RAEDER: May I please see which page this is on? I have not seen it yet. Yes, he says, “in nearly all spheres of naval armament...”
That is not the case, for in the sphere of...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: That’s what I put to you; is that right?
RAEDER: No, it is not right. We had not even built as many ships as we could have built, but—as I have explained repeatedly, the violations were concerned with...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You’ve explained that.
RAEDER: ...violations were...
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Really, we do know the position of your shipbuilding yards. You’ve given that explanation and it’s a matter of discussion whether it’s of any value. I am not going to argue with you. I am asking you this question: Are you saying that the admirals of your historical section are wrong in that sentence that I read out to you?
RAEDER: Yes, I am stating that. It is wrong as it stands.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I see. Well, now let’s pass on—the Tribunal will judge that—to the statement of Admiral Assmann. It goes on:
“This probably took place in no other sphere, on the one hand so early, and on the other hand under such difficult circumstances, as in the construction of a new submarine arm. The Treaty of Versailles had only been in force a few months (since 10 January 1920) when it was already violated in this point.”