1946-12-13, #1: Doctors' Trial (early morning)

Official Transcript of the American military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of American, against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 13 December 1946, 0930-1430, Justice Beals, presiding.

THE MARSHAL: The Honorable Judges of Military Tribunal 1. military Tribunal 1 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this Honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the courtroom.

THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will ascertain if the defendants are present.

THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honor, all the defendants are present in the courtroom.

THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record the presence of the defendants in the courtroom.

MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, the prosecution respectfully requests a 15 minute recess due to the fact we have had mechanical difficulties with the safe in which we have the exhibits secured. We assure you we will be ready in another 15 minutes.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess until we are informed the mechanical difficulties have been overcome.

MR. HARDY: Thank you.

(At recess was taken.)

THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will find their seats. The Tribunal is again in session.

MR. McHANEY: May it please the Tribunal, at the recess yesterday evening, we had completed the introduction of Document NO-231 as Prosecution Exhibit 116, which the Tribunal will recall was tie letter by Dr. Rascher to the Defendant Sievers discussing a conference which he had had with the Defendant Gebhardt.

I come now to Document NO-267 which will be Prosecution Exhibit 117. This is a letter from the Defendant Sievers to the Defendant Rudolf Brandt, dated May 22, 1943.

THE PRESIDENT: The last exhibit I have marked is 116. Did I miss one?

MR. McHANEY: The next exhibit will be Prosecution Exhibit 117. 116, your Honor, was introduced yesterday evening and was Document NO-231. Prosecution Exhibit 117 is on page 149 of the English Document Book. It concerns the report of SS Haupsturmfuehrer Dr. Sigmund Rascher to SS Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt.

Dear Comrade Brandt, on May 17, 1943, I received an urgent call from SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher who wanted to give me an account of his conversation with SS Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt. The contents of that report induced me to request Dr. Rascher to submit the report in writing. I am sending you herewith that report and ask you to let me know whether the Reichsfuehrer SS has given any definite directive to SS Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt in regard to Dr. Rascher's sphere of action and work. I entrust you with this affair and ask you particularly to use it only for your strictly personal information as that Dr. Rascher does not encounter any difficulties with SS Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt. In the meantime Dr. Rascher has submitted his personal and scientific curriculum vitae to SS Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt in accordance with request.

Heil Hitler. Your Sievers

The letter, of course, refers to the report which we have already offered in evidence. Oh, I beg your pardon, it refers to a report which is given in Prosecution Exhibit 116, and again it shows that the Defendant Gobhardt occupied a very influential and powerful position within the Medical Service of the SS. Both the Defendant Sievers and Rascher were very much afraid to do anything that might upset the Defendant Gebhardt, and of course, the curriculum vitae which is referred to in that letter has also been introduced in evidence as Prosecution Exhibit 115.

We come now to Document NO-229 which is a letter of 27 September 1945 by the Defendant Sievers to the Defendant Rudolf Brandt. It concerns the appointment of SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher as a lecturer. Dr. Rascher, as the Court will see, from some of these exhibits, was assigned to be appointed as a lecturer to one of the universities in Germany.

Dear comrade Brandt! I have taken up the matter of the appointment of Dr. Rascher as lecturer. I myself brought together Dr. Rascher with Profossor Dr. Blome as well as with SS-Brigadefuhrer Mentzel. The procedure and the possibilities were thoroughly discussed. Professor Blome talked with Professor Pfannonstiel at Marburg. So that the path toward effecting this appointment, which is to be a 'secret appointment' ('Gehein habilitation') and therefore causes some difficulty, is smoothed. Kind regards and Heil Hitler! Yours, Sievers.

And here we see the Defendant Blome entering the picture for the first time in our exhibits, at least. The Court will recall that the Defendant Blome was, from 1941, a member of that august body, the Reich Research Council, and without any question the Defendant Sievers, who by this time, was himself a member of the Reich Research Council, was in contact through that agency with the Defendant Blome.

