 |
| what is in it, in this letter. This letter is dated 1939. I see now
already that the fact that I received this letter was because there was a
hexogen experimental plant in Rottweil. I was given this letter for reasons of
propriety because this plant did not belong to me. |
| |
| * * * * * * * * * * |
| |
| Q. Dr. Gajewski, do you recall having received a copy of this
document? |
| |
| [Reference was made to Document NI-11746, Prosecution Exhibit 1943, the decision of
the Reich Supreme Finance Court in a tax case involving DAG's relation to
Farben. After objections were made to the receipt of this exhibit in evidence,
the prosecution offered further parts of the record, including petitions by DAG
asserting that it was a dependent subsidiary of Farben, and these parts of the
record were later admitted in evidence as Document NI-11746, Prosecution
Exhibit 1958. Exhibits from one of DAG's petitions in the tax case and from the
final decision of the courts are reproduced immediately below.]
|
| |
A. No, I cannot remember that.
Q. Now, I show you NI-13573,
which we offer as Prosecution Exhibit 1944,1 and I ask you whether your initial
is on the top of that document?
A. Yes.
Q. Does this document
now refresh your recollection that you received a copy of the decision of the
tax court referred to?
A. You show me this letter, indicating that I
received it, but I still don't remember receiving it. Dr. Mueller writes that
it was sent to me at the suggestion of Geheimrat Schmitz, but that's all.
Actually, I had nothing to do with the matter. Probably I did receive it and
took notice of it.
Q. Dr. Gajewski, you testified that you only knew of
the Four Year Plan as a program of autarchy?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you
know that Farben advised Dynamit A.G. and its subsidiary companies to exclude
from their annual reports all statements relating to synthetic raw materials
and the program, in consideration of military economy reasons? Did you know
that?
A. I don't know that. Perhaps you know it better. Perhaps you
will show me the document.
Q. May I show you NT-13516, which we offer as Prosecution Exhibit
1944?
PRESIDING JUDGE SHAKE: I am sorry, that would be 1945, would it
not, Mr. Prosecutor?
MR. AMCHAN: I'm sorry, that would be
1945.² |
__________
¹ Reproduced below in
subsection M 6.
² Reproduced above in subsection M 4.
1380 |
. 
