1947-03-07, #2: Doctors' Trial (late morning)

[Administrative note: due to a scheduling mistake this post is being sent to doctorstrial.substack.com subscribers two days late, instead of on the morning of March 7, 2022 as intended. — ASH.]

THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.

The Tribunal is again in session.

KARL GEBHARDT — Resumed CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. McHANEY:

Q: Herr Professor, you have testified very clearly and emphatically as to the efficient and careful way in which the sulfonamide experiments were executed under your supervision. You have stated that you made a substantial contribution to scientific knowledge concerning the use of sulfonamides through these experiments. You insisted on publicizing your experiments for what they were. You stated that you successfully opposed Grawitz' efforts to brutalize and pervert the sulfonamide experiments. You stated that over the years 1942-43 you learned something of other experiments, most particularly Rascher's experiments. You further stated that you finally influenced Himmler to bring order out of chaos in 1944 and that a regulatory system for experiments was set up in which you played a part. All of this, plus your high official rank in the SS, and your knowledge of Himmler and military medical service in Germany, leads me to believe that you can, if you are willing, tell us a great deal about the experiments which are the subject of this trial and perhaps other experiments on human beings. Will you do that?

A: I was perfectly aware of the dangers of my testimony and the attack which you would so clearly aim at attributing to me all the knowledge of every one of these matters. I might have made the hopeless attempt — something which was humanly rather plausible, to be reticent about my testimony. I chose the other path and I described, roughly speaking, all I know. I am perfectly prepared to supplement my testimony, if you put precise questions to me. But please, will you permit me, during a fair duel, also to say that our conditions of battle and quarters are somewhat different, but that we are also concerned with the fact that you are basing yourself upon the assumption that everything in Germany proceeded in an orderly and obvious manner and that everything could be seen and differentiated clearly.

That was not the situation. In connection with that I would like to emphasize also that with ever increasing dramatic conditions the state of emergency would grow to a point where a number of matters which were points which we would normally have noticed quickly, did not come to my knowledge. Thus, will you please believe me when I say I did not know, I did not conceive it, and that when I say I cannot recollect, it is not because of my being too cowardly to tell you?

Q: Herr Professor, isn't it true that it was generally understood in military medical circles that concentration camps would be made available by the SS for experimentation?

A: That I do not believe to be the case. I believe the expression "generally" is too far reaching. If you want to know the exact details, then put the preliminary question "What did all the others receive? What did one generally know in Germany about concentration camps?" If you don't want to hear that, then I can only tell you that the full realization of what was going on in concentration camps — the events in an individual concentration camp, were such changing matters, with an ever-altering picture, and that the desire, the wish of every individual who was in touch with the concentration camp, to gain distance from this matter as soon as possible was so strong, and that there were cautious men who did not want to know anything about it so that no one might put questions to them — that you can certainly not say that German medical men knew this or knew that. If that is the general type of answer you want to your question, then I must answer with NO.

Q: I understood you to testify that Hitler had approved of medical experimentation on concentration camp inmates, and that disposition was reached by you no later than 1942, and that you specifically learned about it when the sulfonamide experiments were under discussion. Isn't that true?

A: Quite. But then it is wrong once more what you said earlier—that I had such clear-cut knowledge about Rascher before-hand. You must allow us to draw a clear dividing line—something which is almost impossible today—regarding the things that we knew beforehand, and what we learned currently, and what I know today through the trial and the number of people who are informing us. I know today, for instance, what I did not know before, that Himmler went to attend Rascher's experiment. He did not talk about that to me. I know today he took the chief of his personal staff along on this journey, Obergruppenfuehrer Wolf, so that he would report to Hitler straightaway, and that subsequent to this Hitler agreed in principle; so that this is really the first occasion when Hitler expressly approved of the matter; but this is knowledge which I have now from the files and because I talked to Wolf.

