1947-02-26, #2: Doctors' Trial (late morning)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
EXAMINATION BY DR. WILLE (Counsel for Professor Weltz):
May I be permitted to put a few questions to the witness, Professor Schroeder?
Q: You were discussing previously with Dr. Sauter the Aviation Medical Institute of Adlershof and you were answering a few questions. The leader of that Institute was Dr. Ruff. My question is, do you know the Aviation Medical Institute of Munich that was leaded by Professor Weltz? Do you know it from your activity?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know how it is comparable to the Institute in Adlershof or what differences there were?
A: Yes. There was a very great difference. The Institute at Adlershof was attached to technicalities and, therefore, in its research work had to adapt itself to the needs of technicians. The Institute of Professor Weltz when it originated, I think that was in 1935 or '36, was attached to the Physiological Institute of the University of Munich, and because of this difference there resulted a difference in the tasks. The Institute in Munich dealt mainly basic research work, research work which animated from work in physiology.
Q: As I assume, you probably know the scientific work of the Munich Institute and I should like to put a question to you and I am sure you can answer on behalf of your activity at that time. How was his work evaluated scientifically? Was it recognized?
A: From the Institute of Munich a number of theses were worked in the very young field of Aviation Medicine at that time. I remember to work before the war about the change of the blood distribution in the body when accelerated and works of that nature were carried on at that time. This was basic physiological work which originated with that Institute.
Q: So, one could will say that the activity of Professor Woltz was important and, from your point of view, would it be saying too much that Professor Weltz, in a certain sense, was the discoverer of the cold problem and I must tell you how I arrived at that assumption. Professor Weltz was attached to the Aviation Medical Institute as an observer and he was near the channel at the time and observed the catastrophes that resulted from flyers who drowned in the channel who were rescued and died from cold. It was found how important it was to find out methods to prevent death from cold. I should like to ask, is this result of Professor Woltz one of the first in the field?
A: Yes. That is correct. During the Western campaign the fields of tasks of the various Air Fleets, two and three, during that time I had certain connections about it as I spoke yesterday, and similar experiences were made within Air Fleet No. 3 — the Fleet which covered the French part of the coast.
When we left that territory Air Fleet No. 3 to which Weltz belonged at that time took over the entire coast from Holland up to Spain. Consequently, I had sufficient opportunity to remain in contact with these questions and I remember some later discussions in my agency. I was told that the first discussions about the systematical treatment of cold damages were begun by the Institution of Professor Weltz, I think in 1942.
Q: Do you what organization of the Wehrmacht sponsored and took over this discussion of Professor Weltz and used it for their own purposes. In order to make this question more clearly: Do you know that a certain notice was distributed, the subject of which was this statement of Weltz and therapeutical methods to be employee?
A: I cannot say that. I think among the regulations issued by the Army one such notice was distributed, but I cannot say any more definitely.
Q: I am sure you probably didn't know the exact connection. Now, can I say with right, that is, a certain of the research work when he tried to clarify this problem was with animals? Do you know he only carried out experiments with animals?
A: Yes he did that. He performed these experiments on little animals, up to the pig and comparisons can be made of changes with the pig with human physiology.
Q: Do you know that Professor Weltz at a later date receive a research assignment in the field of cold? Also, that this research assignment was never actually carried out? Did you ever hear about that? Do you know anything about that?
A: I assume that since he was an animal expert he probably continued with these experiments.
Q: You probably cannot say that with certainty since it was before your time. Do you know Professor Weltz in his capacity as an x-ray specialist?
A: Yes.
Q: You know that he is an x-ray specialist for many scientific works. Do you know he was the leader of the x-ray Congress in Munich in 1938?
A: Weltz was one of the leading x-ray specialist. The Congress of 1938 in Munich is very much in my memory since I was present there myself and I believe this was the very first opportunity where I started to get into closer contact with Weltz.
Q: I have no further questions.
EXAMINATION BY DR. STEINBAUER (Counsel for the defendant Beiglbeck:)
Q: Witness, you were speaking about the consulting physicians. My question is — is a consulting physician in a superior positions regards departmental physicians in a hospital?
A: Do you mean consulting physician?
Q: Yes.
A: Yes, he is.
Q: The Indictment maintains that Dr. Beiglbeck was a consulting physician of the Air Force. Is that correct, or is it not?
