1947-02-11, #3: Doctors' Trial (early afternoon)

AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 11 February 1947.)

THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.

THE PRESIDENT: Before proceeding with the evidence, counsel, the Tribunal desires to read a statement, an amendment to Rules of Procedure for Military Tribunal I, 10 February 1947.

In all cases where persons are detained in the Nurnberg jail and who have been approved by Military Tribunal as witnesses for the defense, it is hereby ordered that after the date of such approval by Military Tribunal the following procedure shall be followed in the interview or interrogation of such witness or witnesses by either counsel for Prosecution or Defense:

1. Counsel desiring to interview such witness shall petition the Tribunal in writing, stating in general the scope and subject matter of such interview.

2. The Tribunal shall thereupon appoint an impartial commissioner to represent Tribunal at such interview to the end that it shall be orderly, proper, and judicial in character and within the scope of the petition filed and to the further end that there shall be no attempt to harrass, intimidate, or improperly influence the witness in giving his answer.

3. Whenever such a witness is being interviewed or interrogated in the presence of such commissioner by counsel for either side, counsel for the other side shall not be entitled to be present.

4. If in the course of such interview it shall appear to such commissioner that the proper scope of such interview, as set forth in the petition therefor is being exceeded by the counsel conducting such interview or that it is in any other manner being improperly conducted, said commissioner shall on behalf of the Tribunal stop said interview.

5. In such event said commissioner shall report in writing to the Tribunal the substantial and significant facts in relation to such interview and his reasons for having stopped the same.

6. Counsel conducting such interview may, if he so desires, promptly bring before the Tribunal in writing, after giving notice to opposing counsel, his objections, if any, to the action of the commissioner, whereupon the presiding judge of the Tribunal shall either confirm the action of the commissioner or direct the interview of the witness to proceed with such directions or limitations as he may order.

7. In any appeal to the Tribunal from such act of the commissioner, counsel so appealing shall state the name of the witness, the name of the defendant whom he represents, and the title of the cause in which he is acting as counsel.

8. The above procedure shall not be interpreted as in effect in cases, a) where the witness or prospective witness has been procured by the Prosecution but has not been approved by the Tribunal as a witness for the defense, or b) where the witness for the defense has been procured as such by the defense and voluntarily appears without being confined in the Nurnberg jail.

The Tribunal understands that this procedure has been previously discussed with counsel for the Prosecution and with counsel for the Defense and has been found satisfactory to both counsels.

I will file this original with the Secretary General to be noted in the record. Translations will be furnished defense counsel.

I will also file with the Secretary General the doctor's statement that the defendant Oberheuser should be excused on account of illness.

Counsel may proceed with examination of the witness.

DR. NELTE: Mr. President, with reference to the ruling of the high Tribunal which was just read, I should like to ask that defense counsel be permitted to make a statement after having read this ruling. The translation was not such we can at the moment survey the far reaching effects of that ruling. I hope that the high Tribunal will permit us to present eventual considerations which would be in the interest of the proceedings, if such suggestion can be made.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for defense may make any presentation to the Tribunal that they may desire in connection with this ruling. Anything they may present will be considered by the Tribunal.

DR. NELTE: I thank you very much.

SIEGFRIED HANDLOSER — Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)

BY DR. NELTE:

Q: Witness, when ending the morning session you were speaking about the relationship of the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Service to the Waffen-SS Would you please continue that part of your statement?

A: I was saying before that the ruling regarding personnel in the Waffen-SS was most in reference to distribution of personnel to other parts of the Armed Forces. With reference to the settlement regarding material the matter was such; the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Services had a central agency. This central agency was at the main medical office. This department had the task to cover the entire need of medical equipment for the Armed Forces and order it from a central agency and distribute it according to the strength of the respective Wehrmacht branch.

In the case of the Waffen SS difficulties resulted in that connection. It was because only a small part of the Waffen SS was subordinated to the Wehrmacht, while other parts, and that includes the police which belonged to the Reich Physician SS, had nothing whatever to do with the Wehrmacht. Where as it was possible with the Army, Navy and Air Force to control their needs exactly and establish it, such a procedure was not possible in the case of the SS, that is the Reichsarzt SS. The Reichsarzt SS not only had to cover need for the Waffen SS but also for other parts of the SS, including the police.

