1947-01-06, #1: Doctors' Trial (early morning)

Official transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 6 January 1947, 0930, 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: Mr. Marshal, ascertain that the defendants are all present in the court.

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

THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the fact that all the defendants are present in court.

This afternoon the Tribunal will recess probably at 3:30 o'clock in order to go into consultation to consider the matter suggested last week by several defense counsel in connection with the matter of procuring affidavits and depositions by the defendants. The Tribunal desires at that time that the prosecution be represented by one or two of its staff and that the defendants counsel be also represented. As that matter was first suggested by Dr. Servatius and second by Dr. Sauter, those gentlemen will be present at the conference. The defense counsel themselves will choose another representative so that three of defense counsel will be present at that conference.

The prosecution may proceed.

The conference will be held in the Judges' consultation room. At this time I would request the Marshal that there are available for that conference one interpreter who interprets from German into English and one interpreter to interpret from English into German.

MR. McHANEY: May it please the Tribunal, at the end of the session on Friday we were considering evidence with respect to the typhus experi ments carried out at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp.

The prosecution wishes to call at the earliest available opportunity this morning the witness Henri-Jean Grandjean to testify with respect to the mustard gas experiments at Natzweiler. However, there will be an unavoidable delay because of the difficulty of arranging for French interpretation; however, I understand that will be straightened out rather shortly and I hope that we will be able to present Monsieur Grandjean at some time, at least shortly after the morning recess. In the meantime, I should like to continue with the presentation of proof on the typhus experiments at Buchenwald and I now offer Document NO 257 as prosecution Exhibit 283. This is on page 10 of the English document book.

DR. GAWLIK (For the defendant HOVEN): The Tribunal, The Document NO 257, I ask that it not be admitted for the following reasons. I should like to call the attention of the Tribunal to page 12 of the English Document Book. Under the first signature, Dr. Schuler, it says, "This statement was written by me on three (3) pages on typewriter in Freising, Germany, on the 20 July 1945 at 1400 hours, voluntarily and without force." Then it goes on, "I swear by God, the Almighty, that I will withhold nothing, Dr. Erwin Schuler." Further, what follows, first is the translation. Apparently only a written statement was given that he was taking the oath but aside from exceptional cases which are not the case here, an oath can be given orally and, furthermore, there is no indication that the oath was administered by a person who had the authority to administer such oath. Thus there is no real oath in this case. Furthermore, I should like to point out that the last notation sworn to on the 19th of December 1945 must refer to the translation because on the 19th of December 1945 Ding was already dead.

MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, this is another case where the translation department has omitted to include the certification which appears on the original document. It is unfortunate the document mitigates against the admissibility of this affidavit sworn to by Dr. Erwin Schuler. The Tribunal will see from the original which I have before me that it is signed Erwin Schuler on the bottom, on the back of the document is the translation -- the translation department obviously didn't turn it over.

There appears again the signature of Erwin Schuler and immediately underneath that is "Subscribed and sworn to before me at Freising, Germany, this 20th day of July 1945," signed George P. Swanick, Captain, Infantry, Investigating Officer. As I was saying, on the original a certification does appear by George P. Swanick, and it reads: "Subscribed and sworn to before me at Freising, Germany, this 20th day of July 1945." Signed, George P. Swanick, Captain, Infantry, Investigating Officer.

As has been pointed out by defense counsel, the certification which appears on the translation deals with the translation of this document. It was translated by one Harry Ilsen in the first instance. He was sworn by one Fred W. Hofstetter, Captain, Infantry, at Dachau, Germany. That deals with the translation. We must admit that the affidavit is in good order and should be admitted.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel will exhibit the original affidavit to defense counsel and then pass it to the Tribunal.

DR. GAWLIK: If the Tribunal please, I have seen that the original contains a notation which is not included in the translation. Therefore, I withdraw this reason for my objection. My objection against the affidavit I will explain as follows: The person who made this affidavit is dead. In 1945 he committed suicide. Everyone who makes an affidavit can be cross-examined by the opposing body, in the first place in order to supplement the affidavit and in the second place to check the credibility of the individual. Only on an affidavit in which the person concerned can be cross-examined is there full evidential value and can therefore be considered as admissible. This is not the case in the case of this affidavit and I therefore consider the submission of this affidavit inadmissible for this reason.

MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, it occurs to me that the fact that the affiant is no longer available is a very strong reason why the Document should be admitted. I can assure the Tribunal that if he were living and available, he would be sitting in the dock before the Tribunal, but he is now dead and cannot be called here either for direct or cross-examination. The only evidence of his which we have left is contained in this affidavit, which we are now presenting to the Tribunal. I may also say that the position of the defense counsel seems to work both ways. When we have a living affiant and an objection is made to the admissibility of the Document, the witness can be called before the Tribunal. On the other hand, if the affiant is dead, we urge that the Document be made admissible because he cannot be called here. The Prosecution respectfully requests that this Document be admissible. I may add that the statements made herein by the deceased Dr. Ding are amply sustained and substantiated by a considerable amount of document evidence which will come before the Tribunal.

THE PRESIDENT: The objection of the defense counsel is overruled. What was the number of the exhibit?

MR. MC HANEY: This is prosecution exhibit No.283. It reads as follows:

Freising, 20 July 1945

As ordered I answer two questions literally:

1. Witness at an Euthanasy with Phenol at Buchenwald.

At the end of 1942 I took part at a conference in the Military Doctors Academy in Berlin. The topic of discussion was the fatality of gas-burn serum on wounded.

Attendants: General Dr. Prof. Schreiber, Mil. Academy, Hygienist SS Brig. Gen. Prof. Mrugowsky, Hygienist A medical officer who was unknown to me who was a surgeon Myself as section leader of the Central institution in Berlin for fighting of epidemics.

Killion and Mrugowsky gave reports of soldiers who had received Gaseedomasorum in high quantities (up to 1500 cc) and hours afterwards, out of complete recuperation, died suddenly without any visible reason. Mrugowsky suspected that the Phenol content brought about the fatal result of the consolidation of the separate injections.

In the presence of the other gentlemen, Mrugowsky commanded me to take part in a Euthanasy with phenol in a concentration camp and to describe the result in detail since neither I nor Mrugowsky ever saw a case of death through Phenol. Mrugowsky himself could not take part in the Euthanasy because of an urgent trip to the East, on the other hand the affair was important for the fighting troops and the publication of another circular for the troop doctors.

Few days later I asked Dr. Hoven in Buchenwald to notify me when he would perform another Euthanasy with Phenol. The next evening he asked me to the hospital block in the prison building. Besides himself and another doctor - probably Dr. Plaza - only two other prison male nurses, whom I cannot remember, were present.

I talked with the doctor about the composition of the Phenol injection and, as far as I can remember, it consisted of undiluted raw phenol, which was to be administered in 20cc quantities.

One by one 4 or 5 prisoners were led in. The upper part of the body was naked so that the nationality patch could not be distinguished. The condition of the bodies was bad and the age was high. I do not remember a diagnosis as to why the Euthanasy should take place but probably did not ask for one either.

They sat down on a chair quietly, that is, without emotion, near a light. A male nurse blocked the vein in the arm and Dr. Hoven injected the Phenol quickly. Still during the injection they died in a momentary total cramp without any sign of other pain. The time between the beginning of the injection and the fatal result I estimate at about 1/2 second. For security reasons, the rest of the dose was injected, although part of the injection would have been enough for the fatal result (I estimate 5 cc.).

The dead were carried into an adjoining room by the nurses - the time of my presence and witness I estimate at 10 minutes. According to orders I reported to Berlin. I know nothing further to say.

2. Hoven's share in Block 46.

In February 1942 the order to conduct typhus experiments came through. I was chosen to carry out these experiments. Since I had my office in Berlin, a deputy had to be appointed for my absence in Buchenwald. For this post the Reichsarzt SS Dr. Grawitz in agreement with the leading doctor of the Concentration Camps Lolling named the SS 1st Lt. Dr. Hoven as station doctor at Buchenwald.

My presence in Buchenwald lasting always only a few days while the time of the experiments and the length of the typhus epidemic lasted about ten weeks.

Dr. Hoven had the order to get the prisoners (professional criminals sentenced to death), that have been released for the experiments from the Reich security office and the Chief of the Concentration Camps, ready for the vaccination or the infection after an examination of their physical fitness.

