We will give you more beans instead. You won't be able to get any meat this week; you will have to use sausage," and so on. He discussed the matter with the food office; he said, "What food can I obtain; what is on hand, and what can I get from you on the basis of the rations which I am to receive."
Q. You mean to say the Executive Officer of the camp requested the food from the Food Ministry? Then the Food Ministry allocated the food supplies to the camp?
A. Yes, that is exactly the way it was.
Q. And how often did he allocate food to the camp?
A. That depended on the interval at which he compiled his menus. If he compiled his menu for eight days in advance, then he had to negotiate about the matter every week. If, on the other hand, he prepared his menu for the coming month, then it was sufficient for him to negotiate about these matters once a month.
Q. Then it became the duty of the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps to see that the food was delivered to the camps and that the inmates received the food, is that correct?
A. No, this could only be done locally. How could an agency which was located in Berlin intervene in any local negotiation of the Administration Office on one hand and the Food Administration on the other hand?
Q. There had to be someone that they were subordinated to. Who were they subordinated to - the Executive Officer of the concentration camp and the commandant of the camp - who were they subordinated to?
A. Your Honor, there were two people in the camp who had to control these matters. One of them was the commandant, and the other was the physician, the medical officer. The procedure, as far as I know - that was the procedure already in peacetime. In the kitchen there was a certain book and in this book an entry was made every day just what had been served to the people and every day the medical officer had to control and to supervise the kitchen. First of all he had to inspect the kitchen to see it was clean and whether the food was in a decent condition; whether it was edible and he had to see whether the amount which was to be given to the inmates according to the calories and so on was sufficient.
Q. Just a minute. Then the medical officer of the camp was subordinated to Lolling, was he not?
A. Yes.
Q. Then Lolling was subordinated to the WVHA, was he not?
A. Yes, but not with regard to the medical aspect. I want to point out especially here that in the purely medical questions he was subordinated to the medical office. After all, Pohl could not reach any medical decision. For example, if a physician or medical officer in a camp had determined that the number of calories was not sufficient and that the inmates would suffer physical damage, then this was not a matter of Pohl, but it was a matter to be referred to the Medical Office or it was referred to the Reich Physician SS.
Q. Now the other person in the camp was the Executive Officer in the camp. Now who was he subordinate to?
A. He was subordinated to Amtsgruppe D.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: All right, that is all.
BY DR. STEIN (Counsel for defendant Eirenschmalz):
Q. Witness, you were with the same offices at the same time as Eirenschmalz. That was from 1934 up to 1939, that you were with the Administrative Office of the SS; from 1940 to January 1942 you were with the Corps Administration of the Waffen SS, and from 1 February 1942 on you were with the WVHA. Now, I want to ask you, first of all, what were the tasks of Eirenschmalz with the administrative office of the SS?
A. He had to construct barracks for the Special Task Squad.
Q. Did he also have to occupy himself with construction in concentration camps or constructions of the Death Head units?
A. No, up to the outbreak of the war Eicke built then with his independent building organization.
Q. To whom were you subordinated at that time? Was it the construction agency in the concentration camps?
A. I have already said they were subordinate to Eicke.
Q. The Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps? Until that time?
A. Yes. I cannot say that exactly, as to the set-up up to the outbreak of the war. I was unable to follow up the further developments because I was militarily too far removed from all these things.
Q. And who was the director of this building agency?
A. With Eicke? I believe it was Hauptsturmfuehrer Riedl.
Q. Now the concentration camp construction agencies at Oranienburg, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, and others - they were not subordinate to Eirenschmalz, is that correct?
A. Certainly not, before the war and they were not subordinated to him up to 1942. Then Eirenschmalz was with me.
Q. You stated that in your opinion Riedl was in charge of this construction agency. Do you know whether this man also had the task to examine the funds for these construction projects and to administer these funds?
A. Up the the outbreak of the war Eicke had a completely separate organization. That is to say, it examined, it audited, it paid, and it carried out the construction up to the outbreak of the war; this procedure was supposed to change in one or two years. However, I cannot give you the exact time when this was taking place.
Q. Therefore, with the SS Administrative Office Eicke, according to your statement, only concerned himself with the construction matters of the Special Duty Squads?
