1947-01-14, #3: Doctors' Trial (late afternoon)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. HOCHWALD: May it please the Tribunal, the last document read was No.001. I come now to document No.002 on page 43 of the Document Book, which will be exhibit No.392. I do not read the first two pages which are a letter of transmittal of Document No.001 from Buch to Himmler. I will read only the one page which is the answer from Himmler to Buch, who was the highest Party judge in Germany:
19 December 1940.
To: The Chief of Counsel of the NSDAP Party Member Walter Buch Munich 33.
Dear Party Colleague Buch.
Hearty thanks for your letter of 7 December 1940. The proceedings in the place in question -- I may inform you confidentially are carried on by a commission of physicians in virtue of an authorization of the Fuehrer. The selection is carried out as conscientiously and justly as is humanly possible not by an isolated individual but by a commission of which every member first gives his decision independently.
The SS only helps with vehicles, motor cars, etc. It is the doctors, experts conscious of their responsibility, who give the orders.
I agree with you on one point. If the matter has become so public as you say, the process must be faulty. On the other hand, it is clear that is is always a difficult process. I shall immediately contact the competent headquarters and bring the defects to their notice and advise them to drop Grafeneck.
Of course Frau von Loewis will not be implicated in this affair.
When we meet again, I shall give you some more detailed information verbally so that you can inform Frau von Loewis more accurately should you have the opportunity.
Cordial greetings, Heil Hitler! Yours /s/ (illegible)
The next document is No.832, page 46 of the Document Book, which will be exhibit 393.
Reich Minister of Justice Berlin, 24 July 1940 To the Reich Minister and Chief of Reich Chancellery, Dr. Lammers:
Esteemed colleague Lammers:
On the basis of our discussion of yesterday I transmit to you the desired copies.
As you informed me yesterday the Fuehrer refused to issue a law. Consequently, I presume, the necessity arises to discontinue immediately the secret extermination of insame persons. The recent procedure became publicized so rapidly and widely not least by the attempted camouflage. From the enclosures you can decide for yourself how embarrassing a situation can be created and yet the number of such inquiries will increase.
It is extraordinarily difficult to reply officially, reference, for neither to the fact not to the content of a Fuehrer order can be made. It is impossible for our authorities to pretend that the Reich Justice Administration knows nothing of the matter.
I may assume that you, esteemed colleague Lammers, advised the offices concerned of the desire of the Fuehrer and I ask you urgently to inform me of the results of such steps.
Heil Hitler!
respectfully yours, /s/ Gtr.
for Guertner.
The next document is No.833 on page 48 of the Document Book, which will be Exhibit 394.
Reich Ministry of Justice Under Secretary Dr. Schlegelberger Berlin, 27 July 1940 (stamped) Top Secret
My dear Mr. Reichsleiter:
The Reichsminister and Chief of the Reich Chancery has stated that he has gotten in touch with you again in the affair of killing persons unfit to live.
According to the special wish of the Reich Minister Dr. Fuertner, who has left Berlin today for a brief period, I have the honor to send you the copy of his letter addressed to Reich Minister Dr. Lammers, of the 24th inst. together with the attached enclosures for your information.
Heil Hitler!
Your very obedient /s/ Dr. Schlegelberger To The Chief of the Chancery of the Fuehrer of the NSDAP Mr. Reichsleiter Bouhler.
The next document is on page 49, 621-PS, Exhibit 395.
Letter from Dr. Lammers to the Minister of Justice on the Deaths of Nursing Home Inmates.
The Reichsminister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery, Berlin, 2 October 1940.
SECRET REICH MATTER To the Reichsminister of Justice Mr. Guertner Dear Mr. Guertner!I herewith acknowledge your letters of 26 August and 25 September forwarding to me further material about the death of inmates of nursing homes.
I forwarded the enclosed reports of the Chief Prosecutors of Stuttgart and Naumburg to the Reichsminister of the Interior -- Reichs Health Leader -- for further action.
Heil Hitler!
Sincerely yours /s/ Dr. Lammers
The next document is 620-PS on page 50 of the Document Book, Prosecution Exhibit 396.
The Reich Minister and Chief of the Reich Chancellery, Berlin, 9 October 1940.
Secret
To the Reich Minister of Justice Herrn Dr. Guertner Dear Dr. Guertner, The additional material, which you sent me with your letter of 3 October 1940 concerning the deaths of inmates of mental institutions, I forwarded to the Reich Minister of the Interior Reich Chief for Public Health (Reichsgesundheitsfuehrer) -- for the purpose of further decision.
