Friday, 26 July, 1946
― ― ―
INTERNATIONAL MILITARY TRIBUNAL
FOR THE FAR EAST
Count House of the Tribunal
War Ministry Building
The Trubunal met, pursuant to adjournment, at 0930.
― ― ―
For the Tribunal, same as before.
For the Prosecution Section, same as before.
For the Defence Section, same as before.
― ― ―
(English to Japanese, Japanese to English, English to Chinese, and Chinese to English interpretation was made by the Language Section, IMTFE.)
MARSHAL OF THE COURT: The International Military Tribunal for the Far East is now resumed.
THE PRESIDENT: Except OKAWA, who is represented by counsel, all the accused are present.
Does counsel desire to mention any matter? Mr. Warren.
Mr. WARREN: If the Tribunal please, there was no particular time yesterday for me to say what I am going to. When this witness took the stand I stated that the defense had not been notified. I find that our section was notified, and in the manner the prosecution had told the Tribunal, however, that information did not get to us because we are all very skimpy on help; it did not get to us and I went to apologize to the prosecution and to the Tribunal for having made a remark which was not true.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Sutton.
MR. SUTTON: May it please the Tribunal, in answer to the inquiry propounded by the Court just before adjournment on yesterday, with regard to the relevancy of evidence on the subject of opium and narcotics, I desire to call the Court's attention to the fact that in counts 1, 3 4, 5, 6, 27 and 38 of the Indictment there is the charge of waging aggressive war. In each of these counts reference is specifically
made to Appendix “B” ―― I beg pardon, to Appendix “A”, Section 4. This section, Section “A” of Appendix 4, reads as follows: “METHODS OF CORRUPTION AND COERTION IN CHINA AND OTHER OCCUPIED TERRITORIES: During the whole period covered by this Indicement[inducement?], successive Japanese Governments, through their military and naval commanders and civilian agents in China and other territories which they had occupied or designed to occupy, pursued a systematic policy of weakening the native inhabitants will to resist successive Japanese Governments, through their military and naval commanすders and civilian agents in China and other territories which they had occupied or designed to occupy, pursued a systematic policy of weakening the native inhabitants['] will to resist by atrocities and cruelties, by force and threats of force, by bribery and corruption, by intrigue among local politicians and generals, by directly and indirectly encouraging increased production and importation of opium and other narcotics and by promoting the sale and consumption consumption of such drugs among such people.”
MR. McMANUS: If your Honor please, I think the Court knows and we know what the Indictment reads, and the appendix thereto. I don't see any reason to read it into the record. It is there; the Court knows. Just why couldn't counsel make reference to it rather than reading it? We will know what it is.
THE PRESIDENT: The defense raised the objection and it is for you to establish it, and
you may go further than making mere reference. Pers.onally I am glad you to read that.
MR. SUTTON: This position taken by the defense today is quite inconsistent with the pisition which they took on yesterday.
THE PRESIDENT: I think you have read enough. You had better keep those headphones on or I will have to repeat myself.
MR. SUTTON: May it please the Tribunal, I should like to refer to the fact that in the opening address of the chief of counsel this statement was made. I will read from page 35 of that document one sentence: “The evidence will also disclose the opium was used as a military waepon to break the morale of the people and to destroy their will to fight, as well as a mean of revenue to finance Japan's armies.” That is all we wish to say on this point.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection is overruled.
MR. WARREN: Your honor, may l be heard on that before I am overruled?
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, no, it is obviously a matter upon which evidence can be received. We have heard enough, Mr. Warren.
MR. WARREN: On another point, then, your
Honor, we should like to object to it, on the ground that his questions are, as you pointed out, entirely leading.
THE PRESIDENT: I doubt whether I was right. I looked at the record, and unfortunately I do not hear everything that is said at that lecturn, because counsel sometimes turn away from the microphone.
MR. WARREN: And, in addiction, your Honor, it assumes a fact that was not in evidence. I made the same type of previous objection.
THE PRESIDENT: Surely you can assume the fact that narcotics are used in Nanking.
R O B E R T O. W I L S O N, called as a witness on behalf of the pro.secution, resumed the stand and testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY MR. SUTTON:
MR. SUTTON: Will the questions be read back to the witness?
(hereupon, the last question was read by the President from the Official transcript of Thursday, 25 July 1946, as follows:
“Q Was there any change in the sales of opium in Nanking following the occupation of the city by the Japanese in December, 1937?”)
A Prior to the Japanese occupation, I had never seen an opium den with a sign on the outside showing that the sale of opium was going on in that place. It was a capital offense to be found selling opium. About one year after the occupation, in the Spring of 1939, I was bicycling down one mile on Shengjao Road, between Kiang Tang Chieh Methodist Church and Chung Ji-leu, I counted twenty-one opium dens openly ―― twenty-one places openly selling opium. These places all had the Chinese characters “Kwang To” prominently displayed in front
of the place.
Q Doctor, what is the meaning of the Chinese character “Kwang-To”?
A That is one of the tetms used for opium and means “official esrth.”
MR. SUTTON: The defense may cross-examine the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Warren.
MT. WARREN: Apparently there is no cross-examination, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: No cross-examination?
MR. SUTTON: We desire to call as the next witness Dr. Hsu Chuan-wing.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand a Japanese counsel wants to say something.
(Whereupon, the witness left the box).
MR. McMANUS: If the President pleases, we are undermined at this time, at least, we thought there would be no cross-examination concerning this witness. We understand from Dr. KIYOSE that there might be one Japanese counsel who might like to ask a few questions.
