1947-02-25, #5: Doctors' Trial (late morning)

THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.

OSKAR SCHROEDER — DIRECT EXAMINATION (Resumed)

BY DR. MARX:

Q: Witness, when did you hear for the first time of the Berka procedure?

A: I think that this was in May 1944. At that time I heard, for the first time, of the experiments, which were carried out at the Aviation Hospital in Vienna by Oberstarzt Von Serani. At the time the situation was as follows: At that time two procedures were discussed? one which we had tested in Berlin, and the other one had been tested in Vienna from the technical side, independently from the medical aspect. Toward the end of May I was informed by the Section Head of the Medical Department, by Oberstarzt Merz, that those questions should now be decided, and he requested me to attend a lecture by Becker-Freyseng, who had participated in a meeting at the technical office. The technical office was an agency in the Luftwaffe which dealt with all technical questions, from the development of airplanes to the technical details, also with the equipment of aircraft and other things which were in any way connected with it. It was not always quite easy for us to work together with the technical office because very frequently the technical office worked on questions which pertained to the medical part without complying with the medical advice. Exactly the same thing was done in this case; they had developed this Berka process, and they had tried it as purely a technical matter, by finding a drug which was primarily developed on the sugar basis, and which also contained some component to improve its taste, and which was to be added to sea water. With this drug the salt in the sea water was not chemically tried and afterwards removed from the water. This was done in the Schaefer process, but only the taste of salt was improved by adding sugar and other aromatic materials. The technical office had also initiated experiments on its own initiative. The engineer of the technical office would have developed a Berka process, and he was at the Technical High School of learning in Vienna, and he had carried out his work in the laboratory there, and he then contacted one of our physicians.

Q: Please speak a little slower.

A: Then he had conducted tests and he had tested this drug which he had developed at the hospital in Vienna on patients who were slightly ill. The results appeared to be rather favorable so that the opinion was reached there that the drug was ready to be introduced. In addition to this Professor Eppinger, one of our most famous internal surgeons, had moved to Vienna; and he likewise expressed himself in favor of adopting the test. That is, he expressed himself in a very cautious manner, saying that he considered as feasible the possibility of pushing the seawater through the body.

A special situation had arisen for me as medical chief. I had to consider two aspects, first of all, the purely medical aspects; and on the other hand I had to consider the possibilities of carrying out the plan of what use would the best possible process be to me, as, for example, the Schaefer procedure, without first considering the standard of research at that time, if I did not have the necessary raw materials? Our position in 1944 was mainly influenced by the fact of what was given and still available, possibilities of production. The question was could I still realize my intentions and plans at all with the raw materials available.

With the Schaefer process the following, things were needed first of all, extensive technical facilities, which required a large percentage of iron. Furthermore, for the production quite a considerable amount of silver would be needed constantly. Those were two things of which a great shortage existed for us. We new facilities were required for the work of procedure as we only needed sugar and some other materials which could easier be furnished. The technical office only saw these things from the basis of available raw material; and I can understand their point of view completely because on the one hand there was a lack of materials and, if superfluous, they still were necessary.

I now had to reach a decision. Can this product which is more favorable with regard to raw materials be road because the laboratory tests and the tests at the aviation hospital in Vienna, in spite of all other doubts, were still in favor of adoption this process.

Also, the opinion of a man like Eppinger, who was well known even outside of Germany, was favorable toward adopting this. Thus, a situation had arisen for me which could not be answered with yes or no. For example, the possibility might have existed that for several days or a longer period of time the work could be produced and then the sea rescue equipment would have been combined; and in the instructions it would have been stated that one thing is to be used for the first four or five days, and then the other process is to be adopted. In addition to this, the Berka drug could be dehydrated into the size of small cubes; and thus it was a salt mixture which could, be easily handled. All those questions had to be discussed by me when these two opinions were handed to me in May, 1944, and were subject to discussion.

Q: Was any agreement reached that both drugs were to be tested alongside each other?