Once again I am using this to show how these things were running concurrently. For instance, Wolf was my patient, and he did not know anything at the time, and we can say this under oath, about the sulfonamide experiments. On the other hand, that Wolf carried out this contact with Hitler, without telling us about.

Q: Let's get this straight. I understood that you talked to Grawitz about the sulfonamide experiments early in July, or shortly prior thereto, and that both Grawitz and Himmler gave you to understand that Hitler had approved in principle the use of concentration camp inmates for purposes of medical experimentation. Isn't that right?

A: Yes, that is correct.

Q: Now, if that decision was made, Herr Professor, and it was considered helpful to perform medical experiments on human beings, why, then, was not that decision by Hitler, the ultimate authority in the state, made known to the authorities in the military medical sector?

After all, you can't use concentration camp inmates for medical experiments unless somebody knows that they are available.

A: Will you permit me to tell you that this is a type of question which one can only put if one does not know at all what the role played by concentration camps in Germany was. Believe me, there was a fight until the conception of anonymity and secrecy attached to concentration camps was overcome by me by my report during that Third Congress. I do not believe that this clear form was ever expressed before, nor was this secrecy ever penetrated before, nor could I think afterwards, so that all the authorities which had immediate jurisdiction over concentration camps—which is one of Himmler's executive departments through the RSHA, through Glueck and Pohl and so forth—they, right from the start did not allow anyone to look into their activity, not primarily in order to hide these experiments, but because the entire arrangement, the exploitation of this economic potential, was only possible, after all, by transferring them to the property of SS and arranging them under the control of the SS.

In other words, the situation was not that simultaneously there was now suddenly a current order informing all German official departments regarding the possibility of carrying out experiments in a concentration camp. Neither was it ever the situation that the supervising bodies of concentration camps ever attached any importance to having doctors or men of any other type admitted from the outside. Only Grawitz and the staff under Loehing, had the passes to enter concentration camps.

Q: Now, Professor, everyone realizes that the SS had to make these inmates available. The SS had to be approached. No doctor from the Luftwaffe could walk down to Dachau and get in, we all understand that. But it seems to me that you have overemphasized the secrecy aspect of concentration camps and experimentation on inmates when you say that only after your speech in '43 was the matter publicized. I am not interested in whether it was publicized in the broad manner that you suggest; but it is not inconceivable that, after Hitler's decision, that inmates could be used for experiments, he might pass the word along to such a man as Hanloser, without breaching the secrecy veil of concentration camps; he might pass the word a long to Milch and to Hipke. He might pass the word along to Conti and Karl Brandt.

Now, you have assumed your responsibility in connection with the sulfonamide experiments. You have no occasion to shield other people from accepting their responsibility. Don't you know, as a matter of fact, that the high authorities in the military-medical services of Germany did know that they could approach Himmler and the SS, and obtain inmates for experimental purposes?

A: I think that one can only explain this by means of individual example or experiments as far as I know how they arose. First of all, you are making one principal mistake, to overestimate or underestimate information from Hitler or Himmler, according to how it fits into the particular stage of trial. The situation was certainly not that— and, mind you that I was not there— that Hitler might have said, "Now, then, whatever can be cleared up now in the medical field will now be cleared up in a big way through experiments," so that there would have been an order to all official departments that whoever had anything to do with this matter should be consulted.

That certainly was not the situation because then there would have been experiments in many other fields.

On the other hand, I am sure that Himmler—and, mind you, the cause was an initiative coming from outside any channel of orders—and it seems certain—something that I must assume—that I did not know—Rascher did write to Himmler, that Himmler then goes to a concentration camp, and that Rascher is asking Himmler to develop a very productive type of opinion with reference to the whole affair, and that something originated in Himmler's conception, and that be is immediately making a report.

Do you think that history will ever ascertain how cautiously and how generally Hitler's wishes and instructions were expressed?

