BY DR. GAWLIK:
Q. Was the defendant Dr. Bobermin appointed as Dest leader officially?
A. No.
Q. Was he an active leader of the Waffen SS?
A. No, he was a leader, an SS officer in the reserve.
Q. What effect did the agreement have which Bobermin concluded with the Eastern Construction in his position in the SS?
A. He did not have any influence at all.
DR. GAWLIK: That is all. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: How many more counsel are there who have not cross examined? This is the last one?
DR. FROESCHMANN (for the defendant Mummenthey): Yes, your Honor, I believe that I am the last counsel.
THE PRESIDENT: Last but not least.
BY DR. FORESCHMANN:
Q. Witness, Mummenthey was working also at the Dest. He was the co-manager in plants and affiliated branches where prisoners were employed. I would like to ask you with regard to the allocation of prisoner labor as far as that subject has not been discussed up to now. Can you tell me, Witness, why the increased number of prisoners was used in the years of the war from 1940 to 1944?
A. The increased number of prisoners which were used in the Dest works after 1940 was the result of the conversion of these plants for armament purposes, which made it necessary to employ an increased number of prisoners. It was the actual task of the Dest works in the field of the producing of stones; and as the war progressed, this task did not occupy such importance anymore.
Q. Did the lack of workers in Germany play a decisive part in this?
A. It did not play such an important part because the Dest works were to a very large extent operated by prisoners.
Q. Were the details of the allocation of prisoner labor negotiated and dealt with between the managers of the Dest plant and the concentration camp commanders?
A. The questions of allocation of labor were, of course, dealt with by the plant managers; and they were discussed with the camp commanders.
Q. Did the plant managers have any influence on the camp commanders with regard to the procurement of inmate labor?
A. They could request the commander; they could tell the camp commander of their requirements of inmate labor; and they had to comply with the decision which was reached by the camp commander.
Q. Then were the plant managers limited to the possibility of pointing out to the commanders shortages in the allocation of inmate labor?
A. Yes, they could, of course, point out to the camp commander that the number of prisoners who had been furnished were not sufficient and that therefore the plants could not operate smoothly.
Q. Did any difficulties arise between the plant managers and their commanders because of the attitudes which were reached between the camp commanders and the plant managers with regard to the allocation of labor?
A. Yes, this was always the case; but I cannot tell you any details about this from my own knowledge.
Q. Can you remember if Dr. Salpeter reported to you about such difficulties?
A. I cannot remember that exactly.
Q. Did Mummenthey report to you about this?
A. Mummenthey told me on various occasions about these incidents.
Q. Was nothing done by you on the basis of these reports, for example, the transfer of the concentration camp commanders?
A. I cannot say exactly whether these incidents played a part in the transfer of commanders carried out by me. However, it is possible.
Q. Did Mummenthey make any suggestions to you which concerned the allocation of inmate labor?
A. In particular with Mummenthey I used to discuss this question more frequently because he was interested in it and because he asked me such questions.
Q. Were your suggestions passed on to Amtsgruppa D?
A. I cannot recall that exactly anymore.
Q. Can you remember the memorandum of the witness Engler you later on are alleged to have passed on to Amtsgruppe D?
A. Yes, I can remember it. However, I do not know exactly if this memorandum was passed on to Amtsgruppe D. I don't know if I was the one who passed it on.
Q. Can you recall if any suggestions were made in order to improve conditions with regard to the work which was done in stone quarries?
A. Yes, this question was also discussed outside of the Dest on various occasions; and Himmler himself discussed it and the positive points. According to this, it was to be permitted that in the case of good achievements and a good working record prisoners were to receive special advantages in the factories. This was to go so far that a release of the prisoners should take place and that they should be employed in the plants afterwards. I can recall exactly several cases where such prisoners were actually released and the prisoners continued to work in these plants as free workers and employees. That also happened at the Dest. In the case of the Dest, I know that it even constructed buildings for this type of prisoner who had been released from confinement; and I have seen that myself at Oranienburg.
Q. Did Mummenthey also make suggestions to you which concerned the reimbursement for prisoners?
A. Yes, I also discussed that subject with him. Of all the plant managers Mummenthey was probably the one who was very active in this field in particular and with whom I discussed these questions the most. That is why I can remember these matters very well.
