1947-04-01, #3: Doctors' Trial (afternoon)

AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 1 April 1947.)

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

The Tribunal is again in session.

DR. VIDESLAW HORN (Resumed) EXAMINATION (Continued)

BY THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE SEBRING):

Q: Doctor, do you know of specific instances of punishment that were meted out to concentration camp inmates at Buchenwald while you were there, and if so, what were their nature?

A: You are referring to punishments meted out by the SS on the inmates?

Q: Yes.

A: In the period until this process was stopped, most of the penalties were as follows. The smallest penalty was that the prisoner was condemned to so and so many strokes. These prisoners had to come to the hospital where they were examined and then when this penalty was executed an SS doctor was always present. Then prisoners were called to the gate and some of them did not come back. It was said that many prisoners that were called to the gate did not come back end that a court had ordered that they be hanged. This took place particularly in the period when these beatings took place. Almost every day there were executions or hangings of prisoners. That happened mostly in the afternoons. Otherwise we knew of no other camp punishment nor did we see any.

Q: Did you witness or know of any such occurrences at Buchenwald prior to September 1, 1943?

A: Toward the end of 1943 or 1944 these beatings were a normal course of events, and I myself in the later so-called movie room saw how a table was brought in. The prisoner was laid on this table and beaten. Prisoners from my immediate neighborhood were also beaten. I once saw how a gypsy was beaten on this table. I never saw any hangings. But in 1944 I saw the gallows which were near the crematorium.

Q: Can you recollect whether any such punishments were inflicted during the period of time that Dr. Hoven was the official camp physician?

A: Precisely at the time when Dr. Hoven was camp physician these beatings were the order of the day, but they were always done on the orders of the High Rapport Leader. The beatings of which I spoke yesterday, namely, twenty-four strokes, had to he approved by Berlin, and for a week the SS carried out such punishments without permission. So, on the other hand, if you were going to administer a penalty of more than twenty-four strokes, you had to have permission, but if less, then you did not have to have permission. This had nothing to do with the camp physician but was the camp management. It was the camp management that ordered such punishment.

Q: Was it necessary for an authorization to be given by a SS physician who first had inspected the man's physical condition before severe punishment of that sort could be administered?

A: The men were brought to the hospital, in the office, and the physician's office where they were examined. This formality was observed for quite awhile before prisoners were officially beaten. There were also other official beatings, and this procedure with the table on which beatings were carried out had to have a physician's approval before it could be done.

Q: Approval by whom?

A: The SS doctor who was present in the office of the hospital —

Q: Who would that be?

A: (Continuing) It also happened with the medical noncommissioned officers who examined these persons, but mostly it was the physician who examined them, and that a physician was also present at the punishment, and, as I said yesterday, as in the case of Falldorf from Bremen, Dr. Hoven prevented punishment for reasons of health.

Q: What can you tell us about Block 46; what was Block 46?

A: In the period when Dr. Hoven was there, I never entered that block. Only later did I enter Block 46. There were prisoners there who at first were well fed. They were examined. Blood tests were made. Their blood pressure was taken. Everything was examined about them. It could be seen that the prisoners were walking around, and were playing games of one sort and another, and so on. Then I once saw how prisoners were then treated of typhus. One time Dr. Ding called me to Block 46. I was to perform an operation on the kidney. There is a covering to the kidney which was to be cut away.

Why? It is well known that the kidney when not functioning properly, can be restored to its function, if it is so opened. There was a time in the History of surgery where this procedure was carried out only in extreme cases, and I believe that this method of treatment has not been used for the last ten or fifteen years in the larger surgical institutes, because it was not successful as had been hoped, but since there was a misunderstanding in Block 46, those with typhus had high fever, and the kidney, as an organ effected by typhus, was damaged, and Dr. Ding wanted to restore the working condition of these persons' kidneys. I even said that it was correct in some cases, or rather until some years ago it was correct to perform this operation, but in the case of a man with typhus who has a very low blood pressure, and with a high fever, this operation could not be performed, because the man would die under the knife. Dr. Ding showed me literature on several of these kidney operations, but even on the grounds of this literature he showed me, I could prove medically that in any case of typhus the operation under these circumstances should not be carried out. After showing that I was right about that, Dr. Ding no longer discussed such operations with me again. From the First World War there had been cases of typhus, and I know of cases here where they were most certainly sick with typhus. You could see this also from the temperature chart, and the blood reactions that are characteristic of the typhus, as set forth in this chart.