On the other hand, I am sure that it was enough—and, mind you, this is all assumption on my part—it was necessary for him only to say to Himmler "Good Heavens, you have a wonderful way there. Why shouldn't they experience the same fate as people at the front?" That is was enough for Himmler to take up the matter. Naturally, it is correct for you to say that nobody could enter a concentration camp or report an experiment or order who did not take this matter to Himmler first. I think that, with a certain amount of good will, it is correct to say that in the initial stage we were concerned with individual cases and that eventually it was increased, but surely there are three completely different ways we are concerned with. There was the Air Force, and there we are concerned with the very head of it, where it started, or maybe it started right at the bottom in the double figure of Rascher between Luftwaffe and SS. I am sure that wherever we are concerned with this question, we are concerned with the group Grawitz-Conti. I have described to you the sulfonamide story, and in the case of all the others you always come across the circle of persons I have mentioned, but it is quite sure that Brandt and Handloser, up above, were never touched with a general order, nor that they should look into the matter. At any rate, that never occurred in

Q: You testified that you were told of Hitler's decision, I believe, in connection that he made that decision after he had heard of Rascher's experiments, is that right?

A: Yes.

Q: Grawitz reported this decision of Hitler to you?

A: It seems to me I heard it during a conference between Himmler and Grawitz.

Q: It was in May or June or July, 1942?

A: What I want to say, what I think, it was at the end of May, 1942.

Q: So you know about Rascher's experiments before you got the letter from Rudolf Brandt in December, 1942?

A: That was, of course, the type of question I had to expect from you, and I can tell you with accuracy, that was no so, that someone went and said, "Here we have this experiment and here we have that one," and so on. Himmler said it is quite clear that experiments are being carried out, and it is equally clear that he talked to Hitler about it, and that what I recollect is the much more important sentence that at that time people, who were there, should suffer the same fate. Just which experiments he was referring to, I can only say, it is quite in detail, why, I admit that, and whether it was mentioned at that time or not, I don't care, but there was much secrecy attached to it all. Experiments were going on at that time, and my objections and careful discussions, no doubt, were not shared by the others. If, on the other hand, you ask me now whether I can exactly and clearly and surely have known at the time that Rascher and the air forces were so involved, then I once again tell you "no".

Q: But you have no doubt that Rascher's experiments in Dachau were ordered and sponsored by Milch and Hipke, at least?

A: I can tell you that I heard now, heard it through two sources, first of all these proceedings here with their clear cut evidence. This all must have been taken to Himmler. Secondly, Wolf too testified both in the Milch trial as well as when I asked him, and I told him it was important to me to know whether Himmler really could refer the matter to Hitler, and he said, "I saw it myself, and by authority Himmler he reported it to Hitler."

The cause was the visit into the Rascher experiments.

Q: In other words, even Himmler would not have undertaken this type of experimentation without having been covered by Hitler, would he?

A: Now, that is something, just another question which I already turned to use, I already expected you to put it. That is half wrong and half right like all these things, and I am perfectly convinced that if Himmler had the wish to assist and if it was within his powers then he started whatever he could do. On the other hand, according to the story told, and I am convinced that it was so, Himmler actually and deliberately went to Hitler and told him, "Mein Fuehrer, in one of the decisive problems of the air force," and please don't say right now of course you knew, see, "in one of the important decisive questions of air force problems, we can advance the entire development regarding the reconversion of the air force" involved in at that time, "which can be advanced successfully, I have already started on it at Dachau. What do you think about it?" And then Hitler probably said, "That has got to be done for the benefit of the air forces. It is my point of view that they have to go through everything at home during this decisive struggle." And then Himmler never again in his life would have gone back to Hitler with that, and he might say the head of my staff, the head of my state, wanted that. That is my description of the matter.

Q: Well, we at least can agree that a stabsarzt in the Luftwaffe like Leicher would not have undertaken these experiments without knowing that he was declared by a superior authority, would he?

