EXHIBIT No. 592 [Letter from A. Buesmann, Fried. Krupp, Essen, Germany, to Dr. Emil Schill, Humboldtstr. 16, Stuttgart, Germany, dated August 9, 1939] Herrn. Dr. EMIL SCHILL, 2. Zt. Stuttgart, Humboldtstr. ESSEN, den 9 August 1939. SEHR GEEHRTER HERR DR. SCHILL: Bestem Dank für Ihren freundlichen Brief vom 4. d. Mts. Was Ihren Besuch in Glarus betrifft, so wäre ich Ihnen dankbar, ween Sie darauf versichten wollten. Die Wolframers A. G. ist eine reine Holdinggesellschaft, und ich möchte es nicht gerne sehen, ween Sie den Herren nähere Angaben über die Krupp-Nirosta machen würden, was bei Ihren Besuch ja wohl unvermeidlich wein würde. Mit besten Grüssen bin ich EXHIBIT No. 593 [Letter from Emil Schill, president, Krupp Nirosta Corporation, New York, to Wolframers A. G., Glarus, Switzerland, dated February 19, 1940] WOLFRAMERS A. G. (WOLFEG), Glarus, Switzerland. FEBRUAR 19, 1940. SEHR GEEHRTE HERREN: Ich habe Ihnen noch den Empfang Ihrer Schreiben vom 27. November, 1939 (hier**am 12. Dezember), und vom 29. November, 1939 (hier**am 2. Febr. 1940) dankend anzuzeigen. Zu Ihrer Orientierung erlaube ich mir Ihnen mitzuteilen, dass ich in allen patentrechtlichen Fragen der Nirosta Corporation fortlaufend mit Herrn. Dr. L. korrespondiere, dessen Firma, wie Ihnen vielleicht bekannt sein wird, noch direkt an verscheidene neue Patente der hiesigen Firma interessiert ist. Ich schicke eine Abschrift dieses Briefes an Dr. L. mit der Bitte mich wissen zu lassen, inroieweit er Berichte von hier, die such nicht auf patentrichtliche Fragen beziehen, zu erhalten wuenscht. Betonen aber moechte ich ausdruecklich, dass es mir unter den heutigen Umstaenden nicht ratsam erscheint, Berichte rein geschaeftlicher Art, wie ich sie frueher regelmaessig nach L. gemacht habe, bei der Unsicherheit der Postverhaeltnisse zu schicken. Hochachtungsvoll. P. S.-Meinen Brief vom 6. Februar, der Duplikat an Sie abging, hoffe ich in Ihrem Besitz. EXHIBIT No. 594-A [Memorandum of a conference with Mr. Aranson, representative, Crucible Steel Co., New York, and a representative of the Krupp Nirosta Corporation, New York, dated April 6, 1938] NEW YORK, April 6, 1938. 11:30-12:15 MEMORANDUM Conference with Mr. Aranson (Crucible Steel Co.) at Crucible Steel Co.'s office. Aranson introduced me to Mr. R. E. Desvernine, a partner of Miller, Owen, Otis & Bailly, Attorneys for Crucible. Allegheny Steel Co. To my question whether Crucible had received my letter of March 31, 1938, A. answered that he had not seen it yet, as it was probably on Mr. Hufnagel's desk, who had not been in the office during the last few days. Increase of capital stock of Krupp Nirosta. As Mr. Fritz von Briesen had told me a few days ago of a very strong rumor that the attorneys of the Crucible Cteel Co. had some connections with Pomerantz, attorney for the Pan American Securities Corporation in the suit of the Amster dam Exchange v. Bethlehem Steel Co, I asked Desvernine whether this was the case; otherwise I could not discuss any Krupp Nirosta matters in his presence. Desvernine. His firm once had some dealings with Pomerantz, but they were absolutely through with them. He personally never had anything to do with Pomerantz, but in order to make sure he called up his office and asked one of his partners, who confirmed that there were absolutely no connections between the firm of Miller, Owen, Otis & Bailly and Pomerantz. As a matter of fact, only a few days ago they had received a cable from the Amsterdam exchange that they should not have anything to do with Pomerantz. Aranson stated that this firm had been attorneys for Crucible Steel Co. for a great many years, and that I could discuss anything concerning the interests of Krupp Nirosta in the presence of Mr. Desvernine, who assured me again that whatever I told him would remain in strict confidence. We then discussed the two possibilities of getting the majority of the stock of Krupp Nirosta Co. into the hands of American interests. First. By de Bary's willingness to sell enough of their stock in Krupp Nirosta to an American party, whereby de Bary then would only hold the minority of the stock and the majority of the stock would be in American hands. Second. Issuance of some new stock by Krupp Nirosta, to be offered to the present stockholders in proportion to their present holdings. Before the new shares would be issued, de Bary would assign their rights to an American party and the present American stockholders would take up at least 11 of the new shares; the majority of the total issued and outstanding stock in Krupp Nirosta would be held over here. If the 40 shares of the newly issued stock would be taken up by the present stockholders in proportion to their present holdings, the American stockholders together would get 