1947-03-06, #4: Doctors' Trial (late afternoon)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
KARL GEBHARDT — Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q: Witness, I am not sure whether before the recess there occurred a mistake in the translation, but I will ask you again is it correct that before the execution of malaria experiments, the freezing experiments, and all of the other experiments, you did not know about them?
A: That is certainly correct. I don't think that I put it in this light. The point and the difficulty in my position itself, in my evidence I would like to point out; I think that I have to describe in these boarder fields the various conditions of orders were interlocked, but it was not so — I hadn't conceive the question to be such — that I have been asked about individual experiments, but it was described to me now this may have been carried out.
Q: Mr. President, the next document which I present to the witness, is contained in document book No. 5 on page 20 of the English document book, it is document NO 170-179, which is presented as exhibit No. 135. It is a letter of the Reichsarzt Dr. Grawitz, to the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler, on the 28 June, 1944, it refers to the seawater experiments, at first we pointed out a request by the Luftwaffe and then we refer again back to an order on the 15 May 1944. Are you able to quote the contents of this order? I should like to point out, the Prosecution did not present this order yet, but it may have the possibility that this will be submitted to you shortly.
A: I cannot declare upon oath what is contained in this order. I am convinced that this order has nothing to do with myself, but that this order probably is a transmittal of experiments from Pohl to Grawitz. I don't know, but I do know exactly why I mentioned my attitude, and I know what I wanted. Whether this is quoted as an appendix in this order, I will see it, but I would like to declare, what to my attitude toward those human experiments was that time and what I submitted to Himmler. Under the pressure of this trial, it is so that everybody who is in here at the trial will present this in this light, that the human experiments is absolutely out of the question for any doctor and on the other hand, of if everybody says if this is surely a voluntary experiment, then human experiments will be performed.
I may remind you that Dr. Liebrandt, who also mentioned this, that unfortunately in so-called natural science and the development of natural science, the human experiment itself is a heavy problem. It is quite sure least of all for us who are surgeons. At that time I got hold of literature. I attacked the person of Rascher, and I tried to explain my thoughts and impressions about this problem, which I confessed, and an very glad that Himmler heard them, and I explained them at that time. Many other persons had given him other thoughts on the subject; and I would like to be permitted to show the possibility of human experiments and how I would like to think about those experiments. I would like to compare these. There is no doubt whether the initial case is with the doctor, that a doctor suddenly will try to clarify a problem in human experiments, which he cannot do in any other way. That is the ideal experiment upon himself. We have the example of Dr. Speer who applied a local anesthetic upon himself, who proved it would not harm himself; and that is only possible in individual cases and by applying this experiment to myself. If the question is on the bacteriological side, I can only prove, if I did not got along with animal experiments, if I make available a larger group, these larger groups, — can include voluntary people. In spite of our discussions on this point I am convinced that the volunteers for this experiment, will never surpass beyond five or six or ten people — if it is an experiment of life and death. This is the mad initiator of this idea, plus two or three scholars who experienced those experiments which were carried out. These have been carried out in this regard. On the other hand if you approve a mark of three or four or eight hundred, this idea of volunteers receives a queer background. There are not eight hundred people who are absolutely ready, in clear knowledge that they may die in these experiments, if there is not absolutely a chance for them surviving which is made to these experiments.
On the other hand such experiments are being carried out in a correct character. The basis for these experiments is merely not a doctor, but mostly a group, who support him mentally, a circle of research people, bacteriologists, or very often industry, if they want to press the matter. The little man, for instance in Germany here has to approach a problem with a knowing attitude to get volunteers for these experiments, that do not have the clear knowledge of the whole experiment but one thing, and recruiting for this experiment has to be done and recruiting means that the greatest success is achieved in this way: You can use radio; you can promise money, you can cleverly present it in the press, you can suppress the amount of chance of danger, you can apply it to a circle who is accessible to some sensation, who quite primitively falls for a present; these experiments have been carried out in the whole world, on natives, and on prisoners, and on all sorts of mental deficients, but not mad people, and finally they all agreed that they absolutely would use volunteers for these experiments. In these medical experiments the medical initiative in my opinion is in the background and is not quite decent any more, because mostly it is admitted that these 800 do not know how great the danger is, or that under some pressure or some false position they desired to submit to these experiments. The experiments are represented as voluntary and are carried out in this manner and is to be evaluated this way.
