1947-03-18, #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 18 March 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.

THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats. The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I. Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal. There will be order in the courtroom.

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, will you ascertain that the defendants are all present in court.

THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all defendants are present in court with the exception of the defendant Oberheuser who is absent due to illness.

THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court save the defendant Oberheuser who is in the hospital and has been excused on account of her illness.

Counsel may proceed.

KURT BLOME — Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)

BY DR. SAUTER (Counsel for the defendant Blome):

Q: Witness, you remember that you are under oath?

A: Yes.

Q: Euthanasia — did you have anything to do with it?

A: No.

Q: Did you have any close information about this matter at the time, officially or privately?

A: No. Only about 1941 did I hear rumors that insane persons were being killed in insane asylums. I did not learn anything definite about it.

Q: Witness, you recall the chart which was on the wall behind you some time ago? This chart was drawn up on information given by the defendant Brack. On this chart there was a square with the official position of the Reichs Physicians Leader Dr. Conti. You recall that at the right, next to this square for Dr. Conti, there was a small square with your name.

This gave the impression that you were connected with the organization of euthanasia, that you had some official authority and duties. Will you please comment on this, whether this chart is correct or not.

A: No, the chart is not correct. Dr. Conti was connected with the euthanasia action only in his capacity as State Secretary in the Reich Ministry of the interior. In this capacity I was not his deputy, however. As State Secretary in the Reich Ministry of the Interior Dr. Conti had a different deputy, that was Ministerial Dirigent [Conductor] Dr. Linden, who is therefore listed under the name of Dr. Conti on the chart, which Herr Brack has supplied, as number 253, Exhibit 331.

Q: Doctor, you have already said that in this function you were not Dr. Conti's deputy. Now, I would like to know: Not only Dr. Conti participated in this euthanasia action but also a number of doctors, primarily, government physicians and alienists. These doctors connected with euthanasia — were they under you as Deputy President of the Reich Chamber of Physicians and as Reich Leader of Physicians? Did you have any supervisory authority over these doctors — disciplinary authority and so forth?

A: I did not have any right of supervision or any disciplinary authority over these doctors. The execution of the program was in the hands of the government physicians or the doctors of the insane asylums.

Q: And under whose authority were these doctors?

A: They were under the Reich Ministry of the Interior.

Q: With which you had nothing to do?

A: With which I had nothing to do.

Q: Doctor, you were also Deputy Chief of the Main Office for Public Health in the NSDAP, that is, you held a definite Party office position, and in this functioned the title Deputy Reich Health Leader. Did this Main Office for Public Health, this Party office, have anything to do with the euthanasia action?

A: First, I should like to correct something you said. You said I was Deputy Reich Health Leader in this capacity.

I was forbidden to use this title. I was merely called Deputy Chief of the Main Office. Now, as for the question itself, the main office for Public Health of the NSDAP did not have any part in the euthanasia action.

Q: Witness, in connection with this euthanasia matter did letters with complaints or inquiries and so forth come to the Reich Chamber of Physicians, of which you were in charge, and, if so, what did you do in response to these letters?

A: Any official letters, orders, instructions, statements, and so forth, concerning the euthanasia action did not come to the Reich Chamber of Physicians or to the Main Office for Public Health; however, the Reich Chamber of Physicians or the Main Office for Public Health received half a dozen or a dozen letters from the public in 1940 and '41.

Q: And what was done about these letters?

A: I took notice of these letters and according to instructions from Dr. Conti sent them to the Chancellory of the Fuehrer.

Q: And why did you send them to the Chancellory of the Fuehrer? Why did you send them to that office?

A: Because upon my complaint, when I asked Conti about this action he refused to give me any information, and merely said that this was a seen assignment from Hitler to Bouhler and Professor Brandt. Dr. Conti said that any letters coming to the Reichs Chamber of Physicians or to the main office should be sent on to the Chancellory of the Fuehrer.