You see here mentioned also SS Brigadefuehrer Mentzel, and you will recall that Mentzel was something in the nature of a chairman of the managing Committee of the Reich Research Council and Sievers was deputy to Mentzel. And here in this letter we see that the Defendant Blome has been contacted in an effort to qualify Rascher as an academic lecturer on the basis of his research in Dachau on high altitude problems and freezing problems.

I am sorry, Your Honor, apparently I did not offer this formally. This is Document NO-229, and will be Prosecution Exhibit 119.

The next document is NO-432 and will be Prosecution Exhibit 119, and this letter, too, makes a most interesting reference to the Reich Research Council on which the Defendant Blome was active, the defendant Karl Brandt was active, the defendant Sievers was active, and also the defendant Rostock as alternate for the defendant Karl Brandt. This is a letter from the deceased Rascher to Walter Noff who was the inmate assistant to Dr. Rascher in Dachau and helped him very materially with the high altitude, freezing, and other experiments carried out there by Rascher on concentration camp inmates.

The letter reads as follows:

Dear Neff: Your letter dated 11.10 reached me here on the 15.10. First of all many thanks for your decision to write such a detailed letter. I really was very pleased about it. To come right away to the affair concerned: I am very sorry to hear that you are being bullied, especially as there exists no reason at all for it. Please let me know the name, rank, and address of your commanding officer, because I most certainly will take the matter up. There is no purpose at all in your getting stuck there. Finally I too know how the general condition of your health had been, when you were still here, and I also am able to judge that you cannot go through a heavy infantry training. I am glad that you became also accustomed to the ideals of the place and I am convinced that you would be glad to go to the front. But nevertheless: On the other hand, I believe that I need you more urgently than you are needed at the front. As a matter of fact I need you for the following: From the Reich research Council I got the order to carry out open-country freezing experiments, and I think they will take place on the Sudelfold. Now, I need urgently a most reliable man, acquainted with the material, and that is you in this case.

I will go in the next few days with Sievers to the Fuehrer's headquarter and report there in this sense and will let you know immediately.

I received a copy of a letter according to which you have to rely on a family allowance during the time of your mobilization. If the amount of money you receive is considerably lower than the pay you drew up to now, I will be glad to give you or your wi*e 50 marks monthly out of my pocket. You can take it without being ashamed; I can afford it, and I am glad to do it. As a matter of fact, I do not like to see you getting into difficulties. I ask you, of course, to regard that as a comrade like private matter between the two of us. You know me too well to feel ashamed. I expect your frank answer to this matter without any inconvenience. My wife and myself are alright. The last air raid slightly damaged only the lightgiving appliances and the walls, that is to say, the bulbs were smashed.

I expect you notice soon, and remain until then with sincerest comrade-like regards, your old chief, /s/ Rascher.

In addition to seeing from this letter what the deceased, Dr. Rascher -- in addition to his other fine characteristics he was also an extraordinary generous individual. Put the important thing to note is that Rascher states here that he has received an assignment from the Reichs Research Council to continue his dry freezing experiments. Now, I call the Tribunal's attention to the date on this letter from Neff which is 21 October 1943, and ask you to compare it with the date on Prosecution. Exhibit 118, which is 27 September 1943; and from this Prosecution Exhibit 118, the Tribunal will see that the deceased, Rascher, had been in touch with Dr. Blome, a member of the Reich Research Council; and a matter of three weeks later, he reports that he has received an assignment from the Reichs Research Council.

And I suggest that that is not a matter of simple coincidence. Fortunately, however, the Prosecution does not have to rely upon this reasonable deduction from the documents. Document NO-690 --

THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, counsel. I notice that the date of the letter for Exhibit 119 on this copy, at least, is 21 October 1946.

MR. McHANEY: You are right, Your Honor. One moment, please, I am sure that that is a mistake. Mr. Travis will you pass the Exhibit up to the Tribunal? This is the document going into evidence, Your Honor, as Prosecution Exhibit 119, an the date is 1943 and not 1946, which is a mistake on translation.

As I was observing, we need not rely upon this reasonable deduction to prove that the defendant Blome was instrumental in securing this freezing assignment from that great research body in Germany, the Reichs Research Council.