Q: (Question by Dr. Seidl which was not translated.)
A: I told Himmler, I told him clearly he should not introduce such a question which may not be overlooked. This problem, as Rascher asked Himmler, about the idea then Rascher takes the initiative. Rascher does not participate in this experiment. And I may conclude that any experiment was forbidden in the bar. Himmler's participants in the experiment, says that has to be carried out in a different manner and on a larger scale. This experiment nobody can classify as a private initiative, as State initiative. So that in these experiments I find absolutely impossible, that the Government of Hitler fundamentally approved and recognized the experiment as legal, not if it was a question of private idea. But, then in the manner of questioning, it must be considered here a problem of the State. And, of making these experiments it has to be stated clearly how and where these experiments are to be carried out, and the responsibility from a high agency to a lower agency has to be stated.
Q: Now we come to the order of 15 May 1945.
A: Therefore, I suggested to Himmler, I don't know how far other people suggested to him in the years of the War, — during this catastrophic atmosphere that was prevailing, experiments could be carried out in this way — not according to what the individual doctor thinks necessary. On the other hand the State must not criticize this — how this was carried out. And, therefore, I suggested, as you will see, that a supreme medical authority, or anyhow the supreme agency should state whether this problem was of a military importance at this moment. Then the State should take the decision, whether the experiment should be carried out or not — a doctor would never be keen on these experiments; but if on account of this military situation — which has been approved by the military authorities, for instance, a medical agency or a technical agency, or whoever is the highest authority, think it necessary, then, consequently, it has to be decided quite definitely that impossible people, as Dr. Rascher, should not be responsible for the execution of this.
Then comes the question of the scientific utilization, the humane execution, the problem of supervision and the problem of stopping these experiments. Therefore, at that time I never would have inspired these sulfonamide experiments by myself. On the other hand, an agency, the supreme, suggested this to Himmler, the decision whether human experiments were to legally carried out in Germany or not can only be decided by the highest authority and none below that. On the other hand I can ardently look into it whether the people who make these decisions, and can make suggestions are experts or whether just anybody. Here I will confine myself to the sea water experiments. It is like this: first of all Himmler suggested experiments to be carried out and a German expert guarantees the execution of these experiments. If I am asked if these conditions were fulfilled, whether Himmler had the right exports for the decision, I can only say "Yes". On the other hand it is not like this, that I agreed in this experiment which was carried on in Concentration Camp without any control by us, so that in addition I suggested that one should appoint a supervising internist of the Waffen SS for the carrying out, so that in the concentration camps, the clinical procedure should not surpass limits and be stopped. The question on the other hand, which prison is being dealt with and which place to be carried out is with NEBE, and the place is not to be decided by anybody who is camp leader, but by the supreme agency of the camp. That is not known by Schroeder, nor myself, nor Eppinger, because we did not know the circumstances and cannot judge them. I think the attitude essentially has been complied with. That, as far as I know, no new experiments were started which was not authorized by higher agency for this purpose, and I do not think there were doctors responsible for this who were not experts on this field. As to the side lines of the experiments I do not know about them.
Q: These facts which you describe, now made you support the suggestion of the Luftwaffe for these experiments?
A: Yes. At that time of the war I knew quite certain that the Luftwaffe wanted to have these experiments carried out and that Eppinger guaranteed the execution experiment, but I did not agree the concentration camp should be put at the disposal. I advised a supervisory doctor should be applied. One sees how little Grawitz cared — that supervising internist was not supplied; on the other hand the final decision Himmler made — it must have been passed on in another report, otherwise the experiment had not been started but my attitude had nothing to do with this.