Q: What you just said, Dr. Blome, leads me to think that this private inquiry and complaints from the population occasioned you, not officially but as a private citizen, to speak to Dr. Conti about the matter. Is it that on this occasion you asked Dr. Conti whether he knew that the rumors current among the population were true, and that on this occasion you said to Dr. Conti, "If these rumors were true, one would have to try to do something against it." Did you say this to Dr. Conti?

A: Yes, I said something to this effect to Conti, and I requested that we via the Reich physicians leaders should take some interest in this matter. In the last analysis the thing would become the responsibility of the doctors, and it would be said that the doctors were responsible for it, and I did not want that to happen. Conti took an opposing attitude and said that the Reich physicians had nothing to do with the matter, and he was glad of that. As I learned later, this was a deliberate falsehood, for already about at the beginning of the War, as the former Reich Minister Lammers testified here, Dr. Conti had a conference about his planned action with Hitler in the presence of Lammers.

Q: The witness Dr. Kosmehl, who was examined here at the beginning of the case, told us that at that time you took further steps in the matter of euthanasia, especially in connection with a Professor D. Klare; perhaps you can give us some details about this. Who was De. Klare, and so-forth?

A: Professor Klare is a well-known tuberculosis research worker in Germany, who worked especially on tuberculosis in Children. He was a party member who was greatly respected everywhere, and one of the founders of the National Socialist League of Physicians. I had been corresponding with him for years about many questions which bothered both of us, chiefly concerning developments in the Party. I therefore corresponded with Dr. Klare in 1941, also but the euthanasia action, and I agreed with him that on the basis of his influential position he was to write to Conti, Bormann and others, and demand information about the euthanasia action, and protest against the methods of this action. It was impossible for me myself at the time to get any details about the procedure. Otherwise, I would certainly have attempted to intervene in some other way. I would, have been able to do so in a different and energetic form, if the euthanasia action had in any way been in my sphere of responsibility, for example the tuberculosis action in the Warthegau, which I prevented. That was not the case. I was not even able to learn anything about the death of a relative of mine who died in an insane asylum, and I considered Professor Klare the most suitable person to obtain information and to intervene, and Dr. Klare did actually write several outspoken letters to the persons whom I have mentioned, and he sent me copies of these letters.

Dr. Klare, however, did not have any success with these letters. Only thru Dr. Klare did I learn anything definite about the euthanasia action, and, as has already been said, I went to see the Reich Physicians leader — I beg your pardon that is the wrong term in this case — I went to see State Secretary Dr. Conti. I have already told you this step was unsuccessful.

Q: Dr. Blome, in the question of euthanasia, did you have this same basic attitude as Professor Klare?

A: On the question of euthanasia itself I had a different attitude than Dr. Klare. Dr. Klare was opposed to euthanasia in any form. But, as for this euthanasia action, I shared his opinion. Dr. Klare and I, at least from our personal point of view, considered this action illegal, especially because no law had been issued and published where one would plainly find a legal basis for the whole action; and I believe that it was Dr. Klare who pointed out that in the procedure used at the time there was fraud since a false cause of death was given in the death notices.

DR. SAUTER: I may ask the Court that I may submit an affidavit of Professor Klare in this case. It is in the document book Blome, page 6, Document No. 2, and I shall name it Exhibit No. 9. And then another document in the Blome document book, page 9, Document No. 2-A, an extract from the "Berlaner Illustrierte Nachtausgabe" of 21 November 1936, which I shall give this document the Exhibit No. 10. The affidavit of Professor Klare, Document No. 2, Exhibit No. 9, is certified according to the regulations, and Professor Klare says the following about euthanasia, the killing of the insane:

I, (Professor Klare) first heard about euthanasia (killing of insane persons) from laymen (among others from my sister, Mrs. Agnes Klare of Karlsruhe). I thereupon collected evidence of these proceedings which were in a way incomprehensible to me — above all death announcements from various newspapers and told the Deputy Physicians' Leader Dr. Blome about my objections.