/s/ Dr. Lammers
The next document is 681-PS, Prosecution Exhibit 397.
The Reich Minister of Justice, Berlin, 4 March 1941.
To the Reich Minister and Head of the Reich Chancellery Berlin Top Government Secret.
Re: Extermination of worthless lives Appendix to letters of 24-7, 20-8, 25-9, 2 and 5-10-1940
Enclosures: 4 booklets
Sir, The doubts expressed in your letter of 25 July 1940 to Reich Leader Bouhler induce me to forward you the material I have received during the past months, on the question of exterminating useless persons, in the form of petitions, reports and memoranda.
This is in compliance with an order of the late Reich Minister of Justice Dr. Guertner. Although the taking of measures against persons not fit for life does not come directly within my sphere, I consider it ay duty nevertheless, to direct your attention to the fact, that these matters are indirectly connected with many branches of the Reich Administration of Justice and undermine the security of their work. The following branches are those chiefly involved:
In matters concerning guardianship disagreements have been caused by the fact that judges have opposed the transfer of lunatics from one asylum to another when they were under the care of a guardian or trustee, In many cases the courts did not receive any official information, either concerning whereabouts of insane wards or announcing their deaths, although the personal affairs and questions concerning property which arise from guardianship and trusteeship as also the intercourse between guardian and ward, and current personal inquiries by relations, make it necessary for the authorities to be kept permanently informed of the whereabouts and further fate of wards. Since guardianship and trusteeship comes to an end with the death of the ward, the courts often lack a clear perception of the situation to determine whether or not the guardian or trustee who has been appointed is still needed. The uncertainty of the fate of the wards impedes the legal settlement of property matters in the courts for the protection of wards. Frequently the courts are approached by guardians or relatives and asked for information as to the whereabouts of wards, but, in spite of all their endeavors, they find themselves unable to give adequate information to such inquirers.
While many judges have a suspicion of the measures wards have been subjected to, they are justly hesitant in passing on their misgivings to the inquirers, as no official directions have been given with regard to this. On the other hand, it is incompatible with their duty to give incorrect or evasive information. In the same way numerous doubts have arisen in the sphere of the Probate Courts, for instance on the question of granting inheritances certificates. The enclosed booklet I, to which I beg to refer, gives information about these difficulties as far as they refer to voluntary jurisdiction.
In criminal jurisdiction likewise embarrassing positions have arisen. Proceedings have been instituted and carried out although the defendants were already deceased owing to the fact that the prosecuting authorities were never informed of the proper status. Prosecutions and retrials could not be concluded, since both delinquents and witnesses had "died" in the meantime. It repeatedly happened, that condemned persons, living in a sanatorium or asylum, escaped the notice of the prosecuting authorities, because they were removed from the asylums without a hearing and were subsequently liquidated. This proved especially embarrassing, if the court had to decide on a prolongation of the detention of the perpetrator according to article 42 of STGB. The fundamental principles of penal procedure were seriously affected in as much as expert physicians declared that in all good conscience they could no longer give a diagnosis in dubious cases of the increased insanity of accused persons, in order to establish a basis for their confinement in a sanatorium or asylum because such confinement, in its result, was equivalent to the execution of a death sentence without a previous trial in court. Difficulties also arise for the prosecuting authorities in so far as relatives or third persons file actions for murder on persons who have disappeared. An attorney general intends to question now as defendant an official doctor, who compiled the medical report of a "deceased" person, and to investigate the correctness of his report. For details with regard to the difficulties which are being encountered by the criminal jurisdiction, I beg to refer to the enclosed booklet II.
Considerable misgiving arise for the judicial authorities in the carrying out of proceedings based on the law against malicious attacks on the state and party, in so far as the declarations of the accused refer to the killing of persons not fit to live. Due to the fact that measures taken for liquidation are kept secret, various rumors are in circulation among the population, and are being stirred up and exaggerated beyond measure by anti-state elements. The secrecy and general uncertainty with regard to the extent of the measures taken, make a fertile soil for the circulation of such rumors, that also mentally normal inmates or penitentiaries, and even disabled war veterans and aged citizens incapable of working, as well as politically undesirable persons are subject to those measures. To take proceedings for malicious action in the spreading of such statements, seems particularly series even if done in closed sessions, because the light thrown on the individual characteristics of the case would disclose the entire problem of the extermination of worthless lives. On the other hand unscrupulous insti-a gators will evade just punishment thereby. For details I refer to the enclosed booklet III.
