In other cases, feeble-minded persons took the means to have the trial postponed by going to Party Offices and getting certificates that they were eager members of the Party and that the Party did not know anything about their feeble--mindedness. In spite of that, these trials were conducted and they ended in sterilization. The files I had were about three brothers and sisters, Kriselius.
Q. Witness, a witness, Rudolf Klees from Diez, was examined before this Court, against whom before the Heriditary Health Court in Limburg, and in the second instance, before the Chief Hereditary Health Court in Frankfurt on the Main, a sterilization trial was pending. Do you know about that case, and do you know about the file?
A. The case I know. The files, I have here. I also have with me all papers which refer to the achievements in school which Rudolf Klees had. They are dated from a time long before 1933.
Q. Can you describe, briefly, to the court the opinion of these agencies?
A. I would like to refer to the efficiency report from the school which was made about Klees on 4 July 1933. The copy was made on 4 July 1933, however, it dates from the year 1928. This shows that in the main subjects that were taught at the school, German, mathematics, history and geography, he was considered absolutely deficient. He was dismissed from lower class. Only because there was lack of space and so that he would not have to be together with the little children, he was promoted to the next class.
Q. In the Court files, is there a so-called I.G. Questionairre?
A. This prescribed L.Q. Questionairre in the file is in its original form. It is not in accordance with what would be described as a good intelligent examination , but nevertheless, in my opinion, it shows without doubt that he was at least on the borderline of what is called weak-mindedness and what could be described as physiological stupidity.
In consideration of his other social behavior, too, I would reach the conclusion that Klees is debilitated. My own experience with Klees confirms that after he was examined as a witness.
Q. Perhaps you know a few but very characteristic questions from the questionairre which you can tell to the court so they can see what type of questions were asked. Do not tell us all of the numerous questions, but tell us just a few.
A. I do not believe that would be very instructive. I said already that this questionairre was prepared for mass use and for very delicate decisions, it was not suitable. Nevertheless, it says a great deal if someone says Christmas is celebrated in September and if given three words like, hare, hunter and field , he cannot form a simple sentence.
Q. In the files, you also have the decision of the Chief of the Hereditary Health Court in Frankfurt?
A. Yes.
Q. Please make some remarks about this Chief Hereditary Health Court.
A. Since I did not make a personal examination of the persons concerned, I cannot give a personal opinion very well. I know Klees only from a short discussion with him, and from the statements of third persons. I, myself, did not examine him. I do not want to reject entirely what is said in the opinion of the Court. May I read it?
Q. Yes. Go ahead.
A. "From investigations and from the personal examination of the interrogation of Rudolf Klees before the Chief Hereditary Court, the results certainly excluded any doubts that Rudolf Klees is suffering from hereditary feeble-mindedness. He has apparently considerable skill in the contact with other people, which deceives in regard to his mental defects. He has acquired the knowledge necessary for his profession. However, he fails immediately when he is asked questions which go beyond the most primitive facts of daily life and which require any higher combinations.
It is in accordance with those facts, that he was a bad student in school, too. On the other hand, it does not speak against his feeble-mindedness that in his profession, he is an efficient and valuable worker."
Q. Does your personal impression of Klees and what you know about him through his files, agree on the whole with the judgment of the Hereditary Health Court?
A.- The impression on the whole is too short. Nevertheless, I do not see any very considerable deviations in my opinion from those of the Chief Hereditary Health Court.
Q.- Witness, the witness Klees, here in Court, stated that during the trial before the Hereditary Health Court in Frankfurt the decision of the Court was not told to him, that he was told he would receive written information, and that this information came to him ten days later.
Witness, please look at the files, especially the yellow sheet which contains the decision of the Chief Hereditary Health Court.
A.- The Chief Hereditary Health Court?
Q.- Yes, the one in Frankfurt. Not tho white sheet, the yellow one.
A.- The files are not complete; someone else had them in their hands Yes.
Q.- Witness, please look at the back of this opinion -- the remark which is there.
A.- Yes.
Q.- Please read it aloud.
A.- "One copy given to Rudolf Klees on 10 September 1934."
Q.- Please find out, on the first page, when the trial before the Chief Hereditary Health Court took place.