It is therefore true that during my stay in Berlin I repeatedly discussed the question of euthanasia with Dr. Blome.

On the occasion of these discussions Dr. Blome made remarks to the effect that, though euthanasia should not be principally rejected, an irreproachable legal basis should be created for it, and that euthanasia should never be applied in the form of a secret proceeding.

On the occasion of such a conversation, Dr. Blome told me that he had discussed this problem with Reich Physicians' Leader Dr. Conti, and the Dr. Conti had explained to him that the Chamber of Physicians and the Office of the Physicians' Leader had nothing to do with the matter that, as far as he (Dr. Conti) knew, it was a direct order from Hitler to Reichsleiter Bouhler and the defendant Dr. Brandt. Any interference of the Chamber of Physicians and the Physicians' Leader in that matter was impossible he said and, besides, would be entirely useless, I told Dr. Blome of my intention to apply to leading personalities in order to achieve a change or discontinuation of euthanasia.

Thus, I tried to get into touch with Dr. Brandt and the Propaganda Ministry.

I may remark this, Dr. Brandt obviously is Karl Brandt, not the defendant Rudolf Brandt. I continue.

On the occasion of his visit to Bethel Dr. Brandt intended to have a detailed discussion with me. For reasons unknown to me, however, this visit did not take place. This meant that my attempt to get into direct contact with Hitler via Dr. Brandt did not succeed. My correspondence with the Propaganda Ministry was forwarded to Reichsleiter Dr. Bermann. Without being summoned in order to explain my point of view personally, as I had wished, I merely received — indirectly via the Reich Health Leader Dr. Conti a reprimand. My last attempt, a long oral discussion in order to induce Dr. Conti to intervene, was likewise without success. As far as I remember, I sent my correspondence in this matter to Dr. Blome for his information or talked with him about my vain endeavors.

It is true the order of Reich Physicians' Leader Dr. Conti not to concern himself further with the matter, made it entirely impossible for Dr. Blome to take effective steps in the question of euthanasia. Dr. Kurt Klare.

And then follows the certification.

The next Document, Exhibit 10, I shall not read. I ask the Tribunal to take judicial notice of it. I have submitted this extract only in order to show you that this Professor Dr. Klare as early as 1936 spoke in exactly the same way on the euthanasia problem as he felt during the War, according to the affidavit which has been read.

Q: Witness, Dr. Blome, did you learn at that time or later, that the point of view which Dr. Klare took, viz, that there should at least be a legally published law, was shared by many other doctors, and that many doctors had the point of view that if such a law were issued then one could not have any serious objection to this law?

A: Yes, I know that, and I frequently discussed this matter with Professor Klare. Klare, as well as I, held the point of view that if a law had been made public at that time, the German people would have adjusted themselves to it just as they previously had submitted to the sterilization law in 1933 and 1934. That is still my conviction today.

Q: Dr. Blome, we know today that your co-defendants Professors Brandt and Brack dealt with the Euthanasia question; did you discuss the Euthanasia questions with such persons as were officially connected with this problem; in what way and with what success?

A: One day, possibly in 1941, as far as I recall, a few months before the Euthanasia action was stopped, Dr. Conti told me that he had arranged a conference in Munich with Professor Brandt in the presence of the leaders of the Chamber of Physicians, where Brandt was to explain the Euthanasia action. The meeting took place then in the Munich Arztehaus. As far as I recall, Brandt was not present, but the defendant Victor Brack was there as Amtsleiter [Head of Office] in the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, of which Reichsleiter [Reich Leader] Bouhler was in charge.