From the reports which have been submitted to me, and the numerous petitions and applications addressed to me, I gather, that a vast part of the population throughout the Reich is deeply troubled by these measures. The cause of this anxiety is not so much the fact chat human beings unfit for life are being mercifully put to death, but rather the fact that these measures arc kept secret, and, as the people thinks, in its ignorance of the decree on which they are based, are deprived of legal foundation. This gives birth to the fear that decisions might be taken, which are not fully justified. The confidence in the German medical profession, especially in the administrations of sanatoria and asylums, is being badly shaken. Views are expressed, that such cases of death may be traced back to medical errors, and that mental patients are being used for military experiments, i.e. for the testing of poison gas and other means of warfare.
Others rumors reveal the fear that the food situation must be precarious if such measures are taken to liquidate a few hundred thousand insane people.
Evidence on these matters has been gathered together in the enclosed booklet IV.
Owing to the fact that those measures for the liquidation of persons unfit to live are not within the competence of the Reich Administration of Justice I take the liberty to refer these occurrences to you.
/s/ Dr. Schlegelberger
The next document is NO-189 on page 56 of the Document Book, Prosecution Exhibit 398.
It is a report on the "Inauguration of the Archbishop of Paderborn." I would like to read the third page of this document which is page 58 of the Document Book.
The Kapitularvikariat, Paderborn, 12 August 1941.
According to informations, the correctness, of which cannot be doubted, almost 2000 patients, children and adults have been dispatched for killing and cremation from the institutions for mentally ill and feeble-minded persons of Marsberg, Warstein and Eickelborn in the area of the arch-diocese of Paderborn In the name of the fifth commandment of God, which had hitherto been the base of penal legislation of all civilized states, in the name of humanity, the most fundamental laws of which are being horrible violated in the name of the innocent victims and their relatives on whom boundless pain is being inflicted, I object to this systematic mass murder. Among those unhappy human brings who are destined to be killed or have already been killed, there arc many who aside from partial disturbances are mentally completely clear and who know what is going to happen to them. The catholic population of our episcopate has become immensely agitated about these happenings which are absolutely incomprehensible to them. The rumors circulating about the last days of those people destined to be killed and about their treatment devoid of all human feeling at the station where they had to wait for the death call and during the transport, will still increase this agitation.
There are details which cannot be repeated because of their dreadfulness. The faithful part of the population is deeply distressed by the thought of the judgment of God, which, according to the catholic catechism, this crying sin of violation of the holiest commandments of God will draw upon our whole nation.
I beg you, very esteemed Landeshauptmann, to use all your influence in order to put an end to this mass murder of innocent people.
The Kapitularvikar; /s/ Baumann To the Landeshaptmann Kolbow Muenster/Westphalia.
This ends for this time my presentation on Euthanasia. Mr. McHaney will proceed on page 64 of the Document Book.
MR. McHANEY: I would like at this time to introduce into evidence two judgments, one being an Austrian Court and the other being a German Court judgment, against certain defendants who were accused of murder because of their participation in the Euthanasia program.
THE PRESIDENT: Are these documents contained in the Document Book or are they separate?
MR. McHANEY: Yes, Your Honor, The first one -- the basis on which the objection is about to be offered -- is NO-317, on page 64. This is not the judgment but the indictment of an Austrian Court.
DR. FROESCHMAN (defense counsel of Viktor Brack): Mr. President, I object to the presentation of Document317. It cannot be clearly seen from this document what the Prosecution actually wants to prove with this document. The evidence contained in these documents, namely the indictment and the verdict of an Austrian Court, does not refer to any of the defendants themselves. Therefore, it cannot be presented as direct evidence against any or any one, of the defendants. Furthermore, this indictment and verdict come from the immediate time after the capitulation and, therefore, is not a captured document either which would be covered by the signature of the two gentlemen who have signed this document prior to its presentation.
It can only be assumed that Prosecution wants to clarify to the Tribunal with these documents how an Austrian court maintained its attitude toward this question of Euthanasia. However, this does not mean anything but to try to teach the Tribunal as to what legal conception was maintained by an Austrian Court and an Austrian Prosecution. However, to find the law to formulate it is the business of the Tribunal. Therefore, there can be no evidence presented for this purpose by Prosecution or by the Defense. Therefore, I request that this document be not admitted.
MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, the Prosecution offers these judgments for two reasons; firstly and primarily to put before the Court the holdings of other Tribunals on the precise question here at issue; namely, the legality of the so-called "euthanasia" program. One is a judgment of an Austrian court. However, I think reference is made in the judgment to the German statutes which were in existence at the time the alleged crimes took place and there is a discussion in here about the applicability of the facts proved as against the existing German law at that time. Of course, the second judgment is that of a German court and the ruling upon the legality of the so called "euthanasia" program under German law. But secondly we also offer them for the purpose of proving the facts found in the judgment. I am not terribly concerned a bout the second point but without any question the Tribunal is at liberty to attach evidentiary weight to the facts found in those judgments which are in a large part, incidentally, based upon the confessions of the defendants involved and the judgments on their face show that the acts of the defendants being tried were part of the broad "euthanasia" program. For example, the firs Vienna court judgment concerns the killing of children under the organization which is shown on the left hand side of he chart. We're offering the documents for both of those purposes.
THE PRESIDENT: These documents being judgments of Austrian courts might well be cited as declaring the law in case of an argument. The Tribunal is of the opinion that they should not be received as evidence. Their authority is to be cited as the holdings of courts, but the Tribunal is of the opinion that they do not properly constitute evidence. Consequently, the objection will be sustained.
MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, do I understand that the ruling precludes the reading of these documents? In other words, we are presented with the problem of bringing these documents to the attention of the Tribunal and we certainly prefer to do it either under the process of judicial notice or by introducing them into the record as evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: These documents as trial records might well be included in any brief that might be filed on a question of law. The Tribunal does not think that the record should be encumbered with procedure as that. They are authorities and decisions on points of law by other courts and should be cited as such and might be regarded by the Prosecution as such.
MR. McHANEY: I do not want to labor the point but I would like to call to the Tribunal's attention that Ordinance No. 7 does provide that judgments in record of other military tribunals, namely those of Allied nations, which --
THE PRESIDENT: Do you contend that these are judgments of a court of any Allied nation?
MR. McHANEY: Not at all, Your Honor, but we take the position that the Court is at liberty to receive such documents in evidence and to attach weight as evidence to the findings of such tribunals in spite of the fact that these are not findings of Allied tribunals. If it were an Allied, tribunal I feel that under Ordinance No. 7 they would necessarily be admissible under Ordinance No. 7. I am simply urging that the Court may receive them.
THE PRESIDENT: Properly certified copies of these judgments might be filed with the Tribunal in support of arguments on questions of law. The Tribunal is of the opinion that they should not be received in evidence. The objection is sustained.
JUDGE SEBRING: How many of them are there, Mr. McHaney?
MR. McHANEY: No.317 on Page 64.....
DR FROESCHMANN (Defense Counsel for defendant Viktor Brack): Mr. President, may I perhaps answer your question? This objection refers to Documents Nos. 317, 445, 447, 577, 705, 706, 707, 708 and 709.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has ruled on the objection to the admissibility of Document No.317 only. The other judgments or whatever they may be have not yet been called to the attention of the Tribunal. If these other documents are exactly like this document it might be assumed that the ruling of the Tribunal would be followed, but we do not know if they are similar or have points of difference.
MR. McHANEY: Document No.317, page 64 of the English document book, is an indictment filed at Vienna, Austria, against three named individuals and also as part of the same document, beginning on page 68 of the English Document book, the Court will find the judgment of the Austrian court. The next document --
DR. FROESCHMANN: Mr. President (interrupting).....
THE PRESIDENT: The Prosecution may make a check of the record as formal offer of proof.
MR. McHANEY: The next document is N. 577 at page 79 of the English document book which is an indictment filed by the Chief Prosecutor of the district Court of Berlin and for purposes of the record we offer this document as Prosecution Exhibit 399.
THE PRESIDENT: Is the document of the same nature as the one previously offered?
MR. McHANEY: It is, your Honor. This is an indictment filed by a German court against two named individuals for participation in the "euthanasia program.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I would raise the same objection again for the same reasons.
THE PRESIDENT: Objection is sustained.