Q: The next document which I have submitted is in Document Book V, page 11 of the English Document Book. Document NO-177, exhibit 133. It is the minutes on the conference on the 20 May 1944 in the technical office of the Luftwaffe. Prosecution, in submitting this document, asserted that at the end of the document there is a remark which has been written by you. At the end there was a pencil written note and I ask you whether this was done by you?
A: This is not my signature on this document. You can see how this was carried on parallel. I have the impression that Schroeder, as he said, visited Grawitz and discussed this, and that they came to an agreement on this. Letter was sent to Himmler by Grawitz, and asked for our attitude to the participants. After this decision has been made by Himmler execution of the experiment was decided on independently of this document. This document seems to be from a discussion of the technical and of the Luftwaffe and not from the office of Schroeder; and that it seems it was sent to Himmler, Brandt or anybody else — stated the result of the correspondence with Grawitz. It is not my signature, and that is not the document that came from Schroeder.
Q: Now I come to the conference on the Lost experiments. The defendant Dr. Gebhardt is accused of special responsibility for these, too. The document which I shall submit to you is in the English Document Book No. 13, page 56, Document NO-005 which the prosecution has submitted as Exhibit 279. I have the impression that this document has nothing to do with the Lost experiments. The subject of this letter is a letter from Dr. Grawitz to the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler. It deals with the question whether N-substance is a poison gas. What were the reasons for the position which you took in this matter?
A: I can testify to all these things only from memory. I may point out that they happened in 1944 when I was Army Group Physician or shortly before the invasion and these were just minor matters, but I believe that it was the following. N-substance is not, of course, in Lost. It has nothing to do with the Lost experiments. On the other hand, at that time and during the whole war, one of the most important questions was replacement for phosphorus incendiary bombs. They continued to burn on the water, on human beings, etc. I believe N-substance is a mixture of fluorine, halogene, or some such things, which is highly explosive, and the question was of vital importance, not whether it was tested on persons but whether it was a chemical warfare agent, or whether it was an incendiary. I know certainly from some one from Speer's staff, or from Speer himself, that this was not carried out, because N-substance or halogene were so explosive that no matter how they were transported there was great danger of explosion during transport. I believe that our technical office which wanted to put this through and which was competent in this matter had been told by the ordnance office or whoever was competent had been given counter orders and it was not carried out. I do not believe that N-substance experiments were carried out.
Q: The next document refers to the incendiary bomb experiments. This document which I shall have submitted to the defendant is not in the document book. It was submitted separately. It is Document NO-579, which was Prosecution Exhibit 288. This is a record of an expert opinion of 2 January 1942 on a skin treatment for phosphorous burns.
The lotion discussed here is called R-17. The prosecution does not assert that you were directly connected with these experiments but it says that, in view of your position as Chief Clinician, you knew about the experiments. Is that true?
A: I certainly did not see these pictures because I would probably remember them. When the experiment was brought up, it was a local question and not in my field. They went to Ding with an English incendiary bomb or Ding to them and then the final report was sent to Grawitz. The lotion certainly was not introduced by us because we had gelatines and as far as I remember I knew nothing about this experiment.
Q: In the course of the evidence on poison experiments the prosecution submitted Document NO-201 as Exhibit 290. This document is not in a document book. It was submitted separately. This is a report of the defendant Dr. Mrugowsky to the Criminal Technical Institute in Berlin concerning experiments with akonitrin-nitrate bullets of September 1944. The prosecution does not maintain that you were directly connected with the execution of these experiments but in view of your position within the Medical Service of the Waffen SS the prosecution says that you must have known about it. It was tested on prisoners. What do you have to say about it?
A: I learned about this experiment from the indictment against the SS and when I first met Mrugowsky I asked him about it. He says that it was really an execution experiment of the Criminal Biological Office, in which he was involved in some way. He didn't issue any report about it except to the Criminal Biological Office. I am quite certain that I never got it and I don't believe that Grawitz knew anything about it.