As deputy, he often order Dr. Plaza to take over the guard of Block 46. Dr. Plaza in addition continued to work independently under Capo Dietzsch.

For experiments that did not result in fatality, such as the compatibility of Yellow Fever Vaccine, 2-300 volunteers stood in readiness as I know from rosters that Dietzsch showed me once. Such experiments did not only take place in the block but also, in a certain case, in the camp itself.

For that experiment about 80 Dutchmen were taken, they did not have to work and they were given extra rations. For that they had to have their temperature taken three times daily and every two days had to give 10 cc blood for a blood count.

Hoven worked as my deputy until my permanent entrance in Buchenwald in August 1943. In September he was arrested.

In the year 1942 he had to work a lot by himself since I contracted typhus and after that was sent to a resthome. Right after that I had a detail to the Pasteur Institution in Paris. During this time the sick reports carried the signature of Hoven or Plaza.

/s/ Dr. Schuler

This statement was written by me on three (3) pages on typewriter in Freising, Germany, on 20 July 1945 at 1400 hours, voluntarily and without force.

I swear by God, the Almighty, that I will say nothing but the pure truth, and will add and withhold nothing.

/s/ Dr. Edwin Schuler.

The first part of this affidavit, of course, deals with the murder of a number of prisoners with phenol; and, of course, they made that very amazing and wonderful discovery -- that you can kill a man with phenol in less that one second. It is interesting to note, however, that Doctor Ding tells us that this was carried out on the orders, and after a consultation between Professor Schreiber of the Military Medical Academy in Berlin, and the defendant Mrugowsky And, I will remind the Tribunal that Schreiber was one of the principal subordinates of the defendant Handloser. Handloser was, in fact, what you might call the Chief of the Military Medical Academy by virtue of his position as Chief of the Medical Inspectorate of the Army. And, so we see that one of his principal subordinates, that is, to say, Handloser's subordinates, is urging the execution of a number of people in an effort to determine the effect of this gas-burn serium on wounded people, which apparently was a matter of some interest to the Armed Forces.

The second part of the affidavit deals with the activities of the defendant Hoven in Block 46 at Buchenwald; and it was in Block 46 that the typhus experiments, themselves, were actually carried out. It was there that the vaccines were administered, and later artificial injections, through injections, or through the bites of lice, was also done, And we see that Hoven was Ding's principal subordinate, and was in charge of Block 46 when Ding was away on trips to Berlin or to the Pasteur Institute in Paris.

THE PRESIDENT: You refer to Doctor Ding, do you mean Ding or Schuler?

MR. McHANEY: I am sorry, your Honor, Ding is Doctor Schuler. The man's name was Ding up until, I think, sometime in 1944, whereupon he secured permission of the appropriate agency in the Reich government to change it to Schuler. It is a rather interesting story, but I think I will wait and have one of our witnesses tell the Tribunal when this was done.

Schuler also tell us that Hoven, in fact, selected or secured the prisoners who were experimented upon with typhus. And, of course, Hoven also administered the phenol injections which killed the five unfortunate people, and he has admitted as much in his own a affidavit.

I am advised at this time that the interpreters are prepared to interpret into French—

JUDGE SEBRING: The Tribunal has a question. Mr. McHaney, I seem to lose the significance of this affidavit. The first part of it deals with euthanasia with phenol at Buchenwald, and the defendant Mrugowsky is named in the affidavit. Now, is it your view that this affidavit tends to show some culpability on the part of the defendant Mrugowsky in relation to the Euthanasia Program?

MR. McHANEY: I do not think that Mrugowsky is indicted as being a participant in the Euthanasia Program as such.

JUDGE SEBRING: That is the reason I propounded the question.

MR. McHANEY: However, I take it that the affidavit does incriminate Mrugowsky in murder, if nothing more. In other words, the way this was brought about, was, that Mrugowsky and Schuler had a discussion about the effect of gasburn serium on the wounded, and as a result of this, Mrugowsky suspected that the phenol contents of the serium had something to do with the fatal results that they were experiencing; and, that was the reason Schuler was ordered to -in fact, execute four people with phenol. And, that, as he states, was done. Now, while Mrugowsky is not formally indicted under the Euthanasia Program, I take it he is probably indicted for participating in the murders and atrocities through medical experimentations, and I take it that this proof falls within the scope of the affidavit with respect to Mrugowsky.