Q. May I conclude from your answer that Mummenthey apparently had a socially founded attitude with regard to the inmate prisoner question?
A. Yes, without any doubt he showed such an attitude at the time.
Q. Do you know in this connection that Mummenthey not only made suggestions to your agency for the release of prisoners but that he also requested that through another agency directly?
A. I cannot say exactly if he made requests to other agencies for the release of other prisoners.
Q. Now, witness, let's turn to another complex, and I want to ask you a few questions. Whom did you appoint toward the end of January 1939 as representative of the Dest while Ahrends was away on leave?
A. As far as I can remember Ahrends was succeeded by Salpeter.
Q. At the time did Mummenthey become auditor of the Dest and was he appointed as authorized clerk for the Dest?
A. I cannot say that exactly; but I assume that that happened at the time.
Q. Can you tell the Tribunal what special assignment Dr. Salpeter received from you?
A. Dr. Salpeter was to assist the Dest in its construction, which, as a result of its rather unfortunate selection of its site of work produced considerable difficulties. He was again to improve the conditions there; that is to say, he was to rectify the mistakes which had been made previously. These were the mistakes which had been made in the construction and development of the Dest and were based on the fact that the plant was located too far from the clay pit. It was felt of this that there were considerable difficulties and high financial demands which put the plant into a very difficult position during the first few years of its existence. Therefore, the senior business manager Ahrends was dismissed; and he was succeeded by Dr. Salpeter. Dr. Salpeter was to try to bring matters again up to standard.
Q. Who was to carry out the technical aspect of tais reorganization?
A. For this purpose I had appointed a certain Schondorf. He was a very well-known and efficient brick expert who until that time had directed the brick building school at Lippe. He then became the technical director of the Dest. And he was under my direct orders.
Q. For this purpose did Schondorf receive any authorities from you and did he have more authorities than the other directors?
A. Yes, since the removal of the difficulties was primarily in the technical field, I gave Schondorf special authority as the plant director.
Q. Was he directly responsible to you?
A. Yes, Schondorf had the right to see me directly on all matters and he only had to report to me and was responsible only to me.
Q. Was a reorganization of this plant carried out on the basis of written plans which had been worked out to the smallest details?
A. First of all we were concerned with the plant at Oranienburg. However, in the case of this plant, like all the others where detailed technical plans were carried out by Schondorf, Schondorf was the person who was responsible for the technical construction and for the inactivation of the plant at Oranienburg and all the other works; and he was solely responsible to me.
Q. In the course of your direct examination you have already stated that these plants were mechanized to a very high degree. I shall now ask you what was the purpose of this mechanization?
A. First of all, as I have already said, we wanted to show the German clay industry certain exemplary plants; and we also wanted to economize on labor.
Q. Salpeter was then drafted into the army. During this period of time did Mummenthey represent him in connection with a certain Opperbeck?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. When in the year 1943 Salpeter returned, was Salpeter still to the outside the business manager of the Dest although he took over another office?
A. Yes, he continued to bear this title for some time afterwards.
Q. At that period of time were Schondorf and Schwarz appointed as the co-business managers of the Dest?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. In the year 1941 it is alleged that the affiliated branches of the Dest are alleged to have been decentralized to a very large extent and to have attained a certain independence. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Was that the aim of this decentralization?
A. It tried to obtain an easier management of the plants which became more difficult if they were directed from Berlin. For this reason considerable authority was extended and transferred to the plant managers on the spot.
Q. Did you order the completion of armament industries in some places of the Dest?
A. In the case of the Bohemia I did this personally; and I can remember that exactly. However, I cannot think of any other plants at the moment. It merely was the Reich Ministry of Aviation which was interested in the large working halls of the Dest and which carried its leading firms there.
Q. Witness, was this group of business managers subordinated to Mummenthey, Schondorf, and Schwarz, the so-called office administration of Amt W-I?
A. Yes, that is correct. I negotiated these matters with the person who dealt with this special sphere. I called Schondorf to come and see me when I wanted to discuss technical matters. I called Mummenthey when business matters had to be discussed; and I called Schwarz whenever matters had to be discussed pertaining to the plants.
That is how the work was distributed among the three men. Each one of them was responsible for his field of work. He was alone responsible for it to me.