As far as I recall, Brack said that there was a Hitler assignment in respect to the Euthanasia action, and then Brack said all possible safe-guards had been taken whereby only those cases were eliminated, which were really very serious and were proven to be incurable. As far as I recall, Brack pointed out that the church and a part of the population were opposed to this action, but that, on the other hand, large groups of the population did nevertheless approve the action. I believe that on this occasion, Dr. Brack also said that the action was discussed with Ministerialrat [Ministerial Councilman] Dr. Linden in the Reichs Ministry of the Interior. This Dr. Linden wras the representative of the State Secretary Dr. Conti in the Reichs Ministry of the Interior in the Euthanasia action. Brack also showed a law, or a draft of a law, which had not been published and which was to regulate Euthanasia was to be handled after the war; I believe that this was only a draft and not a finished law.

After this meeting in Munich, I again suggested to Dr. Conti that we of the Reichs Chamber of Physicians should try to intervene; but Conti again said that so far he had not participated, that he had not been called upon for participation, and it was completely hopeless for us to try to intervene.

Q: Dr. Blome, this discussion you had in 1941 with Brack in Munich in the Aerztehaus [Medical Center], I assume is identical with the discussion which you mention in your affidavit of 25 October 1946; is that true?

A: Yes.

Q: On October 25, 1946, Document 471, Exhibit 238, in Document Book 11, you described it at that time just as you have described it today.

Now, witness, did you learn whether in this Euthanasia action foreign workers or prisoners of war, etc., were included?

A: I can give no information about that, I did not learn anything about it in the following time. The foreign workers brought into Germany were supposed to be healthy, that is capable of working. As far as I know, there were frequent medical examinations of the foreign workers, sometimes already when they were recruited in the occupied territories. If a foreign worker was discovered to be incapable of working or had an infectious diseases, he was rejected. If a foreign worker, during his stay in Germany, became insane I believe that he had to be sent to a mental institution; but I never learned anything about this, as questions of employment of labor were not the business of the Reichs Chamber of Physicians.

Q: Witness, you said that Dr. Conti, the Reichs Physician Leader, repeatedly on several occasions said to you that this entire matter was not the concern of the medical profession, that it did not have anything to do with this action, and that he said clearly that you, as head of the Reichs Chamber of Physicians, should keep your hands off of it; did you subsequently learn that other doctors in official positions contacted Dr. Conti about this Euthanasia action, and that he always took the same attitude to these other doctors, that he always said that has nothing to do with us, we are not competent, we cannot intervene did you know of such cases?

A: While I was in the camp at Darmstadt in 1946, I heard from a radio broadcast about the trial before the International Military Tribunal where an affidavit of Dr. Sprauer was read, who as far as I recall I believe that he was the head medical officer of Baden. In this affidavit, Dr. Sprauer described how he approached Dr. Conti to object and how Dr. Conti said that this action did not concern the doctors. I believe that this affidavit was submitted here as well in some Document book; I believe that must be the same thing.

Q: Then, Doctor, did you learn later that for what reasons this Euthanasia action was stopped; when did you learn about it?

A: I believe I learned about it at the end of 1941 and it was stopped because of the unrest among the population on this account and because of repeated protests from Catholic and Protestant Bishops and newspaper articles in foreign newspapers. I did not see any of these articles at the time, however, I learned this from someone in the Party Chancellery.

Q: Dr. Blome, we have heard here that after the Euthanasia action was stopped, the so-called Reich Working Committee (Reichsarbeisgemeinschaft) continued to exist. This was the organization in which several cases of so-called "Life Unworthy of Living" were exterminated; did you hear about this Reich Working Committee earlier before this trial or did you learn of it now during the trial?

A: I learned of something like that from a private inquiry, addressed to me. It was a fairly high official who on behalf of an acquaintance of his, who had an idiotic deformed child, approached me. I then asked Dr. Conti whether he knew anything about this, he said to me at that time that it might be that there was some such thing, but that referred only to small children in an incurable condition. Dr. Conti could not, or would not, tell me anything more at the time and I sent the person who had inquired of me to the Chancellory of the Fuehrer.