A.- On 10 September 1934; the dates agree.
Q.- Therefore it is apparent, from the document, that on the very day when the trial before the Chief Hereditary Health Court took place, Klees received a copy of the decision together with the opinion. Is that correct?
A.- Yes.
Q.- As a psychiatrist, on the basis of your knowledge of the files and of your personal impression, do you think the possibility exists that, in the memory of the witness Klees, desires, or imaginations caused by desires, caused him to have a wrong idea in his memory?
A.- I believe that this characteristic of Klees to realize his wish Court No. III, Case III dreams plays a considerable role.
Q.- Witness, did you ever have a case in your medical practice in which the intelligence question before the Hereditary Health Court limited itself to the question of the birth date of Hitler, Goering, and Goebbels?
A.- The question as to Hitler's birth date was, so to speak, the last recourse when we wanted to press something out of a person, because, thanks to Nazi propaganda, it was a date which actually was generally known. On the other hand, I never heard that in examinations before Hereditary Health Courts persons were asked about the other birth dates.
Dr. KUBUSHOK: Thank you; I have concluded.
THE PRESIDENT: Do any of the other defense counsel desire to make him their witness?
(No response.)
You may cross-examine.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY Mr. LaFOLLETTE:
Q.- Doctor, were you in Germany throughout the war?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Were you at your hospital during all this time?
A.- No.
Q.- When did you leave your hospital?
A.- In 1942, after all inmates of our hospital, together with almost the entire personnel, except for four of us, had been deported to Poland -
Q.- I have slipped off the English; I am sorry, you will have to give me the answer again. Give me the English again, will you, please? Clear the English channel. Now I have it. I am sorry, will you give me your answer to that question again? The phone slipped off the English.
A.- In 1942, the institution was dissolved. All of the inmates ajad all of the employees, except for four, among whom I was, were deported to Poland. We never heard anything about these people again. I myself was employed as heater, and night-watchman in the institution. After many hearings before the Gestapo, my life was saved because the frequent attacks of the Allied Air Force did not give an opportunity to the Party officers -- who interested themselves in me in a negative way -- to carry out their intentions.
Q.- Yes. Do you know Herr Dannhauser, who is the present Landrat in Limburg?
A.- No.
Q.- You have your records there. Do they show who was the President of the first court at Limburg?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Landrat Dannhauser?
A.- I don't know whether he was 'Landrat, 'but there was a Mr. Dannhauser.
Q.- Dannhauser, yes.
A.- Yes.
Q.- Do you know whether -- today he is the Landrat in Limburg. Do you know that?
A.- I don't know the gentlemen in Limburg.
Q.- How far are you from Limburg?
A.- Only four kilometers, but the zonal border is between the two places.
Q.- Which zonal border is that?
A.- Between the French and American zones.
Q.- Is Limburg in the -- waht, French zone?
A.- It is in the American zone. Diez is in the French zone.
Q.- Do the records that you have of the proceedings at Limburg show any individual who instituted the proceedings? Is there a complaint in letters asking that proceedings be instituted?
A.- Yes. The trial was initiated by the fact that Klees asked for a driver's license. For that he had to get a certificate from the officiating physician, that is, the Kreis physician that his physical and mental abilities were not inadequate to have a driver's license given to him. During this examination as to his physical and mental suitability for driving a vehicle, the examining Kreis physician discovered the e examining Kreis physician discovered the feeble mindedness of Klees.
Q.- When was this, in 1934?
A.- In 1934, yes.
Q.- Yes. From your experience in Germany at that time, wore there very many anti-Nazis liable to be Kreis physicians at that time?
A.- In 1934 the great cleansing of the positions of Kreis physicians and other civil servant positions had not been carried out, if alone for the reason that the old officials could not yet be replaced.
Q.- Some of them had by that time, had they not?
A.- I cannot judge that. In my district, where I have experience, the old civil servants, still held their posts. And even if, in the meantime, they had adopted certain principles of National Socialism, many of them were very far from recognizing what the Party later revealed itself to be.
Q.- Now, as to the answers to what we call the IQ questionnaire, are they written by the person who is examined, or are they written by the examining officer.