A: No. He was considered as such but as I remember now that was never executed so the designation in the Indictment, namely consulting physician of the Air Force, is erroneous.
Q: According to your knowledge, did Dr. Beiglboeck ever attend meeting of the consulting physicians?
A: No, I cannot say that. I was only present in 1944 during that meeting and I know that he did not attend then. I would not assume that he took part in the other meetings since merely because of special consideration only consulting physicians were assigned.
Q: Was Dr. Beiglboeck ever invited to participate in any of the discussions about sea water experiments?
A: No.
Q: Did he receive any decision about the experiments whether they were to be carried through and how they were to be planned?
A: The arrangement and design of the experiment was communicated to him as it was established by Eppinger, Becker-Freyseng.
Q: Was it provided that the execution of the experiments was to be controlled in Dachau by Eppinger and others?
A: As far as I remember, even Eppinger himself initiated the idea in order to inform himself about the development of the experiments.
Q: Was the name Dr. Beiglboeck already mentioned in Himmler's letter; that is, before Beiglboeck knew about his being assigned for that purpose?
A: Yes, that is to be assumed. It is to be assumed that Beiglboeck, when the letter was sent off, did not know anything about the assignment, for his name had been mentioned by his chief, Eppinger, on the basis of his education and training with the Eppinger Clinic. He was the man who was particularly capable for that purpose and he was, therefore, suggested by Eppinger, and it is quite possible that when he was mentioned in the letter he had no knowledge about it.
Q: Is it correct that Grawitz assured you of the voluntary nature of the subjects?
A: Yes.
Q: Was Dr. Beiglboeck informed by you in the same sense?
A: Yes.
Q: Did the SS approach you when selecting the physicians who were to participate in the experiments, and were you told to consider political points of view?
A: No.
Q: Was any supervision carried out by the Gestapo in that direction?
A: No.
Q: Was Dr. Beiglboeck informed to the effect that the experiments were to be carried out in the Air Force Hospital at Braunschweig?
A: Yes.
Q: Was Dr. Beiglboeck at that time in Braunschweig himself?
A: No. At that time he was not in the hospital of Braunschweig any longer.
Q: What position did he hold while he was working at Braunschweig?
A: At that time he was attached to the Internal Department.
Q: Was he in a leading position or was he in a subordinate position?
A: He was not in a leading position.
DR. STEINBAUER: Thank you.
EXAMINATION BY DR. PELCKMANN:
Pelckmann, counsel for the defendant Schaefer.
Q: Witness, you were saying that you saw Schaefer for the first time when he presented his means through which to make sea water potable?
A: Yes.
Q: How often did you see him altogether?
A: Perhaps two or three times.
DR. PELCKMANN: Thank you.
EXAMINATION BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q: Witness, you testified this morning concerning recommendations which you might make for a promotion of certain of your staff. Through what channels and to whom would such a recommendation go if you made one?
A: Promotions of officers were dealt with according to the rank of the officer either by the Commander in Chief of the Air Force — that was the case from any general's rank up — or they were dealt with by the Fuehrer of the German Reich.
Proposals and suggestions for that purpose had to include the reason given by the competent chief; that is to say, I made these suggestions and they were then sent to the personnel office of the Air Force, where all the suggestions came in from various fields and from there, in turn, they were prepared for presentation to the Commander in Chief or the chief of the government.
Q: Your recommendation then for promotion of one of your subordinates would after being processed by the Personnel Division go directly to the Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe, is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: You testified yesterday that you heard that human experiments had been performed on human beings in concentration camps. When and where did you hear that, and from whom?
A: I heard that when preparing the sea water experiments when difficulties occurred in the institutes belonging to the Luftwaffe to start these experiments as it was originally intended.
Q: When was that, witness?
A: May, 1944.
Q: And where was that, did you say?
A: That was in my agency.
Q: And who told you?
A: Becker-Freyseng.
Q: And what did he tell you about these experiments?
A: He told me that my predecessor — I cannot repeat the word — approached the SS in the case of experiments which had become necessary and subsequently was informed by Holzloehner that experiments were being performed at the camp at Dachau.
Q: Were you then informed upon what persons these experiments were being performed?
A: No. I assume that Becker-Freyseng did not know any of these details.