191⁄2 shares of the new stock which, together with the 385 shares of the old stock, would give them 604% shares, provided de Bary would assign their rights to 201⁄2 shares to an American party, the total number of shares (old and new stock) held over here would be 625 shares, against de Bary's 615 shares. Desvernine and Aranson are both very much in favor of the second plan, as they both agree with me that probably de Bary would not care to sell any more of their present holdings in Krupp Nirosta. I was requested to submit the plan to the European stockholders and obtain their decision in the matter and then communicate with Crucible again. EXHIBIT No. 594-B [Memorandum of a conference with Mr. Aranson, representative, Crucible Steel Co., New York, and a representative of the Krupp Nirosta Corporation, New York, dated March 31, 1938] NEW YORK, March 31, 1938. 4-4:30 o'clock. MEMORANDUM Conference with Mr. Aranson (Crucible Steel Co.) at his office. At the request of Fritz v. Briesen, I reported to Aranson (Crucible Steel Co) that the attorney of the Pan American Security Co. is trying his best to get hold of the Krupp Nirosta's stock held by foreigners and is threatening to appoint a receiver for Krupp Nirosta. While this, according to Fritz v. Briesen, seems to be nearly impossible, there is no doubt that in case the Pan American Security Co. should in one way or the other get hold of the majority of Krupp Nirosta's stocks, at present owned by European interests, serious difficulties regarding the management and the policy of Krupp Nirosta are to be expected. I explained to Aranson that his suggestion to have American interests acquire enough of Krupp Nirosta's stock now held by Europeans, in order to have the majority of the stock held by American interests, would be difficult to carry out. I, furthermore, explained to Aranson the reason for my bringing this matter to the attention of Crucible was the fact that they were the second largest stockholders of Krupp Nirosta and would, therefore, in my opinion, have a vital interest in the future of the company. In Aranson's opinion, Krupp Nirosta's attorneys should without waste of time work out some kind of a plan to prevent Pan American from getting the control of Krupp Nirosta's stock. EXHIBIT No. 595 [Letter from Emil Schill, president, Krupp Nirosta Corporation, New York, to C. H. Prange, vice president, Austenal Laboratories, Inc., New York, dated June 7, 1940] JUNE 7, 1940. Mr. C. H. PRANGE, Vice President, Austenal Laboratories, Inc. New York City. DEAR MR. PRANGE: Your airmail letter of June 6 in reference to Wiptam arrived just in time. Our Mr. Gleichman is going to sail for Europe tomorrow morning and has instructions to discuss the matter with our friends over there, provided, of course, that he will succeed in getting into Germany or will meet somebody from E. in Switzerland. With best regards. EXHIBIT No. 596 [Memorandum of telephone conversation between Emil Schill, president, Krupp Nirosta Corporation, Watervliet, N. Y., and L. C. Tubbs, United States Department of State, 3:30 p. m., July 9, 1940] MEMORANDUM JULY 9, 1940 3:30 P. M. NIROSTA U. S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Mr. L. C. Tubbs of the United States Department of State telephoned to inquire whether Gleichman had left for Europe. That he, Tubbs, had spoken to Mr. Bergen, of Crucible Steel, as he could not get in touch with Mr. Desvernine, president of Crucible, in reference to the letter Desvernine had written to the Department of State to support Gleichman's application for a United States passport. Bergen had told him that Gleichman went abroad in order to confer with Nirosta's majority stockholders, Wolframers, in Glarus, Switzerland. I answered T. that this was corerct and told him in answer to his question that the purpose of the conference with Wolframers was that I did not think it a good policy for an American corporation to be controlled by foreign stockholders. Gleichman should induce Wolframers to sell part of their stock to American interests in order to have the majority of the stock over here. Are there any other foreign stockholders in the company? "No; 51 percent are held by Wolframers and 49 percent are held over here. A few shares out of the 49 percent were originally in the name of a Frenchman, Aubert, but have in the meantime been transferred from Aubert to Iselin and later on from Iselin to Dominick & Dominick. Dominick & Dominick appear on the books of Nirosta as the owners of the stock originally held by Aubert." Did all the patents under which Nirosta licenses steel makers originally come from Krupp, Essen? "No; about half of the patents were acquired by Nirosta at the time of its incorporation from various American corporations. The