A.- By the person who makes the examination.
Q.- Yes. They are not written by the subject?
4.- No. Many subjects are not in a position at all to fill out such a questionnaire in handwriting. If one wants to have something written by them in handwriting, one asks them to copy down a little story in handwriting.
Q.- Yes; the answers are written by the man who conducts the examination A.- Yes.
Q.- Did the first court at Limburg refuse sterilization pleas -did they not?
A.- I did not understand.
Q.- I say, the original health court at Limburg refused sterilization, is that not correct?
A.- Yes.
Q.- And how long after that was the trial held at Frankfurt?
A.- It can be seen from the date -- the trial before this court was in September 1934.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. LaFollette, it is necessary for us to recess at this time.
Mr. LaFOLLETTE: Yes, I understand.
THE PRESIDENT: A 15-minute recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
BY MR. LAFOLLETTE:
Q: Doctor, will you turn to the proceedings at Limburg.
A: I didn't understand.
Q: Will you turn in your file to the proceedings of Limburg, the first proceedings at Limburg. Do you have that in your file?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you find a place headed "Opinion?"
A: Opinion?
Q: Opinion, in Limburg.
A: Yes, opinion.
Q: As I read the English translation, it reads this way: Rudolf Klees belonged to the hackward pupils. However, as results from certificates he presented, he accomplished his job to satisfaction. He also was able to answer the questions concerning his field of activity, particularly as to the legal nature of bills of exchange and checks, though naturally in simple terms in the correct way. Therefore, no feeblemindedness, as stipulated by the law, can be ascertained in his case. Is that what your file shows?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, turning to the proceedings at Frankfurt.
A: Yes.
Q: Do you find that any such questions were asked of Klees at Frankfurt -- at least as far as the files show?
A: Of what nature these questions were put to him in Frankfurt cannot be seen from the files. As a rule that was not put into the files. The opinion of the Chief Hereditary Health Court usually was based upon a free conversation, with the person in question.
Q: Yes, so that if Klees says now that no questions of that character were asked him at Frankfurt, you will find nothing in the file to indicate he is not telling the truth, do you?
A: I didn't quite understand the question, in what way was he not supposed to have told the truth.
Q: I am just saying that Klees in this court testified that no questions were asked of him with reference to his knowledge of bills of exchange or other matters when he was at Frankfurt. There is nothing in the Frankfurt files to refute the correctness of his statement, is there?
A: No. The correctness of this statement by Klees is not refuted by the Frankfurt files. If I am supposed to speak about Klees, I can only do that on the basis on analyzing his person such as I experienced it.
Q: When did you sec Klees yourself?
A: I heard about Klees on the basis of an announcement that appeared in the newspapers that Klees as a main witness so to speak, on the question of the Hereditary Health had testified in Nurnberg. I did. not know him at that time. From various sides he was described to me as a phychopathic, very irritable, and easily influenced. I met him when one day he appeared at my Hereditary Health Office; he introduced himself with the words, very proudly, I am the man Klees; I was in Nurnberg. Now, after all somebody will have to deal with the question as to how identification can be made to me. Of course, literally I cannot give you all that. I told him, incidentally, that I knew him already from the articles that appeared in the newspapers, and he was very flattered; but, when I said, Mr. Klees, personally I haven't met you before, and I would first have to see what is put down in the files which we have about you, then he shouted in fury about the following: These files have to be burned; that is a nasty business; you, yourself, are a Nazil and the entire Hereditary Health Office has to be dismissed. It has to be stated in this connection that all those officials of the Hereditary Health Office who were there at that time have long since been dismissed; that quite new people arc there now, but that the investigation of the old officials before the Spruchkammer (Denazification Court) has shown in part that they have not been guilty.
Q: These were the officials at Limburg?
A: The officials in Limburg I do not know. I was only there for about eight weeks in Diez; I know a few people in Diez, and much less though from Limburg.
Q: Yes, but the first trial of Klees was at Limburg, wasn't it?
A: Yes.
Q: So that when you speak of people being cleared up by the denazificiation hearings, you are not talking about the people at Limburg, arc you?