EXAMINATION BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q: Witness, you made the answer a little while ago in answer to the question, "Do you know that Dr. Weltz carried out his experiments only with animals?", you answered, "Yes." Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: How do you know that?
A: Approximately at the time when I entered my office, and that was January 1944, I visited Professor Weltz in Munich who at that time was ill. I did that because I had to make a visit in Munich for other reasons anyway. The reason for my visit was only an ordinary visit to an ill colleague. During that opportunity Weltz was speaking about the work which his institute had performed during the last years, that is, during the time when I was absent from the Central Office. At that time he outlined his working program in a few words up to that period of time and emphasized that he was still continuing with the old line, namely, to continue basic research work and to further it wherever it was possible by experiments on animals. During that talk, which in itself was very short because Mr. Weltz had just come through a severe attack of scarlet fever, he told me these facts in a few words or sentences, and that is how I know something about it.
Q: What gave rise to the discussions; was there some controversy existing in German medical circles at that time concerning the question of whether or not there might be something ethically wrong with experimenting upon human beings?
A: This discussion didn't take place from that point of view; it was merely an information about the work performed in his institute.
Q: I understand, but you made some statement to the effect that Dr. Weltz said that he was sticking to the old method of experimentation and intended to further that line of experimentation, that is to say, with animals wherever he had an opportunity to do so. Now, I ask you this; Was there some question in German medical circles at the time about the propriety of experimentation with human subjects; or, was there some controversy at the time in medical circles about these matters?
A: With regard to the admissibility or necessity, or such questions regarding human experiments, no mention was made as to that on that occasion I had just come back from the front and was not at all acquainted with these lines of thought. I only started thinking on that line here in Nurnberg. I can even say, with certainty, that a discussion with reference to experiment on human beings didn't take place at all. I may bring the word "method" which you just mentioned into the right connection, that is, how it was used at that time; that is to say, his old method of basic research work that time he explained to me that the manner of work as it was carried on in his institute will still continue to be in line with basic research, and he wanted me, as his new chief, to give my confirmation with regard to the method and line that his institute was taking so he could maintain such work.
Q: At about the period when it was contemplated that your experiment would be conducted upon concentration camp inmates, did you know then what type or class of concentration camp Inmates were being held at Dachau?
A: No.
Q: Do you know what type of such inmates were being held there at any time during the period of the war?
A: I knew only about one; these were people who had been excelled from the Wehrmacht. In our regulations we received the necessary orders to what effect; that is to say, people who were repeatedly subject to punishment and who did not maintain the disciplinary orders of the troops and proven endangered it. I remember this fact exactly because at one time in my capacity as Fleet Physician, I read through all the orders to that effect. Since I held a rank at that time — since I had an officer working with me at that time whom I had to warn because of his bad behavior that he may be sent to the police and then be sent to a concentration camp.
Q: Can you state by what process or writ such a man in the Luftwaffe would be placed in the concentration camp; would it be upon an order, by the commanding officer; or upon your order, upon a decree entered as a result of the court-martial; or a directive; just how did the nan get in there?
A: It was a prerequisite that this man had to have received repeated punishments; furthermore it was a prerequisite that the competent superior had to be convinced that this man by further punishment could not be corrected. Then, and this is something I personally experienced at one time, the competent disciplinary superior had to give this man a warning in writing in which he told him that he had received a certain number of previous punishments; that his behavior and demeanor with the company was so bad that he was not worthy of continuing to be a soldier, and that at the next opportunity he became subject to punishment he would be sent to the police in order to be transferred to a concentration camp.
This had to be handed to that man and he had to sign it, the acknowledgment of this regulation. If such a case re-occurred, his disciplinary superior had to demand the transfer of this man to a camp giving a detailed reason. This letter had to be sent to the police, as it said in the regulations. The approval of such a transfer was then given by a superior who had the disciplinary authority of a commanding general. He had to confirm the fact and only then could he approve the transfer. That is how it was.
Q: Doctor, how many human subjects did you calculate or estimate would be necessary to fulfill and successfully carry out your experiments?
A: What were you talking about — the sea water experiments?
Q: I am talking about the experiments which you said you had something to do with; the sea water experiment; and what experiments do you now say that were carried on at Dachau as a result of your instigation.
A: The sea water experiments.