Q: I understand you to say that you did not actually enter Block 46 until after Dr. Hoven had left Buchenwald?

A: Yes, of that I am sure.

Q: Prior to the time that Dr. Hoven left Buchenwald, that is to say, prior to September 1, 1943, did you have any under standing which you had gained either by actual observation, or actual knowledge, or the reputation that Block 46 had gained, as to the nature of the things that went on there?

A: It was generally known in the camp that in Block 46 experiments were being carried out on prisoners, and as I said yesterday I discussed that question about Block 46 only once with Dr. Hoven, and was told by him that in Block 46 Dr. Ding was doing some work for Dr. Mrugowsky.

Q: Did you understand whether or not there was any official collaboration of any kind between Dr. Ding and Dr. Hoven at that time?

A: I was never present there, but I can test my observation in this form, Dr. Hoven was greatly interested in the medical administration, and also in the relations between the prisoners. The hospital was a large one, and consequently the first camp physicians like Dr. Hoven who is the medical director of the hospital, it is understandable he should concern himself with these administrative matters. Dr. Hoven never dodged the doing of medical work, and he would attempt to learn somethings surgically, but he did not have the time for that. It was characteristic that we prisoners were forbidden to treat members of the SS. That, however, was a regulation that was not observed. The second staff officer, Sturmbannfuehrer [Major] Bannewald fell sick. He was a member of the camp management. He had erysipelas. It was interesting that at that time that the clinic in Jena said they could not accommodate Sturmbannfuehrer Bannewald, because, I believe, that even a German civilian clinic had to have special permission to treat a member of the SS. Then I was called once to the camp commander, that I should tell him how serious this disease was. I fought it out, that Sturmbannfuehrer Bannewald was over fifty years old, that I had taken X-ray pictures of him, and had ascertained that his heart was in a rather poor condition.

I openly told the commander that I believe that Sturmbannfuehrer Bannewald did a little more drinking than was good for himself, and this heart condition and possibly liver condition could suffice for a disease like erysipelas to be fatal. The commander of the camp asked me, "Is equipment and medicine in the camp sufficient for the handling of Sturmbannfuehrer Wannewald, the same way that he would be treated in a clinic?" He said that he was to be sent to an SS Hospital in Thuringia, Berga, but that this SS hospital was a very poor one. Consequently, he would take the responsibility himself, if Dr. Hoven would undertake the treatment, and that he would use the prisoner physicians in addition. I told the commander, frankly, that there was a considerable danger and risk. After two hours I was fetched by Dr. Hoven, and we went to see this Sturmbannfuehrer. We used the medicines we had in the camp; this was during the first half of 1942. Treatment was made with injections. We prepared everything for Dr. Hoven to give the injection. Even in this case Dr. Hoven held himself back, and what was there unpleasant to me I had to give the injections at first in his presence, and then later on alone. From this it can be seen that Dr. Hoven except for technical measures, did not concern himself with this.

Q: What did you understand room 11 was, Dr. Horn?

A: As I said, room 11 was in those barracks which we were not allowed to enter, we three doctors signed a statement that we would not enter those barracks; there was the room 11, and, as I have heard, and what was the general opinion in the camp, was that prisoners were there on orders. The prisoners, as I say, were to be done away with there. That was the general opinion in the camp.

Q: Was there any general opinion in the camp as to what prisoners or what race of prisoners, or what class of prisoners, were to be eliminated in room 11?

A: Dr. Hoven divided the prisoners into the so-called decent prisoners and, on the other hand, the others. This subdivision corresponded with the opinion of the old political prisoners in the camp, so that I had the impression that Dr. Hoven subdivided the prisoners in accordance with the opinion of the old political prisoners in the camp. I myself a few times had to tell Hoven that a man wanted to be operated on, then he would say, what sort of man is that? And it was sufficient for me to say, He is a decent prisoner, and in that case he was taken into the hospital and operated on.