A: No. No agreement was reached in the course of this meeting. I was absent on a more extensive trip; and in the technical office as well as on my part the decision was postponed. Becker-Freysing as my deputy then requested Eppinger to come to Berlin; and, further, some other men of the technique formed a smaller circle; and the views pro and con then were discussed. Then on the basis of the very clear attitudes of Eppinger and Hacuptner an experimental theory was considered which was to be a parallel test of the two procedures in order to compare them with each other. In a very short troop experiment these two procedures were to be tested, next to each other.

Q: Witness, what did you do in order to make such an experiment on troops possible?

A: As I have previously stated I first of all turned to the medical academy. I wanted to carry out these experiments with our candidates at the academy because these young medical men were particularly suited for such experiments. They were also able to make observations on themselves and they could set clinical controls which were applied. They could carry them out themselves.

Thus they could have learned something themselves and then they could also have collected this experiment, which was important to me at the same time.

Unfortunately this could not be done because in the meantime—but I do not know when—I returned from my trip; and an order had arrived from the general staff that these candidates had to be sent to various units; that is to say, that they were put into newly activated units.

DR. MARX: May it please the Tribunal, I shall offer the statement of the witness in evidence by presenting a statement of General-Arzt Dr. Schmidt, who at that time was Commander of the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe, and I shall submit this affidavit, together with a document book "Schroeder."

BY DR. MARX:

Q: Witness, now that this possibility did not exist any more, what further steps did you take?

A: I then turned to the hospital and in such cases I always liked use troops myself in experiments or in other tests of a technical kind, and that was the aviation hospital at Brunswick, and it was directed by General Arzt Harringhausen. He was a man who was ready to act in all suggestions, with the testing of dressings and similar things or special methods of treatment which were to be tested, and I knew that I could find special support and assistance there. I called Harring-Hausen by telephone and asked him he could assist me. However this attempt failed also because he wanted to back to something new. These things took place towards the end of May and the beginning of June, 1944, at a time when we were evacuating hospitals, the West and transports of severely wounded patients were being transfer the homeland and when Brunswick, Halle, Greifwald were all receiving such number of severely wounded soldiers, so that we were unable to put lightly wounded patients in a sufficient number which could have been used in the experiments. There was also an additional factor, the air attacks began growing in intensity at that time so that the bringing in of the patients seven times a day into the air raid shelters and bringing them back into the w** made orderly supervision impossible and could not guarantee them any more under these conditions. Therefore, it was also impossible to carry out the experiments at Brunswick.

Q: Are you able to tell us at what time this notification was sent to General-Arzt Harring Hausen?

A: Yes, on the 1st of July. It was by accident effective on the * of July that he was promoted to General-Arzt. I had intervened in order have him promoted and on the 1st of July at noon I received notification that the promotion had been approved.

I then called him by telephone and that occasion I discussed this request with him. Otherwise, I would not remember the dates any more, it was July accidentally.

Q: May it please the Tribunal I shall present an affidavit of the General Arzt Harring Hausen to the Tribunal on that subject, which shall be contained in the Schroedor Document.

THE PRESIDENT: These affidavits may be presented with the document book is prepared.

BY DR. MARX:

Q: Professor, will you please now tell the Tribunal about the continuation of this matter.

A: May I add, that Beigl-Bosch also tried to lodge this series of experimental persons at his hospital at Harbis but that failed also.

Q: Witness, you have already described to us in very short sentence the situation that prevailed at the time and the situation which confront you.

A: Yes, there were the big difficulties. That was a time of the general attacks and air activity over Germany was particularly great on the part of the enemy, and on our side the last efforts were made and where we tried to obtain everything that could be obtained at all, and also the hospitals had to make room, because as a result of the air attacks hospitals were constantly lost and thus the situation was such that such a number of experimental subjects which might have been carried out formerly without trouble and we did carry out troop experiments in hospitals and they could have been billeted there without any difficulty. This simply could not be done any more within the frame of such a hospital where the bed space was about eight to nine hundred beds.

Q: Therefore, you were confronted with a certain emergency situation because those experiments had to be carried out someway.

A: It was an emergency situation because on the one had a decision was urgent and on the other hand I had such difficulties in order to find place to carry out these experiments, then the suggestion was made to me which originally came from the technical office, to carry out the experiment in a concentration camp, because it had been shown by experiment that no large scale air attacks could be expected there.