A: No, no, no. That is quite out of the question, of course. He had cover, the backing. First of all, when one part of the experiments started through a department which had jurisdiction over him; and of course, the extent of that I couldn't quite judge during the lecture; and as far as the second part was concerned, namely that of his own independent experimenting, he had the express personal backing of Himmler. At least that is how I understood it.

Q: And the same Principle would apply to such a man as Hagen, would it not?

A: Hagen, of course, must have had the backing of an official department, and one of them must most certainly have been Himmler at all times. If Hagen now carried out an experiment on behalf of the air force, then of course he must have had the backing of the air force. If, however, he succeeded through some other channels, apparently if he succeeded through HIRT in entering into the Ahnenerbe circles, then in this capacity, of course, Himmler's order alone was sufficient. I can't decide on these matters because I only know what you have said here in court yourself. Some of the documents seem to confirm that we are concerned with air force experiments, but air force gentlemen have said it was purely Professor Hagen with Professor Hirt who carried out on these matters. At any rate Himmler's confirmation was also essential, and that of the official department above, who also had to be informed. I can't judge this. That was in individual cases.

Q: Of course, the SS and Himmler were the common elements in all of these experiments since they were carried out on concentration camp inmates. We both understand that, don't we?

A: Yes, of course.

Q: But before we forget it, let's rehabilitate Rudolf Brandt just a little bit. I feel that you belabored him rather heavily in the direct examination. He was a Standartenfuehrer, wasn't he?

A: Rudolf Brandt, yes, that is right.

Q: That is only two ranks below that which you held, wasn't it?

A: Yes.

Q: Now, you are a doctor and a professor, Witness, and perhaps you are inclined to be a little bit impatient with administrative officials, but if we are looking for a man who know what was going on with respect to Himmler's office, a man who handled all the correspondence, a man who wrote letters of some importance on his own initiative, then that administrative official could very well be Rudolf Brandt, couldn't he, Witness?

A: I have described to you the position which Rudolf Brandt held. Will you please tell me in this individual case to what extent you think it is uncertain?

Q: If I understood your description, Himmler regarded Rudolf Brandt as being something in the nature of an indispensable man, he wanted him around, he wanted him to handle his correspondence?

A: Yes.

Q: He had access to top secret information by virtue of that position?

A: Yes, yes.

Q: And he was a man of substantial rank in the SS?

A: I think that you do great injustice to Rudolf Brandt when you underline his rank in the SS. All mail went through Brandt, that is right, and it used to go the same way before when the ranks were higher or lower. This department was always the same. Then afterwards as a reward he was externally speaking transferred to that corresponding rank, and became Standartenfuehrer. I am not sure he was at the front. He was there for a bit. But in the Waffen SS he most certainly was not Standartenfuehrer. He had this rank in the general SS and in the Waffen SS, for a very short period— but I had better be careful there— I think he was Hauptsturmfuehrer, he was something like that, when he served for a while, but as commander in the Oldnel Waffen SS, a rank which is two groups below mine, he certainly never put in appearance.

His position rated the same before as afterwards; you can draw your own conclusions from the individual case you want to present.

Q: Now, you participated in an attempt to overthrow the Weimar Republic as early as 1924, didn't you Witness?

A: Who? Me? What do you mean, to what extent? Might I have your reasons for that statement?

Q: It seems to me that I have seen something to that effect that you have participated in such a Putsch in 1924. Am I incorrect on that?

A: No. I am awfully grateful that you are bringing that up because now I can show you how these affidavits are made. That is just what I have been waiting for. It says in my affidavit in great detail, now, let me read this to you. In my affidavit it says "painstakingly", "in the Nazi putsch in 1923 I took part." Now, about this matter, about this simple sentence, there were at least three interrogations, and the gentleman who so kindly carried them out is sitting right here and he will be able to confirm to you how right I am.

