 |
[at…] tention to this on my trip because I was much interested
in that. I was worried about my own plant, also, in this respect.
Q.
Your testimony then is that you reported concerning the effect of air raids
upon the chemical industry in Poland to the Vorstand, is that right?
A.
That I gave an account of my observations on the few plants that l had visited,
that is my recollection.
Q. Now, you said you didn't have anything to
do with the acquisition or the operation of Boruta thereafter. As a matter of
fact, Dr. Wurster, did not the Vorstand decide, on the very same day that you
made your report to the Vorstand concerning your inspection of Polish plants,
that a dummy corporation should be planned in order to acquire or to operate
the Boruta plant — on the very same day?
A. I do not remember any
more. But that certainly was not in connection with my report, for the
negotiations conducted by representatives of Farben about this affair were all
before my time and not in this connection.
MR. SPRECHER: Now, in thus
connection, Your Honors, we would like to introduce NI-15107, as Prosecution Exhibit No. 2120.* These
were extracts from the 14th Vorstand meeting of 8 November 1939, and I think
that can just go by way of supplementation of the testimony we have just had.
PRESIDING JUDGE SHAKE: Mr. Sprecher, I am just wondering.This is not an
instance here of where you are putting in some evidence in chief that is
neither cross-examination nor rebuttal. This does not dispute anything that the
witness has said.
MR. SPRECHER: I beg, your pardon. May I refer to the
document?
PRESIDING JUDGE SHAKE: Yes.
MR. SPRECHER: I don't
think we will have to be detained longer on that, Your Honor. Mr. President, do
you have paragraph 2, the report on industrial plants in Poland there?
PRESIDING. JUDGE SHAKE: Yes.
MR. SPRECHER : Do you notice in
the second line, with respect to the trips of both Buergin and Wurster —
"Both gentlemen report on their general impressions as well as particularly on
technical condition and the economic situation of file plants inspected —
"?
PRESIDING JUDGE SHAKE: Now, does that dispute the witness’
testimony?
MR. SPRECHER: The witness testified that as far as he
remembered he did not report on the technical conditions of the plant. Now, if
you further look down and see the decision made during the report of the
Commercial Committee, under “3,” where they discuss the acquisition
of Boruta. the direct relationship between a report |
__________
* Reproduced in 2 above.
35 |
. 