Dr. Conti had told me earlier that all inquiries concerning the Euthanasia program should be passed on to the Chancellory of the Fuehrer.

DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, in this connection I should like to refer another document in the document book Blome. This is document 6 in the document book Blome on pages 17 and 18. I need not give this document any exhibit number because it is an extract from the book of Dr. Blome, which a whole has been given exhibit No. 1. This extract will also, therefore, for under exhibit 1. I shall read this quotation because it shows the fundamental attitude of the defendant, Dr. Blome, on the question of euthanasia. This was at a time when he had no idea that in the year 1947 he would be called upon to defend himself before a Court.

In this book, "Arzt Im Kampf", which appeared in October. 1941, the defendant, Dr. Blome, writes on pages 221, to 223, as follows — I am reading from document No. 6:

Sterilization is not dishonorable: It is no Disgrace. Even less is a punishment. It is a sacrifice which the individual concerned makes to the community and to the future of his nation.

The time was not yet ripe to understand such thoughts, far less to made them the subject of a public discussion. But the physician in practice again and again met cases which showed him this problem in its merciless truth and urgency.

This then formed the subject of discussions in the closer circle of friends, whether it would not be better to put an artificial end to an exist unworthy of a human being and often not even felt by the person concerned.

We considered it senseless that, for instance, insane persons who endangered their own lives and the lives of others, idiots of high degree who perhaps cannot keep clean or eat by themselves, were brought up and kept alive with great effort end expense. In free nature these creatures would not be able to exist and would be exterminated according to divine law.

We also did not understand that persons inferior in character and spirit anti-social creatures who had murdered, were, it is true, condemned to death but then as a rule pardoned and kept alive in penitentiaries at the expense of the public.

But also in cases of quite another nature, where it is not a question of the extermination of inferior life, we wondered, whether the physician should not be given the legal possibility

— I emphasize 'legal possibility' —

to end an unhappy life prematurely. We were thinking of seriously suffering, incurably sick persons, who, until their death, had to expect only enormous mental and physical suffering and who themselves asked the physician to free them from their suffering.

I remember some cases of incurable suffering in my practice, in which the patients implored me to put an end to their lives. 'Doctor,' they said, 'please give me an injection so that I don't wake up any more. I can't stand it any longer.' Cases in which the daughter drew aside and also asked: 'Please help my father, fulfill his request'.

And he then ends his quotation with the words:

I could only say: 'According to the Law the Physician is forbidden to do that.'

And yet there are cases in which the physician made his own sense of responsibility as a higher law by reasons of profound humanity.

This is the extract from the book by the defendant, which as I said, was published in the year 1941. I lay special emphasis on this date, because at that time the euthanasia action of Hitler was still in operation and the defendant, Blome, was diametrically opposed to this action of Hitler.

Q: Witness, as for the question of euthanasia, to conclude this chapter I should merely like to ask you about a document which was submitted here on the 6th of February. It is the Prosecution document 119, exhibit 445. It a Fuehrer Order of February — just a minute — a Fuehrer order of December, 1942, I believe, December, 1942, published in January, 1943, according to with in certain cases the obligation of silence of the doctor is repealed and the doctor has the duty to report. This Fuehrer order of the 23rd December, 1942 which is document, 119, did you know about it at the time. Did it have any connection with the euthanasia action? What do you have to say about it?

A: This Fuehrer order has no connection with the euthanasia action. I was issued in December 1942 when the action had long been stopped. The reason for this Fuehrer order was that leading personalities in public life, including a Gauleiter [District or Regional Leader] and a General, had fallen ill of paralysis.

These cases had unfortunate consequences. They were reported to the Fuehrer and Hitler felt it necessary to issue an order that all doctors, lay healers, etc., had to report various illnesses of leading personalities in the State the Party, the Wehrmacht and Industry, disregarding the obligation of silences. They had to report it to Hitler through Professor Brandt. This order had nothing to do with euthanasia. One must say objectively that it had a certain justification.