Q The order to call this group a collegium--did the expression that you have used yesterday, "primus inter pares", also belong to that?
A Yes. Not quite in that sense, however, because I must say here of Schondorf's position, as a result of the large number of technical questions concerned, his influence was much stronger and there were two first men.
Q Now, I come to some final questions. Witness, why was this divided into Amts ruppen and why were these groups provided with the title of a chief of an Amt?
A I have already repeatedly pointed out that the economic enterprises which are listed on the chart were reproduced by me exactly as well as the remaining organizational units which were subordinated to me. That was solely in order to be able to hook over these things more clearly. To make comparison, it is just like a closet with many shelves, where many shelves were the soldiers and way on the bottom the business men. Now, because these people happened to be located within the WVHA and because I might have been able to see the difference between many people who were around there, it was not so easy for them to keep things apart and to see the difference between the military set up plants, just like the commercial enterprises. I therefore did this in order to simplify the system; and that is why I chose this form. This would have been changed at the latest at the end of the war; and all these plants would have been placed under an independant; general administration. It would have had a general director at its top.
Q You just state the difference to us between the business men and soldiers. Was not Mummenthey both a soldier and a business man?
A While he received his salary from his firm, he was a retired soldier.
Q. As I understand it, the relationship could exist between General of the Waffen SS, and Mummenthey was a Sturmbannfuehrer. That is, were you in a position to give orders to him?
A. Well, the relationship existed in any case. As a soldier he was subordinated to me. However, he was also subordinated to me as business manager.
Q. That is what I wanted to find out. You could issue orders to Mummenthey by virtue of your position as General of the Waffen SS and Mummenthey as Sturmbannfuehrer?
A. Yes.
Q. Could there be a relationship, between you as civil servant insofar as you were chief of the WVHA and Mummenthey was the chief of an Amt and, thirdly, could there be a business relationship between you insofar as you were business manager of the DWB and Mummenthey was business manager of the Dest? Is that correct?
A. No, that is much too complicated. Only in the superior relationship which existed here was the last one you mentioned here. That was the one on the commercial basis. That was where Mummenthey was business manager of the Dest and I was his chief. That was the only one that could have existed.
Q. And the DWB was the holding company?
A. Yes.
Q. And the Dest was one of its affiliated branches?
A. Yes.
Q. And the Dest had affiliated companies, the various plants?
A. No. The Dest did not have any affiliated branch. The Dest had plants. There was a holding company, the DWB, and the DWB had affiliated companies. One of the affiliated companies was the Dest. The Dest, of course, consisted of several plants. However, these plants were not in the position of an affiliated branch. They were just part of the works.
We had Mauthausen first and Oranienburg, Flossenberg and so on.
Q. This morning you have already stated that by virtue of the Fuehrer principle you in the WVHA were the only one who had the right to issue orders and these orders naturally had to be observed by everybody who was subordinated to you. Did I understand you correctly?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. To a question which my colleague put to you and you answered yesterday, the question was, "Whether you could imagine that anybody would have opposed your orders," and in that connection you stated, "That you could not imagine that," is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. I now would like to go one step further. I don't want to force you to answer, if you do not want to answer; I will ask you one question anyhow, what would have happened if somebody would have opposed one of your orders?
A. Then I would have to tell you that he would have been shot.
DR. FROESCHMANN: Thank you. Your Honor, I do not have any further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: I have some questions.
Q. When did you first find out that it was the national policy of the Reich to exterminate the Jews?
A. Your Honor, I can not give you the exact date. In the course of time, that is to say, in the course of 1943 I formed this knowledge. However, I do not have any official document with me.
Q. Not before 1943?
A. No, sir.
Q. When did you join the SS, was it in 1934?
A. I joined the SS in 1934.
Q. When did you join the National Socialist Party?
A. 1926.
Q. So that it was nine years --- it was seventeen years after you had joined the Party that you found that the extermination of the Jews was a National policy?
A. Your Honor, neither in 1926, nor in 1934, nor in 1940 or 1941 had it ever become known to me that the government had decided on the extermination of the Jews.
Q. All right, I see. Did you ever hear of the Nuernberg Decrees?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know when they were adopted?