I then went to see the Reich Physician SS Grawitz, and I described the position to him and I ask him if he could help us in this respect and with regard to this matter I been told at many agencies that already on a number of occasions previously we had been aided by the Dachau concentration camp. However, I told him * of all I wanted to discuss these things with him in order to see clearly in this was feasible at all and that I did not get another disapproving state in this case if he were to declare to me beforehand that it was impossible However, Grawitz considered it quite possible but he told me the decision not up to him and that the matter would have to be referred to Himmler, an I then discussed the matter with him and I said: That I knew that we from the Wehrmacht occasionally were furnishing people to the concentration camp. They were people who had been dishonorably discharged from the Wehrmacht, and they were people who had also been soldiers and who perhaps should be given this opportunity so that they could volunteer for such an experiment for their former comrades, which in any case did not result in any damage their lives or their health. Furthermore, I told him at the time it was possible for us to obtain full aviation rations for that period of time and full hospital rations should be an attraction, that is an allotment of food which is about twice the ration of food in Germany, because the food for aviators was between 3500 and 3800 calories and at the time the food in Germany contained 1500 to 1700 calories, and this should be of some attraction to some persons, because military personnel is always grateful for increased food rations. I then briefly described the process of the experiments to him as they had been described to me but I did not go into detail for the most part because these things were things supervised by us and we had agreed on that in the preliminary discussions. Then Professor Beiglboeck, an especially experienced medical man, was to be in charge of the experiments and that this exclusion of damages to the body and the physical health should not rest with the agencies of the SS, but that the responsibility for it should rest with the man in charge of the experiment who was appointed by us.

This agreement was made with Grawitz and I requested him that if he did not want me to route the request over him to the Chief Minister of the Interior and to the Chief of the police; that we should explain the situation to Himmler, in case he desired that, because I did not know him personally, and because I did not have any contacts with him and we remained with this state of affairs at that time, and later on and only after the experiments had been concluded I found out that gypsies had been used for them. I have seen here from the correspondence that Grawitz raised an objection on one spot. I assume that these objections were based on discussions where I spoke of former soldiers unfit to serve in the military forces and I hoped they would be furnished to me for the experiments.

Q: Professor, did you express it clearly to Professor Grawitz that volunteers, that is people who were voluntarily participating, were necessary in order to guarantee success of the experiments?

A: Yes. I emphasized this particularly and I would like to say, no only with regard to what has developed here now but for a different reason it was a soberly medical point of view because in particular in the case of such experiments it well depended on the person and I made a difference already in the discussion with regard to experiments with virus infected or some other bacteria or diseases, or experiments where the surroundings were changed — and our experiments belonged to the last category. If in the case the experimental subject does not himself actively participate, but already on the very first day when he does not feel so well he "No" then I will never be able to reach any success whatsoever on a human being that I would have to force every day to drink something. With that person I would be unable to achieve any results. But he must have a certain amount of interest for the experiment. I must explain the subject to him previous — that he will take an active part in the experiment — and I ask him "Are you interested now to go through with the experiment?" For that reason hi volunteering is the most important part on this subject. I cannot do that with persons when forced to take part in the experiment.

Q: Witness, on the 7th of June 1944 you addressed a letter to the Reich Minister of the Interior and Reich Fuehrer-SS. This letter is contain in Document Book V of the Prosecution, on page 16 — Prosecution Document185, Exhibit 134.

Before I continue, Mr. President, I would like to point out a note which has been sent to me, that previously the period of time of the telephone conversation with Harringhausen is alleged to have been placed by mistake on the 1st of July, should be the first of June, and not the first of July, which is also confirmed by letter to the Reich Minister of Interior and Reich Fuehrer SS.

Professor, do you have this letter before you?

A: Yes.

Q: It contains the following:

It already gave the Air Force the possibility to clarify the matter under question of experiments on human beings.

How did you make this introductory remark and how did you know anything about experiments which had already been carried out there long before your appointment in the office of the Medical Chief?