Q: Dr. Blome, in conclusion, will you please say a few words about that question of euthanasia? Was it clear to you during the course of these long proceedings why you are indicted for euthanasia?

A: No.

Q: Now, I go on to another Chapter, Professor Blome, which will unfortunately be complicated, that is biological warfare, and the problems connected with it. Dr. Blome, what does biological warfare mean?

A: This means the use of small organisms existing in nature which hard or destroy human beings, animals and plants, in human beings and animals primarily bacteria and viruses which cause disease and epidemic, and in the case of plants, insect pests.

Q: Dr. Blome, from whom did you receive an assignment to prepare for biological warfare and when was that?

A: Unless I misunderstood you, you said, an assignment to prepare biological warfare. I never received any such assignment.

Q: It is alleged that you did. What assignment did you receive?

A: I received an assignment for research, for counter measures against biological warfare.

Q: An assignment for counter measures against biological warfare?

A: An assignment for defense measures.

Q: When was that?

A: That was about the beginning of 1942 in a discussion of a meeting the Reich Research council in Berlin in which Ministerialrat Professor Schumann told me I was to take charge of research for measures against biological warfare.

According to his information there were reports that the enemy was working in this field. Therefore, a coordination of research in the three sectors was necessary. These sectors are human beings, animals and plants. This matter had so far been dealt with separately by three separate agencies, the Army Medical Inspectorate, the Army Veterinary Inspectorate, and finally the Chief of Military Science in the OKW. None of these three Wehrmacht agencies wanted to subordinate itself to the other. Therefore, a civilian agency was to be given the supreme authority. One had thought of the Reich Physician Leader, Dr. Conti, for this, out for personal reasons he was not wanted, and, therefore, the choice had fallen on me. Then this whole matter was to be put into civilian hands because there was a great danger for the whole civilian population. In any case, I declared myself willing to take over this assignment.

Q: That was at the beginning of 1942, you said?

A: About the beginning of 1942. I cannot say exactly when.

Q: And when did you get the assignment and from whom?

A: Sometime after the first discussion with Professor Schumann there was a talk with Field Marshal Keitel at his office in Berlin. Keitel told me that he was now giving me this assignment. It was to be a secret assignment under my cancer research which already existed. Keitel emphasized that the Fuehrer, that is Adolf Hitler, had strictly forbidden any provisions for the use of biological warfare. Keitel also explained to me that he himself did not believe that biological warfare would be used at all in this war. He did not believe that there would be any gas warfare but Keitel emphasized that by way of precaution every thing had to be investigated in case defense measures should become necessary. There were no definite legitimacy or authority from Keitel to me. Consequently, on the basis of this talk with Keitel I could not yet begin my work.

Q: Professor, in the talk with Schumann, whom you just mentioned, and in the talk with Keitel, which you have just described, was it said in any way that there might possibly be an offensive on our part, for example, against Russia or some other enemy state, and under what conditions?

A: Only defense measures were discussed in the event that the enemy should begin biological warfare.

Q: Only defensive measures?

A: Yes, only defensive measures.

Q: In this connection, Professor Blome, I should like to point out to you a document submitted by the Prosecution. This is Document 1308, Exhibit 325. I do not believe that it is in any Document Book. It was submitted separately when dealing with biological warfare on the 10th of January. This document 1308, Exhibit 325, is a file note which Stabsarzt Professor Dr. Klieve made in September 1943. Stabsarzt [Medical Officer] Professor Dr. Klieve you have heard the name mentioned here frequently. It deals with a report which Professor Klieve made in the presence of this Professor Schumann, whom you have just mentioned, to the Chief of Office AWA. Mr. Schumann is supposed to have said, I quote:

We must not sit idly by and watch but we must prepare for the mass use of biological warfare.