At no time, not even 1944, was possible to exercise an exact control and exact distribution in connection with the SS. The SS quite clearly refused any such interference and even in the year of 1944 rejected making reports to the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Offices about the state of their equipment. They gave as the reason that the Reichsfuehrer SS had an authority from the Fuehrer, according to which his equipment and his orders were only a matter for the Reichsfuehrer SS to decide. In this manner there was no control exercised with reference to the Waffen SS and there was no such task in connection with material distribution and steering of such distribution.

I now come to the Navy.

Q: Before you continue, I should like to speak, Mr. President, about the relationship of the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Services to the Waffen SS and in that connection I should like to submit two affidavits. One affidavit made by the co-defendant, Professor Dr. Mrugowsky, which is Document 17 in Document Book 2, page 28, and furthermore the affidavit of the defend Dr. Genzken as Document HA 16 in Document Book 2, page 27. Both these affidavits are dealing with the relationship of the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical services to the Waffen SS and I think it is necessary to submit these affidavits in that connection since this will simplify the procedure and will confine it to the complexes and thereby the proceedings will be shortened, ask for permission to offer these affidavits as Exhibits 5 and 6 to the High Tribunal.

THE PRESIDENT: Which affidavit does counsel offer as Exhibit 5?

DR. NELTE: HA 17, Document Book No. 2, page 28. Exhibit 6 will be Document HA 16 in Document Book No. 2, page 27.

MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, it seems to the prosecution that instead of shortening the case of the defendant Handloser, it is apt to prolong it considerably by this procedure of bringing in all of the evidence when the witness Handloser is on the stand and sailing for his comment on each affidavit and other document which is going in. Now we have here two affidavits one from Mrugowsky and one from Genzken, concerning the relationship of the Chief of the Medical Services of the Wehrmacht to the Waffen SS. I don't understand the order of proof in bringing these documents, which are quite u* related to the testimony of this witness, into the proceeding while he is testifying. I don't have any particular objection to the admissibility of the documents themselves. It is more a question of order of proof. I think we would get along much faster if he would proceed to interrogate the witness, release him for cross-examination, and then put in his other documents.

DR. NELTE: I believe that Mr. McHaney is right and that it is a question of the expediency of the submission of evidence. I think it would be more expedient if a certain complex of questions is concluded while submitting evidence. I don't think it is advisable to let the defendant speak first and then submit affidavits when submitting documents. I think that the Tribunal will gain a much better picture about this certain complex of questions when it a the same time takes judicial notice of the documents rather than after the examination of the defendant is concluded. I think this is a question of expediency and I think that the procedure as I adopt it is in accordance with expediency.

MR. McHANEY: I would ask the Tribunal to request Dr. Nelte to state whether or not he now plans to read these affidavits into the record during the course of the interrogation of this witness and, further, whether he intends to direct any questions to the witness Handloser, based upon matters which are stated in these affidavits.

DR. NELTE: I merely wanted to submit and present these affidavits and should like to emphasize the most essential points and then leave it to the prosecution to put any questions they may desire in connection with that document.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for defendant may proceed according to the plan which he has outlined, for the present at least.

BY DR. NELTE:

Exhibit 5 is an affidavit of the co-defendant, Professor Mrugowsky. It refers to the chart which he himself handed to the prosecution and which was submitted to the High Tribunal. He says:

In the pamphlet known as 'Basic Facts about the German State Health System' which was submitted to the Tribunal by the prosecution it appears as if the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, Professor Handloser, had directed and supervised the Medical Service of the Waffen SS.

I have to state the following: Basically and generally, the Medical SS vice of the Waffen SS was not subordinate to the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service. There was only limited supervision by him, which extended only to the Medical Service of the front divisions of the Waffen SS when in action with the Wehrmacht. The Waffen SS trained and obtained the necessary medical personnel independently. The Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service did not have any authority over the medical personnel. Only units of the Waffen SS in actual combat service were subordinated to the Wehrmacht. Therefore, the subordination was only temporary and within the framework of the consequent necessities.