A. They were adopted I believe in 1936.
Q. Well, that is pretty nearly right. 1935. When they were adopted, did you hear about them?
A. I heard as a whole, but I did not see the details.
Q. As you remember it, what did they provide?
A. They were decrees for the protection of the German blood, so far as I know. They were regulations about marriages between the Germans, between people of German blood and people of non-German blood. I believe that was the provision of the decree. However, I did not know any of the details of the decree, because I actually never read it.
Q. Did you ever read "Der Stuermer"?
A. I personally never read the paper. I would see it in a public place. I did not subscribe to "Der Stuermer" and it was not a part of my literature.
Q. Did you ever read it, at all?
A. I occasionally looked at it, yes.
Q. What did it say about the Jews?
A. Well, I could not say as to this. It just played a strong exaggeration, which was a provoking opinion of the Jews.
Q. Let me read you one paragraph and see whether you remember reading this: "Not only is Germany not safe in the face of Jews as long as one Jew lives in Europe, but also the Jewish question is hardly solved in Europe so long as Jews live in the rest of the world." That was published in May, 1942. Do you remember reading that?
A. No, I can not recall that. Of course, "Stuermer" only printed things of that sort. However, I can not say today if I read that particular sentence. It is not different anyhow from the farm in which the "Stuermer" printed these articles.
Q. That is right, and they all said the same thing in different words, didn't they, all the articles in the "Stuermer"?
A. Yes, quite, that is correct.
Q. You, and everybody else knew that the policy of the "Stuermer" was to stir up anti-Jewish feeling?
A. Yes, that is what the "Stuermer" occupied itself with.
Q. Now, when you joined the Party, did you know anything about its principles, or its policies?
A. I have already pointed out that I did not occupy myself with racial questions, and the Jewish question particularly.
Q. No, no. When you decided to become a member of the National Socialist Party, did you know what its declared principles were?
A. I knew of this program, but I did not know any more than what was shown in this program about the Jews, or of the racial question.
Q. Well, six years before you joined the Party, the Party program was announced containing twenty-five different points, and point four, which I will read to you, was one of them: "Only a member of the race can be a citizen, and a member of the race can only be one who is of German blood without consideration of creed. Consequently, no Jew can be a member of the race." Did you ever hear that before?
A. Yes, I read that.
Q. You knew that was a part of the Nazi Creed?
A. Yes, I knew that.
Q. And do you subscribe to it? You agree with it?
A. Yes, I knew that.
Q. No, not that you knew it. You agree with this statement I have just read when you joined the Party in 1926?
A. Through my entry to the Party I agreed to its program.
Q. And you knew what the program was?
A. Yes, I knew it.
Q. So in 1926 you knew that you were joining an organization which believed that no Jew could be a member of the race?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know what happened on November 9 and 10th, 1938, in Germany?
A. Yes, I do not know exactly just now what you are referring to.
Q. At that time you had been a number of the SS for four years?
A. Yes.
Q. Those are the two nights in which the SS and others destroyed all the synagogues and the stares of the Jewish people, and beat them, and with the help of the Gestapo arrested between twenty and thirty thousand of them. Did you ever hear about that before?
A. Yes.
Q. Where were you then, in Berlin?
A. Yes, at that time I was at Berlin.
Q. Did any of this violence take place in Berlin?
A. I only read that something like that had happened in the press, that excesses had been committed against the Jews.
Q. Where?
A. At Berlin.
Q. You did not see any of it?
A. No.
Q. And you were not on duty as an SS officer that night?
A. Well, I slept during the night. I worked as an administrative chief, and I did not have anything to do with that or what happened, whatever, in the streets.
Q. Well, all right. Did you hear about it the next day?
A. The next day I heard of it.
Q. What did you hear?
A. I heard that excesses had been committed against the Jews.
Q. By members of the SS?
A. The SS and SA, and other units participated in it.
Q. And the Gestapo?
A. Yes, certainly, the Gestapo.
Q. But including the SS?
A. Yes, SS also, yes.
Q. Well, did you begin to suspect by that time that it was a National policy in Germany to murder all the Jews?
A. No, I did not think of that at the time. I believe in 1938 and 1939 nobody ever thought of exterminating the Jews. It was nothing unusual. It cannot be described to the world today that the riots at Berlin at the time had been the first excesses against the Jews.