MR. McHANEY: The next document is on page 86 of the English document book Document No.445. This is the judgment of the District Court of Berlin based upon the indictment which was previously offered as Document No.577, Prosecution Exhibit 399. I now offer Document No.445 as Prosecution Exhibit 399.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there the same objection on the part of defense counsel?
DR. FROESCHMANN: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Objection sustained.
MR. McHANEY: The next document is No.446 on Page 103 of the English document book. This is a judgment in a criminal proceeding against one. Karl Kieling which is referred to in the judgment by the District Court of Berlin in Document No.445 and it was inserted in the document book in case the Tribunal wished to refer to that judgment. It does not deal with "euthanasia"' and I will not at this time offer it.
The next document is at Page 108 of the English Document Book and is Document No.447 and this is a decision on appeal in the action against Hilde Wehrnicke and Helene Wieczorek who were found guilty by the District Court of Berlin as shown by Document No.445. and the Prosecution offers this as Prosecution Exhibit 399.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I object for the same reasons which I have previously given.
THE PRESIDENT: Objection sustained.
MR. McHANEY: The next document is on page 122 of the English document book and is No.705 and this is an extract from the German penal code; namely, paragraph 211 a.F. and paragraph 211 n.F. I should think that quite possibly this document and several of the succeeding documents might properly be admissible in the record as they are extracts of German law. The Prosecution offers Document No.705 as Prosecution Exhibit 399.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I object to this document because this is not a verdict but it is a law from the German criminal code and therefore it cannot be presented as evidence but perhaps only as an argument it can be used in that manner in the pleading of the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: The opinion of the Tribunal is that this law might be used as a matter of argument and cited by the Prosecution but that it should not be admitted in evidence in the record. Objection is accordingly sustained.
MR. McHANEY: The next document is on Page 123 of the English Document Book and as NO 706. This is an extract from a report on the work of the Criminal Commission on Criminal Law published by Dr. Franz Guertner, Reich Minister of Justice in 1935.
The particular extract is on page 127 of the English Document Book, the paragraph next to last at the bottom of the page, beginning "Granting permission to liquidate unworthy life is entirely out of the question." The Prosecution offers this document as Prosecution Exhibit 399.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I also object to this document for the same reasons as I gave in the case of Document No.705.
MR. McHANEY: I may say that I think there were a large number of such excerpts which were admitted in evidence by the International Military Tribunal However, I think it is largely a question of expediency. If the Court prefers these matters to be advanced in briefs as a matter of argument rather than be included in the record that is perfectly satisfactory with the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: The Court is of the opinion that such a matter as this might be more properly submitted by way of a brief in argument rather than be admitted in evidence and thereby encumber the already long record. The objection to the admission of this document in evidence is sustained. Of course, when presented by counsel as a matter of argument the document will then be considered and given such weight as the Tribunal thinks it should have as a matter of law.
In this connection I would ask Counsel for Defense if they would admit the authenticity of this law which was last stated, and of this document which is at present before the Tribunal. If the defendants admit that actually that was the law -- if they admit that this book containing this paragraph was actually written then they could properly be used in argument. If that would be disputed then it might well at some time be the subject matter for proof but if there is no objection by defense counsel -- I don't mean that such a book was written -- then it would be a matter for argument and net for the record as evidence. Do I understand that the defense counsel admits that such a book was written by the man purported to have written it?
DR. FROESCHMANN: Mr. President, I admit that in the new and old edition of the German criminal code these provisions were contained as are stated here in Document705.
IURA NOVIT CURIA.
THE PRESIDENT: Does any other counsel for the defendants challenge that statement?
MR. McHANEY: I would like to.....
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, counsel.
Hearing no challenge from any other defense counsel it will be assumed that the law referred to was actually a German statute at the time it purports to be such a statute. In regard to this Exhibit 706 is there any question. That is on Page 127 -- the paragraph referred to. On 123 it states the title of the book.
DR. FROESCHMANN: We do not argue on this point, for my part. We do not contest it.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any challenge by any other defense counsel to the fact such a book was written at the time it is purported to have been written and by the person who purports to he the author? Hearing no such challenge it is assumed none is made, and none will he received later. These matters then may be used as a matter of argument by the prosecution.
The objection to the admission of Document706 is sustained.
MR. McHANEY: We come to Page 130 of the English Document book, which is document No.707, which is an extract from the German Criminal Code, Paragraph 211, and I understand this to he the so-called old version of Paragraph 211, whereas the one we have previously offered as document705 is the so-called new version. I offer this Document707 as Prosecution Exhibit No.399.