As soon as the units of the Waffen SS were withdrawn from the combat area, the temporary subordination and supervision ceased, just as it did what wounded or sick SS men were transferred to rear echelons. The Waffen SS said to it that its men were sent to its own hospitals. The Waffen SS was independent in establishing new units, as far as medical supplies were concerned, just as in the case of personnel. The Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service did not have any authority over this.

The connections of the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service to the Medical Service of the Waffen SS were therefore very limited. There was no official connection with the medical research institutes of the Waffen SS and the SS.

The Institute for Typhus and Virus Research at Buchenwald, which was subordinated to me, did not have any official connection with the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service or the Army Medical Inspectorate. It was neither subordinated to, nor was there any supervision by, the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service.

Dr. Genzken, in Exhibit 6, confirmed this statement in its entirety as being correct and true.

Now, Professor, I ask you to continue describing the relationship of the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service to the various branches of the armed forces.

A: I now come to the Navy. The Navy was an armed unit with special tasks and they always led a special existence. Even in peace time there were only limited connections between the Army and Navy. As closed as the Navy always was, it continued to be that way toward the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service. It strictly observed its jurisdiction and whenever it was possible, they rejected, throughout their Supreme Commander, any interference or insight of the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Service, giving the reason that he was only there for the purpose of coordinating mutual tasks, but not in order to interfere with the special tasks and special sphere of the Navy.

Concerning the number of medical officers, the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service was fully aware that he could not decree the number of medical officers who were in the Navy.

The Navy during this war, in addition to their tasks at sea, that is within the so-called floating units, had a number of tasks on land, which it had to take over; to that one has to count the anti-air-craft system of the entire western coast starting from Norway down to Spain.

The needs of the Navy on medical equipment materially differed to such an extent from the equipment that was needed by the Army that even here a coordination was hardly possible; that meant that the possibility of exercising influence by the chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service on the Navy remained very small.

I now come to the Air Force —

Q: I should like to interrupt you here. You are speaking about the actual facts, which made it impossible to coordinate mutual tasks of the Navy and the other Armed Forces Branches, but I do think the High Tribunal will be interested in knowing whether on the basis of that decree of 1942, you had the authority to assume that authority whenever the occasion arose.

The prosecution maintains on the basis of that decree of 1942 you had the obligation to assume authority and exercise control and had you not done so, under circumstances, one could say that you neglected to be aware of your tasks and exercise supervisory powers in such a manner as your responsibilities should have required.

Now, will you say something about how the authority has to be interpreted on the basis of that decree; the first thing, of course, is the authority to issue orders?

A: The Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, on the basis of the decree of 1942, did not in any passage receive the authority to issue orders and it was not expressed in any passage; just as little was it expressed that he had the authority or the duty to exercise supervisory functions. On the other hand, I interpreted the decree of 1942 as it was thought and that was on the basis of its formulation that in the field of coordination and adjustment of personnel and equipment, I had the duty to do everything possible for the purpose of salvaging in order to make a just coordination; that is for the purpose of saving material and equipment. That did not present any difficulties with the Army, Navy and Air Force and I concluded that the introductory words of the decree of 1942; namely, the loading of personnel and material direction into the various branches of the armed forces had to be interpreted in such a way as I did.

The armed forces branches would never have given the right to the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Service to exercise any control in their medical service or any supervision. This was never expressed. It was never said that this decree could be interpreted as an authority to issue orders.

In addition, I should like to state quite basically that it was not at all intended to completely leave out the various medical services of the armed forces branches or to interfere in their independent rights. That actually never took place. Just as little as it was never intended to create such a situation when introducing the Commissioner General and thereby cut down the jurisdiction of the Chief of the Medical Service of the Armed Forces.

Q: Did you at any time inspect an institute of the Navy; and you know there was such an institute in Tuebingen?

A: In Tuebingen there was the Medical Academy of the Navy. I never inspected it; I never was even there.

Q: Now, will you please continue and speak about the relationship of the Chief of the Medical Service of the Armed Forces with the Luftwaffe?

A: The Air Force was a young army. At the head of the Air Force was Goering.