A: I was told in the course of discussion. The question whether he?? the experiments should be carried out and I have already stated that two possibilities existed for me, to carry out the experiments in the Academy and in the hospital — and that I failed in these attempts and had to choose another way. On that occasion I was told that something regarding this had been done and that experiments had been carried out in concentration camps. In those camps at the time I wrote the letter — I did not know any thing the composition or organization of these camps. It may sound strange for me to say that today but that is exactly the way it was. At the time wrote the letter — at the time I signed it — I did not know that any foreigners were confined to these camps. I was only informed about that after the capitulation and I only thought of dishonorable discharged member of the German Air Force.

Q: And then you write further. I quote:

I am again confronted by the decision which after numerous experiments on animals must have a final solution by means of experiments on volunteer human beings.

From this is could be concluded that now the experiments were not to have been carried out any more on volunteers and that possibly they should be carried out on persons who were forced to take part in them. What is your opinion on that project?

A: I believe this conclusion cannot be drawn from it if you consider what I have stated with regard to that subject earlier, because neither I the academy nor in the Luftwaffe hospitals, would I have been able to have experiments carried out on involuntary subjects because the natural requisite would have been the voluntary character of the experimental subject.

And I can't understand why it should be different here when it appears natural in the two different places, and aside from the fact of what I have just stated. The active participation of the experimental subject with regard to an experiment designed in changing the surroundings — this also applied to the high altitude experiments in the same way.

Q: Therefore, by adding the word "involuntary" you wanted to express the fact that in this expression volunteers were again involved?

A: This was a statement which I included as natural.

Q: Professor, when you approved these experiments did you have any idea that these experiments were dangerous to the health and life of the experimental subjects?

A: No. I did not burden candidates at our school with experiments which would be dangerous to health or life. And, in the second place I have practical experience from the time when I was Fleet Medical Officer and I described here a young aviator who for six days and seven nights had res** in the Mediterranean. Now, this was certainly an extreme case. However, I have seen many other cases of persons who had drifted for several days 2 or 3 days. And, at that time in the Mediterranean area we had pointed out to the internists, and the consulting internists also made close observation about it, whether these people through drinking sea water had resulted in damage to the kidneys, etc, and we have found nothing at all. But, in every case we were confronted by the same picture when the person concerned had been rescued, when given fresh water, milk, or any other liquid — coffee, tea, or any other liquid connected with fresh water — the greatest amount of illness was already removed. I really had experience on account of my previous activity.

Q: So, the manner of the planning you have, in your opinion, taken precaution to avoid all dangers?

A: Yes. That was clearly understood — that physical damage had to be avoided and also the experiment had to be interrupted if this water was refused. That is to say, if the man says, "No, I cannot go on any more" then they were to be discontinued.

Q: What do you knew generally about the use of sea water in medicine and what do you know about the potential damage which sea water can inflict?

A: I also had some experience in that regard. In the years 1937 and 1938 when I established the Aviation Hospital Westerland on the Island of Sylt then I also had, for certain reasons, included certain facilities in this hospital and also the equipment necessary for sea baths and also drinking cures because, especially in the Thirties, in the literature with regard to urinology there was a lot said about drinking cures and sea water and also that certain successes could be achieved with it in an extremely simple manner, just by merely drinking sea water. Amounts of five hundred grams or more were prescribed or suggested as daily doses and I wanted to have this problem worked on scientifically mere in detail and I had also used specialists for that purpose. I had already had a certain insight into the compatability of sea water. I believe I can state in connection with this that all persons who have ever bathed in the sea certainly have always swallowed some sea water and if they jumped into the sea they probally have not had the impression of jumping in a solution of poison, in order to use the words of the prosecution which spoke of the poison contained in sea water. I do not believe that this corresponds to the scientific and medical facts.

Q: Professor, you have already previously mentioned the fact that this was a very old problem. It was a question of solving the condition of thirst of people who were drifting on the sea?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you know how other nations attempted to solve this problem during the war?

A: Yes. They had exactly the same problems as we had and nobody was further ahead in solving the problem. I know about all the things achieved by the American Air Force and their conditions were not better than ours, There were two things: One was a fishing equipment. The idea was that the person adrift at sea in his rubber raft should catch fish and that these raw fish could be eaten and that the juices contained in them would already protect the person adrift at sea from suffering thirst.