A: At that time the Hereditary Health Office at Limburg and Diez were under one management; both counties were together, merged and worked together. There was no zonal border line which separates us today; and frequently transfers were made from one Hereditary Health Office to the other.
Q: Do you know a Doctor Lapp, who was -
A: Yes.
Q: Where is he now?
A: He is a medical practitioner in Limburg.
Q: Did he have any connection with this Klees case?
A: As far as I know, he filed the report; and. he was the one who, according to his duty, had rejected making out that certificate for the friver's license. But I cannot stale that with certainty because usually the chiefs of these offices signed and not the official who made the investigation.
Q: Yes. You don't know what became of tho Senate President, Dr. Fuehr, who presided at the Frankfurt case, do you? -- Since tho war?
A: Dr. Fuehr in the Frankfurt case, or the physician?
Q: Doctor of jurisprudence, I think it is -- President of the Senate. Did you know him?
A: I don't know Dr. Fuehr.
Q: So you don't know that ho has been removed -- from your own knowledge.
A: No.
Q: In the cases that you dealt with, from your hospital, there was no political issue present, was there? All of the unfortunate people in it were Jews and their political position was known; That is correct, isn't it?
A: Yes, I do not consider it possible; I don't believe that their arrest took place for political reasons if they went through the Hereditary Courts; the Gestapo would not have chosen that way; the Gestapo would have removed or restricted these people in a different fashion.
Q: That, of course, was the case of Jews in Germany; is that right?
A: I believe that that was the, case generally; also from my knowledge of other cases, people who resisted or offered disagreement did not even come as far as the courts, at least not during the last years.
Q: Did you observe the way these courts functioned, Doctor? Did they immediately decide cases or did they take some time to prepare their findings; or did they just act right off the spot the same day they had the hearing?
A: That depended upon the difficulty f the cases. In cases of difficult decisions, opinions were demanded from higher up; for instance in the difficult questions of genuine or other epilepsy; I know among the authors of a Professor Sagnilli (?) from Duesseldorf who says that about two hundred cases of epilepsy were submitted to him as higher export.
Of these, as far as I remember, he considered only fifty t o be genuine epileptics.
Q: I think nay be you misunderstood my question. Were the findings or the opinion written out in the presence of the person who was to be sterilized and the doctor or representative on the day of the hearing -- as you observed then?
A: As far as I know, at least in our cases, these opinions were sent to us because on account of the large number of patients from the same hospital institutions, it was technically quite impossible to write out the opinions immediately. We, of course, on our part found out in the course of the proceedings what the opinion night be; the judges bold us also what their point of view was, -- That it nay have been different in other places, of course, I couldn't know that because very infrequently I attended other cases.
Q: Does it strike you as peculiar, from your observations of what you saw, in the conduct of those courts, that the findings of Frankfurt would be written out and prepared in full on the sane day of the hearing?
A: That is not particularly peculiar, if the court had sufficient time on account of the short opinion that was required and the analogy with many other cases, I believe that the Court was well in a position to give that opinion immediately.
Q: I think you said you would call Klees' case, in connection with your study of the files and your conversation with him, a border line case; is that right?
A: Yes.
Q. I wonder if you would get out for me the part of the file that you discussed with Dr. Kubuschok that h s on it either written or stamped; handed to Rudolf Klees this 10th day of September 1934.
A. You want me to pick out the opinion which was handed to Rudolf Klees by the Hereditary Health Court on the 10th of September?
Q. Well, I want the one that contains the endorsement on the back; handed to Rudolf Klees on the 10th of September , 1934.
A. I will look for it.
Q. Now neither you nor I can tell from looking at that whether that writing was, in fact, written on there on the 10th day of September , can we?
A. I can only refer to the official certificate on the back of the files.
Q. That's right. Other than that you and I don't know whether it was written that day or any other day, do we?
A. There is nothing else but that written notice.
Q. Yes. I will ask you whether or not it is possible , in your opinion, for Klees today to be irritable and to be in the condition that you found him when he came to your office if since 1934 he has harbored the conviction that he was wrongfully sterilized.