The Air Force when it was first created could, with right, exploit everything that was available and Goering did everything to further that. In connection with the Luftwaffe, we granted that right to the Luftwaffe and by saying we, I mean the Army. There was no one in the Army who was not of the opinion that the Air Force had to be equipped better than the army in every sphere. In peace time and during the building up of the Luftwaffe, that was quite understandable, but after the Army had to bear the main burden during the war and that quite obviously appeared to be possible; that this difference in equipment could not be maintained. Therefore, it was quite clear to the Air Force that a Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Service could have not other task, that he interfered with the medical equipment of the Air Force in favor of the Army. It is quite understandable that the Air Force defended itself against that procedure as well and as long as it could, but because of the events in the winter of 1941 and 1942 the relationship of the position of the various armies had become so obvious and the Air Force was in a position to transfer about one hundred of their medical officers to the army. That made it clear that further interference with the Luftwaffe would be possible. As Chief of the Medical Services of the Armed Forces, I handled this matter in such a way and we came to some agreement in that connection.

The material coordination and the stoppage of the supply channels to the Luftwaffe made no difficulties whatsoever. However, what rightly was considered by the Luftwaffe as their property were the tasks and the work which was in connection with special affairs of the air forces and in connection with our field, aviation medicine. I, and the former medical chief of the air force and the last medical chief of the air force, Schroeder, never had any doubt that aviation medicine and its research was a special sphere which could not form within the coordination of other tasks and could not be coordinated by the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Service. The same was true in the case of medical research work of the Navy, which often had to specialize in hygienic and special medical research with reference to things peculiar to the Navy. I refer to U-Boat hygiene, and whatever else may be in connection with the service of the Navy at sea. There was never any quarrel about that, because from the very beginning there was a clear differentiation made.

Q: Does that conclude your description and report with reference to your jurisdiction on the basis of the decree of 1942?

A: I have yet to mention the Army. In the case of the Army, the relationships were very simple, since at the same time I was at the head of the Medical Service of the Army. All armed forces branches knew exactly that the Army could not give any of their bases away, but rather that they had to receive some more, and I should like to say something in that connection in order to clarify the situation. At some point the prosecution put the question to a witness, "how the numerical relationship between the Army and the other armed forces branches were, whether air force and Navy together were larger than the Army" and for that reason I should like to speak about these numbers in round figures I, as Army Medical Inspector, that is during the war years of 1942 to 1944, in agreement with OKW, had to deal with the standard figure of the Army of 10 million, and that was the basis on which I planned. The strength of the Air Force amounted at its peak to around two million. That was a fifth of the strength of the Army. The Navy probably never exceeded one-half or one-fourth of a million. From that one can see clearly that the Air Force in relationship to the Army was one-fourth to three-fourths, — rather one-fifth to four-fifths.

Q: May I now summarize your jurisdiction on the basis of the decree of 1942, first with reference to the Wehrmacht Branch and the Waffen SS, on the basis of the decree of 1942 as Chief of the Medical Services, you had not authority, is that correct?

A: Yes, that is correct.

Q: As far as a coordination of mutual spheres of work was striven for by you and reached, you had a technical right of giving directions and exercising controls, is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: Thirdly, the research system did not belong to this sphere, that is Figure 1 of the decree of 1942?

A: No, not the research system, only medical measures which could be adapted to a coordination. If I can give you an example, the common vaccinations which had to be carried through on the Army. That is the best value available for the necessity of such a coordination. For in special parts of the front, where for instance the Army, Navy and Air Force were working along side of one another, and were committed together, the type of inoculation as well as the time of inoculation, or a prevention, for instance in the case of malaria, differs in the case of all the three Wehrmacht branches. Of course, that was such a situation which could not last.

Q: It is clear that the prosecution did not consider that sphere of research system, and I am referring to what you have just mentioned, which was coordination in reference to inoculation with proven vaccines. Fourth, I want to say something regarding other medical service of the Waffen SS; there, was only a technical right of giving directives for troops who were located at the front, and during the time of combat, is that correct?

A: With reference to front territory, there was clearly a technical subordination. One has to imagine that these divisions were first subordinated to the Corps Commander, the Corps Commander to the Army Commander, the Army Commander to the Troop Commander and the Troop Commander to the Supreme Commander of the Army. In the same way the subordination of a Division Physician of such a system was carried through, that is Corps Army Physician, Troop Army Physician, Army Physician and Army Medical Inspector.