America must be attacked with epidemics for human beings and animals and insect pests and the Fuehrer must be won over to this plan.

That is the statement of Professor Schumann and Professor Klieve who drew up this file note writes:

It has less to do with the matter but apparently rejects this idea.

I should like to ask you, was this not to be preparation for an offensive biological warfare? I believe you were not present at this report and I think this is the only document, Professor, which has been submitted with any such contents but perhaps you will comment on this one document.

A: As for the meeting with the Chief of Office AWA, I believe that is the abbreviation for General Ordnance Office. I learned of it only here. That Schumann made such a statement I consider quite possible. I heard Schumann say on various occasions that everything was sleeping, that the dangers threatening Germany were not recognized and everybody fighting about jurisdiction. One had to exaggerate to wake people up. Everybody thought the war was almost over. In regard to America he said to me when we happened to be together, that one would have to attack America if there should be a biological warfare. When I asked how he thought that could be done he said he did not see any technical possibility but one should examine the general opportunities for the attack, one should have to know them in order to find defense methods. Schumann did not have any special knowledge of biological warfare. Briefly the following about the personality of Schumann: He was generally considered fantastic. He was considered a "busybody" — a person who wants to have his finger in everything. It was known that he did not himself believe everything that he said. His field of work was physics but he dealt primarily with music and composed a great deal. To make it brief, he was unreliable and not to be taken seriously, and an English Major in an interrogation at Karlsberg expressed the same opinion.

Q: Mr. Blome, this file note of Professor Klieve is of September 1943. You already had a secret assignment on biological warfare at that time and, I believe, you had received your appointment which was issued in May 1943.

A: Yes, that must have been May 1943.

Q: But, nevertheless this talk to which the file note referred, you did not hear about it at the time, you were not called upon, you were not informed?

A: No, I heard of it here.

Q: Professor Blome, in this same document 1308, Exhibit 325, is a report of a meeting of the Working Committee with the name Blitzableiter (Lightening Rod Committee). This meeting was on the 24th of September 1943. You yourself are supposed to have been present at this meeting and the record said:

Further experiments to be conducted in the field of human bacteriology.

And then it said:

Since it is unknown whether and under what conditions aerosoles which are breathed in or drops which are sprayed on certain pathogenic germs

I shall repeat—

sprayed drops of certain pathogenic germs create diseases in human beings, Professor Dr. Blome suggested experiments on human beings.

Now, with this you are connected with human experiments and I ask you what kind of experiments were they which you are said to have suggested at that time? Were they experiments involving danger to life and health of the subjects, severe pain, etc?

A: From examination of Frenchmen or documents found after the campaign in the West I knew that the French were dealing with the question of receptivity of human beings for bacteria which were sprayed. They thought that contagion was possible only if poison gases were also inhaled. In July 1945 the English Major in Heidelberg, who was an expert in the problem of bacteriological warfare, explained the same thing. I wanted to know whether this assumption was true and that was why I made the suggestion. It was quite general — I did not suggest any specific bacteria. There would have had to be a definite discussion, for example, whether influenzal bacilli or pneumococci, or other bacteria should be chosen. I would have liked to know whether contagion by spraying was possible at all. If experiments had come about we would have cleared up the question with a harmless bacteria as possible. I was thinking of experiments with volunteers.

Q: You were thinking of experiments with volunteers, you say? Is it true that you made the suggestion that experiments should be conducted in the Military Medical Academy in Berlin?

A: Yes, I suggested medical students, medical students of the Wehrmacht, so-called medical officer candidates, but Professor Klieve refused experiments in the Military Medical Academy because there was no clinical section there where the course of the experiments could have been observed. Experiments on soldiers were prohibited in principal because soldiers were not to be taken out of service for such purposes. Experiments on civilians could not be conducted because of the matter of secrecy. Experiments on military doctors and medical students seemed impracticable because these persons would not have been available long enough, as long as necessary for the experiments. Thus it came about that no such experiments were conducted at all.

