to file a request for new trial of the case in his favor. I shall, moreover, examine whether the document is to be treated as a pardon plea."
That is dated Berlin, February 14, 1942.
We call attention to eight letters beginning on Page 25 of the Engl text, all of which are similar in content and consist of denial of clemency pleas for the defendants. There is a letter for each of the condemned defe ants; each letter being signed by the defendant Schlegelberger and dated 6 March 1942. This is an extremely lengthy document, and in excerpting as w** have, we have had in mind to call the essential facts to the attention of Court without prejudicing the facts as they exist. With that in mind, we offer the Document NG-596 as Prosecution Exhibit 137.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received in evidence, and we will take the afternoon recess at this time of 15 minutes.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: An important announcement will be made at this time. On next Saturday, March 29, at ten o'clock a.m. there will be a Saturday session of this court, of this Tribunal, which will be held in Room 600, that being the room that is usually occupied by Tribunal No. 1. At that time the evidence introduced will be a film on display lasting about an hour and a half, representing the People's Court.
I shall further announce at this time that beginning next Monday morning this Tribunal will meet in Room 501, that being the room at present occupied by Tribunal No. 2. These meetings in that room beginning next Monday will last a short time to permit certain re-arrangements to be made of the desks in this room.
MR. KING: The next and final document which we desire at this time to introduce is Document NG-613, which is to be found on Page 51 of the English Book 3-B and 148 in the German text. When I say "final" document I refer to the final document in this book. We shall emit reading from the indictment, which begins on Page 51.
THE PRESIDENT: There seems to be a little confusion as to whether or not Exhibit 137 was introduced.
MR. KING: Exhibit 137; yes. Exhibit 137 was the last large document, voluminous document, NG-596.
To repeat, we shall omit reading from the indictment of this particular case which begins on Page 51, and also includes the following page. We shall read from the opinion of this case, beginning on Page 56 in the English text which is, I believe, Page 140 and 141 in the German text. Beginnin on Page 56 under II:
"After the breakup of the Polish State the defendant frequently visited his relatives who were living in the Eastern territories. When in the autumn of 1940 he visited his brother-in-law, the cattle-dealer Kasimir Kubiak, who lived in Powitz, the latter got him to read a "prophecy" which was written by hand in the Polish language. The contents of the latter include the following passage:
"Nastro Damos who was born in Paris in 1603, was asked by Catherine de Medici whether France would ever lose her independence. He answered: I see three persons of lowly birth who will take the throne. The first is Mussolini, who will rule beside the Pope and the king. The second is Stalin, who bids his people free themselves from God and convert their hands into fists, and who also closes his boundaries in the sight of others. The third in Germany is Hitler, who at the end of 1939 will send his army to the mouth of the Vistula. It will be a short and bloody battle. He willinvade our empire by way of Flanders. A long time before France will erect a wall of steel in which the soldiers will live, who protect the frontiers. Paris will cease to exist. The towns of Europe will be devastated and the villages will die out; there will come grief upon grief. So many aircraft will cross the sea that the sun will be darkened. That will be 430 years after my birth."
"Then the writing further prophesied that the white eagle would rise again, but that the black eagle would be overthrown and a new *** powerful Polish Empire would arise which would be twice as big as the old one and extend from sea to sea.
"The defendant made a copy of this "Prophecy", and on his subsequent return to Stettin - finally in the summer of 1942 - read it out at least four separate occasions to several Polish civilian workers, who were billeted there in special camps in Heiliger Geist-Str., Grosse Oderstrasse and Frauenstrasse. He asked the workers whom he visited in the camps not to betray him. Then he says he destroyed the document.
"The defendant also frequently visited the Polish workers in these camps other than on these occasions, or he spoke to them in the street and sent them cigarettes and victuals (bread, butter, eggs, jam, tangerinos, strawberries, etc.), and in spite of the existing prohibition, several times in 1942 he took a Polish worker to a German service in a Catholic Church, making him fever up with his cap the "P" on the right side of his breast, which showed th t he was a Pele.