THE PRESIDENT: Is it your position Counsel that this affidavit conveys any information at all as to the nationality of these victims or phenol?

MR. McHANEY: If I understood the question, I do not think the affidavit does reveal the nationalities of the deceased victims. As he states, their nationality patches could not be observed because they were -- that portion of their bodies were naked. So, I take it that it probably could not and would not be assumed by the Tribunal that these people necessarily were non-German nationalities.

JUDGE SEBRING: Well, it is your view that this affidavit may tend to establish culpability as against the defendant Mrugowsky under the preliminary charges that are not particularized; mostly under Count 2 and Count 3, is that correct?

MR. McHANEY: Yes, indeed, the preliminary portion of paragraph 6, as I recall it.

JUDGE SEBRING: And, also 11.

MR. McHANEY: Yes, indeed, 11.

I am advised at this time, the interpreters are prepared to interpret from Franch into English and from English into German; so, at this time, the Prosecution would like to have the witness Henri-Jean Grandjean called to the stand.

THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will summon the Prosecution's witness Henri-Jean Grandjean.

Henri-Jean Grandjean, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

BY THE PRESIDENT:

Q: Hold up your right hand. You will repeat the oath after me:

I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.

(The witness repeated the oath.)

Q: Now, I will administer the oath to the Interpreter. The interpreter will rise and raise her right hand, and repeat after me:

I, Margaret Abraham, do solemnly swear that I will perform my duty as interpreter to the Tribunal to the best of my ability and skill, so help me God.

(The interpreter repeated the oath.)

The Prosecution will proceed with the examination of this witness.

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. McHANEY:

Q: Your name is Henri-Jean Grandjean?

A: Yes.

Q: You are a French citizen?

A: Yes.

Q: Are you now residing at 13 Rue de Marivaux, Paris?

A: Yes.

Q: Witness, will you please tell the Tribunal what your present occupation is?

A: Administrator -- business manager.

Q: Are you an expert to some of the French courts?

A: Only for business matters.

Q: Now, witness, did there come a time in 1943 when you were arrested?

A: In November 1943.

Q: By whom were you arrested, witness?

A: The Security Police.

Q: The German Security Police?

A: Yes, the German Security Police.

Q: Why were you arrested, witness?

A: As an officer in the French Army -- as a fighting officer, I was arrested, as a French military.

Q: Were you an officer in the so-called FFC?

A: Yes.

Q: And, that was a resistance movement, I take it?

A: Yes; we had a special task in France.

Q: Now, what happened to you as a result of this arrest? Were you given a trial?

A: I was tortured by the Gestapo in Paris; later I was sent to Reims for two months.

DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, may I make a technical suggestion? The interpreter is translating incorrectly there, and is not repeating the words of the witness. Would it be possible for the witness to speak loud enough so we can understand him in French -- to be able to check the French. If the microphone could be moved over a little, the interpreter is speaking too low as if she was carrying on a private conversation.

THE PRESIDENT: The witness will speak louder and into the microphone. The interpreter will also speak in a little louder tone.

BY MR. McHANEY:

Q: I had just asked whether or not you were tried by any court because of your participation in the resistance movement?

A: I was arrested in 1943. I was arrested by the Security Police in Paris. I was subjected to a very severe interrogation for eight days. Later I was transferred to Rheims, but I was kept in custody for two months. I might add that I suffered very much because an attempt was made to make me betray my comrades. On the 2nd of January 1944, I was transferred to the Natzweiler Extermination Camp?.

Q: Were you ever tried, witness, by a court?

A: No.

Q: And, you were sent to the Natzweiler Concentration Camp in January 1944

A: On the 2nd or 4th of January 1944.

Q: What work did you perform in the Natzweiler Camp?

A: I did various kinds of work. I was a ground worker. I built walls for the V-1; and, in April I entered the infirmary as a medical assistant.

Q: Well, were you ever tried, witness, by a court, or were you just....

A: No.

Q: And you were sent to the Natzweiler Concentration Camp in January 1944, is that correct.

A: On the 2d or 4th of January 1944.

Q: What work did you perform in the Natzweiler Camp?