THE PRESIDENT: Is the authenticity of this quotation from the old Statute admitted by counsel for the defense?
MR. GAWLIK: Yes, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any other challenge on the part of defense counsel to this statement? There being none he objection to the admission of this offer in evidence is sustained.
MR. McHANEY: The next is Document No.708, at page 131. This is an extract from a legal commentary by Dr. Ludwig Ebermayer and Dr. Adolf Lobe. It is the edition of 1929. We wish to offer this document for the purpose of reading the extract from Page 132. The first full paragraph reads: "Euthanasia is punishable either according to par. 211, 212," etc. We offer this as Prosecution Exhibit No.399.
THE PRESIDENT: The authenticity of this book of pamphlet whichever it is. Is it admitted by counsel for the defense?
DR. FROESCHMANN: We do not protest the authenticity of this document. However, we want to state that this is only the legal opinion of the three authors.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand this commentary is a private work, and was without official authority, and carries weight only as the opinion of the author.
The authenticity of the book, the fact it was published is not denied or disputed by defense counsel.
MR. McHANEY: The next document, page 134 of Document No.709, which is an extract from Jr. von Olshausen's Commentary on the Penal Code, the 12th revised edition, which is offered for the purpose of reading the paragraph on Page 136. Beginning "No right to mercy killing replacing the certain cause of death, which is painful," etc., it is offered in the record as Prosecution Exhibit No.399.
DR. FROESCHMANN: I object to this document for the same reason I objected to No.708.
THE PRESIDENT: Does defense counsel challenge the fact that such a publication as this was written, printed and published at the time it purports to have been by the person by whom purports to have been written?
DR. FROESCHMANN: No, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any challenge from any defense counsel to that fact? There being no objection to the admission in evidence of this document, the offer of the exhibit is sustained.
MR. McHANEY: We come now to Document No.823 on Page 138 of the English Document book, and this is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No.399. This is a very long confidential memo written by Pastor Braune on 9 July 1940. He was director of the Central Committee for the Home-Mission of the German Evangelical Church. I wish to read only a few extracts from this memo, the subject of which is "Planned Economy Removal of Inmates from Mental Institutions."
In the course of the last months, it has been observed in various parts of the Reich that a great number of inmates of mental institutions have been transferred for reasons of 'planned economy'; that in some cases they are moved several times, until after a few weeks the news of their death is received by their relatives. The uniformity of the measures and also the uniformity of circumstances banishes any doubt that these are measures planned on a large scale by which thousands of human beings 'unfit to live' are being done away with in a certain way. Some are of the opinion that for reasons of Reich defense it is necessary to kill off these useless caters. The opinion is also voiced that for reasons of the improvement of the German race, it be essential to eliminate as quickly as possible the mentally diseased and otherwise incurable cases, as well as those human beings who are abnormal, asocial and antisocial.
It is estimated that a hundred-thousand and more people may be concerned. In an article by Professor KRANZ in the April issue of the 'NS-Volksdienst' the number of those whose liquidation would probably de desirable is indicated as exceeding one million. There now are probably thousands of Germans who, without legal justification, have been done away with or whose death is immanent. It is mandatory to abolish this procedure as quickly as possible as the morale of the people is thereby heavily undermined. The invulnerability of human life is one of the pillars of any form of Government. If killing is to be ordered, valid laws must be the basis of such measures. It is impossible that ill people are constantly done away with without careful medical examination and without any legal protection, also without hearing the opinion of their relatives and their legal representatives, simply for reasons of usefulness.
I skip now to Page 141 of the English Document Book the second paragraph from the bottom of the page:
In order to determine the approximate number of persons having died in Grafeneck, I call the attention to the fact, that the urn of the Mr. Heimer who died on 10 April 1940 bears the number A. 498, while the urn of another man who died an 12 May 1940, also in Grafeneck, Max Breisow, bears already the number A.1092. As the whole institution has in normal times not more than 100 beds, this can only be the number of the death cases. According to that 595 people died in 33 days. This would mean 18 deaths per day in an institution with approximately 100 beds. This final conclusion does not seem to be impossible in the light of the fact that in the course of 1 to 2 months 300 patients were transferred from BedburgHau to Grafeneck, from Buch also some hundreds, from Kueckenmuehle about 150 and from Wuerttembergian institutions an additional great number not known to me.