"The defendant also exhorted other Poles to fervent prayer on his visits."
We do not wish to read further in this opinion except to point out that for this reading in a subsequent trial the defendant was sentenced to death. We introduce as Exhibit 139 the Document NG-613.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be received.
MR. KING: The Court will observe that in Book B from which we have just read there is one additional affidavit, NG-675. We do not at this time wish to introduce that in evidence. We may later, but if so we will give the Court and the defendants' counsel ample opportunity to bring the book with them prior to the introduction.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean by that is the only document in that book not yet introduced, but you might introduce it.
MR. KING: That is right.
The next four cases which we wish to present should be read in connection with the law which appears on Page 13 of Document Book 2. It is Exhibit 112. That refers to Article 2 and 2a of the Penal Code. Since this has already been introduced in evidence, I wish only to read the applicable article to which the cases from which I am about to read apply.
THE PRESIDENT: We are not sure about the page in the book.
MR. KING: Page 13. I will read only Article 2.
"Whoever commits an act which the law declares as punishable or which deserves punishment according to the fundamental idea or a penal law and the sound concept of the people, shall be punished. If no specific penal law can be directly applied to this act, then it shall be punished according to the law whose underlying principle can be most readily applied to the act."
It will be noticed that I read the "or" in the first sentence as "and". That is pursuant to a typographical error which defense counsel pointed out to us last week.
Pursuant to the section of the law from which I have just read a part, desire to introduce, at this time, as Exhibit 139, the Document NG-385 which to be found in the index of Book 3c in the English Text, at Page 87 andin the German text at Page 78.
This document was distributed separately and for the convenience of the Court several copies have been handed up to the bench so you will be able to follow as I read.
So far as pagination in the English text is concerned, we will start first with Page 87-1, the last page being 87-26. I think that will fit into the system of numbering adequately We turn to the sentence of the Court which, incidentally, is the Special Court for Nurnberg, which was handed down on 9 July 1942.
The portions which we wish to read begin on Page 16, from the opinion under "Reasons I."
"The defendant was brought up by his parents in Burnberg. After attended primary school for four years and secondary school for six years, he worked for two years as an apprentice with the Siemens Schuckert works in Nurnberg, with the intentions of becoming an engineer.
His father was employed as an engineer with the Siemens Schuckert works. Later on, the defendant gave up his intention. From 1921 onwards, he worked as a coiler, first with the say plant. In the years that followed, he found employment with other plants i his acquired profession.
"With regard to politics the defendant was a member of the Communist Party from the fall of 1932 until its dissolution. He was also political head of the urban district, Nurnberg-South for six months. Even after the dissolution of the Communist Party, the defendant continued to pursue the aims of the Communist Party, i.e. the establishment of an Advisory Council Dictatorship of the Proletariat in Germany. Towards the end of the year 193 he had discussions with a Communist leader about the situation of the Commun Party in Nurnberg, Grasser participated in the reconstruction of the CommuniParty in Nurnberg in a liaison capacity, distributing Communist pamphlets and placing his apartment at disposal for meetings. Because of these illegal activities for the Communist Party, which continued till January 1934, the defendant was arrested on 8 February 1934, and by sentence of the Bavarian Supreme Court, which is the Court of Appeal, Munich, dated 9 June 1934, was convicted to two years imprisonment for the crime of preparation for high treason.
"The defendant served the term of imprisonment until 9 June 1936. After that he was detained in the Dachau Concentration Camp until 21 April 1939.
"On 19th May 1939, the defendant was re-employed with the Siemens Schuckert works and was assigned to his old job ms a coiler. For this occupation he drew the usual pay.
"On the occasion of the bombing of the town of Schwabach by English planes, several fellow-workers of the defendant, were discussing that night attack on 13 October 1941. In the course of that discussion, while the attack on defenseless civilians was being strongly repudiated, the defendant remarked that, for the English, residential quarters were military targets as well, because, as a result of the attacks on the civilian population, people would be losing their lives, be missing from their jobs and therefore lost for production.