TRIALS OF NAZIS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26095, 7 March 1946, Page 8

TRIALS OF NAZIS

ATTACK ON COUNSEL JUDGE EXPRESSES CONCERN NUREMBERG, Mar. d. Lord Justice Lawrence announced that the War Crimes Tribunal had asked the Allied Control Commission in Germany to investigate publication in the Berliner Zeitung, which is published in the Russian zone in Berlin of a severe attack against Streicher’s counsel, Dr Hans Marx. Lord Law-' rence said the article suggested tnat Dr Marx, in asking questions of the court, behaved most improperly, and that the proper course for him was to remain silent. “The matter assumed a graver aspect, because the article goes on to threaten Marx with complete ostracism, using violent and intimidating language. The tribunal wili not tolerate such conduct. The right of the accused to be represented by counsel •is one of. the most important elements in the administration of justice” Lord Lawrence added that Dr Marx in no way exceeded his professional duty U-Boat Warfare Counsel for Doenitz asked permission to interrogate Admiral Nimitz, also that the British Admiralty flies should be opened to disclose combat orders given to British merchant ships. He assured the tribunal that Admirai Nimitz's replies would prove that America “ observed the same strategic and legal considerations in carrying out submarine warfare and gave orders identical to chose of the German Naval High Command.” He added that American submarines attacked all ships in specified operational waters without warning, also all Japanese ships, at least from the time it was surmisable that such ships would resist being taken as prizes. Finally. American submarines did not assist shipwrecked people in waters where the submarine would endanger itself by doing so. The British prosecutor, Mr Maxwell Fyfe, objected to calling Admiral Ni- . mitz to give evidence concerning sea warfare against the Japanese on the ground of irrelevance. He said that even if what Doenitz claimed the American submarines had done were true, it could not be assumed that they followed the same legal considerations as those of the German Naval Command. It might have been dne as retaliation. Dr Franz Buehier, counsel for Doenitz, said he did not wish to prove that the United States and the Admiralty in U-boat warfare against Japan broke international laws. “On the contrary,” he said, “I am of the opinion that they .acted strictly within the limits of international law. The United States was faced-with exactly the same problems as confronted Germany in U-boat warfare against Britain.

Lord Lawrence said the tribunal would consider this with the other applications. It was pointed out in court circles that Doenitz’s counsel had already been given permission to visit London examine documents in the Admiralty. 1 Strcicher’s Denials Streicher sought to call his wife and son. His counsel said the former would prove he had no connection with Hitler and other Nazi chiefs. Streicher asked for his son as a witness to refute the prosecution charge that he was a sexual sadist. His counsel said both Streicher’s wife and the chief editor of Der Stuermer could tell the truth concerning his so-called pornographic library. Counsel added that Streicher had lived since 1940 in banishment so complete that he never heard of such infamous terrorists as Heydrich or Kaltenbrurmer. Schacht wanted witnesses to testify that he was concerned in the attempt to overthrow the Nazi Government in September, 1938, and that he participated in the attempt against Hitler’s life on July 20, 1944. Funk’s counsel applied for 10 German witnesses, and indicated that he would seek to prove that Funk was opposed to importing slave labour to Germany. Goering's counsel stated that Lord Halifax was the only one of eight persons who replied to the interrogatories sent in connection with Goering’s defence. The tribunal sat in closed session in the afternoon considering decisions.