original Krupp Patents have expired or will expire in the course of the next few years." Tubbs furthermore asked whether the information that Nirosta was a patent holding company was correct. "Yes." Also whether it was correct that the company was incorporated under the name of Krupp Nirosta Co., Inc., some time in 1928 or 1929? "Yes." Does Gleichman also intend to go to Germany? And if so, would it be for business reasons? “According to Gleichman's United States passport he is not supposed to go into any of the countries now at war. Whether Gleichman will try to go to Germany from Switzerland I do not know, if so, it would not be on business or upon instructions from Nirosta. Should Gleichman go to Germany it would be only for personal reasons in order to see his mother, a born American and living in Hamburg." Nirosta is not a manufacturing concern? "No; Nirosta neither manufactures, nor buys nor sells, nor imports nor exports anything. It is solely a patent holding company." Mr. Tubbs thanked me for the information given to him, which would probably cover everything the State Department wants to know. SUBMITTED BY JAMES S. MARTIN, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, SEPTEMBER 13, 1944, ON GERMAN PENETRATION OF THE AMERICAN AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY EXHIBIT No. 597 [Letter from E. C. Rassbach, Director, Robert Bosch A. G., Stuttgart, Germany, to A. T. Murray, president, United American Bosch Corporation, Springfield, Mass., dated April 4, 1933] ROBERT BOSCH A. G. STUTTGART, Mr. A. T. MURRAY, United American Bosch Corporation, Springfield, Mass. Stuttgart, April 4, 1933. MY DEAR MURRAY: I received your letter of the 17th March which at least contains some good news, insofar as your arrangements with the Navy Department are concerned. I hope that this turns out to be something worth while, although, to be quite frank, I always feel a little suspicious of Government contracts. Our reason for giving up carburetors is very much along the lines that you indicate; the market that we could reasonably hope to obtain was not sufficient to warrant further activities, more especially because our main competitor, the Solex Co., was in a position to do us considerable damage in France, a damage which would have amounted to a lot more in money than anything we could hope to gain from the carburetor business. Under the existing arrangements, they are prepared to assist us in certain endeavors in France and above all to stay out of the pump and nozzle line. With regard to the political situation, everything is still in the making and it is practically impossible to form a definite conception of what is intended. Only one thing is very evident, namely, that all forces of administrative and economical endeavor, such as the different cartels, etc., are to be brought into one definite line of endeavor coinciding, of course, with the policy of the ruling party and that individual opinions and utterances will be submitted to a similar rule. I think it may be safely said that the Italian organization will serve as a model in many respects. With regard to the anti-Jewish propaganda, there have undoubtedly been happenings which are very much to be deprecated, and on the other hand there has been a very gross exaggeration by the newspapers outside of the country. Whether or not other nationals have been molested is beyond my knowledge, and if it did happen it is absolutely unpardonable, both from the point of right and from the point of tactics. Personally, I believe that the anti-German propaganda started before the rest of the trouble and was caused by the very belligerent utterances of some of the local leaders. There are, of course, two things which, I believe, no one outside of the country really understands: The first is that we have gone through a second revolution which, insofar as the basic ideas of the forces making the revolution are concerned, goes much deeper than the revolution of 1918. The latter was more or less a removal of leaders who had failed and brought into effect ideas which have long been advocated in Germany and had been in effect in the other western countries. Our new revolution has as its foundation a decidedly different conception of the state and the individual, just as it is the case in Italy, and consequently, is much more aggressive in its methods and its first enthusiasm than is necessary or desirable. For a full-fledged revolution it was fairly peaceable. The second fact which is always overlooked is that the Jewish question in Germany is not under any aspect whatsoever a religious question, but a racial question and should be compared to movements like the anti-Japanese or antiChinese movement in the far western States. I am not trying