1947-02-26, #1: Doctors' Trial (early morning)
Official transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nuernberg, Germany, on 26 February 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats. The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal 1. Military Tribunal 1 is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you will ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all defendants are present with the exception of the defendant Oberheuser, who is absent due to illness.
THE PRESIDENT: A certificate having been filed by Captain C.K. Roscoe, U.S. Army Medical Corps, to the effect that defendant Oberheuser is unable to be in court due to illness, the defendant will be excused from attendance today, it appearing to the Tribunal that her absence from court will not prejudice her interests and her counsel being present. The Secretary General will file the doctor's certificate. Counsel may proceed with the examination of the witness.
OSKAR SCHROEDER — Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
THE PRESIDENT: I was informed by the Marshal that counsel for the defendant Schroeder desired to place a witness on the stand, one witness Jentsch. If the witness is in a hurry to leave, the testimony of defendant Schroeder could be temporarily suspended.
DR. MARX (Counsel for the defendant Becker-Freyseng): May it please the Tribunal, the matter pertaining to the witness Jentsch has bean clarified. The witness Jentsch can be heard this afternoon.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.
DR. SERVATIUS: I am representing Dr. Nelte, counsel for the defendant Handloser. Dr. Nelte is unable to attend today.
EXAMINATION BY BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q: Witness, you yourself were Medical Chief of the Luftwaffe for a period of more than a year?
A: Yes.
Q: When you asked for a furlough, did you need the permission of the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service?
A: No.
Q: If you had violated any regulations, were you subject to the disciplinary authority of the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service?
A: No. The Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service did not have any disciplinary authority over me.
Q: When you wanted to have some people promoted, did you need the approval of the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service in order to do that?
A: No.
Q: The things we have just discussed, are they not important indications of relationship with regard to the fact that he was your superior?
A: Yes. In military life these are the characteristics of a military superior relationship.
Q: I can deduct from this that Handloser was not a professional superior to you?
A: No, he was not my superior with regard to our professions.
Q: At the time the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service was appointed, was this action welcome by the branches of the Wehrmacht?
A: When this agency was established in 1942, I did not see it in the Ministry because at the time I was the Fleet Medical Officer of Sicily. But from some discussions at the time and later on I know that opinions on the subject were divided. At the time in 1942 when I saw for the first time this regulation in the regulation sheet, later on when I as Medical Chief had this position myself, and when I had to work with the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, I had always emphasized that I welcomed the establishment of this agency. However, I know that other people had a different point of view with us.
Q: Was there a clear settlement of the medical leadership wanted?
A: No, I do not think so. That situation arose from the conflicting opinions. I believe the idea of the superior relationships which were organized in a military manner was that this establishment of an agency the middle of a war was not to cause any disturbance and unrest in the subordinate agencies and, secondly, was intended to give us directives so that this agency could develop — this is the way I understood it; and not from the requirements of our work, the basis was to be established in order to — after the necessary experiences had been collected — organize the position of the Wehrmacht Chief of the Medical Service as was necessary for a military agency.
Q: Witness, then several months of difficulties were first of all to be left to those persons participating in it?
A: Yes. You also have to bring into account that the Wehrmacht Medical Chief, as well as the Medical Chiefs of the Wehrmacht branches, experienced in their duties, and that they had been active in the military medical field for decades — in other words were qualified to work out their problem together.
Q: Well, did the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service have an equal authority towards the other chiefs of the Wehrmacht branches?
A: Well, a difference has to be made in this respect. The Wehrmacht Medical Chief of 1942, in order to use a common title, was primus inter pares (first among equals), while the same position in 1944 had already been [illegible] somewhat because at that time he had the right to issue instructions -that time he already had a certain amount of authority.
Q: If I understand you correctly, he was not yet superior but he want to develop into a superior?
A: He was not yet a superior in the sense in which we understand military superiors.
Q: Witness, you speak of a military superior relationship. Does that also refer to the specialist superior relationship?
A: Yes, that is what I have meant. That is what in the military we understand, by the superior relationship.
Q: Witness, what was your predecessor Hippke's attitude towards this question. Did he recognize the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service as his superior?