A. I didn't quite understand the question. Could it be repeated to me, please?
A. Well, I will try again. You described your conversation with him and the remarks which he made when he visited you approximately a month ago; that's correct?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. I ask you now did the condition which you have described, in your opinion, as a psychiatrist, could that have resulted from his, Klees, having harbored the opinion since 1934 that he was sterilized without right and unjustly?
A. There are two sides to this question.
Q. I only asked one, but go ahead.
A. Well, if Klees is feeble-minded, then he is not only that, but he also is one of a type of people who are very sensitive and suffer more severely from interference with their condition than others. I believe certainly that his psychological condition was influenced by the fact that in his opinion unjustly he had been sterilized, but I have also the impression and that is the other side of the question, that he has calmed down in the course of years and only due to the peculiar conditions recently that has been brought up again and made more difficult to bear , through interference by other people.
Q. Yes. So other than what you find in the files which are answers written down by the people who conduct the hearings, who conducted the hearings in the case of Klees, and your conversation with him, you have no other facts upon which you based your opinion that he is a border-line case?
A. I also have the impression that the case of Klees was a border-line case from my personal conversation with him and from utterances he has made during the last time since he was questioned here. For instance, he went to a teacher repeatedly who only said that he had been a bad pupil and threatened him and that in a manner which one would not expect of a person if it is only based on affect. It was so clumsy that I should like to conclude therefrom to say it mildly that at least he is not a smart fellow.
Q. Would you conclude that he ought to be sterilized?
A. I have already said before that I do not know Klees sufficiently well and did not observe him enough, but that I would consider it valuable on account of the principle question involved that that should be done by capable specialists and experts.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I think that is all.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness is excused.
DR. SCHILF: Schilf for the defendant, Klemm.
May it please the Tribunal, I have a request for my client, Klemm. Though I know fully well that the Court did not want to create a case of precedence when it permitted the defendant, Dr. Schlegelberger, to remain absent for one day from the proceedings, I have the request that the defendant, Klemm, may be excused for tomorrow because I am still in the stage of preparation for his case, and the short evenings which are at our disposal are not sufficient for that work.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: The Prosecution has no objection, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has been informed that the difficulties with that procedure relate to the administrative problems of guards, and so forth. Surely the Tribunal itself has no possible objection -
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Nor does the Prosecution, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT : --- to that kind of procedure. We want you to have full opportunity to confer with your client in preparation for his defense. Subject to your making arrangements with the authorities who have jurisdiction of the prison, the Tribunal has no objection and is willing that you have this privilege, I am told , however, that there are rather serious difficulties involved which will become more serious if the practice is continued. I don't know what the outcome may be, but I state this merely to pass the information along to you.
DR. SCHILF: I thank you very much, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: He hope that if the shortage of guards is the difficulty that can be adjusted so as to more fully accommodate Defense Counsel. It is not an order but it is a hope.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: With the permission of the Tribunal, I shall now submit a few documents connected with the hearing of this witness. I should like to submit those documents which deal with sterilization. These documents are contained in my document book number 5.
THE PRESIDENT: How has counsel planned upon identifying his exhibits? Would you inform us about that? Will you, for instance, have a separate number of exhibits for each defendant so that the exhibit will be Schlegelberger Exhibit No. so-and-so, than -
DR. KUBUSCHOK: Yes, I believe that is the best method.
THE PRESIDENT: -- than to use a numerical series for each defendant.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: Yes, so that the documents Schlegelberger would be exhibit Schl. No. so-and-so.
I begin with Schlegelberger Document No. 96 from document Book V which after its admission by the Tribunal will be Schlegelberger Exhibit No. 1. It is a copy of the periodical Deutsche Justiz -German Justice. That is an article written by the then lecturer Dr. Adolf Schoenke, now a very well-known professor. In this article Schoenke presents a rather exhaustive study of the idea of sterilization and particularly writes about the application of sterilization abroad. The article is very extensive. Therefore, I entered it in my document book, only a few passages which are particularly interesting. I have not included the passage which concerns the application of sterilization in the United States. For that issue I have a different document.
I do not intend to read individual passages, but I just want to refer the Tribunal to this article. I ask that this document be accepted as Schlegelberger No. 1.
