DR. SIEMERS: Yes—the witness Soltmann? I have given his address in my application.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you?
DR. SIEMERS: It is Falkenberg near Moosach in Upper Bavaria.
Number 16, Admiral Schultze is in Hamburg, and it is an easy matter to have him testify personally here in Nuremberg. The Prosecution have accused the Defendant Raeder of participating in the National Socialist policy of conquest. This accusation is unfounded. Raeder, both in Norway and in France, constantly directed his efforts towards bringing about peace; in other words, not towards the effecting of any final conquest of the countries. In this Raeder found himself in a strong opposition to Hitler, and only after much urging did Raeder succeed in enabling himself to negotiate with Darlan in Paris concerning the possible conclusion of a peace. I believe that such a positive intervention for a quick termination of the war with France is important enough, in a trial like this, to have the witness testify personally. I cannot understand how Sir David, in view of his accusation, can say that this point is irrelevant. The Prosecution has constantly declared that the Defendant Raeder was agitating for war.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not believe that Sir David did say it was irrelevant. He suggested interrogatories.
DR. SIEMERS: I made a note that Sir David said the witness was irrelevant, but that he would, as a concession, agree to an affidavit.
THE PRESIDENT: Then I was wrong.
DR. SIEMERS: I simply wanted to make my position clear on the question as to whether or not this witness is irrelevant. I believe I have shown that he is relevant.
THE PRESIDENT: You want the witness? You would not agree to an affidavit or an interrogatory? Is that right?
DR. SIEMERS: I ask the Tribunal to hear Schultze as a witness here in Nuremberg, because, in my opinion in view of the principles of the Indictment, it is a vital point that Raeder’s attitude toward the entire problem is shown by facts prevailing at that time, and not by present assertions and statements.