A: I have never discussed this subject with him because we only saw each other very rarely. However, I do not believe that he recognized him his superior, that is, when I consider this from the military aspect.
Q: And what was your attitude at the time you took over the position?
A: As I have already stated earlier, expressly positive. I morally considered him as my superior, even if he was not in fact, and I did everything in order to form a basis for the future position, that is, in the form in which I informed him about things which seemed to be important to me and which I considered important enough to come to his knowledge; I also requested him to inspect hospitals of the Luftwaffe.
Q: Witness, Professor Handloser has been heard here and he has stated that no superior relationship existed; Hippke has stated something different. In your opinion, which one of the two is correct in his statement?
A: Handloser, that is quite clear, it is an indisputable fact. If I state that I considered him my superior, then I am only speaking of my personal attitude towards his position as Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Services and my attitude did not give any new rights on the part of Handloser towards me, but that is only the way in which this thing developed.
DR. SERVATIUS: I do not have any further questions to this witness.
EXAMINATION BY DR. TIPP (Counsel for the Defendant Becker-Freyseng):
Q: Witness, where and for how long have you known Dr. Becker-Freyseng?
A: In 1938 I made his acquaintance when Becker-Freyseng entered the institute of Professor Stuckholt as collaborator.
Q: Did you see him frequently during the war and did you have discuss with him?
A: I beg your pardon?
Q: Did you see him frequently during the war and did you have any discussions with him?
A: Yes, when I became Chief of the Medical Service, but not before.
Q: Now what position did Becker-Freyseng occupy in January 1944?
A: Then I became Chief of the Medical Service he was assistant expert in the Medical Department of the Air Ministry and the regular specialist was professor Anthony.
Q: When did this change occur?
A: Approximately May 1944. At that time there was a limitation in personnel; Anthony was an internist and was transferred by me to an air fleet as a consulting physician.
Q: And what did Becker-Freyseng become from that time?
A: He became the successor of Anthony, in the agency of that department.
Q: And you have heard, professor, that from the position of specialist from that position, Becker-Freyseng is charged with a great responsibility. He is charged with that responsibility by the Prosecution. Now will you please describe to us the position of a referent, a departmental expert in your opinion?
A: Yesterday I have already briefly described the inner organization of my agency and if I should say it differently now. — From the Chief of the Medical Service it went down to the Chief of Staff, from there to the section heads and from the section heads to the group leaders and the referents. Towards the middle of 1944 I had 20 or 25 referents (departmental experts). They were medical officers who, according to specialist training in their capacity, specialized in individual fields. There were several administrative officers; then there were also some troop officers. The referent (the departmental specialist) was the lowest agent in the official organization, with regard to the tasks which were entrusted to him.
Q: Now what tasks did the individual referent have?
A: As I have already stated, the referent is the person who works or special field, operation personnel, aviation medicine, or something similar.
Q: And now what did this work include?
A: This work included, first of all, the preparation of the reports and the correspondence with regard to these special fields and the further handling of all these matters.
Q: This was a preparatory activity?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, when mail arrived, was this mail immediately handed to the referent?
A: No. As I have already stated yesterday, a part of the open mail was handled by the registration official and it was passed on directly to the section heads and the more important open letters and the entire mail which was classified as Secret, went to the Chief of Staff, who marked the either for the individual section heads or, if it was an especially important matter, he would pass it on to me. The major part of the mail, however, went directly or through the Chief of staff to the section heads and they passed them on to their referents and the group leaders.
Q: You previously stated that the referents had to make the necessary preparations?
A: Yes.
Q: Well, were the referents at least independent in their preparatory work?
A: No, that cannot be said at all. The referent worked on the letter which he received, using files and other documents in order to perform his work; he then prepared all these things in such a way that he could report his section head about these matters — so that he could hand him a complete report. The report was then reviewed by the section head, together with a referent. The section head was able to decide independently in things of minor importance. In general, however, the section heads did not use this method very much but they on their part passed on these things to the Chief of staff, who then signed these things; for the most part these things were handled by the Chief of Staff. Only when fundamental matters, or question by older medical officers were concerned, were these things then submitted for my signature.
