. ©MAZAL LIBRARY

NMT07-T0297


. NUERNBERG MILITARY TRIBUNAL
Volume VII · Page 297
Previous Page Home PageArchive
Table of Contents - Volume 7
them for the improvement of the workers’ quarters and a rejection would have resulted in a deterioration of the foreign workers’ lot.

As regards the conditions in the Hoechst plants, the defense will prove that the number stated for loaned workers, etc., in the graph Exhibit 1559 (NI-7376 A), Document Book 68, page 17a, is incorrect and bound to be misleading in view of the fact that no inmates of concentration camps had been employed in Hoechst at all. In refuting the affidavit by De Bruyn, Exhibit 1367 (NI-11613), Document Book 69, page 207, evidence will be submitted that the employment of foreigners and prisoners of war was conducted in an appropriate manner and was not in violation of Article 31 of the Geneva Convention, dated 27 July 1929. Furthermore it will be shown that arrangements had been made for adequate housing, food, good medical care, schools, sewing rooms, and that the plant manager, Professor Lautenschlaeger and Herr Jaehne, as his deputy, made particular efforts to this effect. Accordingly, the treatment of the foreigners in Hoechst was decent and humane. Beyond this, arrangements had been made in a generous way for recreational facilities. There were large club-rooms with radio, newspapers, libraries, canteens, athletics fields, sporting equipment, theater, moving pictures and above all, the possibility to attend religious services. On the part of the plant management, everything was done that was possible under the unfortunately prevailing war conditions. It was due to his engineering activity that Jaehne inspected many plants of the IG for the purpose of solving any special technical problems. Thus, he also paid a brief and fleeting visit to the Farben plant in Auschwitz. It can be proven that he did not enter the Monowitz concentration camp during this visit and has not seen anything which ought to have induced him to interfere with the independent management of this plant, which did not belong to his jurisdiction. Neither did he obtain any knowledge of gassings, either from observation or from any information beyond that of rumors.

The defense for the defendant Jaehne will open its arguments by interrogating the defendant on his own behalf, and thereafter will conclude by producing documents and affidavits as well as the interrogation of a few less important witnesses.  
 
O. Opening Statement for Defendant Gattineau* 
 
DR. ASCHENAUER (counsel for defendant Gattineau) : In the
__________
* Tr. pages 4838-4854, 19 December 1947. The final statement o the defendant Gattineau to the Tribunal appears in section XII 13, volume VII, this series.  



297
Next Page NMT Home Page