 |
include them in the sphere of my observations since the charges have
been brought and the prosecution could not make up its mind, so far, to drop
them as suggested by me. I refer, in the first place, to the concept of the
so-called Military Economy Leader (Wehrwirtschaftsfuehrer) which is entirely
misconstrued by the prosecution. I shall show that this is a meaningless title,
possessing no practical value, either economically or politically. In my
opinion this question was most correctly evaluated by Military Tribunal V in
the Flick case, this allegedly “serious charge” being passed by
without comment.
Much the same applies to another point which will deal
with the so-called “Small Circle.” Analogous to the other economic
trials, the prosecution has veiled this phenomenon in magical semidarkness and
thus surrounded it with a semblance of importance which would have been worthy
of a better cause. The Tribunal will be interested to learn that the Flick
trial bypassed this point in silence also and denied any responsibility within
the purport of the charges.
The discussion concerning the so-called
“Small Circle” will be in conjunction with another general topic,
that will deal with the Economic Group Iron-Producing Industry and the District
Group Northwest of this economic group. Here again we can cite the findings of
the Flick verdict. Just as little, as the membership of the Small Circle, did
the Military Tribunal deduce criminal responsibility from the work of the men
accused in that case in the economic group and the suborganizations referred
to, or see reason why even one of the defendants should be sentenced. I shall
limit myself, therefore, on the whole to the material already submitted in the
Flick case and, moreover, I shall refute the case for the prosecution by the
examination of a witness.
Besides these points which, in my opinion,
have no bearing on the outcome of the trial, there are some questions which
necessitate more extensive argumentation. In the foreground of my plea
regarding this will be the financial development of the firm of Krupp up to
1943. The period from 1943 to 1945 will be dealt with by my colleague, Dr.
Schilf, as a part of his plea. I shall prove that the firm of Krupp did not
profit excessively or unduly by the Hitler regime. In this way I shall refute
beyond any reasonable doubt, substantiated by sober figures and graphic
illustrations, the allegation of the prosecution that the firm of Krupp was to
be “rewarded” for maintaining its armament potential. In regard to
this matter I shall call an expert witness and besides, on hand of further
illustrations, I shall provide the Tribunal with the possibility of comparison
with the financial development of other firms at home and abroad. It will be
|
903432
— 51 — 11
145 |
. 