Q: Therefore, I understand you correctly when I say that the referent did not have the authority to make any independent decisions?
A: No, he did not have the authority to sign any documents.
Q: Now if a decision had been made which had been worked out by the referent — if this decision had been made by the Chief of Staff or the Section Head — how was the responsibility for that divided?
A: I would like to say that the referent had the responsibility just pertaining to the work itself. The referent was responsible towards the section head for the correctness of the papers which he has used in working out the matter or the correctness of the information which he has obtained in order to perform his work. This section head had to be able to depend on the fact that what the referent passed on to him was based on the facts. That was the responsibility of the referent. Therefore, the decisive superior was solely and alone responsible for the decisions regarding the outside.
A: The responsibility for the outside was born by the person who signed this letter. I can say this responsibility with regard to the work was fixed in such a way that in the draft of the letters the number of the referent could be seen who had dealt wiht the work, so that by later reference afterwards the person could be determined, and the referent who had worked out the communication.
Q: That now was the responsibility of the referent. Now, you said that Becker-Freyseng. was an assistant referent; now what actually is the position of the assistant referent with regard to his work and his responsibility?
A: The assistant referent was an emergency measure caused by the war, I would like to say. Normally, you would not have any assistant referent. However, during the War for a more extensive period of time, or for a short period of time, work had accumulated which even with the greatest effort could not be handled by the referent. In these cases assistant was used for a longer period of time and maybe temporarily. This assistant was attached to the department in order to assist the referent with certain tasks. Such assistant referent frequently did not have any planning position in this agency, but they were listed on the budget of some other agency and they were detached by orders from another agency to some other office. This explains the fact that such assistant referents frequently were very little acquainted with the procedures in that particular agency. They were only temporarily used and detached into that particular agency to perform a certain special task, and therefore they were not carried on the table of organization of that agency.
That is for the most part the position of the assistant referent.
Q: Now, Becker-Freyseng was for four or five months assistant referent when you were Chief of the Medical Service, and Professor Anthony was at that time the official referent?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, can you tell us concretely what Becker-Freyseng did during that time as assistant referent, was he the permanent deputy of Anthony?
A: No, if I remember correctly was for the most part of the time when I was Medical Chief, and he was assistant referent he was not in our agency at all, but I had assigned him to work at some scientific task. I reassign him to the Aviation Medical Institute, where he was originally stationed.
Q: May I interrupt, because I did not want you to go so far into detail but only wanted you to clarify the one question. Was Becker-Freyseng also acquainted with all the work which was carried out in the department or did he have to work on certain special fields as assistant?
A: It is impossible that he was acquainted with all the work.
Q: Now, one question with regard to Becker-Freyseng's position referent; one of the co-defendants, Dr. Schaeffer has stated in an affidavit that Dr. Becker-Freyseng had been your only research consultant; can you please tell us something on that subject?
A: That is probably not very elegant way of expressing it. It actually was not the case. After the departure of Anthony, Becker-Freyseng was referent for aviation medicine. That means to say that he was working on the special field in my agency, and of course since we were together everyday we frequently discussed current matters, and of course we had to do that as a result of our inner contact, but my consultant in the sense of the consultant medical officer, this was the Director of the Aviation Institute, Professor Struckholdt, who personally was also in Berlin and visited me for longer discussions every week or two weeks, and whom I was visiting in his Institute, then it was Professor Rain form Goettingen, I was unable to see very frequently, because he was located to far away, and then there were several internal physicians like Rauch, Bruehl, — but I cannot recall his first name.
They were the actual consulting medical officers.
Q: Well, Becker-Freyseng was not your consultant but the other medical officers?
A: In such cases when critical decisions were concerned Dr. Becker-Freyseng always pointed out to the consulting medical officers that I would have to be informed.
Q: When Professor Anthony left the department and Becker-Freyseng became referent who became his successor as assistant referent?