A second region where these observations were made to a greater ex tent, is the country of Saxony.
There the State Mental Institutions were concerned, by these measures at first. These are the institution Hohenweitsschen near Westerwitz, Grosschweidnitz near Loebau, Arnsdorf and Hubertusburg and Zadrasch. In the first mentioned institution the number of death cases amounted:
in 1938 to about 80 in 1939 to about 102 until 15 May 1949 to about 124.
In the institution Grosschweidnitz the number of death cases amounted to:
1938 50 1939 141 until 25 May 1940 228 While it is true that in normal times about 12 patients died in a quarter of a year, in 1940 125 patients have already died in the same period of time.
The increased death number of the year 1939 is exclusively from the last quarter. General weakness is mostly stated as death cause. There is a similar situation in the institution Arnsdorf, where the number of deaths amounted:
in 1938 to 101 1939 to 200 until 25 May 1940 to 101 This means an increase of about three times over the normal death rate.
It has been established beyond doubt in the Saxon institutions, by visits, that the death rate is increased by depriving the patients of food. The food is diminished, as it is reported by reliable persons, to a daily value of 22 to 24 Reichpfennig. As it is impossible for the patients to live on that they are given a medicine (Paralyth by force, whereby they are falling into an apathic condition. By verbal end written reports it is pointed out in a dramatic way, how the patients cry again and again their "hunger, Hunger!" Employees and nurses who cannot bear that any longer have stilled some hunger with their private means but the result is absolutely clear.
Hundreds have died a quick death in consequence of these measures.
But this does not only concern patients, who are mentally absolutely dull, but in the contrary patients, which are realizing rather exactly these procedures and noting the number of funerals per day. One report describes the deathly fear of a patient who was fully aware of the fate in store for him and his fellow-sufferers.
In Saxony the former penitentiary Waldheim has been renamed in consequence of these measures to 'mental institution.'
From this so-called mental institution, too, came suddenly death notices, always in identical form, to the relatives, who did not know any thing about a transfer, saying that the patient has died of influenza, heart weakness or some other disease. His body had to be cremated immediately because of danger of spreading diseases, the clothes had to be burnt likewise or were handed over to the National Socialist Peoples Welfare.
MR. McHANEY: We turn now to the following Page, 145. The first full paragraph:
The persons who died, as per enclosed letter, probably were not insane at all but were merely inmates of above mentioned penitentiary Waldheim in Saxony;
THE PRESIDENT: From what page are you reading, counsel?
MR. McHANEY: Beg pardon, Sir?
THE PRESIDENT: What page?
MR. McHANEY: 144.
THE PRESIDENT: I thought I understood you to say 145.
MR. MCHANEY: I think I did, Your Honor, but it is page 144.
--in one case it is said that initial steps had already been taken for release from the institution. At any rate the relatives do now know that their deceased kin was incurably sick. The 'letters of condolence' seem to be made according to a general pattern which perhaps is fitting for feeble-minded and epileptics. But it hurts when the letter always repeats the phrase: 'In suite of all medical efforts..... we did not succeed in saving your husband's life.'
Since the City of Brandenburg has its own crematory a cremation of the dead is quite possible particularly since the Neuenburger Street has a special exit.
We now turn to the next page of the document, which is page 149 of the English Document Book, the first full paragraph:
If they are giving as a reason for this measure that the food situation of our nation requires the elimination of useless eaters, I have to reply that even in the case of killing one hundred thousand persons, among 1000 healthy only one sick would be killer, which is of no importance at all for the food situation. Nor can they offer as a reason that the occupation of the existing buildings and rooms is considered a waste from the point of view of national economy. After all these buildings had first of all been erected for the sick, and at the outbreak of the war the very institutions have put at disposal ten thousands of hospital beds without restricting the care of the sick beyond a supportable measure. It is true that the sick, too, shall participate in the burdens of the war, but this is still far away from a systematic destruction.
We are therefore confronted with an emergency state that affects deeply all who are familiar with the problem, that destroys the tranquility within many families and threatens to develop into a danger whose consequences cannot be foreseen.
The competent authorities are requested to see that these disastrous measures be abolished and that the whole complex of questions be first examined from the legal, medical, ethical and state-political point of view, before they decide upon the fate of thousands and ten thousands of beings.
It is signed "Pastor Braune, 9 July 1940."
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.