to condone it, but simply trying to put it in the light where it belongs which may or may not be worse than the light of religious persecution under which it is at present regarded. The root of the antipathy lies in the fact that we have always had a strong influx of Jews from the Near East who brought with them methods of living and methods of business which the Germanborn population dislikes intensely. The better class of these immigrants passed on to France and England, where in consequence no such atmosphere developed; their nearest of kin populate the New York East Side which to my knowledge is not looked upon with extreme favor by the rest of the United States of America. Personally I am absolutely against all of these methods, as I am against every form of generalization, but when the fact remains that in a great many of the undesirable happenings of the last 15 years here Jews have held a prominent position, then it is very easy for the man in the street to come to the conclusion that they instigated it and have caused a lot of our difficulties, wrong as this conclusion must be. Somehow, however, everything seems to be going wrong everywhere, and I am afraid that Walter Lippman, in his California address, started to tell the truth, but did not go far enough. It certainly looks as if one or two generations will be used up in the remaking of this world and the process is not going to be entirely pleasant. Believe me with best regards, EXHIBIT No. 598 E. C. RASSBACH. [Letter from Commander M. Calderara, general European representative, Pioneer Instrument Co., Paris, France, to Lucien Friez, president, Pioneer Instrument Co., New York, dated April 13, 1933] PIONEER INSTRUMENT Co., CHATOU (S.-&-0.)—(PARIS, FRANCE), April 13, 1933. Strictly confidential. Subject: Germany. From: Commander M. Calderara. To: Mr. Lucien Friez, President, Pioneer Instrument Co. DEAR MR. FRIEZ: As you probably realize, the aviation industry in Germany is at present the object of great interest on the part of the Reich Government. In fact, when the revision of the Versailles Treaty is discussed, the most important German demand will be for the right to manufacture airplanes, aviation engines, and all accessories pertaining to these instruments. I am personally convinced that even if Germany was not given any permission of this sort, nobody will be able to prevent Mr. Goehring from developing aviation, and if I could talk with you, I could prove you this. In view of these conditions, I esteem essential for us to consider the position of Messrs. Pioneer in Germany, as the nationalist mentality of that country will undoubtedly prevent the importation of foreign make instruments. For this reason I have been looking into the possibility of selling a license in Germany for the manufacture there of Pioneer instruments. I found that there will be no great difficulty in interesting capitalists to support this proposition. It would be necessary, however, to reach an understanding with the Reich Government with regard to the use of Pioneer instruments built under license, and to be sure that orders would be forthcoming at least on a satisfactory proportion relatively to other German firms such as Ascania. In order to approach the Government, my friends and myself must have some kind of a firm option from yourselves which should be valuable for the period of several months and which could be shown to Mr. Goehring, who is in control of the German aviation, and the next in power to Hitler. In this way I believe that my friends and myself can secure an understanding with regard to future business with the Reich. I therefore request you to give this matter your prompt consideration and to draw up an option for a license agreement under which, in return for an exclusive license for all instruments under your control, you should receive from the German company royalties on sales. You should also provide in the option that you will furnish all technical, engineering, and organization experience to the new company at the start, on definite conditions. Your option should be complete as to licenses for present and future inventions and should contain two categories of royalties: One for the instruments covered by German patents; The second for instruments which are not patented in Germany. the latter should, of course, be considerably smaller than the former. With such a firm option in hand, I believe the moment is most opportune for us to build a strong position in Germany, which will be lost if we do not follow up this idea. I am in close touch with Mr. Stanton, and I will appreciate his assistance on this matter. I should ask you to give me your reply at a very early date. Yours very truly, M. CALDERARA, General European Representative. |