A: I did not have any collaborator or successor as assistant referent, At the time on my own initiative I have tried to relieve my agency from all work which did not have to be achieved by all means in the ministry, and I transferred this work to other branch offices, and so in the field of aviation medicine everything was taken out of the central agency which could not be decided on solely by us, and I turned all that over to the group for science and research which was available to me, so that there was no need of an assistant referent in that office.
Q: And now what field was taken out of the department?
A: I cannot tell you that anymore; at that time it cannot be put in such a way that a certain field was withdrawn, but everything that does not mean a fundamental decision was transferred.
Q: Now, a specific question, Professor; what contact did Becker-Freyseng have with the virus research and research assignments of Professor Haagen at Strassbourg?
A: None whatsoever, and especially in the field of Haagen this work was in the field of virus research and hygiene, and this work was handled by these special subject departments, but they were not handled by Becker-Freyseng.
Q: The competent department for the work of Haagen was what department?
A: That was the department for hygiene, which was also located in the medical department. That is the department to which Becker-Freyseng belonged, and at that time Stabsarzt Atmer was in charge of it.
Q: The Stabsarzt was the specialist for that field?
A: Yes.
Q: And the scientific questions in the fields of which ascertained the daily work, how is it Professor that in hygiene some letters to and from Haagen to mark "To the Department of Hygiene" years. You know that the Prosecution has drawn the conclusion from that that Haagen received his orders from Becker-Freyseng. Will you please give a short statement on that subject?
A: You mean File Mark 55, and also 21B? In the Wehrmacht we had a so-called uniform file plan. This file plan went through all branches and parts of the Wehrmacht, no matter if it was infantry, artillery or medical service, and each special file had a certain number and this number was generally applied everywhere, for example File Mark 59.
File mark 49 was the medical service, therefore, if any letter was sent to an outside agency and at the left, under the heading, it was marked file mark 49, then everybody immediately knew, without even looking at the letter, that this concerned a medical question and it was assigned to the agency which had to deal with it. Of course, there were sub-divisions under the individual numbers.
Also there was a file mark 55. This referred to all research, research in the field of animal epidemics or mechanics or aviation medical experiments, it did not make any difference. File mark 55 was the code name for research and it had the big advantage that the keeping of files was facilitated very much, because you had only to keep those numbers in mind. All special files were kept together properly and this system had been introduced in my agency by my predecessor. Everything connected with research, that is the administration of this file mark 55 in the department, was located with the department for aviation medicine. This was the result of the fact that 90% of all research assignments, which had accumulated with us, were assignments with regard to aviation medicine. The administration of the aviation medicine departments had for many years been in the hands of high school teachers, Professor Bach, Professor Ludwig, Professor Anthony. They had been charged with administering this title for the main reason that they had the over-most assignment and secondly, because owing to the war, many regulations had to be observed in caring for these assignments as there were the priority numbers, personnel questions and many other regulations. There were quite a few formalities and of course they were administered by departments which were frequently connected with these things, as there were other departments who only worked on these matters once or twice a year. For this reason all research assignments were dealt with by the Department for Aviation Medicine. Now when assignments in the field of hygiene had accumulated, then the scientific aspect of these assignments and everything connected with it, was worked on by the Department of Hygiene. The administration matters were handled by the Department for aviation medicine.
Now, I am again referring to what I have already stated about the title and the note on the draft, if a letter or any reference had been needed from our agency because of an assignment, then we would have looked at the draft and on the draft we could have seen who had worked on the matter. Then we would never have said that is aviation medicine and a certain person is responsible for it, then we would have seen that it was worked on in the Department of Hygiene.
Q: Then, it was done in such a way that in order to summarize the answer, you would know that the physician who marked No. 55 referred to all research assignments?
A: Yes.
Q: And all research assignments were dealt with by the department for Aviation Medicine and they were worked on in that agency. According to all formal aspects, that is the work, the specialized work, was left to the competent reference mark.
We will now come back to the question with reference to Professor Haagen; do you think the field of Professor Haagen was far removed from the Department for Aviation Medicine and that the specialized work in this case was not done by Dr. Becker-Freyseng, but it was carried out by persons who were competent in that matter, Stabsarzt Atmer?
A: Yes.