There was a very clear subordination for the medical service of these divisions. But not for the medical service as such, no.

Q: Why not?

A: Because these divisions could not deal with medical service or rather medical affairs, that is research, assignment, and so forth.

Q: Now,-

MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal, please, I think it would be helpful if the interpreter would use the German word Sanitaetsdienst as distinguished from Sanitaetswesen. I think that is the distinction the witness is trying to denote, and when translated into English it is extremely difficult to follow. I think if he would use the words Sanitaetsdienst and Sanitaetswesen, which the witness uses, in drawing this distinction, I think it might be easier to follow.

THE INTERPRETER: I thank you, Mr. McHaney, for this suggestion.

DR. NELTE: It is one of the most essential points to define the difference between Sanitaetsdienst and Sanitaetswesen. We will see that during the course of the farther presentation of evidence.

Q: Now, I should like you to look at the decree of August 1944, and the official directive dated the same day -

DR. NELTE: Mr. President, you have both of these documents in your possession.

Q: (continued) Would you please state what difference there was between the decree of 1944 and the jurisdiction which you received there and the decree of 1942, and the tasks which were then intended for you? In the decree of the year of 1944, it says "In extension of my decree of 1942."

A: In the decree of 1944 it has to be pointed out that here in addition to the decree of 1942, it is being expressed that we are concerned with a stronger ability to gather strength in the sphere of medical services. The decree of 1942 spoke of the coordination of material and personnel, and here one would have to add the words "still stronger," and if you add these words and take note of them you will understand what is being meant. The differences as regards to 1942 are very clear and obvious, and authority to issue orders being given, which however, confines itself and limits itself to a technical authority to issue orders to the medical chiefs of the Armed Forces Branches, with reference to the Waffen SS and other units, as far as it deals with their activity within the armed forces.

Q: In order to enable the Tribunal to understand better, would you state what difference there is between authority to issue orders as such and technical authority or authority to issue orders in technical matters?

A: An authority to issue orders as such presupposes a relationship of superior and subordinate; that is to say, that anyone who has a total authority to give orders must be a superior. Then, we further have to differentiate between a total authority to issue orders and a limited authority as it is here, limited to technical matters.

Here this authority is technically limited to the Sanitaetsdienst, and one may understand it better if I say that a medical officer always had two superiors; one military superior that was his divisional commander, his regimental commander, his commander or supreme commander, and on the other hand he had a technical superior that was his army physician, division physician or regimental physician. An authority to issue orders in technical matters it has to be understood that the chief of the armed forces medical service in technical matters could give an order to the chief of the medical services of the Luftwaffe, but you have to add, without his becoming a superior on the strength of that authority.

I shall later come back to this superiority relationship. The next thing was the separation of the personnel union between the chief of the armed forces medical service and the armed forces medical inspector; that is, the creation of independence of the office of the chief of the armed forces medical services and the appointment of a new medical inspector of the army and army physicians.

In connection with that a new working staff was created belonging to the chief of the armed forces medical services. The third new thing created was the notation in the Fuehrer order to the effect that the official directive by General Keitel had the approval of the Fuehrer; that is to say, a sanction by the Fuehrer.

Q: You said that you then received a new staff. In order to give us a picture of the situation can you tell me how large the staff after 1942 was in relationship to 1 September 1944, as far as the budget was concerned?

A: The chief of the medical services of the armed forces had, in the year of 1942, one medical officer of the Air Force, one medical officer of the Navy, one registration official, and a few clerks. The staff of the chief of the medical services of 1944 comprised about thirty medical officers belonging to all the armed forces branches, and about seventy other employees.

Q: Did that include officers of the Waffen SS?

A: No, they were officers of the Army Air Force and Navy. A suggestion of mine that a number of SS physicians were to be included into that staff was rejected by the Waffen SS.

Q: Why did you want to include medical officers of the Waffen SS in your staff?

A: I emphasized before that I had no possibility to gain any insight into the personnel and material situation of the SS, and I was of the opinion that in this manner I would succeed in receiving such an insight. When my suggestion was rejected this channel, of course, was blocked.