Q: How many human subjects did you calculate or estimate would be necessary to successfully carry on and conclude these experiments?
A: According to the suggestion as it was made to me at that time there were forty.
Q: You estimated that would take forty subjects, forty human subjects.
A: Yes.
Q: Now then, at the time how many men from the Luftwaafe were incarcerated in the Dachau prison camp?
A: That I don't know.
Q: Do you know whether there were any?
A: Yes.
Q: How do you know that?
A: I heard that on the basis of such transfers as they were demanded.
A: You heard it from whom?
A: During my activity as Fleet Physician, this came to my knowledge whenever any such case was a subject of discussion. Fortunately such a thing didn't occur frequently, but now and again there were some such events and such transfers had to be carried out, carried through. During conversations with our Chief Judge, who was the chief of justice within the Fleet, such questions were now and again discussed. I once asked Judge Schreiber how future development of this reassure was handled and he told me that as far as he pursued those cases he always found out that they had gone to Dachau, and this is how I realized how this was done.
Q: But you say that the case where you were obliged to take someone from the Luftwaffe and send them to Dachau occurred only very rarely; is that true?
A: Yes.
Q: How many such transfers were actually carried through to your knowledge?
A: That I don't know. I cannot tell you that under oath, but there may have been a few dozen. I can only tell you that from the sphere of my activity as Air Fleet Physician because at the time I discussed these things with the chief judge. At that time during a period of three years, I think two dozen people were mentioned, but I in the year of 1944 was only concerned with questions from the air force, but the same regulation was applicable to the army and the navy; that is to say, those Wehrmacht regulations were handled in the same manner every where, so that the army probably had to transfer many more people than the people that came from our sphere.
Q: But aside from the fact that there were at Dachau these men who had been taken from the Luftwaffe, the army and the navy, you had no idea that any other types of prisoners were at Dachau?
A: No, I can say that very honestly here under oath, namely, that I didn't know that any other non-German people were there. I heard that people from civil justice was sent there who made themselves subject to punishment.
Q: But at that time you had no idea of the number of inmates at Dachau either as German political or criminal prisoners or as men who had been sent there for delinquencies in the Wehrmacht or non-German nationals?
A: No, I heard nothing at all about non-German people. I considered them all to be German prisoners.
Q: Did you have any idea at the time of the size of the Dachau Concentration Camp or of the facilities there for housing the prisoners?
A: No, I saw Dachau for the first time when I was sent there myself as a prisoner.
Q: Can you tell the Tribunal after these salt-water experiments were approved who actually requisitioned the persons who were to become the human subjects of the experiment?
A: No. The request went to the Chief of the German Police through my letter to the Reichs Minister of Interior. How this was done in the inter-office communications of the Reichs Minister of the Interior, I don't know, because this was another Reichs agency who, in their own competency, had to settle this question.
Q: Do you know when the Dachau camp was first established as a camp or prison for, oh, either German political or criminal prisoners or non-German prisoners of any kind?
A: I cannot say when it was first instituted for the very first time. I gained, knowledge of it as a camp in the year of 1937 or 1938 when the case of Pastor Niemoeller came up. At that time I heard from circles who were acquainted with Pastor Niemoeller that he, after the proceedings against him, was sent to the camp at Dachau. At that opportunity I for the first time consciously heard the name of Dachau.
Q: Well, did you gain any impression at that time about what kind of camp it was? What it's purpose was?
A: No.
Q: I believe that you made some statement to the effect that the arrangement and design of the experiment in which the defendant Beiglboeck was to take part was communicated to him; is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: By whom was it communicated?
A: Beiglboeck at that time was ordered to Berlin to come to my agency. Then he went at first to Becker-Freyseng who greeted him shortly and perhaps already told him some details. Then he came to me together with Becker-Freyseng and rejected. I greeted him and I told him that we had considered him as the leading person in charge of this experiment since his chief during his civil activities, Prof. Eppinger, had suggested him because of his pre-education, experience and personality and that he was deemed especially capable to conduct and lead this series of experiments.
Q: In your letter, witness, to the Minister of the Interior concerning these experiments, what did you say to him?