A. Yes.
Q. How do you judge this activity, according to its extent when compared with the construction tasks of the Waffen-SS?
A. I cannot answer this question in this manner. I can only say that Eirenschmalz, as far as I know, constructed two barracks, two barracks which were known for their beauty and for their technical com pleteness.
I believe that Eirenschmalz constructed this matter 100 percent perfectly.
Q. Approximately how many collaborators did Eirenschmalz have in this office?
A. I am unable to say that.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Well, was it a big staff?
A He had a building office which had to make the drafts and which had to summon the taking of requisites. If there were 14 or 20 people working there, I am unable to say.
Q Can this activity of Eirenschmalz's be compared with the activity which later on was carried out by Kammler as Office Chief of Amtsgruppe C, or was this activity much more of a minor character?
A It cannot be compared at all.
Q Witness, do you know that Eirenschmalz in the year 1938 wanted to obtain a private position and that he made a request to work in private industry?
A I know that, yes. I believe that the reason for this was because differences existed between Pohl and him. I believe that these differences were, of course, for technical reasons.
Q Well, in 1939 to 1940 Eirenschmalz came to the Corps Admministration of the Waffen SS and he was subordinated to you. Why was he transferred?
A I don't know the exact reasons anymore today. However, the main reason probably was that he wanted to work under my leadership because he knew me, because we came from the same province, and because, as I have already stated, his relationship to Pohl was not very good.
Q How long did Eirenschmalz stay in your agency?
A Up to the 1st of February 1942.
Q What activity did he exercise there?
A He continued the construction of barracks for the special duty squads, and new constructions were only completed if they had previously been started.
Q Did he have any contact at all with concentration camps in his field of tasks?
A He could not do that because the whole office did not have any contact with the concentration camp matters at all at the time.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q The agency was then dissolved and Eirenschmalz was detached on duty with the WVHA. Did Eirenschmalz request of you that his transfer to the WVHA be prevented and did he say that he wanted to enter the troop administration service?
A Yes, I know about that. His transfer to troop administration could not be carried out because Eirenschmalz from the military point of view had too high a grade. As a colonel he would have been at least the administrative chief of an army corps or of an army group; and he did not have the necessary military prerequisites to fill that position. After all he was a specialist.
Q What was the relationship of Eirenschmalz to his superior, Kammler?
A This relationship was still worse than his relationship to Pohl. This was not a surprise because Kammler from a psychological point of view was exactly the opposite of Eirenschmalz, exactly in contrast to him.
Q How did it happen that in spite of this bad relationship Eirenschmalz became the deputy of Kammler, effective the 1st of January 1943 in the organizational plan?
A Well, it probably had to be done on paper because he was the administrative leader with the longest service record.
Q Have you ever seen any document which bears the signature of Eirenschmalz as deputy of Chief of the Amtsgruppe Kammler?
A I cannot remember that.
Q Let us assume that Eirenschmalz with this strange relationship to Kammler only represented him to a minor degree.
A With the character of Kammler I don't consider that probable at all. Kammler did all the work by himself. He was extremely explosive and did not very easily tolerate anybody to be at his side, especially in the case of Eirenschmalz. Furthermore, Eirenschmalz was ill at this time with a stomach disease and could only do half the duties that were required.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
Q Do you know that Eirenschmalz in the year 1943 had to go into a hospital for some length of time because of the disease of the stomach?
A Yes, that is where I obtained my knowledge that he had a bad stomach.
Q When was that?
A He had already complained before he was with me about the condition of his stomach.
Q I want to know in which month of 1942 it was?
A Even in 1941 he had complained about pains in his stomach.
Q In which month did he take his leave? You don't know exactly which month he fell ill of this disease?
A No.
Q Eirenschmalz was then in charge of Department C-6? It can be assumed that first of all he took the work and completed the work which he had brought along from his previous position?
A Doctor, about the activity of Amtsgruppe C I am so little informed that since I am under oath here I don't want to make any statements on the matter.
Q Well, he was in your office; and when he left your office then it is probable that he had not completed all the work?
A No.
Q Now, concerning the remainder of the work which still had to be carried out, did he continue to deal with this work in the WVHA?
A That is quite possible. I only know the one thing--that he did the examining. That is, he carried out the technical examination of the now constructions and the buildings which had been newly erected. He did that subsequently.