Q: In the course of the case the prosecution submitted Exhibit 127, an affidavit of SS General Pohl. The affidavit is in Document Book 4, page 26 of the English test. Document NO-065 under Number 5 in this affidavit says that the Oberarzt at Hohenlychen, Dr. Heissmeyer, received from Himmler personally permission to carry out experiments with tuberculosis.
What was the position of Dr. Heissneyer at Hohenlychen? What do you know about these experiments?
A: Within the sanitoriun of Hohenlychen there was the lung sanatorium for tuberculosis. Heissmeyer was the chief physician or the deputy chief physician before I came to Hohenlychen. He was, of course, on our staff but he was so independent that, for example, I never entered the sanatorium for clinical reasons and I did not check his work. We surgeons actually wanted to get the lung sanitoriun out of Hohenlychen as soon as possible. I do not believe that Heissneyer ever conducted any experiments, but I do not know. On the other hand, it is true that Heissneyer was the nephew of Obergruppenfuehrer Heissneyer, that he knew Himmler, and that he met Himmler when Himmler came to visit us, and it is also true that very early, I believe it was in 1938 or 1939, there were the first tuberculosis experiments in the sense of pure investigation. Heissmeyer was involved in this. I know for certain that Heissneyer conducted such similar experiments at Ravensbruck by my observations during his work, because for weeks the women passed our building going to and from his sanitarium. Later he went through half of Germany investigating tuberculosis and I arranged for him to visit Professor von Bergmann and report on his work and this was published so the work was certainly correct. As far as any human experiments are concerned, I know of nothing in connection with Heissmeyer.
Q: The same affidavit of Pohl says that, according to his assumption — that is, Pohl's — the Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler discussed medical questions with the doctors whom he knew. I believe that your testimony so far has clarified this point sufficiently.
A: Our position was not such that we were called upon on a certain question, and I could give enough examples when Himmler decided against my point of view in the selection, treatment, resettlement, science of the SS, etc. Pohl cannot have any knowledge of his own on these Questions.
A: In the affidavit which you yourself signed, and which the prose cution submitted as Exhibit 25, you said, among other things, that at the end of the war you were Army Group Physician.
What were the duties which you had in this position and how did you solve the problems which arose?
DR. SEIDL: Mr. President, before the witness answers this Question, I should like to have the permission of the Tribunal to read a brief notice contained in Document Book No. 2 which I shall later submit in evidence. It has only two sentences. The High Command of the Wehrmacht issued this pass for the defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean the Prosecution's Document Book No. 2 or Gebhardt Document Book 2?
DR. SEIDL: The defense Document Book 2. A few affidavits are missing and consequently the book is not translated yet.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may read the portion to the witness.
DR. SEIDL: I quote:
High Command of the Wehrmacht, Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, Berlin, 1 November 1944.
Pass. SS Gruppenfuehrer and Waffen SS Generalleutnant Professor Dr. Gebhardt has received from the Reich Commissioner of the Fuehrer for Health and Medical Service, and from the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, a special assignment to visit medical agencies and medical installations of the Wehrmacht and Waffen SS and is instructed to report about his observations. All medical agencies and medical installations are to aid SS Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt in every way in the execution of his assignment. /s/ Dr. Handloser, Generaloberstabsarzt.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q: Now, will you please answer the question, witness?
A: This passage shows what our main worries were at the end of the war: that was to get the supplies through — the medical supplies; I would be quite wrong that I considered myself an army group physician in the usual sense. I did not have the prerequisites for this positron, and the work was done by an old medical officer who was appointed under me for that purpose.
After the total collapse in the civilian sector in the West in 1944 after the invasion, and in the East at the time of the retreat from the Vistula to the Oder, that time since Himmler was chief of an army group of the reserve army and Reich Minister of the Interior, I tried to save what could still be saved, and I went to him with this assignment from Brandt. I asked him to call Conti, and Conti had to admit that it was simply impossible to supply the civilian sector anymore.
Then I was given this authority, and we attached over thing to the only column that was still standing — that was the Army — and the supplies for the civilian and military hospitals, which could not be separated any longer, because the air raids had created emergency conditions. I believe that I was able to supply a few thousand people through these orders from Handloser and the work which we did.