And I offer Document NO-690 as Prosecution Exhibit 120, and this, Your Honors, is a card taken from the files of the Reichs Research Council which shows the research assignments being worked on under the auspices of Professor Dr. K. Blome, who is the defendant Blome in this dock; and I call your particular attention to the research assignment listed third in order on page 154 of the English Document Book. There you will see that the priority number which is listed as the SS number is 0328, requested by Rascher, Munich; topic: Rewarming after general freezing of the human body, healing after partial freezings, adjustment of the human body to low temperatures. Then comes the registration number 1879/15. This is noted as worked on by Professor Dr. K. Blome with his deputy being Dr. Breuer; and I submit that this document conclusively proves that the defendant Kurt Blome was also implicated in the horrible experiments that took place in Dachau.

As long as we are on this document --

THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Sebring): Will you point that out again, sir, that statement from which you draw that inference?

MR. McHANEY: The research item is noted on Page 154 of the English Document Book, and you will see that the third research assignment under the auspices of the defend ant Blome in listed as Rascher: "Rewarming after general freezing of the human body, healing after partial freezing, adjustment of the human body to low temperatures." I construe that, Your Honor, to be a continuation under the auspices of the Reich Research Counsel of the freezing experiments in Dachau; and, of course, that is corroborated by Prosecution Exhibit 119, the letter to Neff in which Rascher is asking Neff to return to him in order to assist to carry out this research assignment from the Reichs Research Council.

THE TRIBUNAL (Judge Sebring): I thought you drew some inference and made some statement to the Tribunal that the document tended to show that Dr. Blome had worked upon the matter, is that correct?

MR. McHANEY: Well, I wouldn't go so far as to say that he actually experimented with Rascher. The burden of my argument is that the defendant Blome secured an assignment by the Reichs Research Council for the deceased Rascher in order that he could continue his experiments under their auspices and with their support, which proves a number of things, Your Honor, in addition to the fact that the defendant Blome has now become implicated in the dry freezing experiments at least. It also shows that the Reich Research Council as a whole has become involved in criminal experiments upon living human beings and to further support that, I call your attention to the research assignment immediately under the Rascher assignment which reads:

"SS number 0329, Hirt, Strassburg." The topic is "Changes in the living organism under the influence of poison gases." And that, if Your Honor please, is a reference to the Mustard gas experiments to which we will come at a later point in the trial and those experiments again will be proved to have been carried out upon living human beings in concentration camps; and these two were carried out under the auspices of Kurt Blome in the Reich Research Council.

We come now to Document NO-290 which will be Prosecution Exhibit 121. This letter again makes reference to the efforts of Rascher to obtain admittance as a lecturer to a university. This letter is from the defendant Sievers to the defendant Rudolf Brandt, dated 21 March 1944.

Dear Comrade Brandt, My last letter to you on this subject was written on 27 November 1943. In spite of the intervention of SS Brigadefuehrer Professor Dr. Mentzel and the deputy Reichsaerztefuehrer (Chief of the Reich physicians league), Professor Dr. Blome, of which I informed you at the time, admission to the faculty with Professor Pfannenstiel at Harburg was not possible. On the 30th of November, Pfannenstiel wrote to Professor Blome on the subject as follows: "I tried to pave the way for admission to the faculty here since it was clear from personal discussions with Dr. Rascher that our spheres of work ran parallel to a great extent. The fact that Rascher's activities have to be kept secret makes the affair very difficult to handle. In these circumstances I was unable to persuade the Marburg medical faculty to admit Rascher. (Professor Pfannenstiel then recommends that an attempt be made to have him admitted to the faculty in Frankfurt or Munich). I am genuinely sorry that I cannot fulfill as I originally hoped to do, Dr. Rascher's justifiable desire to gain admission to the faculty in Marburg on the basis of his scientific work with which I am acquainted, and I ask him to consider my other proposals on the subject.

To undertake such an attempt in Munich would serve no purpose, since, as you know, a similar attempt was already made with negative results. The director of the Institute for Aviation Medicine in Frankfurt, consented to take part in the presentation of the thesis in Marburg, would most certainly have been induced to favor admission to the faculty in Frankfurt. However, owing to the need for secrecy we would have been exposed to the same difficulties with the medical faculty in Frankfurt.

