Стенограмма Нюрнбергского процесса. Том X.
NINETY-SECOND DAY
Wednesday, 27 March 1946
DR. HORN: … In Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 50 (Document Number Ribbentrop-50) further stress is laid on armament. It concerns a speech of Winston Churchill's of 16 October 1938, and I beg the Tribunal to take judicial notice of this speech in connection with extracts from it as a document. I am quoting only a few sentences from it:
"We must arm... We shall no doubt arm.
"Britain, casting away habits of centuries, will decree national service upon her citizens. The British people will stand erect and will face whatever may be coming. But arms - instrumentalities, as President Wilson called them - are not sufficient by themselves. We must add to them the power of ideas. People say we ought not to allow ourselves to be drawn into a theoretical antagonism between Nazidom and democracy, but the antagonism is here now."
I prove the fact that England was arming energetically in the air far beyond the normal needs of defense, by Ribbentrop Exhibit Number 51 (Document Number Ribbentropdl), which I am offering to the Tribunal with the request for judicial notice. This is a declaration of the British Secretary of State for Air in the House of Commons, dated 16 November 1938.. .
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Horn, I thought you understood what the Tribunal wanted you to do, which was to put in the documents all together. I think I have said from 44 - wasn't it the document that you had got to? - to 300 something, that you could put them in all together. But now you have gone through 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 and 51, and you seem to be going through each one in detail, doing exactly what I asked you not to do. Didn't you understand what I said?
DR. HORN: The way I understood you, Mr. President, was that I may read important parts from them. That is what I did. It concerns only important extracts.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you going to find an important passage in each of the 300 documents?
…
COL. POKROVSKY: My objection was dictated by the wish to save time and is of a very practical nature.
From the moment when a certain document-well, at least the contents of it - from the moment even a brief account of it is recorded in the transcript this material becomes the property of the press; and it seems to me that it is not in our interests to have a document which is a known falsification, and the fate of which has not been determined by the Tribunal, that such a document should be turned over to certain circles and that it should be made public.
Meanwhile, among the documents which have been presented by Dr. Horn, there are such documents; and it is not quite clear to me why these particular documents were delayed in translation, why these documents were presented later than others. And on the basis of this consideration I thought it my duty to address the Tribunal, and I think that the Tribunal will consider the reason for my objections.
THE PRESIDENT: I follow what you mean now with reference to documents being communicated to the press, and steps ought to be taken on that: The Tribunal will rule now that documents, upon the admissibility of which the Tribunal has not ruled, are not to be given to the press. I believe there have been some infractions of that in the past; but that is the Tribunal's ruling, that documents should not be given to the press until they have been admitted in evidence before this Court.
COL. POKROVSKY: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: I ought perhaps to add that the Tribunal are not in complete control of this matter. It is for the Prosecution to see - and also possibly for the Defense - that documents should not be given to the press until they have been admitted in evidence here.
COL. POKROVSKY: Up to now the order was such if the documents mentioned in Court are recorded in the transcript, then they become public property.
SIR DAVID MAXWELLFYFE: Your Honor, I wonder if I could help on that practical point, because it is one which has given us a little concern.
As Your Lordship knows, the practice has been that the documents have been given some 24 hours before they are produced in Court, on the understanding which has been practically entirely, completely, complied with, that the press would not publish until the document is put in evidence. And, My Lord, I am sure that if the Tribunal expressed the wish that where any objection is taken to a document and the Tribunal reserves the question of admissibility, the press would, in the spirit with which they have complied with the previous practice, comply at once with the Tribunal's desire and not publish it in these circumstances. I think that in practice that would solve the difficulty which Your Lordship has just mentioned