Q: Now I come to the last question. What were the measures which you took in view of the imminent collapse in April 1945, especially as President of the Red Cross?
A: I can say only one thing, that as President of the German Red Cross I worked exactly one day, and I had one or two letters. The Red Cross is unjustly charged with me.
On the other hand, the war was approaching my own sanitarium. Himmler no longer knew how we could go on. I was probably the last man who was with Hitler. We discussed all these things once more with Stumpfegger and Hitler. Hitler did not want me to stay with him, but Stumpfegger. I then went back to Himmler. Everything was more or less around my sanitarium, which was about 60 kilometers from the front, and then Ravensbruck was near there.
The last mad orders came that no prisoners could fall into the hands of the enemy. These orders came from Berlin.
I don't know — if I hear now that thousands of people in spite died in Ravensbruck, I don't know. I can only say that it was my influence, in part, that caused Himmler to call up and say that in Ravensbruck, at least in the days when I was back there — I came back in April — certainly no one was killed there then.
Every one of us was negotiating with any available neutral agency. Since '43 I had had connections in Switzerland with the International Red Cross, and in '43, for one year, I had a Swiss assistant at Hohenlychen, and I was visited by Swiss commissions. On the 16th or 17th of April, a Swiss commission was at Hohenlychen and at Ravensbruck; it was led by the same assistant who had worked for me formerly. I know for certain that some of the Polish women went back to Switzerland with then at the time, but I have no evidence for the figures now. We had five or six trains to transport thousands of people from Ravensbruck over to me, so that everything was collected. We were under fire from the enemy. It was not my doing, but it was done by the Swedish Red Cress and its chief, Count Bernadette. In those last unfortunate days, after the Swiss did not come back the second time because of the losses they had had the first time, the Swedish Red Cross came to us, and, unfortunately, Grawitz blow himself up that day, so that the German Red Cross had no one to carry on the negotiations.
For various other reasons, Himmler wanted to negotiate with the head of the Swedish Red Cross. The negotiations were carried on in my house.
The rest of the Poles, women all of them, went in Swedish cars, in cars driven by Poles which I had supplied. They went to Flensburg, under enemy fire, and arrived in Flensburg. I took leave of the Swedes in Luebeck, and then I had to report to Himmler in Flensburg, who had arrived earlier, and I had my last conversation with Himmler. All the Gruppenfuehrers who could have been used for this question were nearby at Flensburg.
At that time together with Ohlendorf, I suggested that we should take over the radio, which would have been possible at the time, with the remnants of the SS, and that Himmler should relieve the last SS man from his oath, so that this question would be definitely settled and any thought of illegality would be stopped, and the next day Himmler should surrender at the head of his generals. Ohlendorf drew this up, and for one whole night I urged Himmler, and if the poor Brandt with his bird brain could remember at all then he would remember how we acted at that time. That was the only time when Brandt was present.
Himmler hesitated until three in the morning. When I came the next morning the quarters were empty. At noon I sent a letter from me to Poppendick, who was at Flensburg on Doonitz' staff, and then I surrendered with Ohlendorf.
DR. SEIDL: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has been informed that on Monday morning, before Tribunal No. 4, the defendants in the case of the United States versus Pohl and others, will be arraigned at 9:30 o'clock. The Tribunal has also been informed that several of the defense counsel appearing new before this Tribunal represent defendants in the case at the United States versus Pohl, and that their presence is required at the arraignment on Monday morning. This Tribunal will, therefore, when it takes its recess tomorrow evening, recess until 11:15 o'clock Monday morning. The arraignment will be completed at that time. The arraignment before Department No. 4, at 9:30 o'clock, will be held in this courtroom. After the arraignment, Department 4 will vacate the courtroom, and this Tribunal will reconvene here, as I say, at 11:15 o'clock Monday morning to proceed with the trial of this case.
We will now recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(At 1630 hours, 6 March 1947, the Tribunal recessed until 0930 hours 7 March 1947.)