Q Witness, in your affidavit you have stated that Eirenschmalz among other things audited the bills which arose from repairs carried out in the concentration camps. In your opinion does this also include the bills for the constant repair work which had to be Court No. II, Case No. 4.done there?
A No, the current repairs appeared in the general bills of the administrative officer.
Q To what agency were those bills submitted?
A Just like all the other bills, they were submitted to Amtsgruppe D.
Q Did the administrative agencies and the local administration also have to pay the expenses for the current repairs and maintenance?
A It is very difficult for me to answer that question because I don't know the authority of the construction agency. I only know that from the point of view of the Ministry of Finance, that is, from the budgetary aspect, buildings which cost less than a hundred thousand marks--in my affidavit I made a mistake and said forty thousand marks; but this changed to a hundred thousand marks during wartime. For these constructions the approval by the Ministry of Finance was not required. But what Kammler did do or what he reserved for himself or what his office chiefs reserved for themselves or what the construction Inspectorate reserved for themselves, and what was transferred to the local construction agencies, I do not know.
Q Witness, on Friday and today as an administrative expert you have made statements about the manner in which the auditing and examinations which in your Office A were carried out; and I now ask you, did the same principles also apply for the accounts of construction plants?
A Yes. To explain to me what you mean by the word "principles" you have to go a little more into detail in my opinion. What do you mean in particular?
Q I mean the auditing of the bills, the preliminary auditing which was carried out by Amt C-6. You have described it here as a subsequent auditing examination. You have further stated that in the course of the war an exact auditing of all bills was not possible any Court No. II, Case No. 4.more in particular because of the lack of personnel.
A I can only say one thing in this connection. In this decision of the president of the auditing corps in the partial reduction of the auditing system the office of Eirenschmalz was also included. Is that sufficient for you?
Q Yes, thank you, that is sufficient. Witness, since the year 1934 you worked with Eirenschmalz. Afterwards you were his superior for about two years. I now want to ask you, just how do you judge the character and personality of Eirenschmalz?
AAs a human being I esteemed him very much. He was a good comrade. He always kept his word, and I had never heard anything derogatory about him. From the professional point of view Eirenschmalz was a very, very efficient expert. In my opinion, however, from 1938 on he was no longer used in accordance with his capabilities and skills.
Q What sort of life did Eirenschmalz lead?
A Eirenschmalz was a very good head of a family, and he lived in an extremely solitary fashion and was withdrawn from the public.
Q Did he have any hobbies?
A Yes, he loved to ride on horseback very much. I did that too.
BY DR. BELZER (Counsel for Defendant Sommer):
Q. Witness, on Friday you stated in connection with Action Reibhardt -- and you have repeatedly mentioned the fact that watches were sent to Sachsenhausen. The Prosecution has also occupied itself with the deliveries of watches to Sachsenhausen, and in its opening speech made the following statement, which I quote:
"The defendant Sommer was informed about the repair of thousands of watches which originated from Jews who had been liquidated, in the warehouse of the concentration Sachsenhausen."
I now ask you, witness, what you have to say on the basis of your personal knowledge to this statement by the Prosecution.
I now ask you, witness, what you have to say on the basis of your personal knowledge to this statement by the Prosecution.
A. I have already stated in my direct examination by my attorney that one must not and can not assume that a watch came from a person who had died in the meantime. I have admitted that it was a bad master to take a watch away from a person. I believe that Sommer knew that the Jews and other inmates of concentration camps from whom these watches were taken did not receive any compensation for them. However, that they came from dead people, that Sommer could not know, in my opinion.
Q. When did you make the acquaintance of the defendant Sommer?
A. I met Sommer here for the first time, here in the prison.
DR. BELZER: Thank you, I have no further questions.
BY DR. RATZ (Counsel for defendant Pook):
Q. I have only two short questions to ask you, witness. When did you meet the defendant Dr. Hermann Pook for the first time?
A. Here in prison, the day the Indictment was read to us. That was the day I saw him for the first time in my life.
Q. Did you ever hear the name of the defendant Dr. Pook in Berlin as a member of the WVHA?
A. No.
BY DR. HEIM (Counsel for Defendant Hohberg):
Q. Witness, when was the examination of Account R carried out at Lublin?
A. According to the document, it was in June, 1943.
Q. Do you know whether it was the beginning or end of June 1943?
A. No.
Q. And were the negotiations between you on the one hand and Dr. Hohberg and Dr. Wenner on the other hand because of the credit of thirty million to the DWB -- did that happen before or after the examination which was carried out by Vogt?