Q: We will new come to the question of sea-water experiments. In the direct examination you have already answered these questions in detail and just for the purpose of clarification, I would like to repeat what I have deducted from the answers. I ask you now to confirm these questions. Did Dr. Becker-Freyseng tell you that first on the basis of the attitude of the technical office on the one hand, as well as on the basis of the attitudes of Professors Eppinger and Holpner that through internationally recognized scientists work on the other hand, that the experiments were necessary; is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: And in compliance with the requirement for carrying out the experiments that these experiments were not dangerous?
A: That is correct.
Q: That the experiments were to be carried out in the form of proving experiments?
A: Yes.
Q: And if it should be impossible to carry out a proving experiment, only then concentration camp inmates were to be used?
A: Yes.
Q: The conditions for the experiments were to be the same in every case, regardless if they were with soldiers or if prisoners were concerned?
A: Naturally.
Q: Well that is what you inferred about the participation of Dr. Becker-Freyseng. You have previously talked about the responsibility of a referent and perhaps we can clarify this by means of an example; who was responsible for these experiments?
A: Well, I was.
Q: You, thank you. Then another question: did Becker-Freyseng submit any reports to you? Reports from Ruff, Romberg and Rascher with regard to the field of high altitude, or reports by Holzloehner, Finke and Rascher with regard to the specialized field of freezing experiments?
A: No.
Q: Thank you, I do not have any further questions.
EXAMINATION BY DR. ROSE (Defense Counsel for the Defendant Rose):
Q: Professor, the Prosecution has presented an affidavit from you and it is located in Prosecution Document Book No. 5, with regard to sea-water experiments. It is Document No.449 and is Prosecution Exhibit 130 and in it you have signed the following, among other things, and I quote:
Aviation Hygienist General Gebhardt Rose supervised the research work done by Professor Haagen.
And I continue to quote:
Rose had to be informed about all research work, which was carried out by consulting hygienists like Haagen on behalf of the Luftwaffe.
Professor, regarding the defendants Rostock and Handloser. Now on the basis of your knowledge of the positions and tasks of the consulting physicians of the German Wehrmacht — and they have in turn stated that such supervisory duties were even the authority for that and that the consulting physicians to the medical inspectorate did not have the authority to do that.
Will you please explain to us just what brought about your statements to the contrary in the affidavit?
A: The statements in the affidavit are not the words used by me, but it is a summary from various interrogations, which were presented to me in this form at the time we discussed those things. If I hear it again in this form today, then I must say this is wrong or not a very good explanation.
The right to supervise, I have never claimed in the interrogations, and the consulting physicians did not have such authority. The consulting physicians had a so-called information authority, if I want to explain it that way. They could be ordered by the chief to be informed as to the progress of the work in order to report to the chief about it. That was their task and this question was proved more or less actively by the individual according to his tendencies.
Q: Therefore, today, you can likewise confirm the correctiveness of the testimony, which has been given by the Defendants Rostock and Handloser?
A: Yes, that is the generally recognized clear task of the consulting physicians. And this also refers to the positions of Professor Rose toward Professor Haagen.
Q: You stated earlier that this affidavit was not drafted by you, but that it was only presented to you for your signature?
A: Yes.
Q: In this original draft by the prosecution were there any other statements about Professor Rose, for example, the claim that Professor Rose had been the hygienist consultant of the SS?
A: Yes, it contained several mistakes which were false the way they were expressed, and in correcting these mistakes I failed to change this, or I would have changed it already at that time.
Q: In the same affidavit it is stated in another place, and I continue to quotes "Dr. Dohmen was his collaborator", namely, Haagen's. Now, I claim, Professor, that according to the knowledge which we have obtained here, Dohmen was not the collaborator of Haagen, but to the contrary, that he had a certain conflict with him, and do you agree with me now that this description in your affidavit is not correct?
A: I have heard that in the meantime. I made a mistake there. I assumed that they had already worked together at an earlier period of time.
Q: Then there is another conflict. Do you remember that in the fall of 1944 the SD, the Security Service, wanted to start a trial for treason against Professor Rose because Professor Rose had given lectures in neutral foreign countries, namely in Switzerland and in Turkey, in which he described in detail the progress which had been made in Germany in the field of combating typhus and combating malaria?