Q: On the strength of the decree of 1944 did an extension with reference to the Waffen SS arise?

A: No, in no way at all. The numerical relationship of the SS divisions who were committed in the Wehrmacht had become different. I should merely like to correct a figure that I mentioned before. I previously mentioned the year of 1941 when speaking about divisions of the Waffen SS, whereas I should have spoken about 1942. In the year of 1942 there were nine divisions of the Waffen SS at the Eastern front, but with the decree of 1944 nothing was changed in my relationship towards the Waffen SS compared to the year of 1942.

DR. NELTE: Mr. President, in that connection I refer to the official footnote in the official directives intended for the chief of the armed forces medical service, dated the 7th of August 1944, which is before you.

Q: In this footnote it says in this sense the Armed Forces, the Army Air Force, Navy as well as the units of the Waffen SS subordinated to the Wehrmacht and the organizations and units included within the framework of the Wehrmacht; that is to say, this relationship of subordination just as before referred to that part of the Waffen SS and that part of the medical service of the Waffen SS that was committed at the front?

A: Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: When counsel refers to an exhibit if he would give the number of the exhibit for the record it would make reference much easier.

DR. NELTE: This was already mentioned by me before, since we were dealing with an exhibit of the prosecution.

THE PRESIDENT: I understand that, but if the number of the prosecution exhibit were included in the record together with counsel's statement it would make future reference to that exhibit some other time more convenient. Counsel need not go back and cite these numbers, but in the future when attention is called to an exhibit already in evidence, if the number of the exhibit could be mentioned it would facilitate examination of the record later.

DR. NELTE: We are here concerned with Document NO-227 in Document Book Number 1 of the prosecution, page 18, and Exhibit 6.

Q: Won't you please continue? Extensive authorities and extensive tasks were planned. Wherein were they extended? The staff that you mentioned was intended to be your working staff, intended for larger functions, what were these larger functions which you were to assume from that period on?

A: These interpretations are not quite correct. One must not forget that up to that time the working staff of the chief of the medical service of the armed forces was given by the people from the Army Inspectorate with reference to the material and technical tasks that had to be performed. The Army Medical Inspectorate was an office with over two hundred people. Among them I am sure there were fifty or sixty medical officers. After the regulation of the year of 1944 that meant a separation of the chief of the armed forces medical services with the army inspectorate, the personnel that was at the disposal up to that time had be substituted by new personnel of necessity.

That was a necessity, automatic necessity, in order to create an extensive independent staff of one's own.

Q: When was this new decree put into effect?

A: It came into effect with the 1st of September 1944, and I think the month of September 1944 passed before the individual medical officers arrived in Berlin from the various Wehrmacht branches, until their housing was settled, most of all until the female clerks had been employed. One could well say that we started to work on the 1st of October.

Q: What did you actually do on the basis of your new tasks?

A: On the basis of my newly-given authority of issuing orders, I ordered at first that all Wehrmacht branches and the Waffen-SS give me an exact report about their personal and material strength at that time. Secondly, I started to see that the central departments who up to that point were still working within the framework of the Army Inspectorate were to be taken over and included in the staff of the Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Service. Furthermore, the sphere of Wehrmacht care and welfare was taken over from the Army Medical Inspectorate, then the Department of Voluntary Care for the Sick and basically the problem of care for prisoners of war. This, of course, extended this sphere of work quite considerably. Furthermore, there was introduced, and this was important for the military services, a central exploitation of the sick reports which came from the various Wehrmacht branches.

Q: I see under III under this Service Regulation 3 that as Chief of the Medical Service of the Wehrmacht you had the right to inspect certain units. Would you please say something about this right of inspection or right of control that you started to assume from the 1st of September, 1944?