Q: Witness, I will ask you to keep your headphones on in order that we can control the examination just a little bit. Now, I am not interested in having a discourse by you of how interrogations were carried out. I asked you a question about your participation in this putsch in 1923. Now, you may explain that, but I don't care to hear anything about the possible mistakes or inaccuracies which arise in affidavits which you read and which you signed, I am just interested now about what part did you play in this early Nazi activity, if any?

A: That is something which I am just trying to explain to you. I am not taking my earphones off, you know, to stop you, but I suffer from a head injury which I have been having the greatest difficulty, but if you insist I keep to this, of course, I will do so.

Q: Witness, I don't wish to have you labor under any physical difficulties. If you will limit your answers and be concise and to the point, it is quite satisfactory to me to have you take your headphones off, but we don't want to take any unnecessary time in this interrogation. We are simply seeking information, so let's eliminate this attitude of duel which you have conjured up and get along with the proceedings.

A: I am attaching a great deal of importance in explaining my participation in 1923 because it has become important. In 1923 I took no part in the party, nor within the SA as it existed at the time, and with Oberland which took part as a third section, but I was used as the medical officer on duty. I walked in the third row without anyone else, and I treated both the wounded of one party as well as those of the other, such as a captain who was shot and died in my arms, just as much as Mr. Vondenfurth who was fighting for the other side. This is something I said yesterday, and I think I can supply to you witnesses stating that was so. But the youth group which was under me from the Oberland division was not taken along in this march by me, and I subsequently, in 1925, did not enter into the recently formed SS which originated from participants of the 1923 affair.

I do not consider it a shame, if a German, as a doctor, assisted both sides at the time, and marched along, but that I should have personally overthrown the Weimar Republic during this one year when I was an assistant doctor—that seems improbable to me.

Q: Who sent the order that no prisoners were to be captured at Ravensbruck in 1945?

A: I'm afraid I don't quite understand your question.

Q: You testified yesterday that while you were in Hohenlychen, shortly before the collapse, you saw an order that no prisoners were to be evacuated from Ravensbruck — no inmates. Pardon me, I phrased that wrong, that they were to be evacuated — that they were not to be captured. I'm asking you, who sent that order?

A: It is known from the previous trial, and it was discussed in detail that Hitler's order came at the end, that from no concentration camp should a single inmate fall into the hands of the enemy, and that Kaltenbrunner, in his official capacity, passed it on. I told you that I heard this myself, and that excited discussions between Himmler and Kaltenbrunner took place over the telephone. As far as I know, — as far as I know, it wasn't carried out in Ravensbruck, whether in other camps I don't know, since the transportation and the continuous transfer of such camps to other districts was simply not possible.

Q: When did you join the SS?

A: In 1935, in the spring.

Q: Weren't you at least an unofficial member as early as 1933?

A: No; no, I wasn't. Do you mean the 'subscribing members'?

Q: I'll pass you up a letter which you wrote to Heini Himmler on the 12th of May 1933. This is Document NO-649. I just want to read a couple of sentences out of this letter and then you may explain what they mean. It is a a letter from the witness Gebhardt to "Dear Heini Himmler", dated 12 May 1933. The first sentence reads:

Excuse me for requesting your help again as an old Landshut comrade. I had an interview with you at the end of May 1933. You suggested at that time that I should join your personal staff as medical collaborator. Thereupon I no longer tried to obtain admission to the SA as their athletics physician. You told me in July 1933 by telephone that I had now been appointed by you, that I should fill in the questionnaires and that I should submit an outline of my activities to the Reichsarzt.

And then, down in the second paragraph, there's a sentence that reads:

All this puts me in an impossible position: you incorporated me into the SS, never received a written acknowledgment nor an answer to my applications.

Now, were you, in fact, appointed in the nature of an unofficial member or something of that nature in 1933?