Well, this is not strictly orthodox, but this method could be used. Then, the other method was also brought up by the American Air Force. It was an evaporating plate — it was a cellophane plate in which a felt plate had been inserted. It was inserted in the water and then this plate caught the water and then the plate with the cellophane side was held against the sum. Then the sea water evaporated and then it came down in small drops from the plate. Then below this water was accumulated. Some water could also be gained in this way, but in order to do this the sun had to shine. Otherwise it was impossible to do it. This equipment was used in the Mediterranean but for the English Channel and the North Sea it was not effective. We had these experiments repeated there and they did not show a sufficient amount of success. This problem was acute for all persons who were flying over the seas. It had to be solved but everybody was confronted by the same difficulties. The scientists here and over there were confronted by the same problems and afterwards the process which was developed by Schaefer was tried or experiments were made with it later on by the American Air Force. I cannot give you the chronological order of these things, but that is the way things are done in science. Various things are solved in the same manner at various places.

Q: Professor, what can you tell us about the results of the experiment at Dachau? When did you receive a report about it?

A: After the conclusion of the experiments. From the evidence which has been offered here I believe that was towards the end of October. I cannot remember the exact date, I can only remember the fact that one day at the hospital at the Flakturn this discussion took place and that I only heard part of it because I had to go elsewhere. The result was what we had already expected from the medical point of view. That for the time being only the Schaefer Method could be used and that the Berka Process could also be used for several days but that we still had to decide on a real aid and that the Schaefer Process was to be improved and adopted and that for aircraft such packages were to be issued.

Q: Did you receive any report that physical damage had been done in the course of the experiments or even that fatalities occurred in connection with the experiments?

A: I was expressly informed of the fact that no physical damage, no fatalities had occurred in compliance with my instructions. I assumed that to be natural because that was the basis on which the whole experiment had been ordered. But I asked that question specifically. I made that inquiry and the fact was confirmed to me.

Q: Therefore, if I have understood you correctly, then the core of your instructions was the limit of compatibility and that this limit was not to be exceeded? That is to say, that these people were not to have their health impaired?

A: No, that would have been contrary to my intentions. I wanted to ascertain what the aviator can do when he is adrift at sea and not what he cannot take.

By giving an overdose I can inflict damage with every drug. I only wanted to see how much they could take.

Q: May it please the Tribunal, this concludes my examination of the defendant Professor Doctor Schroeder, except for listening to experts and by calling witnesses and I am not as yet ready for that at this time for the following reasons. The sea water complex will be dealt with once more in the course of this trial with regard to the defendants Becker-Frayseng, Beiglboeck and Schaefer. It therefore would be a superfluous imposition on the Tribunal if at this time and in connection with the examination of the defendant Schroeder evidence should be offered by experts on the subject. I therefore request that I be reserved the right to also deal with this complex when the evidence is offered for BeckerFreyseng, Schaeier and Beiglboeck at a later period of time and then to be permitted te re-examine Professor Schroeder again.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may have the right to cross examine the witness and re-examine the defendant Schroeder at that time if he desires. That right may be reserved to counsel far defense until the matter is brought up in the case against the defendants mentioned.

As for the name of the witness whose presence he desires here, I didn't get it.

DR. MARX: In the complex of sea water, Professor Vollhardt will appear here. Or this may be the female witness Grodel.

THE PRESIDENT: I shall, request information concerning the progress being made in finding this witness.

MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, the prosecution, of course, has no objection and, as a matter of fact, is highly gratified that the defense counsel for Schroeder does not plan to burden the court with duplication of expert testimony. However, unless compelling reason is shown for again calling Schroeder to the stand after that testimony, I think I must interpose an objection to that procedure for the reason that if a precedent is set in this case of permitting a defendant to appear on the stand again I'm afraid it will prolong the trial intolerably.

THE PRESIDENT: Of course, Counsel for the prosecution has the right to object. It will be understood that there will be some good and sufficient reasons for recalling the defendant Schroeder to the stand. Counsel may be heard from at the time the effort is made.

MR. McHANEY: Very well, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDENT: Court will be in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.

(A recess was taken at 1430 hours until 0930 hours 26 February 1947.)