A: After an introductory sentence which was to convey certain connections with some assistance demanded further on where I said something like this:
"You, Reichs Minister, at former occasions gave opportunity to the Luftwaffe to carry out experiments which were urgent and again I am before a decision which demands of me to request you to make it possible for me to carry on an experiment at a camp." Something like that. And then a discussion followed what was intended by us, where the purpose of the experiment laid and, furthermore, that we ourselves in a small frame had performed these experiments on our own personnel and that we were now looking for some results by trying a large number of experimental subject and we wanted to decide which one of the two methods would be the most expedient for the needs.
Q: You said that in your letter to the Minister of the Interior you made some reference to former occasions upon which experiments had been conducted. What did you mean by that witness? What were the former occasions?
A: This was the result of the cold experiments of which we had been informed; cold experiments that were conducted by Holzloehner.
Q: Do you know, witness, or when did you find out that there were concentration camps in Germany in which non-German nationals were kept or restrained?
A: I only learned that during my imprisonment after the collapse. I can repeat here once more; up until the time of the collapse I knew of two concentration camps. One was at Oranienburg. Every man resident in Berlin knew that. That was nothing. The second one as I already mentioned, was Dachau. Whatever went beyond that — whatever existed in Germany beyond that, I only learned after the collapse. I believe that this can be made a little more credible by the following — it seems almost like a fairy tale if someone says something like that today. Up until September 1943 I wasn't in Germany at all and when afterwards I was sent to Berlin as a Medical Chief I had no opportunity at all to receive any insight into these affairs.
Q: I would assume that the German military system, as most others do, have two places of confinement for soldiers who have offended against the law. One is called generally a disciplinary barracks for less serious offenses and another is the penitentiary or prison for more serious offenders. If a soldier committed an offense and was convicted of the offense which called for a sentence of death, where would he be sent for confinement until the sentence of death could be executed?
A: There were so-called Wehrmacht prisons in which there were only prisoners of all of the three Wehrmacht branches. I remember one such name as the Wehrmacht prison at Germersheim. I think there was another prison by I don't know its name. I can't remember its name. As we learned from the regulation sheets such prisoners were selected for labor and sent to the concentration camps in order to work there in armament work for the war effort and they mention one thing. Mr. President; in the Wehrmacht there were two forms of punishment. One was the so-called disciplinary punishment which was not in the hands of the judges but in the hands of the military superior, who was authorized to do that. For instance, there was the disciplinary authority of the company commander or the regimental commander, division or corps commander. These authorities include reprimands and also punishment which deprived people of their liberty up to four weeks arrest. This was not called imprisonment but was called arrest. These authorities of disciplinary punishment was to prevent every little detail being dealt with by courts.
Punishment by court only started in the case of a certain severe act and which could only be judged by judges. That is something that you have to differentiate in the Wehrmacht Penal Regulations — the disciplinary and the juridical punishment.
Q: I understand that very well, That was what I mentioned in my question, but would a German member of the Armed Forces who had committed murder or some crime for which he was sentenced to death — would he be sent to a prison or simply to a concentration camp? Would he be put to work in a concentration camp when he was under sentence of death for murder?
A: Mr. President, you are asking me too much. I don't know these smaller details. I couldn't tell with certainty how these matters were conducted.
Q: Witness, you have detailed at some length the manner and official channels through which you passed in order to get your seawater experiments approved and human subjects in concentration camps made available for the experiments. Now, then, in proceeding in the manner that you did, did you consider that you followed official military procedure as you then understood it?
A: Excuse me. I didn't quite understand the translation. I understood the first part. Would you repeat the second part?
Q: In proceeding in this manner to have your experiments approved, did you consider that you went through official channels and followed official military procedure, as you understood official channels and military procedure at the time? Did you understand my question?
A: I don't know whether I quite understood what you were saying. Will you please repeat the question?
Q: Are the translation channels open?
THE INTERPRETER: Yes.
Q: You have told the Tribunal what you did and the official channels—military channels— through which you passed in getting your sea-water experiments approved, and men, prisoners in the concentration camp, made available to you for the experiments.
Is that true?
A: Yes.
Q: Now then, in following the procedure that you followed, was that accordance with military procedure for getting such matters approved?
A: A military procedure did not exist for that purpose. I had to see how I could safeguard the execution of the experiments in the most expedient manner and under the consideration of all prerequisites which are necessary for the health and other questions.