A: Just now you're making a small mistake. You see, the whole personal background cannot always be read out of documents. The second head of the Hohenlychen Institute at the time, in the director's board, was Dr. Denker. He, was Reich Medical Officer of the SS, if he did exist at the time, and also at the same time, he was holding a ministerial post, and he was the head of a committee for tuberculosis. The sanitorium at Hohenlychen was under Denker's command in two capacities; one is in his capacity as Tuberculosis Chief, and it was my own wish that I should have some clear-cut official relationship to Denker now regarding my own activities. I cannot tell you clearly what this memorandum contained, but I made a draft for it, to the effect that I should work to an equal extent for the Reich Ministry of the Interior, that is, State Secretary Tschammer, at the same time, for Denker's staff under Himmler, and thirdly in the same capacity also for Dr. Todt.

After Denker had not agreed to this at the time, but wished a decision to the effect that I should either work for the SS or for Tschammer, who was with the SA, it was not actually brought about, but only in 1935, when Tschammer himself agreed, which is something I have told you, because now he was interested to exclude all these difficulties with tuberculosis, and I'm saying here that I found myself in an impossible position, because now Denker is now no longer Reichsarzt, though still my superior.

Q: So it's not correct, when you state to Himmler, that "You told me in July 1933 by telephone that I had now been appointed by you?" I understand that to mean "appointed by the SS."

A: I know perfectly well that you are now trying to show me proof, how unreliable my testimony was, but I, at that time, wanted to be both in Denker's staff under the SS as well as Tschammer's staff in the SS, as well as on the other staff on the Organization Todt, and at the same time, in the Ministry of the Interior. That I was a member of all these four organizations, thereby also in the SS. If I could remember this matter in detail I would have told you. I would have told you honestly. The point when I really am going into the SS lies in Spring 1935, but it was not accomplished at this time because of these complicated conditions. That's the best explanation I can give you.

Q: Were you ever a member of the faculty of the University of Strasbourg?

A: No, that is Professor Gebhardt, the pharmacologist.

Q: You testified that you were a consulting surgeon of the Waffen SS beginning in 1939, I believe; is that right?

A: My position in the Waffen SS, both formally and as far as its contents are concerned, can't be so very easily defined. You must believe me that. I received my appointment, and my task regarding my activity at the front, signed by Himmler, in May 1940. And there it states: "In your capacity as consultant surgeon to the Waffen SS"; that is correct, and at that time there was a hospital detachment of the Waffen-SS at Hohenlychen, but at that time the Waffen SS was not yet in existence, and the term "Waffen-SS" is painstakingly achieved in June; and one of the first people appointed on the staff was I. But the position in practice was that, in reality, I belonged both to the Waffen SS as a surgeon, not as consultant, as well as to the army in this case, a certain army, and as consultant surgeon also to the Sports Organization, and also the Organization Todt. I'm summarizing it; there was never a clear-cut position. But I did have the name, the title, "consultant surgeon to the Waffen SS", such as the certificate states.

Q: And you retained that position until August 1943; is that right?

A: That is changing afterwards because I'm trying to extend it. Above Sports and Waffen SS I had under me, and also to the police, and a superior conception had to be created, thus the unfortunate words, "supreme clinic official", came up, because there was no subordinate clinic official. And that was of course at the end of August 1943.

Q: Well, weren't you —

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel -

MR. McHANEY: Pardon me.

THE PRESIDENT: Have you finished your examination in connection with this letter, signed by the witness under date of 12 May 1943?

MR. McHANEY: Yes, I think I have, Your Honor. There are other letters —

THE PRESIDENT: Well, with regard to that letter, there are apparent inconsistencies. It is dated 12 May 1933. The first line of the second paragraph reads:

I had an interview with you at the end of May 1933.

Again,

You told me in July 1933,

and, in the long paragraph, the third line:

I was transferred on 1 September 1933.

Those are dates subsequent to the apparent date of the letter.

MR. McHANEY: You're quite correct, Your Honor, and I'll ask the witness if he can clarify that from the original document he has in his hand?