A: I did various kinds of work, I was a ground worker, I built walls for the V-I, and in April I entered the infirmary as a medical assistant.

Q: You were a male nurse in the infirmary?

A: Yes, I was a male nurse

Q: Were you able to observe whether or not any medical experiments were carried out at Natzweiler?

A: Sometimes.

Q: Do you know whether any experiments with mustard or Lost gas were performed on concentration camp inmates at Natzweiler?

A: Yes, in this regard I was assigned to Block 5 to take temperatures and pulses of 5 persons who had been in a gas chamber and who had survived.

Q: How were you able to talk to these 5 survivors about what had happened to them?

A: Yes, I was able to talk to one or two of them

Q: And what did they tell you had happened to them?

A: One of the survivors was a gypsy and he told me that he had been taken with 15 of his comrades and put into a gas chamber for experiments at Struthof. The SS gave him capsules which they were to break when a sign was given from outside. After some time the door was opened and the 5 survivors were brought for observation to Block 5, Room 2. I was told to take their temperatures three times a day.

Q: Now do you know what happened to the other 10 persons who were experimented on with gas?

A: They had died.

Q: How do you know that they died?

A: Their surviving comrades said that they had died. Some of them were dissected by Dr. Bogartz from Brussels.

The bodies showed palmonary edemas.

Q: Did you know the man who dissected these bodies?

A: Yes, it was Dr. Bogartz who worked with me.

Q: Now as to these 5 survivors whom you saw and whose temperatures and pulse you took to whom did you make a report in the camp about their condition?

A: The Capo of the hospital.

Q: Is the name Dr. Haagen familiar to you?

A: Yes.

Q: Did he have any connection with these gas experiments to your knowledge?

A: He was interested in the development of the curves and temperatures.

Q: Do you know whether these temperature charts were given to Haagen?

A: Yes, certainly, because the Capo asked for them every time Dr. Haagen came to the camp.

Q: How many times did you see Dr. Haagen in Natzweiler?

A: Five or six times.

Q: And how did you know it was Dr. Haagen?

A: The Capo did orderly service and therefore he knew that this was Dr. Haagen.

Q: And he told you that this man that you saw was Haagen?

A: It was the hospital Capo who said that it was Dr. Haagen and I personally had no connection with Dr. Haagen.

Q: Did these inmates who underwent the gas experiment, suffer such pain?

A: They were completely exhausted.

Q: Well but in observing these survivors and in talking to them, did they tell you that they had suffered much physical pain?

A: I didn't see them immediately after they came out of the gas chamber, only somewhat later when they were already somewhat calmed down. They were completely exhausted.

Q: Witness, did you ever have occasion while you were in the infirmary to observe cases of typhus?

A: Yes, many.

Q: And what did you have to do with respect to these typhus cases?

A: The typhus block was a closed block which was visited by German doctors. We only drew up special charts -- they were not medical charts but contained general information.

Q: What did these charts show?

A: They were drawn charts. We drew on them with india ink the temperature curve and the pulse of the patients.

Q: And these were typhus patients, is that right?

A: Yes.

Q: To whom were these temperature charts given?

A: The German doctors, Dr. Haagen, who was interested in these matters, and Dr. Hertz from Strasbourg.

A: Now you said there was a typhus block.

A: Yes.

Q: Were you ever in the typhus?

A: Never in Natzweiler because the block was closed; it was forbidden to enter it.

Q: Do you know from any source what they were doing in the typhus block?

A: Nothing in particular that we knew of aside from special attention given to the charts of the patient.

Q: Was it an experimental block?

A: Perhaps experiments were carried out there because there were very many dead.

A: You do not know, do you, how these patients which you say came to have typhus?

A: These people came from the camp and from the various commands. The epidemic broke out suddenly in June or July.

Q: Do you remember that there was a typhus epidemic in the camp in June or July, 1942?

A: That is what I was talking about.

Q: And as far as you know, these typhus patients which you observed, could have caught typhus in the camp naturally, is that right?

A: Yes. They do not leave the camp. That was especially astonishing because we had all been vaccinated against typhus; at least, we had been told we had been.

MR. McHANEY: I have no further questions at this time.

PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: Do defense counsel have any questions to ask this witness on cross-examination?

There being no questions propounded to the witness on cross-examination, the witness will be excused.