A: Yes, I remember that an inquiry from the SD was addressed to us at that time which contained these things.
Q: Do you further remember, Professor, that in this case above all, was information about the results of research by Professor Rose and other German scientists about the practical application of DDT powders against insects which were carrying diseases, above all with lice in the case of typhus and flies in the case of malaria?
A: Yes, the question of those lectures abroad was already prevalent with us before Rose had held them by request of the scientific societies and had been clearly determined, and at that time a settlement was made that he should talk about these things.
Q: It is correct that prior to the speech of Professor Rose at Basel articles had appeared in literature of the belligerent countries about the use of DDT powders with regard to combating epidemics, and that such articles had never appeared?
A: Yes, at that time probably this powder had not yet been discovered.
Q: Can you confirm that research was involved in this case which was of the utmost importance for the troops in combating epidemics?
A: That is a research of the utmost importance.
Q: Do you know the reasons which Professor Rose gave at that time for his attitude; namely, that the results of medical research even in times of war should benefit all mankind?
A: Rose, through his course of life and through his training, was used much more than we in working together with foreign countries. He was assistant in Switzerland and he has spent many years in China. He has worked in America, and in this way he has seen the large framework of scientific collaboration much more than we did, and he has incorporated this into his manner of working. In this course he desired to hold these lectures. It was at one time by suggestion of his friends in Switzerland and also because of his own attitude, and he wanted to give this information to all circles regardless to what nation they belonged.
Q: Professor, but you yourself agreed?
A: Yes, naturally. Otherwise it would not have been possible because we had to apply for passports.
Q: And later you had an inquiry about the defendant Rose from the SD?
A: Yes.
Q: And did you also request the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service to comply with your attitude?
A: Yes, I had to do that because the inquiry by the SD had probably been routed through the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, and that is the reason I had to give him exact information.
Q: Then, a few more questions. Did Professor Rose, as consulting hygienist, have anything to do with problems and questions of aviation medicine?
A: No, nothing whatsoever.
Q: Did Professor Rose have anything to do with high-altitude experiments, with sub-freezing problems, the sea water experiments, or any problems connected with drifting on the seas?
A: No, Rose limited himself strictly to the purely hygienic questions of his field of work. He was exemplary in the respect that he did not intervene in any other fields.
Q: Did it ever come to your knowledge, Professor, that Professor Rose participated in research on hepatitis epidemica?
A: No, he was not used in that respect by us. I have never heard that he worked on that.
Q: Did Professor Rose already in 1943 transfer his department at the Robert Koch Institute, that is, his department for tropical science — was this before you became medical inspector — did he transfer his personnel and his equipment there to the Luftwaffe and did he convert it into a unit of the Luftwaffe; namely, the department for typhus therapy of the Luftwaffe at Ammerode?
A: You mean malaria?
Q: Yes, I mean malaria.
A: Yes, you can call it that probably, because this department for malaria therapy was, as far as I know of these happenings and that was before my time — they were organized with personnel and equipment from the department of the Robert Koch Institute and already at that time it was very difficult to obtain personnel, and thus Rose at that time furnished his personnel and his equipment for this task.
Q: Was this not an unusual procedure, namely, the conversion of such a purely civilian research agency into a military unit?
A: Of course, in peace time this would have been impossible, but since there was such a shortage of personnel every measure was taken which could be carried out at all. That had to be done in order to help oneself.
Q: Then, another question. In the time when you were chief of the medical service of the Luftwaffe, did Professor Rose still stay at Berlin, or did he not rather have his permanent residence, aside from official trip at the department for science and research of the Military Academy of the Luftwaffe; that is, at Saalow, and later on at Bad Harzburg?
A: Yes, Rose was constantly with that agency.
Q: Do you consider it possible, Professor, that Professor Rose still had the possibility to carry out his civilian functions as vice-president in the Robert Koch Institute after he had completely removed his own department from the Robert Koch Institute and had transferred it to Thuringi and after he himself did not have his military station at Berlin?