THE WITNESS: Well, that means that apparently the date at the top, "May the 12th 1933", must be wrong. According to the contents that follow, I don't know, but it is correct that the events which are described, Danker's retirement, and negotiations regarding Conti and all that, all the alterations happen in 1933. The end of May 1933. Yes; yes; that's quite right. I went to Hohenlychen; that's right.

THE PRESIDENT: There's a note on it, 24 May '34, in front of initials "H H".

THE WITNESS: May 1934; that's right; quite right. So that the cause of a mistake, Mr. President, will obviously be that it should be "12th of May 1934", because the whole current events go through to September 1933, in this letter.

A: I cannot, you see, recollect this letter at all.

MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, I would suggest another possibility which I think is more likely since the dateline is Hohenlychen, and then appear the numerals, Arabic 12, Roman V, Arabic 33, I think perhaps that date is actually December 5, 1933, but the date below which is 24 May 1934 and initials Heinrich Himmler, I think are written on the letter and apparently are file marks rather than the dateline carried by the original letter. It is quite apparent, however, that the letter must have been dated sometime following September 1933.

THE PRESIDENT: It would seem reasonable if the letter were originally dated 12 May 1933? Himmler may have received — I mean, dated '34, 1934, Himmler may have dated it when he received it? 24 May '34.

MR. McHANEY: That is probably the correct analysis, your Honor.

THE WITNESS: May I remark in this connection that it is becoming apparent I am saying that after the 1st of September I am going to Berlin after a visit from doctors, so that everything must have been written after the 1st of September.

BY MR. McHANEY:

Q: Witness, going back to your position prior to August 1943, is it not true that you were immediately subordinated to Genzken as Chief of the Medical Services of the Waffen SS?

A: I have made efforts to describe this in such a way as to show that the part of my staff working for the Waffen SS was under Genzken's orders, but that was definitely a very small portion and dependent upon the number of matters I took up to Genzken. It would be equally right to say that at the same time I was the adviser of the Todt Organization and came under that just as I was on various other spots. Purely formally speaking I considered myself as being on the same lever, and particularly with questions to the Waffen SS, which was only being painstakingly formed during these years; had contact with Genzken.

Q: When did you first hear of the Ahnenerbe Institute, do you remember?

A: I believe myself it was not so much the institution of the Ahnenerbe.

Discussions always dealt with the entry into the so-called circle of friends of Himmler. That, of course, is the superior institution. I think Himmler rather quietly indicated to me at some stage that it was rather a good thing that I wasn't in that circle. As far as the Ahnenerbe is concerned, and everything that was subordinated to that, they all came under this circle of friends, and I also believe and I want to say this cautiously, that it was from there that they were paid. Of Ahnenerbe itself I saw during meetings Professor Dr. Wuest representing Pector Gas, Munich organization, who was the chairman of the Ahnenerbe.

Q: When did you first hear of their connection to medical experimentation on concentration camp inmates?

A: I do not believe that became abundantly clear to me till the very end. It was always my impression that this came much more directly under Himmler; that it was going through military channels, and that they had a military medical department and that Sievers was so important was something that never dawned on me. It was said that there was a direct order, just as it was the case with us, without that there was any institution inserted in between.

Q: Well, didn't you know when Rascher came to see you in May 1943 that the Ahnenerbe was connected with his experimentation on human beings?

A: Yes, of course. I am admitting it to you. It was one of the points under discussion between us. That's what we were concerned with. At that point Rascher is saying, "No, I shall continue to experiment, this time under Himmler's supervision, and by name I am under the Waffen SS, but I am immediately coming to the Ahnenerbe." That's how I knew that Rascher was allowed to continue, and that since he had to be placed in some special organization he was put under Ahnenerbe.

INTERPRETER FRANK: I didn't understand the last sentence of his answer. Perhaps you can have him repeat it.

Q: The translator did not understand the last sentence of your answer. Will you please repeat it?