A. As far as I can remember, this was done four to six weeks previously; that, before June.
Q. That was before the examination of Vogt?
A. Yes.
Q. Can you still recall whether and to what extent you told Dr. Wenner and Dr. Hohberg about the source of the money of the Reichardt Fund?
A. Whether in the course of this conversation we discussed the matter at all, if we discussed the Reinhardt Fund at all -- I don't believe so, because the conversation dealt only with the question of the credit. Where the loan was to come from, that was rather without any particular interest for Hohberg. He was interested only in obtaining the loan.
Q. Therefore, there is no possibility that the co-defendant Hohberg could know anything of the Action Reinhardt at the moment when he negotiated about the loan with you?
MR. ROBBINS: I object to the wording of the question.
THE PRESIDENT: Objection sustained.
BY DR. HEIM:
Q. Do you know that the Defendant Hohberg in the end of June 1943 discontinued his activities as economic auditor of the DWB?
A. Yes, I found out about that.
Q. In your opinion, is it possible that Dr. Hohberg before he left the position as economic auditor heard anything about the results of the auditing work that was carried out by Vogt at Lublin?
A. I am unable to say that. I don't think so however. After all this had nothing to do with the examination which was carried out by Hohberg. Vogt was a Reich auditor, and Dr. Hohberg was an economic auditor.
Q. With regard to document NO-1266, Prosecution Exhibit 483, which is in Document Book 19, Page 15, of the German text and Page 12 of the English text, there is a file note of Dr. Hohberg with regard to the conversation which he had with you on 26 June 1943. I now want to ask you the following question: What was the purpose of the visit at your office by Dr. Hohberg and Dr. Wenner, as described in this document?
A. We were dealing with the technical decision with regard to foreign exchange. I assume that Dr. Hohberg asked me at the time about the approval for foreign exchange, about the fund which had accumulated in the Deposit 12. I hardly occupied myself with the origin of these funds, but I believe that the entire conversation was only an inquiry of Dr. Hohberg with regard to the technical treatment of the foreign exchange. It is extraordinarily difficult for me today to reconstruct exactly a case which was of such minor interest to me. I am unable to tell you the whole thing exactly, but I assume that it happened in that way.
Q. Witness, if I have understood you correctly, the visit of Dr. Hohberg at your office on 22 June 1943 was only for the purpose of having a discussion with you with regard to the authorization of foreign exchange?
A. Yes, it was information which he tried to obtain from me and which he actually did obtain.
Q. In cross examination by the Defense Counsel of the defendant Vogt you stated that the establishment of an economic inspector was necessary for the exact supervision of the food in the concentration camps.
I now ask you: Would the appointment of an economic inspector which you considered necessary, be identical with Pohl's plan to appoint the defendant Hohberg as an economic inspector?
A. That can not be identical. Hohberg, after all, was an economic auditor to whom I referred would have had to be an official of the Reich.
Q. Can you tell me on this occasion if in Document NO-1954, Prosecution Exhibit 529, the appointment of Dr. Hohberg to the economic inspectorship by Pohl, which has been mentioned here, was actually carried out or not?
A. I cannot answer this question.
Q. Well, then, can you tell me at least if this title was ever used for the defendant Hohberg in the WVHA or in the DWB?
A. I don't think so. It certainly would have come to my attention; after all, it is quite a big title, economic inspector, and as far as I know Hohberg at least did not use this title.
Q. Did you ever discuss with the defendant Hohberg and did you have any closer contact with him?
A. I had no official contact with Hohberg whatsoever, with the exception of this credit action.
Q. Now, my final question: Did you ever have any social contacts with him?
A. No.
DR. HEIM: Your Honor, I have no further questions.
BY DR. FRITSCH (Counsel for defendant Baier):
Q. Witness, as far as I know, you have known Baier since the year 1937?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. In the year 1937 Baier was appointed Director of SS Administrative Training School at Dachau?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you have anything to do with that school?