Q: In the same document, the file note of the 24th of September, 1943 Document 1308, it says on the second page that, as we have already said, you suggested experiments on human beings to be carried out in the laboratory of the "MA". That is apparently the abbreviation for Military Medical Academy. This was refused, "it was still to be discussed, if Professor Blome visited the MA laboratories." That is apparently the laboratories of Professor Klieve. What can you say about that and what happened then? You said no experiments were conducted?

A: No, no experiments were conducted. I was present at this meeting. That was about the experiment about breathing in bacteria. This was a suggestion of mine. No conclusion was reached and I never saw Klieve's laboratories.

Q: The next document, Dr. Blome, submitted by the prosecution had the number 1309, Exhibit 326. It is not in a document book. It was submitted on the 10th of January. In this Document 1309, which I want to put to you, there is again a file note of Professor Klieve of the 23rd of February, 1944. It refers to a discussion with you on the same day, 23rd of February, 1944, and it says that

at Posen a new institute is to be built, under Dr. Blome, at which biological warfare agents are to be studied and tested.

Klieve then goes on to say:

The Wehrmacht, at the request of Field Marshal Keitel, is not to have a responsible part in these experiments since experiments with human beings would be conducted.

That is the quotation. You recall that, in connection with the charge against a different defendant, this document has already been discussed. Since this document also refers to you, perhaps you will also comment on it and also refer to this where the document goes on to say:

Above all, an examination of our vaccines would be necessary, especially of the plague vaccine. Experiments on human beings would have to be conducted. There are quite wrong opinions prevalent about the effect and maximum doses of many poisons which can also be removed only through experiments on human beings. As soon as Professor Blome reports to the Reich Marshal Goering and Generalarzt Professor Brandt, he will so report.

That is the end of the quotation, and I can also put this to you at the same time. It says that you said that in European Turkey four thousand cases of plague had occurred. Professor, considering what I have just put to you, will you please comment on this file note of Professor Klieve which is very important for you?

A: This part of the file note of Professor Klieve is correct. Himmler did give me the assignment to test the plague vaccine and to establish, by means of experiments on human beings, whether the plague vaccine which we had was effective or not. That was doubted by many people. Therefore, Himmler gave me the assignment to discover and produce an effective plague vaccine in case the enemy should work with plague and the necessity should arrest to take corresponding measures in order to protect our population against the plague. A certain SS Sturmbennfuehrer [Major] Karl Gross had been sent to Nesselstedt by Himmler where he was to build my institute to do this work on plague for me, but I have reason to think that the thing was too dangerous for him. In the beginning I considered the idea of plague experiments seriously. Of course, for defensive purposes, but the more I dealt with the problem the clearer it became to me that we had no experienced doctors and nursing personnel and that we hardly could find experimental subjects for plague experiments.

If we had wanted to attack with plague, the problem could have been cleared up in a few months but that was quite out of the question from the very beginning. I received Himmler's assignment in August 1943 but in January 1945 the institute was not yet finished and consequently the work could not be begun for that reason alone. I did not even have an incubator there. I had only one plague culture which we received only shortly before we left Nesselstedt in January 1945. In September 1944 I discussed with Himmler the possibility to evacuating the Posen Institute. He agreed to a new construction enterprise in Nesselstedt. Until the Americans arrived, however, only the foundation was built. I did not have the intention of doing anything and nothing was done. As for my suggestions to test the effect of poison or the maximum doses, nothing was done. It was not in my sphere of duties. It was merely a suggestion on my part. I made the suggestion because Klieve, when he visited me, spoke about the news of sabotage with poison and bacteria in the East. Since poisoning is frequently treated with so-called anti-toxins and the official maximum doses are very low, I considered it desirable to ascertain how high one can go in the doses of so-called anti-toxins.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the Tribunal will now be in recess.

(A recess was taken.)