(Witness Excused)

MR. McHANEY: I shall now return to the typhus experiments in Buchenwald. I come to Document Number 578 which will be Prosecution Exhibit 284.

PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: On what page?

MR. McHANEY: There is an insert on Page 13. The photostat is inserted in the front of the book. It is Exhibit 284. If the Tribunal please this is a chart which shows the course of inoculations given to certain people. We see in the upper left-hand corner that a stamp of the "Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS" appears. It is followed by "Typhus and Virus Research Department. Telephone: Weimar 6311." That indicates that this document was one prepared by Typhus and Virus Institute at Buchenwald. The Tribunal will recall that it was a part of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS. You will also note the Weimar number. The Buchenwald Concentration Camp immediately adjoined the town of Weimar, as I understand it.

Consequently, we submit, that this document is, in fact, a chart showing that various vaccines were inoculated into some 15 persons over a period of three months, from November 8, 1943, until January 17, 1944. You see in the lower left-hand corner the signature of Dr. Ding, who, as we know, was the head of the Typhus and Virus Research Department of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp. The chart shows that the inoculation of the vaccines was made over various periods of time. The inoculations were increased as they went along. We also get the temperature and pulse reaction of the individuals who were subjected to the inoculations.

We do not claim that this chart shows that any of these individuals were infected with typhus or with any other disease following these inoculations. As matter of fact, I think the contrary is true as we will see from the Ding Diary. You will note these vaccinations were made with some preparation called "Fraenkel"; that appears in the upper left-hand corner of the chart, to the right, just under the date, November 22, 1943. We will be able to key in this name "Fraenkel" with the Ding Diary entrees for the days corresponding to this.

It appears that they had obtained these preparations known as "Fraenkel" and they wished to test inevitability of the human body to the vaccine. Consequently, they made this course of inoculations.

I come, now, to Document Number 571 which will be Prosecution Exhibit Number 285. This is a very interesting document because -

MR. FLEMMING: Attorney Flemming for the Defendant Mrugowsky.

I ask that this document not be admitted in evidence. The document is not signed. It is not really a document. It is a draft. The Tribunal sees that the so-called work report on the last page is not signed. It is prepared for a signature. It was to be signed by Ding, apparently. On the first page of the document, a dateline is prepared, but not filled in. The contents of the report is such, that the document can only be considered a so-called secret matter or a military secret. The Tribunal probably knows the regulations for submitting secret matters.

They must bear a stamp, "Secret." The number of the secret diary must be included on all copies. Neither of these precautions was taken in the present case. This shows that this is only a draft. In the case of such a draft, one can never ascertain who drew it up. One never knows whether the person concerned had adequate knowledge for the preparation of the draft.

In the case of this draft in question, I call the attention of the Tribunal to Page 5. There a little below the middle of the page, there is an entry of the 25th of June to the 15th of August, 1943, ordered sick leave.

If the Tribunal from Exhibit 283, which was submitted now, were to compare the last paragraph they would find that Dr. Ding, whose sick leave is questioned, stated there that he had this sick leave in 1942. This inaccuracy, alone, shows that the draft, which is being submitted here, is absolutely unreliable. It neither bears a signature nor a date. I am convinced it cannot be admitted in evidence.

MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, I would just like to observe that the objection is based on conjecture. It was just as reasonable to assume that the document is a duplicate copy; the original having been signed. As a matter of fact, if we are to indulge in supposition about the matter, I submit that is perhaps is a more reasonable conclusion to draw because the original of the document, which I have before me, has a hand-written note up at the top which reads in translation, "To Mrugowsky."

As for there being no date on the document, the original clearly shows that there is a date, which was January, 1944, and there certainly is no blank for the inclusion of any date; that is the date of the day either before or after the word, "January." This document is a work report for a full year, 1944. It is not at all unusual that they did not put the date of the day on the document. Whether or not this is a draft copy or a final copy as submitted, seems to me to be beside the point.

The document is admissible for what it is worth.

If Counsel for the Defense wishes to attack the weight of the document or to show any inaccuracies from other documents, he is, of course, at liberty to do so. I am not sure I got the full import of the so-called inaccuracy to which he purported to draw the court's attention. If there is any inaccuracy, it slipped by me. I assume that Dr. Ding could have had a sick leave in 1943 as well as in 1942. So, we submit that the document is admissible. I would like to pass it to the Tribunal for their inspection.

PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: The Tribunal will be glad to hear anything as the materiality of this document; just what does it purport to prove?

MR. McHANEY: The document, Your Honors, is a work report of the Department for Typhus and Virus Research of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS at Buchenwald for the year 1943. The document gives us a very detailed picture of exactly what they were doing in the Buchenwald Concentration Camp in the Typhus and Virus Research Institute for that year.

We learned how many people they experimented upon with typhus and how many were infected. I do not recall that this tells us the number of persons who died. We will pick that information up from a later document. It also shows the persons who made inspections of the Department for Typhus and Virus Research at Buchenwald on Page 17 of the English Document Book. We find out what visitors they had at the Institute who knew what was going on there. Consequently, I submit, it is a very important document for the Prosecution.

THE PRESIDENT: The objection to the admission of the document is overruled. The exhibit will be admitted.

MR. McHANEY: This is Prosecution Exhibit 285. Up at the top we see the pencilled notation, "To Mrugowsky, Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS, Department for Spotted Fever and Virus Research Weimer-Buchenwald, January 1944. Work Report for the year 1943."

The first part of the report is headed "Department for Spotted Fever and Virus Research, Clinical Section," and then follow a number of entries giving the dates thereof and what took place on those days, and I would like to read a number of them.

On 1 December 1942 to 20 February 1943, the entry is made:

Experiment with spotted fever vaccines 'EM' of the Behring Works, carried out on 20 experimental persons; 10 January to 20 February, Experiment with spotted fever therapeutics 'Akridin' and 'Methylen-blue', carried out on 47 experimental persons; 10 January to 17 May, Tests with yellow fever vaccines, carried out on 435 experimental persons;

25 January to 28 April, Experiments with spotted fever vaccines 'Riga' and 'Zuerich' carried out on 40 experimental persons;

24 March to 20 April, Performance of a large-scale experiment according to the scheme of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS, carried out by SS Standartenfuehrer lecturer Dr. Mrugowsky with small-pox, typhus, paratyphus

-- and I may say parenthetically that should read paratyphoid instead of paratyphus,

paratyphoid A and B, cholera, spotted fever and dyptheria, on 45 experimental persons.

I might also reemphasize to the Court that when we come to the words 'spotted fever' which appear in some of these translations, that should not be construed to mean the disease which is known in our own country as Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever. We are here talking of classical typhus and it could better be translated spotted fever typhus or just typhus alone.

However, those words always appear in the original German document made available to the defendants as Fleckfieber, so there can be no misunderstanding on that score. I continue with reading of Prosecution Exhibit 285.

31 March to 11 April, Experiment with spotted fever therapeutics 'AkridinGranulate' and 'Rutenol' carried out on 40 persons;

11 April to 24 May, Preliminary experiments with fresh blood infected with spotted fever for the purpose of investigating an infallible mode of infection, carried out on 41 persons;

11 April, not yet terminated, Infections with spotted fever, so far applied to 47 persons;

24 April to 1 June, Experiment with spotted fever therapeutics 'Akridin-Granulate' and 'Rutenol' carried out on 40 experimental persons; 28 May to 9 September, Experiment with spotted fever vaccine 'Asid' 'Asid-Adsoriat' and 'Weigl' carried out on 70 persons;

10 June to 8 August, Experiment with typhus therapeutics 'Othromin' carried out on 40 experimental persons; 8 November, not yet terminated, Gangrene - high immunization experiment, carried out on 15 experimental persons; 19 November, not yet terminated, Experiments with burns by means of phosphorus-caoutchouc incendiary bombs, carried out on 5 persons...

The Tribunal will recall that one of the paragraphs in the indictment deals with incendiary bomb experiments and this little entry of 19 November 1943 is the first bit of evidence we have had on that charge in the indictment.

21 November, not yet terminated, Control of blood conservation;

23 December to 31 December, Special experiment carried out on 4 persons.

We shall see from the Ding diary and also from the testimony of the witness that this special experiment was one of the poison experiments charged in the indictment.

THE PRESIDENT: At this time the Tribunal will recess for 15 minutes.

(Recess was taken.)