A discussion with SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Hirt, who is thoroughly familiar with Dr. Rascher's work, revealed that the easiest thing would be to have him admitted to the Strassburg faculty. Here it is possible to have the work examined by SS Fuehrer's only and admission to the faculty carried out in secrecy.

Your Honor, the next two pages of the Document Book have been reversed. The letter continues on page 152 -- rather, 158 of the English Document Book. Page 157 is an attachment to the letter itself. The letter continues with the listing of the SS Professors at Strassburg who could help Rascher gain admittance, and these are:

1.) The Dean of the medical faculty, Professor Dr. Stein.

2.) The Assistant Dean, Professor Dr. Hirt.

3.) The Professor of Physiological Chemistry, Professor Dr. Dyckerheff.

4.) The Professor of Pharmacology, Dr. Gebhart.

It would be advisable for you to forward a letter to the Dean of the medical faculty in order to initiate the procedure in the proper manner. I enclose a draft. Please inform me when the letter has been dispatched, so that Dr. Rascher may submit his work. /s/ Sievers.

And the draft of the letter is on page 157 of the English Document Book. It is addressed to the Professor Dr. Hans Stein, Dean of the medical faculty of the University of Strassburg.

My dear Professor: By order of the Reichsfuehrer SS, the department head in the Institute for Military Scientific Research of the Waffen-SS, SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher has carried out experiments dealing with the freezing of the human body which are important for the conduct of war. Since the Reichsfuehrer SS wishes Dr. Rascher to obtain admission to the faculty, the latter intends to do so by submitting his thesis on "Experimental tests on phenomena occurring during the freezing of the human body." The Reichsfuehrer SS is willing to agree to this, but considers it necessary that the secrecy regulations laid down for such experiments also be complied with in carrying out the admission to the faculty. Professor Dr. Hirt, furthermore, is familiar with the details of Dr. Rascher's work. The Reichsfuehrer SS therefore requests that the work be examined by competent members of your medical faculty and a decision be made whether the admission to the faculty can be carried out.

This document shows us that the University of Strassburg was, in fact, an SS university, and we will see that, among others, the Defendant Karl Brandt had some relationship with members of the faculty in Strassburg.

I come now to --

THE PRESIDENT: I would like to return a moment to your Exhibit 120 referring to Dr. Blome.

MR. MCHANEY: Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: I notice in that exhibit, on page 154, Professor Blome is described twice in connection with cancer research.

MR. MCHANEY: That is right, yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: And on the next page, 155, he is also described twice as Commissioner for Cancer Research.

MR. MCHANEY: Yes, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: Now I do not understand clearly the meaning of the form of this letter. Is it your assumption or opinion that Dr. Blome was also in charge of these other five items which are listed on page 154?

MR. MCHANEY: That is certainly the contention of the Prosecution, Your Honor. If Mr. Travis will pass me that exhibit; it is 120. The Reich Research Council, Your Honor, consisted of a number of so-called leading scientists in Germany who were working there and who had a research organization under them so to speak. It was a rather loose research organization; that is to say they might be dealing with a number of different scientists who had no relation one to the other. Now Kurt Blome was known as the Plenipotentiary for Cancer Research and was appointed to that position in the Reich Research Council, theoretically, by Hermann Goering. So that was his title; he was the Plenipotentiary for Cancer Research.

THE PRESIDENT: Does it appear who prepared these documents 120? Do the bear the signature of Kurt Blome?

MR. MCHANEY: They do not, sir.

THE PRESIDENT: I notice at the head of this column it says: "Requested by;" And then "Schwarz, Seel, Rascher, Hirt, von Borstell", and then below that "Cancer Research", worked on by: Blome," and the same on the next page.

MR. MCHANEY: Well, sir, the best explanation of that is that this handwritten note up here, I am quite sure, was written on this document after it was captured. This is, in fact, a research card taken from the files of the Reich Research Council, a large number of which were captured. Now there is a hand-written note up on the left hand side of the translation which says: "taken out of the file after being requested," and although the translation doesn't show it, that is dated June 10, 1945, and it quite apparently refers a request made by someone who was interested in picking up this particular research card and was pulled out, undoubtedly, by some German worker who was familiar with these files and who was retained after the end of the war. The card itself is a card which gives the research assignments under the Bearbeiter, who is Professor Dr. Blome. His name appears on the exhibit up here at the top and under here they describe the research assignments which are being carried out under the auspices of the Defendant Blome.