Q: The reason I asked the question is this: let us assume that the proof shows that other experiments in the field of special research were carried out for the purpose of determining important medical problems that existed during the war. Would the general procedure that you followed in getting your sea-water experiments approved and material made available for experiments — would that be the ordinary procedure that would be followed by some of these other gentlemen who had fields of special research in the Wehrmacht or in the Armed Forces or in the Navy? Do you have any idea?
A: I assume so. I can't imagine any other possibility.
Q: In other words, it would be impossible within the framework of the German Wehrmacht as well as it would be impossible in the framework of any other organization, to determine that concentration camp inmates would be made available in certain numbers, to determine where the laboratories for such purpose would be established, to determine where these concentration camp inmates would come from, to determine how they would be taken from the camp to the seat of the laboratory and to determine how they would be treated and to determine what founds should be made available for that research — that would be impossible without the matter being taken up through the channels in virtually the manner in which you proceeded in taking up your experiment, wouldn't it?
A: Well, yes, as far as I understand you.
Q: Yes. Could you suggest any other way that a project that needed all of these things could be approved and all of the material and the laboratory and the human subjects be brought together without some sort of official procedure — through official channels by which these things would be approved, the appropriated and the material allocated? There would be no other way to do, would it, defendant?
A: No, I believe that it can be explained very simply.
Q: Well, will you explain?
A: The situation itself helps along the solution of such a problem.
Q: But there must be a great many agencies who naturally would gain knowledge of an approved experiment; wouldn't there be an order to have that experiment put into execution? For example, if there was a particular type of special research, that special research first would be suggested by someone who thought that research necessary, would it not?
A: Yes.
Q: Then the problem of where to conduct that special research would considered by someone and approved by someone wouldn't it?
A: Yes.
Q: Then would there not arise the question of financing or making the fund available for the research and in that particular some other governmental agency would have to know about the matter so that they could make the funds available; isn't that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: Then it would have to be determined that certain individuals from concentration camps would be made available?
A: Yes.
Q: That fact would have to become know to someone within the framework of the German Government who had something to do with concentration camp inmates, wouldn't it?
A: Yes. It wouldn't be possible otherwise.
Q: Then someone who had held the authority or the responsibility or the discretion to select certain individuals would have to make that selection, wouldn't they?
A: Yes, that would come within the sphere of the Minister of the Interior.
Q: Yes. Then let us assume that these concentration camp inmates were at Buchenwald and the laboratory was at Dachau, someone would have to be responsible for transporting those concentration camp inmates from Buchenwald to Dachau, wouldn't they?
A: Yes, that would be an inter-office affair of the Minister of the Interior.
Q: And someone would have to supply the motor trucks or the railroad cars and furnish the fuel for implementing the railroad cars or motor trucks to get the people over there. Isn't that the procedure through which it would follow?
A: Yes.
Q: In other words, a problem or task of this kind could not possibly occur without the whole matter passing through channels and virtually everyone who came in contact with that experiment officially from top to bottom would have a knowledge of it. Isn't that true? Either the person himself have knowledge of it or his agency or department? Wouldn't that necessarily follow because all of those matters would be detailed in official reports or requests, would it not?
A: Well, but that would have been an inter-office arrangement within the sphere of the central agency which was responsible for the camp, that is, the Chief of the German Police, for instance.
Q: I understand that but there would have to be, in the German Army as well as in any other Army, records kept and details approved and all of that sort of thing, in detailed order. Is that not true?
A: Yes. If I may explain it, giving myself as an example. At that time I sent the letter say, at first, I sent it only away after I had consulted the possibility of the experiment with Grawitz. And after I had informed him how the whole thing was brought by us so that he could pass on this information to Himmler in case it became necessary. Then this letter was sent off and after possibly four weeks when Beiglboeck had arrived at Dachau —in the meantime he was given an opportunity to carry out this work. Whatever lay in between that, how in the administrative way this was organized, we never learned that as I just said, it was an inter-office affair of this authority. We only saw the initial point and the end point of this route.
MR. PRESIDENT: As the Tribunal desires to propound some more questions to the witness, the witness in this case will be put under the rule and not permitted to consult with other defendants or with his counsel during the noon recess. That rule will be followed only when it is directly requested by the Tribunal and it is requested in this case. The Tribunal will be recessed until a quarter before two o'clock.
(A recess was taken)