Pogroms against the Jews, and excesses had taken place in Europe at all times. And I was surprised to read in a journal after the war that inspite of the cruel happenings in Germany, the Jews had begun being persecuted in Poland, and there must have been some sort of reason for it. The Jews had done nothing to me up to now, and I have done nothing against the Jews. I could not do anything to stop the Germans from taking steps against the Jews. Therefore, there must be two sides to this matter.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, no, there are not two sides to a murder. There is just one side to a murder. I am not talking about excluding the Jews from the German Reich which the German Reich would have a perfect right to do, I am talking about wholesale mass murder. Do you think there are two sides to that?
AAbsolutely not. I was not filled with this extermination idea of the Jews, or cater ot it today, nor did I then. I condemn this today as I did then. I regret I did not have the power to stop the state government from carrying out this program.
Q You regret that you didn't have the power to leave two organizations that were actually doing the exterminating, the SS and the National Socialist Party?
A Your Honor, when I heard of this for the first time, that the state government was engaged in a formal plan for the extermination of the Jews, at that time we were not in peace times, but we were in war. According to my fundamental attitude on these questions, in peacetime I would have resigned from my office. However, we were in a war, a war to life and to death in which my Fatherland was engaged. In view of the terrible suffering which was taking place in Germany, in view of the hundreds and thousands of lives, of human phosphor torches, I was confronted by the question, under my oath as soldier, I had to choose between the German people and the Jewish people. Your Honor, I have decided in favor of the German people, and I have remained in my position during the war. I now state that I did not want to be more of a coward than the hundreds and thousands of young soldiers who sacrificed their lives before the guns of the enemies. If that was a crime, to remain on my post as a soldier during the war, then, Your Honor, I am prepared to voluntarily put my head down before the seat of this high Tribunal.
Q You see, you miss the point. I am not talking about Germany at war at all, and I haven't mentioned any date after 1939. I am talking about 1926, 1934, 1938. You were not a soldier defending your homeland then, were you?
A I was not, Your Honor. In 1936 and 1938, at that time nobody in Germany spoke of the fact that the Jewish people in Germany were to be exterminated. Individual excesses, also, if they were carried out by party agencies with the help of the SS and the SA, you can not describe them as measures for the extermination of the Jewish people.
That is impossible. I have told you that such excesses took place in all countries, before and afterwards. You only have to go to the east now where the Jews before 1938 and after 1938 were killed and maltreated in exactly the same manner. In this case it can only be a question of when the plan of the Reich Government to exterminate the Jewish people was put into effect, and as can be seen by the documents, I believe that it appeared for the first time in 1940 or '41. At that time we were engaged in a war, and the men who had this on their conscience did not have a bad idea in mind, because in peacetime, I do not think that they would have succeeded in carrying out such an insane policy.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other questions of this witness?
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I have two questions to put to the witness.
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q The first question rises out of the statement made during the direct examination, and the other just occurred to me now because of the answers you have made to the President Judge. You said that you had to choose between the Germans and the Jews. Were the Jews making war on Germany that you had to choose between the two?
A Yes.
Q The Jews had declared war on Germany, they were in the field against Germany, and therefore you had to exterminate them?
A From the moment on when I had to decide for or against the extermination of the Jews, at that time I had to choose for or against the Jewish people or Germany in the war. I could not express my attitude with regard to the extermination of the Jews individually then through the fact that in the war I said, "I do not like this sort of thing. Germany is engaged in war. I have been a soldier for thirty years, but I am going to leave my post." In that case I would have decided in favor of the Jewish people. At least that is my concept.
Q You have not answered the question. You said you had to decide between the Germans and the Jews, that suggests that the Jews were in some way making war upon Germany that you had to regard the Jews as enemies. Were the Jews in the field actually fighting Germany that you had to take them into custody, take them into gas chambers, execute them, and otherwise dispose of them?
AAbsolutely not.
Q Then you did not have to choose between Germany and the Jews.
A Of course I had to choose from the moment on when I would have left my post because I did not agree with this extermination policy. I would have deserted my post, and I would have deserted Germany.
Q You had to choose between following Hitler and his policy of exterminating the Jews and your conscience, because you admit that you did not approve of the extermination of the Jews. Therefore it violated your conscience. You had to choose between your conscience and Hitler, and you choose Hitler, is that right? Now answer that question.