THE PRESIDENT: We will give permission to cross-examine the witness, who will be recalled for that purpose. Bring doctor back. The doctor
may have gotten away. I think you had better go on with the next witness.
MR. KEENAN: May it please the Court ――
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Chief Prosevutor.
MR. KEENAN: Yesterday the Court, as I understand it, made the ruling that when a witness spoke in English language the practice of permitting the offering of the affidavit would not be countenanced.
THE PRESIDENT: Put it this way: when he is a European, born in America, and educated there up to university standard.
MR. KEENAN: With great respect, I want to suggest two matters to the Court. First of all, the Charter itself, in setting forth the admissibility of affidavits, specifically makes no distinction as to the language, either in the original affidavit as filed, or the language of any witness who would testify as to germane subjects. And secondary, in the best estimate of counsel, such a ruling would prolong the length of this trial a matter perhaps between four and five weeks. With great respect, we want to inform the Court of our views and our estimates of time upon that subject, so that if there is a profound reason for the distinction, we do not care to urge the
matter any further, but if it is compatible with ordinary trial, we greatly request the Court's reconsideration of that ruling to determine if we are within the provisions of the Charter in offering the evidence in affidavit form, as already I understand has been the during the proceedings in this Court. We think that in fairness to the Court, we ought to apprise the Court of our intention in future, from the time element, so that that might be given whatever consideration it deserves in the minds of this Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Obviously, the Charter does not deprive us of the discretion we exercised yesterday, that is, to insist upon the examination in chief being confucted orally and not by affidavit. No time was lost in following the normal course. The oral examination was conducted as speedily as the affidavits could have been read. In receiving affidavits we have exercised more liberality than had been displayed at Huernberg. The Court will continue to exercise its judgment in each case.
(Whereupon, Dr. Robert O. Wilson returned to the witness box).
MR. S. OKAMOTO: I am OKAMOTO, Shoichi, counsel for the defendant MUTO, Akira.
THE PRESIDENT: Doctor, you are still on your former oath.
MR. S. OKAMOTO: I also believe so. In line with the Court's views, I will be quite pleased if the oath should be re-administered ―― should be administered again.
THE PRESIDENT: There is no need for that. Please put your questions or retire from the lecturn.
BY MR. S. OKAMOTO:
Q You have testified that the doctors and nurses at your hospital ran away before the fall of Nanking. Does that not also apply to the inhabitants of the adjacent districts?
A The population of Nanking before the war was slightly over one milion. At the time that the Japanese took the city a majority of the inhabitants had left and the population was less than half a milion.
Q I did not hear the time. When was that that it decreased to that number?
A During the month of November and the first two weeks in December.
Q Then you aware that before the fall of Nanking a great number of the people hsd already fled?
A That is true.
Q Is it correct that you had 170 beds in your hospital?
A The number is usually given as 180.
Q And you say that these beds immediately became full ―― became full immediately after the fall of Nanking. When was this?
A Within the first week after the fall of Nanking. Many patients were turned away because we had not enough beds.
Q About how many patients did you turn away? Do you remember the general figures, the approximate figures?
A I would have no way of telling that, principally because my work was in the operating room and I was there busy most of the time day and night for a few weeks after the occupation. The others handled the out patients and had to turn away patients when there were no beds.
Q You have stated that many of your patients, these patients that you treated, had wounds. But as the translation was incorrect, I would like to point out one example. For instance, you say thst a woman
of anout forty had a wound in her neck and that the muscles were cut and were hanging loose. But what was this caused by?
A A Japanese sword.
Q Were not many of the other wounds due to fragments of shells?
A Not at that time. During the fall in October and September when we were under many air raids we received numerous wound fragments. But at the time that we are referring to, after the fall of Nanking, there was no fighting.
MR. S. OKAMOTO: That is all I have to say.
CAPTAIN KLEIMAN: May I?
THE PRESIDENT: The Japanese counsel who has just cross-examined was under misapprehension, but you are not. We will not allow you to cross-examine.
CAPTAIN KLEIMAN: If it please your Honor, I sit in a far corner of the Tribunal and the head table did not consult me as to whether I wished to cross-examine.
THE PRESIDENT: You have a voice and you could have used it from there.
CAPTAIN KLEIMAN: I just had two question in mind, very short.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, he was not recalled
for cross-examination by you, Captain Kleiman, but for cross-examination by Japanese counsel.
MR. ITO: I am ITO, Kiyoshi, counsel for the defendent MATSUI, Iwane.
BY MR. ITO:
Q As I was unable to get your testimony very well yesterday, being unable to understand English, I would like to just ask you this question.
You say that a Chinese woman was raped by a Japanese soldier and that two months she showed sign of being in the second stage of syphilis. Was that correct?
A That is true.
Q Thank you. According to my observations ―― of course I am an amateur so they may not be correct ―― manifestations of the second stage of syphilis are not unusually until after over three months have passed after infection. But is that Correct?
A That is the third stage.
Q Is that a difference in theory? The book that I have here says three momths.
A I am sure I don't know what that book is. My observation are that any time from six weeks to three months the secondary rash may appear.
Q Well, anyway, accounting to this book I cannot but conclude that since it takes over three months for the second stage to appear, that this woman could this woman could not have been infected dy a Japanese soldier two months previously.
A You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine.
THE PRESIDENT: You must take the witness' answer. You can call evidence later to contradict him if you wish.
MR. ITO: I shall do so later.
PRESIDENT: Yes. That will do, doctor.
(Where upon, the witness was excused.)
MR. SUTTON: The prosecution desires to call as its next witness Hsu Chuan-Ying, of the Republic of China.