A: This right of inspection is limited to the Sanitaetsdienst Medical Service, to the Medical Unit, among others, roughly speaking, hospitals, and medical troops and institutions of the Armed Forces; that is to say, the various Armed Force Branches. In addition to this limitation, the Chief of the Wehrmacht of the Medical Service had the obligation to report the results of such inspections to the various branches of the Armed Forces, or rather their Commanders. And there is the following to say in this connection: In my capacity as Medical Inspector of the Army, with the Army, I had an unlimited right of inspection. Whenever I did not want to, there was no necessity for me to inform any one about any intended inspection tour. During the years of my office, I also maintained the point of view that any inspection could only serve a purpose if it comes unexpectedly as possible, and that it would be completely nonsensical if days before an intended inspection all sorts of preparations were being made so that the man who is inspecting would be satisfied. With this limitation, namely, that the OKW was to be informed, the main purpose of such an inspection was lost. For these inspections that were carried through with the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service could never serve the purpose of controlling the medical works of hospitals for that was the right and the duty of the Medical Chiefs and their subordinated agencies. The purpose would have been to establish how the hospitals of one Armed Force are equipped with material and personnel in relation to the hospitals of another Armed Force Branch. Whether this purpose could have been fulfilled with such an inspection tour was highly questionable. For example, I wanted to emphasize particularly that the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service did not have the right to appear as a controlling person at any branch of the Armed Forces. I am sure that the Chief of any such branch would have rejected this interference, rightly so.

Q: Then, it appears that most of your authority was in you capacity as Medical Inspector of the Army?

A: That is true. Generaloberst Fromm, who at that time was my superior in the whole army, and to whom I was subordinated as Army Medical Inspector, told me when the question became acute.

When preparations were made in the Spring of 1944, he said I would receive a high-sounding name, but would remain a poor man, and that is actually what happened.

Q: In the Service Regulations, I see under Roman Numeral II, Arabic 4a, what the duties of the Medical Chief of the Wehrmacht will be: "A) In the medical scientific field uniform measures in the field of health guidance, research, and the combating of epidemics." Would you please state what can be understood in that connection under your jurisdiction generally? We shall come to the research question later.

A: Already under the old Wehrmacht Medical Chief of 1942, and then strengthened by the Regulation of 1944, the mutual tasks in the field of Health Leadership, and that does not only mean inoculations, but that also includes directive and regulations for Hygiene with units, new regulations about troop Hygiene, the introduction of mutual vaccines, the discussion of questions whether it would be necessary to deal with the question of Influenza, and the combating of such a disease, and similar questions were dealt with.

Q: Let us assume that you had in this sphere of Typhus—the Air Force was conducting research, that is to say, medical officers of the Air Force were dealing with that problem. On the basis of your authority, would you have had the obligation to interfere and to say that you must not deal with Typhus research and Typhus experiments; that is something that is being coordinated; that is being done in Krakow, for instance, Professor Eyer is working on that or somebody else is working on it. Can your jurisdiction be understood in that manner?

A: Neither my jurisdiction can be understood in that manner nor would I have an occasion to do it nor would I have thought it correct to do it.

JUDGE SEBRING: I want to direct a question to the witness.

BY JUDGE SEBRING:

Q: Suppose you had learned, Doctor, that in these experiments they were being conducted under the circumstances Doctor Nelte has talked about, upon non-German nationals in concentration camps without their consent, and as a consequence scores of them were dying from the medical experiments. Would that change your answer to the question?

A: If I had learned that which you have just described, the first question would have been in what sphere it was done, and by whom it was done. And, such a report which would have reached me as Chief of the Armed Forces Medical Service, I would have transmitted by official channels to the Medical Chief who was responsible for the persons concerned in the first place; that is, either the Army, Navy, or Air Force. And when transmitting this report, I would have asked him to supply me with information, asking him how the matter stood, whether it was correct or whether he knew anything about it. This would have ended one obligation on my part.

The second obligation which would have resulted, but only after I received a confirmation from the Medical Chief concerned, would have been a report to my military superior; that would have been the Chief of OKW. And, no doubt I would have made a report to the Commissioner General because in the Service Regulations it said that he is to be informed about basic matters; and by that I also understand these important matters.

As Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service I had no authority toward the individual medical officers. I would have had to turn to the medical chiefs of the various branches of the Armed Forces. The situation would have been clear in relation to the Waffen-SS; namely, that any such report about such happenings would have been reported to the Medical Chief of the Waffen-SS. In the latter case, however, there would have been a difference; namely, that this would have been a matter outside the sphere of the Wehrmacht, and in that connection this would not have been an official duty on my part, but merely a report to which I would have thought I was obligated to make.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will take a recess.