THE PRESIDENT: I would like to know the basis for that assumption,

MR. MCHANEY: Well, sir, perhaps if I passed up this exhibit it would be a little clearer what I mean, I take this card to mean that all assignments on this sheet are under the Defendant Blome, since it carries the words: "Worked on by" and then proceeds to list and describe research assignments under that.

DR. SAUTER: Mr. President --

THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute, Counsel, until we have had an opportunity to examine this exhibit. We will hear you in just a moment after we have had an opportunity to examine this exhibit.

(Examining document.)

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will hear from Counsel.

MR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I would like to make a request to take a look at the photostats. It would make things easier for me because otherwise I will have to request the photostat through my office and it would be easier if I could see it now at this time.

THE PRESIDENT: Certainly.

DR. SAUTER: Thank you very much. I only wanted to see if this photostat bears any signature and that does not seem to be the case; there is no signature. Thank you very much.

MR. MCHANEY: If your Honor please, of course the discussion goes to the weight to be given to this document. That is to say it is only of probative value and does not go to the admissibility. However, in connection with its probative value, I would like to make clear again that this document was secured from the file at the trials in Frankfurt and it represents a file card listed under the name Kurt Blome; and the file card shows that Kurt Blome, as chief or Plenipotentiary for Cancer Research, had these research assignments under him as noted.

THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit will be admitted in evidence for what it is worth, subject to argument at any time.

MR. McHANEY: We come now to Document 2428-PS which will be Prosecution Exhibit 122, and this is a deposition taken from one Leo Maklowsky by the War Crimes Branch at Dachau. It was taken immediately following the -- or at least following the liberation of that camp by the American Forces. This is listed in the Document Book as a translation of Document 2428-PS which is a mistake because this is -- the original deposition was taken in English, and the Court will notice that they swore in an interpreter before inducting the questioning of Leo Maklowsky. We had hoped to be able to bring Father Maklowsky here to testify because he is one of the few living survivors of the water-freezing experiments in Dachau. Unfortunately we have been unable locate him, and so I offer instead this deposition.

If the Tribunal please, I am informed that they do not have that document ready to offer at this time, but it will be down shortly from the document room, so I will pass this and offer --

DR. PELCKMANN: May I request the Tribunal -- Attorney Pelckmann for the Defendant Schaefer. May I request the Tribunal to have the English original of this testimony read to you. In the document room for the International Military Tribunal several days ago on the occasion of another testimony I have rechecked the signatures, and I have not been able to find any. I have only seen the note of the American official who was interrogating the witness to the effect that it was not possible for him to procure the witnesses because they have been absent in the mean time, and as a result of this no signatures could be procured. It is possible that this is the case also with this witness.

THE PRESIDENT: The document is not at this time in court. Discussion on the admissibility of the document will be reserved until the document is brought in.

MR. McHANEY: I move then to Document NO-538 which will be Prosecution Exhibit 122. This is a portion of a deary kept by the Defendant Sievers. Exhibit 122 consists of the first six months of this diary, and it es a very interesting document on a great number of points. I would like to read at this time a few of the excerpts. We will have occasion to refer to this document at other points in the trial since it bears upon a number of different experiments.

The entry of 12 January 1943 reads as follows:

SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Stabsarzt Dr. Rascher:

Item 1. (a) advises that he has been put in the reserve liable to recall at any time of the Luftwaffe.

(b) Necessary that he be given leave until his transfer.

(c) Instigation of necessary motions.

2. (a) Procurement of necessary apparati and instruments from Holland.

(b) Instructions to SS Obersturmfuehrer Dr. Schneider.