A No, I can not follow you, Your Honor. That is incorrect. The way to ask the question is much simpler.
Q All right, you put the question.
A I was confronted by the question in times of war whether the extermination policy of the Hitler Government against the Jews was correct or not correct. I condemned it.
Q And how did you decide it?
A I condemned it.
Q Very well.
A I have condemned it.
Q Yes.
A If this had happened in peacetime I would have said, "I am not going along with this; I am going to resign from the office." That is what I would have done in peacetime. However, the matter was complicated through the war, and I have been a soldier for more than thirty years.
Q You told us that.
AAnd I had sworn an oath of allegiance to Hitler, and I had sworn an oath of allegiance to Germany. If I had left my post in times of war I would have violated that oath. The decision had to be made during the war. If I would have left for the Jews
Q It was not a question of leaving your post, you have admitted you condemned the policy of the extermination of the Jews. You admit that?
A Yes.
Q Even in wartime?
A Yes.
Q But you followed it nevertheless, even though you condemned it as a matter of conscience, did you?
A You can conclude so from the fact that I remained, but you have to ask yourself why I have remained. Well, I remained there because I had to fight for Germany as an old soldier. That is why I remained in my post. The situation would not have been complicated for me if we had moved in times of peace. It would have been a completely different situation. However, I had to make the decision in times of war, and I decided, for Germany, and I remained in the war on behalf of Germany. There were many things I did not like in the war.
Q Had the Jews declared war on Germany?
A What?
Q Had the Jews declared war on Germany?
A Your Honor, it has nothing to do with the question. We do not understand each other.
Q We understand your point. Just one more question. You stated in your direct testimony that you had witnessed one of the highaltitude experiments. That is correct, isn't it, at Dachau?
A Yes.
Q And that Himmler was with you while this experiment was taking place?
A Yes.
Q And that so far as you were able to determine, the experiment was entirely innocuous, no one was hurt?
A Yes.
Q But that you observed Himmler speaking to Rascher privately for ten minutes or so?
A Yes.
Q Then you learned later that death resulted from these high-altitude experiments?
A I only heard that here from the documents. It did not become known to me at the time that people were killed as a result of these highaltitude experiments. I did not find out about that at the time.
Q You did not follow up these experiments at all after this one view?
A No, I only watched them one time.
Q Your curiosity wasn't aroused, nor did you feel that your occupying an important position that you should ascertain just what was developing along this line?
A No.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: All right, that is all.
MR. ROBBINS: May it please the Court, I have three requests to make. First I respectfully request the Tribunal to expunge from the record the remark of the witness that Poland is persecuting the Jews today on the same grounds as I stated earlier, that this witness can not possibly have any knowledge of what is going on in Poland today. That it was an unsolicited remark.
THE PRESIDENT: That remark will be deleted because it does not relate to the issues.
MR. ROBBINS: Secondly, it would be more convenient for the Prosecution to begin cross-examination when Court convenes again. In other words, I would like to request the Tribunal to recess for the balance of the day and also to rule that this witness may not speak to anyone about the case between now and the time the Tribunal convenes again, since he is on cross-examination.
THE PRESIDENT: I rather think Security will take care of that, Mr. Robbins, more effectively than a warning by this Tribunal.
MR. ROBBINS: May it please the Court, I request that that would include all defense counsel. Your Honors, I think the witness is on cross-examination and that is not an unusual request to make once the witness is on cross-examination.
THE PRESIDENT: It is entirely new to me, Mr. Robbins. I have seen a good many hundred witnesses released on direct examination and turned loose in a large city to speak to whomever they liked. I did not know there was any duty to remain incommunicado. I doubt both the authority and the capacity of the Tribunal to enforce such an order if made.
MR. ROBBINS: I might say that Tribunal I has made such a ruling, and I respectfully refer to that.
THE PRESIDENT: Your motion that the Court recess until next Tuesday morning at nine-thirty will be granted. Your motion to direct the witness not to speak to anyone between now and that time will be denied.
THE MARSHAL: This Tribunal is in recess until 0930 Tuesday morning, the 27th of May.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 27 May 1947, at 0930 hours.)