A: I was saying that he did not begin his work in Dachau, in my opinion as a member of the Ahnenerbe, but in his capacity as a captain in the Air Force who was to go over to the Waffen SS and who was immediately retransferred to the Ahnenerbe, only because he should be removed from any reach of any supervising doctors; that is the way I understood the matter to be.

Q: Was Rascher wearing a Luftwaffe uniform when he visited you in May, '43?

A: No, no — that — I can't tell you that. I was going to say no right away, but I can't be certain about it. I would have thought -well — Fischer must know, Fischer took him around with me. At any rate it is probable that — more probable that he was wearing an SS uniform to my recollection at any rate, rather than the other uniform, but I can't remember these details now.

Q: Well, you referred to him yesterday as a Stabsarzt in the Luftwaffe coming to you -

A: Yes.

Q: —and you treated him with some scorn, so I therefore got the impression that he must have been still in a Luftwaffe uniform at that time.

A: That's an assumption which I would like to refute right now. It wasn't that I treated the man as inferior because he was working for the Luftwaffe. I toned him down because he came to me -

Q: Do you mean to say that you treated him with scorn because he was a member of the Luftwaffe, but you referred to him as being a Stabsarzt in the Luftwaffe and for that reason I assumed he still had on his Luftwaffe uniform.

A: I spoke for much too long to this Tribunal yesterday for me to repeat everything now that I said yesterday. I said the man came along with a memorandum for the Waffen SS. Therefore we have here Waffen SS, and then I said he came as a surgeon on behalf of the Waffen SS, and then later on the man came, referring himself directly to Grawitz and Himmler, so that quite certainly the question over which I had rows with him did not have anything to do with the Luftwaffe.

What is important is that he is evading me afterwards, stating that he can also apply himself to the hygiene department and other work which he had carried out secretly; I don't think that the word secret was used, I would have remembered that, and this work was carried out by the Luftwaffe.

Q: You do not remember whether he was wearing a Luftwaffe uniform, an SS uniform or civilian clothes; is that right? You just don't remember?

A: Naturally he reported to no in uniform, but I cannot on the other hand say which one it was. Very probably the uniform of the Waffen SS, because, as a newly adopted member of the Waffen SS, he had to report to me so that if he didn't wear it then it could only be because it hadn't been completed yet; otherwise he would have had to report to me in the proper uniform, but I do not remember it.

Q: Did I understand your testimony yesterday to mean that there came a time when you served as adviser to Himmler with respect to medical experiments on concentration camp inmates?

A: I have already said earlier that I assumed that you would put that into my shoes because of my open minded statement; It isn't true. It was described in detail that I was urging myself upon him in these borderline questions as far as I considered it necessary. I was convinced that I had shown you that there was not one adviser because in questions of biochemical subjects he couldn't ask a surgeon, "Well, implicate me if you must." I can't explain it to you any differently.

Q: Then you are testifying that you did not serve in the capacity of advising Himmler on medical experiments carried out on concentration camp inmates; that you may have been approached from time to time but you didn't occupy any position with respect to that?

A: I have been trying to describe to you that Himmler did not have a central one man adviser and expert of that type, but on the other hand, I have been describing to you that I was making efforts to react to all these matters and that I am only claiming for myself that I always stated to Grawitz, "Don't allow everyone to persuade you that these experiments are important. Look at the people with whom we are concerned who are getting at Himmler, and if you can't stand up to Himmler, if you don't dare tell him that this is not a department, then will you see to it that it is being done together with me. I think I can undertake to tell Himmler whether this is a department and whether there is an expert doctor." If that's what — if you are now stating that I am implicating myself, then it isn't true. It is certainly not the situation that Grawitz came to me with everything, nor is it the situation that Himmler was telling Grawitz everything, and don't you forget that after 1944 we were heading for the abyss rapidly.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now recess until 1:30 o'clock.

(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)