A: No, I believe that this activity came to a complete standstill.
DR. FRITZ: Thank you, I do not have any further questions.
EXAMINATION BY DR. SAUTER (Counsel for defendant Ruff):
Q: Witness, from 1943 on you were a medical inspector of the Luftwaffe?
A: From the 1st of January, 1944 on.
Q: As a result of this you also made the acquaintance of the defendant Dr. Ruff?
A: Yes, I knew him.
Q: Can you tell us what was the title of the institute whose head was the defendant Dr. Ruff?
A: It was called the German experimental station for aviation research and that was the medical department of the German experimental station for aviation research.
Q: You will hear in a minute why I want to know the exact title.
A: Well, I cannot remember the exact title anymore. In any case it was the medical department there.
Q: Well, can I inform you of the exact title? Aviation medical institute of the German experimental station for aviation.
A: Well, if you tell me that now I assume that it is correct.
Q: Yes, you can be quite certain it is correct. Then there was yet another institute which existed in the field of the Luftwaffe. It had a quite a similar title. That was the institute of Professor Struckholdt whom you have already mentioned quite a few times today.
A: That was the Aviation Medical Research Institute.
Q: That is correct, Aviation Medical Research Institute of the Reich Ministry of Aviation, the RLM. Witness, I placed emphasis upon this clarification because of a document which I am going to hand to you. It is located in Prosecution's Document Book 5, on page 12, Document No. 177. It is a document with which you have already occupied yourself with during the previous days. This document, No. 177, is a record of the meeting about making sea-water drinkable. Witness, could you perhaps at this time, answer another question: Did the Institute of Dr. Ruff have anything at all to do with this problem, that is, with the problem of making seawater drinkable?
A: No.
Q: Nothing whatsoever?
A: Nothing whatsoever.
Q: Now, please take a look at that record. On page 12, you first of all find a list of persons who participated in the meetings; and, under No. 14, and we are not interested in the other numbers here, it is stated:
Underarzt Dr. Schaefer's Medical Research Institute for Aviation.
What kind of an institute was that; was it the institute headed by Dr. Ruff or was it the institute of Professor Struckholdt?
A: That was the institute of Professor Struckholdt.
Q: He was, that is, a referent of the institute of Dr. Ruff, and did not participate in the meetings. And, now, please let us go on a few more pages and take a look at the end of this document. On page 15 of Document Book No. 5, at the end of the distribution, it is stated in this document —
A: (Interposing) Yes.
Q: And, under that distribution it states, information copy, that is to say, certain agencies were to be informed, and here now is the third agency: You will find the institute for Aviation Medicine, the DVL, Berlin-Adlershof; according to its title, this would be the institute of Dr. Ruff. Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: I am now asking you, Witness, you remember perhaps that in dealing with these sea-water experiments, the Prosecution has referred to the strange notices with regard to the distribution; that is to say, there still had to be a certain connection with the Ruff Institute to these sea-water experiments. Dr. Ruff will confirm in the course of his examination that this document had never been presented to him at an earlier period of time. Now, Doctor, how do you explain the fact that the Institute of Dr. Ruff is listed here at the end of the distribution, although no referent from his institute participated in the meetings and his institute did not have anything whatsoever to do with these experiments?
A: I cannot quite understand the claim by the Prosecution if I read through the list of the distribution here correctly. However, since I know the agency I must make the following statement: This report was not worked on by a medical agency, it was handled by a technical agency. It was recorded and worked on there, and it was presented there, and if I see now who received the information copy of it, then I could not help but gain the impression that this was done according to certain schemes because the technicians here, at least, or the technical agencies with which they were usually in contact because not only the Institute for Aviation Medicine does not play any part here at all but just is interested as the testing station directly in the medical experimentation, and its Experimentation Department at Jueterbog which has also been listed here. These three agencies which I have just mentioned do not have anything whatsoever to do with the matter and it could have been only listed here by people who worked on this matter, and who were not acquainted with the connections at all.