THE PRESIDENT: There being no objection, the exhibit is received.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I come to the second document in the same document book. The document has the number 97, and if accepted will have the exhibit number, Schlegelberger No. 2. The document is an affidavit by Anton Schaffner, who since 1937 was presiding judge of the District Court of Appeals, Nurnberg. I would like to read from about the middle of the first page and only a few sentences:
"The proceedings which were initiated by the requests of the petitioners entitled to do so by law, were always in every case completed properly. I always granted reinstatement to the former status in cases of repeatedly occurring disregard of the time limit for complaints on the part of those whose sterilization was ordered by the Hereditary Health Courts, since they could not grasp the importance of a fixed time-limit to the same extent as persons who are in full possession of their mental and physical powers."
I skip one sentence and continue:
"The decisions in most cases were only reached after renewed intensive collection of information or clinical observations and examinations and in doubtful cases the applications for sterilization were refused or the proceedings were suspended for several years. Political, religious or racial considerations played no role in any case."
Moreover, I refer to the balance of that affidavit.
I ask the Tribunal to accept this affidavit as Exhibit No. 2.
THE PRESIDENT: It is received.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I come now to the next document. That is an excerpt from the Reich Legal Gazette -- Reichsgesetzblatt -- of 25 July 1933, and it contains the laws of the 14th July 1933.
I will not refer in detail to the contents of this law. It is before the Tribunal. I believe if this law is carefully scrutinized the impression must be created that all safety measures for the application of this law and for carrying out these measures are contained therein. I ask to accept this law as Exhibit Schlegelberger No. 3.
THE PRESIDENT: No. 98.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: No. 98, yes.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I come now to the next document, which has the number 99, Schlegelberger, which I offer as Exhibit No. 4. That document is the official argumentation for the law just mentioned, of the 14th July 1933. It was published in the Reichsanzeiger of 1933, No. 172. I should like to read a short passage of the second page of this document. I am beginning with the second paragraph on that page:
"For decades already the German scientists concerned with hereditary health, as well as scientists of other countries, have raised warning voices, pointing out that the steady decline of our superior heritage must result in serious degeneration of all civilized peoples (Kulturvoelker). Therefore the demand is made nowadays by large sections of the German people that the biologically inferior part of our heritage be eliminated legally by decree for the prevention of progeny subject to hereditary diseases."
From the next paragraph I read from about the middle of the paragraph:
"The Health Council for the Land of Prussia (Preussische Landesgesundheitsrat) has already approved, in its session of 2 July 1932, after hearing over a hundred experts, a measure on sterilization to foster hereditary soundness."
I ask the Tribunal to accept this document as Exhibit No. 4.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: The next document, which has the number Schlegelberger 100, and will be offered as Exhibit No. 5, is the decree for the carrying out of the law just mentioned, of 14 July 1933. There again I refer to its contents without reading it in detail, and ask the Tribunal to judge whether or not the decrees and regulations for the carrying out of the law show a very careful handling of that law. That impression will be supported by the forms which are attached to that decree for the carrying out of the law in the Reich Legal Gazette. The forms show -- page 21 of the document book -- with what special care these examinations had to be carried out. These forms represented instructions to the office concerned to carry out these examinations as they were ordered to. In particular, we see here the so-called intelligence form. That is found on page 54 and following pages of the Document Book. It is a questionnaire -- that is, an intelligence test -- which we just discussed when hearing the witness, Dr. Rosenau. Therefore, for this I ask for the Tribunal's judgment as to how carefully these questions were worked out in order to convey a true and complete picture of the state of mind of the person in question. I ask the Tribunal to accept this Document 100 as Exhibit No. 5.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received in evidence.
DR. KUBUSCHOK: I come now to the next document, No. 101. I should like to state in this connection that this and further laws which I shall submit arc submitted first because the Prosecution did not submit the laws proper, only referred to the fact that they were also signed by the Defendant Schlegelberger. For that reason and because I have taken upon myself the task of dealing with the subject of sterilization also for the general Defense, I have included these laws in my document book.
I submit first, therefore, Document 101, as Exhibit No. Ordnance 6; that is the second ordinance for the execution of the law of the 14th July 1933. I ask that this document be accepted as Exhibit No. 6.