A. Yes, in a certain way I was the inspector of that school.
Q. Was that in your capacity as Office Chief of Amtsgruppe A?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you know for what reason Baier was appointed Director of that school? What I want to say is the following: Did he fulfil any special prerequisites for this task?
A. At the time I reported to Pohl and stated to him the necessity of a specialist who was intelligent and without any flaw at all in his character. Pohl told me at the time, "I believe that I have such a man. I shall try to have him transferred from the navy." That is exactly what happened.
Q. That man was Baier?
A. Yes.
Q. In the year 1937 did this school have the designation which I have just mentioned, or just what was its name?
A. It was called the Administrative School. It was called the SS Administrative School. I don't know whether it had another title at that time. In 1942 it was the SS Leaders School.
It was you who told me that the school at that time was called Training Center for Administration?
A Yes, that is quite possible. After all its extent was very small.
Q You just called yourself the inspector of that school or this training center. Did you ever inspect this school or this training center?
A Yes, I inspected it at the beginning and at the end.
Q And to what did these inspections extend?
A I believe it would go too far here to explain that. Very briefly, about the quality of the students, about the quality of the lectures and the subjects that were given by Baier, and about the maintenance of the goal that I had set.
Q That is sufficient for me. And what was this goal?
A Our aim was to train an administrative officer who would meet the requirements of the troops.
Q Where were these men sent to after they had been trained?
A. They were sent to the troop units.
Q They were sent to the special duty squads?
A Yes.
Q Can you still remember how many main office teachers were employed at that school?
A What are you referring to?
Q I am referring to the time before the war.
A. In my opinion Baier was the only teacher before the war.
Q In the year 1943 Baier was transferred to the WVHA. Did you have anything to do with his transfer?
A I had nothing to do with the transfer, but I had something to do with his replacement.
Q Can you tell us any more details on this subject, very briefly?
AAt the time Baier had to be transferred from the school, and this was done for military reasons, since the totality of the war became more increased and this required that the administrative officers who were used at the front should be trained by a man who also had gained some experience at the front.
However, Baier did not have this experience, and experience which he had gathered during the First World War had already been surpassed. What I have said is confirmed by the fact when I state that the successor of Baier had been decorated with the Knight's Cross, the so-called "Ritterkreuz". Therefore he had a high decoration from combat service, and at the same time through the training which he had received he met the requirements to the fullest extent which at that time he had to have to be a director of the school.
Q What was actually taught at that school, Witness?
A Everything was taught which we considered and which we expected of an administrative officer in the Waffen-SS, and that was a lot.
Q I would be very grateful to you if you would only state some of the subjects that were taught there to the Tribunal, so that we will get an idea exactly what was taught there?
A The administrative officers of the Waffen-SS had to learn various subjects there. They had to be able to improvise. They had to be honest, and they had to know to one hundred percent the knowledge that was required of an administrative officer. I can describe this activity very briefly by stating that there were twenty-five different regulations which had to be complied with, and they had to learn those.
Q Witness, please don't blame me for asking a question. Was any language, was any training given in languages, or was any training given in payment, or with regard to the procurement of food? That is what I would like you to tell me. Tell me just one point.
A Yes, everybody had to learn at least one language, English. It was mandatory to learn English, and if an officer did not learn English, or already knew it before, then he had to learn a second language. That is to say , if he did not want to learn English, or if he was not very suitable for learning that language, he had to take up another language.
He had to have exact information about the food. That is to say, he was taught about meat, for example, if it was good meat or bad meat. Then he had to learn how to differentiate. He had to learn how to store potatoes so they would not spoil.
He had to learn everything about the treatment of vegetables, and he had to learn how grain was stored, etc. Then he had to know everything about all the fields with which any officer had to deal with who had to clothe a man and who has to feed him, and that under the most difficult circumstances.
Q And then, in order to shorten the matter, I can state he had to supply the man?
A Of course, naturally. He had to pay the soldiers. He had to take care of the allotment of a soldier for his family. He had to know what civilian employees were to be paid. As I say, there were twentyfive regulations he had to know by heart.
Q If I can sum up this matter, therefore this was an administrative, technical training?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Witness, do you know if this transfer of Baier was carried out with his agreement, or did any difficulties arise on this matter?