3. Procurement of memoranda on reaction of troops to extreme cold.

4. Discussion of the until now neglected results of the use of Castein water. Continuation would not pay.

5. Procurement of memoranda on the conference concerning the effects of cold in Nuernberg.

The next entry on the same date is:

1. SS Unterscharfuehrer Hamann, Mr. Wolter of the Economic & Administrative Department concerning procurement of apparati for Dr. Rascher's research.

The next entry reads:

Continuation of discussions with Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher.

An entry on the 15 Januare 1943 is:

1. SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Schnitzler: (a) Continuation of work by SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher.

Your Honors will recall that Schnitzler was an official at the Dachau Concentration Camp.

16 Januare 1943. SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher reports on the results of his discussion with the Reichsarzt-SS.

Your Honors will recall that we have put in as an exhibit a report of that discussion. On the next page of the English Document Book, that is, page 163, item 2 under 27 Januare 1943 reads:

Because the camp is temporarily closed, Dr. Rascher is to work with SS Hauptsturmbannfuehrer Professor Dr. Pfannenstiel, Harburg, and proceed to Strassburg.

Under 28 January 1943, we find an item stating that:

SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher: The General Inspector of Sanitation for the Luftwaffe has declared himself opposed to the continuation of Rascher's work. Attitude to be taken.

And we have read into the record a letter from Sievers which amplifies on that thought. On 23 Januare 1943:

SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Brandt: Report on attitude of Professor Dr. Hippke toward Rascher's research work.

-- Then --

Mrs. Rascher (by telephone): Apprisal on the report to Professor Dr. Hippke. 1 February 1943. Department of Sanitation of the Waffen-SS, SS Brigadefuehrer Dr. Blumenreuther. Procurement of apparati, instruments, tools and chemicals for experiments by SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher.

I will call to the Court's attention that the Chief of the Department of Sanitation of the Waffen-SS was the Defendant Genzken, and Blumenreuther was one of his subordinates in that capacity. On 12 February 1943:

SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher reports by telephone on the successful outcome of negotiations with SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Professor Dr. Pfannenstiel, "Marburg."

On 18 February 1943 concerning SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher:

1. Charged with execution of experiments with an available plant-extract to cure cancer.

2. position to be taken in the proceedings instituted against Rascher.

3. Transfer to Waffen-SS. Rascher is also to write an application of his own.

4. Record of freezing experiments with animal heat.

And with respect to the Adjutant's Office, Reichsfuehrer SS:

1. SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Schnitzler: Insertion of SS Court into proceedings instituted against SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher by the Luftwaffe Court.

It appears from these entries which I have just read that Sievers for one was very much concerned that Rascher be court-martialed by the Luftwaffe as a result of this tug of war over his services. This, of course, did not, in fact, occur.

On the next page the entry for the 12 March 1943:

SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher:

1. Transfer from the Luftwaffe to Waffen-SS was approved today in accordance with verbal advice from Generaloberstabsarzt Professor Dr. Hippke.

2. Report an status of his work.

3. Serrum production, in accordance with letter of 7 March.

And down at the bottom of the page on 6 April 1943 concerning SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher:

1. Neff, who has again been declared eligible for military service, will have to be made a member of the police force.

2. Discussion of Hippke's letter to SS Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff.

3. Entlistment of SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Dr. Kuehn of the War Economic Board in the Reich Research Council in the procurement of apparati.

And Item 8 under 6 April 1943 indicates that they were still at this time continuing certain low-pressure chamber experiments. Item No. 10 says that:

Assignment to the Reichsarzt SS does not alter attachment to and necessity of reporting to the Ahnenerbe.

Your Honors will recall that there finally was some difficulty between Rascher and Grawitz about to whom he was to report and as to whether or not he should continue to work under the auspices of the Ahnenerbe.

I drop down to an item under 7 April 1943, item 15:

Assignment of Dr. Rascher to Reichsarzt-SS. R.

-- who is Rascher --

remains under command of the Ahnenerbe and must be transferred to it.

Down at the bottom of the page, 17 May 1943, item 5:

SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher (by telephone): Report on discussion with SS Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt.

Document 3546-PS is next and will be Prosecution Exhibit -

THE PRESIDENT: At this time the Court will recess for fifteen minutes.

(A recess was taken.)