Q: Witness, if you will take another look at the distribution, which would perhaps give rise to the assumption that, in the distribution, the Institute for Aviation Medicine, that is, the Institute of Dr. Ruff, was included for the reason that it was mistaken for the Institute of Professor Struckholdt, which has a similar name?
A: Yes, this probability exists because the institute which was interested in this question has not been listed; that is, this possibility had to be considered, that a mistake was made here. The correct institute has not been listed in the distribution.
Q: Although, under Article 14, a representative from that institute, that is, the Institute of Professor Struckholdt has been named as attending —
A: (Interposing) Yes, and by all this institute was the one which had done part of the work, and that is why the referent Dr. Schaefer attended.
Q: Witness, I still have another question. In the course of the trial, in an earlier period of time, you knew the defendant Dr. Ruff had carried out experiments with a low pressure chamber in 1942 — the purpose of these experiments is, as you know, to rescue aircraft, to rescue aircraft personnel from high altitudes. In 1942, you were not the Medical Inspector?
A: No.
Q: And, therefore, you are not responsible for the experiments which were carried out at that time; therefore, I am the more interested to hear from you if such high altitude experiments with the low pressure chamber were absolutely necessary for our Luftwaffe in the year 1942 or were these experiments superfluous?
A: These experiments were very important, and I am speaking of this from my experience as Fleet Medical Officer, where these questions were discussed rather frequently, and that no fighter planes were flying at altitudes with which the ones we have been used to. I can remember quite a few discussions about this question of our flight engineers, and with regard to how the technicians would solve their experiences, and I can remember I used these experiences rather frequently. The technique is one that placed new problem upon us. At that time, I knew just as little as our flight engineer when these experiments were carried out, but these experiments were necessary and we were interested in them and we considered them necessary.
Q: Witness, can you tell us anything about the personality of Dr. Ruff in his capacity as a scientist. Now, that Dr. Ruff was subordinated in some respects to your Medical Inspectorate, and I am particularly interested in the question: Is it correct that Dr. Ruff, at that tine, was generally Known as a scientist who was conscientious and particularly careful in carrying out his experiments, and who furthermore had the reputation that he carried out almost all experiments on himself. Can you tell us anything about that?
A: Yes. At this time I would like very much to give a judgment of Ruff; and I can probably give it with the necessary objectivity because I have known Ruff since 1936, or it may have been since 1937. When I at the time was chief of the staff of the inspectorate, Ruff then drew my particular attention because he was not only a physician but he was also captain of a flight, and flying captain in Germany meant a high achievement in aviation. It was not a name which everybody could have who had ever passed his flight training, but it was a title which was given as a result of special achievements in aviation.
For us, this was a very favorable matter. Ruff was the only physician at our disposal who was flight captain. We had a large number of other medical officers who were aircraft pilots. But we had only Ruff with this great aviation experience. This fact shows more than words that somebody who is so experienced in aviation and who has achieved so much there is naturally the person to carry out these experiments on himself because he fulfills the technical prerequisites for it. This we also knew; and also on the part of my agency they always referred to the fact that medical experiments which required special aviation experience could only be carried out with Ruff and by Ruff. He did not hesitate to carry out these experiments at all times.
Furthermore, Ruff at that time was a relatively young physician. However, he had an outstanding aviation physiological medical basis; and during his very young years he had understood it in this big institute for aviation research where probably our best and most experienced experts of aviation technique were working together to obtain an absolutely authoritative position for their own sectors. For us, Ruff with his work was the counter balance to the Aviation Medical Research Institute, the institute which on the basis of its laboratory organization was able to carry out this kind of work and which usually established prerequisites for Ruff's work; and this could now be completed by Ruff and his practical work.
Ruff was a man who basically carried out experiments on himself only; and only when he believed that he had obtained enough security did he then include his closer collaborators into his experimental circle. It is also characteristic of the work done by the institute that there were very few transfers of assistants. Once a person had become an assistant with Ruff, then he did not want to leave there anymore. It was a research community based on such loyalty and comradeship that men were inseparably connected with their research and their chief.
DR. SAUTER: May it please the Tribunal, I do not have any further questions to the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess.
(A recess was taken.)