A No, he certainly did not agree to this fact. He was very depressed about it. I could understand that, because it is a very beautiful task to lead people. It is much more beautiful than to work on files.
Q And Baier was then transferred to the WVHA. Did you still have official contact with him at that time?
AAs far as I can recall only on one occasion. That was when he came to see me and when he wanted to sign the agreement about the thirty million.
Q Can you briefly describe this loan of thirty million to us, and can you specify about it?
A Can I perhaps do it this way? This was the Reich loan to the DWB.
Q It was in the amount of thirty million, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Where did this money come from, Witness?
A Well, this was money which belonged to the Reich, yes.
Q I now refer to Document Book 14 on page 52 of the German text; it is Exhibit No. 391. It is the note which Baier, when he started actively in the WVHA found was waiting for him, and under paragraph 17 of this note the following is stated, and I quote. "The agreement between the Reich and the DWB with regard to the loan from the Reinhardt Fund has to be fixed yet in writing." In direct examination and also in the crossexamination you have already made several statements about this Reinhardt Fund. Now, I am only interested on the subject of one particular question. What was the activity of Baier in fulfilling this point, and to what extent did you deal with this matter together with Baier?
A I can recall that Baier came to see me at the time. He told me then, "Gruppenfuehrer, the agreement about the thirty million has already been fixed, but it has not as yet been signed and ratified. I have found a note here by Hohberg according to which this agreement has as yet to be signed." He already had this agreement with him. He asked me just what it meant, what had happened, why the words "Reinhardt Fund" had been used in this note? I told him then that this already had been surpassed, and this was only a question of the first two back payments, that, however, there was no reason at all to use the words "Reinhardt Fund" in the agreement or to use the words "Action Reinhardt" at all in the agreement. In the agreement which was signed by me in this conversation the word "Reinhardt" was not mentioned at all. I assume that the Prosecution has this document in their hands and that this can be checked. I signed this agreement on behalf of the Reich. Pohl signed it for the economy. That is what brought it about.
Q When did this happen, Witness?
A That must have happened during the first days of September.
Q That was 1943?
A Yes.
Q Now, did you give Baier any explanation for the word "Reinhardt"? I understood you to say, Witness, that Baier apparently asked you, "What does that word 'Reinhardt' mean?" because he had this word for the first time here, and he had only come into the WVHA a short time before, and apparently you changed the subject, if I understood you correctly, you practically said it was without any importance.
A Well, I can repeat to you what I said to him that day and in any case I told him that the agreement should not contain this word and there was not any reason to have this word in there. I don't think that I gave him any explanation about it.
Q Witness, your relationship was somewhat strained at the time, if I am correctly informed?
A Yes, Baier was angry with me because I had him transferred from the school.
Q You were Gruppenfuehrer?
A Yes, we would not come together any more than was necessary.
Q That was what I wanted to know. Apparently he did not engage in any lengthy discussion about this contract?
A Well, we did have a somewhat strained relationship at the time.
Q Well, this agreement has not been submitted so far. Could Baier from this agreement obtain any knowledge about the so-called Reinhardt program?
A No, there was not even a word mentioned about the Reinhardt Action in there.
Q Now, another question, Witness. Do you know whether Baier, outside of his acquaintance with the Defendant Pohl, since the time he served in the navy, ever had any closer contact with other collaborators in the WVHA or if he had any other obligations towards them?
A. Not as far as I know.
Can you tell me what the attitude of Baier was in the WVHA, can you tell me anything about his relationship to the other workers there?
AAre you referring to the time when he was in the WVHA, or are you still referring to the school?
Q I am still referring to the time he was in the WVHA.
A I can not tell you that because when Baier came I left the place. I was unable to make any close observation.
Q I want to refer once more to another question. You previously mentioned the fact that you also played a part in having Baier transferred from the school. Did you also play a part in having Baier transferred to the WVHA?
A No, to the contrary. I even believed that Baier would be sent to the units because of his experience which he had as far as the administration at home was concerned. However, I don't know just why he was transferred to the economy. Perhaps it was because Hohberg had left just about that period of time.
Q Did he have any practical experience in order to fulfill the task?
A I believe that Baier had studied economy before.
DR. FRITSCH: Thank you. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Recess until 1:45.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess until 1:45.
(A recess was taken until 13:45 hours.)