Q: If it should happen that he was not in that class that one of you in whom Dr. Hoven had confidence was was classified as a decent prisoner, what, then, would become of that man? Suppose, for example, you had told Dr. Hoven, this is not a decent man, but he is one of the trouble makers. What would be the outcome of that case?

A: I was not in such a position that I was obliged to say that a person was not decent. These, as far as I was concerned, were sick people, and I as physician never made that subdivision.

I emphasized that — that I belonged to the legal management of the camp. I did not belong to that illegal management but was a doctor, and other criteria were made to me and in this division between decent and non-decent.

Q: Bat let us assume that there would be people in the illegal camp administration who did not have the upright, ethical aspect and concept of the situation that you had, and who would not hesitate to brand one of these prisoners as being indecent, let as say; and that one of these prisoners became in ill health, and was so classified by a member of the illegal camp administration as being a trouble maker, or as being an indecent sort of fellow. What would be the outcome of that man, and his treatment, so far as Dr. Hoven, and the hospital, and the medical facilities, at the camps were concerned.

A: Mostly, the prisoners carried out the business of taking prisoners into the hospital, and it happened that a non decent prisoner was not taken into the hospital. Of course, such a thing was not present for prisoners, and those prisoners whom the illegal camp management called not decent, as I said yesterday, I was against this illegal management; but they said to me again and again, what can we do with these people, we can't turn them over to the SS; consequently, it sometimes happened that sometimes the members of the illegal management killed such a man. I can remember a case of a capo who was a block leader, whom the political prisoners beat to death because of a crime. In other words, the fate of the so-called indecent prisoners was the same no matter what their race was and even if they were political prisoners their fate was certainly unfortunate. They went on the worst transports.

Q: I have one more question, please. There were two separate witnesses who took the witness stand, and one testified to one incident, and one to another, which I shall combine for the purpose of the question which I am now about to put to you.

One of these witnesses said that he visited one of the concentration camps — I don't recollect the name of it at this time — and that the inmates there seemed to be well taken care of, that the sanitation facilities, the housing facilities, the living conditions, were good; and that he saw some of the inmates there coming down the camp streets playing harmonicas and singing songs. And the other one said that at the concentration camp he inspected he found that for the inmates who had to go to hospitals for treatment there was champagne and coffee for them.

Did you have any champagne and coffee for inmates in Buchenwald, and was it the general thing for them to come marching down the street playing the harmonica and singing light songs?

A: I certainly didn't have any champagne, but such visits or inspections of the camps took place, very often visitors who were brought there by the Wehrmacht and were lead through the camp-and I must confess that many visitors did not see the camp in its worst aspects. They walked down the camp street at a time when the worst work commandos were outside the camp; and on the camp streets during a period of inspection you saw prisoners who had administrative functions of one sort or another; in other words, the prisoners who were best off. They then came to the hospital, and then they went to the kitchen, and then they went to a special block, and all of this was, of course, prearranged, and could consequently not have made a poor impression.

That the prisoners played their mouth organs — that must have been after hours, after work hours. That could have been true, yes; but in the case of this testimony that you just quoted that those were not inmates of the camp, and it cannot be claimed that that was anything like a normal state of affairs. The visitors and Wehrmacht officers who came there were not allowed to speak to us, but in their inspection, if there were fifty visitors, they were accompanied by the camp management and the SS, but a few of them did succeed in asking a few questions on the side, and they asked whether this was a normal street in the camp, or whether these wore normal conditions and, of course, none of us gave an answer that would have tipped them off. That is quite understandable. In 1939 a large group of journalists came to the fort prison of Spielberg — the most horrible, terrible Gestapo prison in Czechoslovakia — and you can still read today what good conditions prevailed in that prison because they didn't see the worst that was to be seen there. Thus, these visits and the opinions expressed by them who did the visiting are of no value, and anybody who was drinking champagne was certainly not a prisoner. That they were playing mouth organs, that could be possible.

Q: How difficult would it have been for a high ranking officer, medical officer or otherwise, of the Waffen-SS, or the Wehrmacht, to have come to Buchenwald and to have actually discovered the true conditions prevailing there?

A: Neither the Wehrmacht nor any SS officer of the troops, or even SS Buchenwald officer who did not actually belong to the camp, could have found that out at all. Any visitor had to report to the commander, and someone was appointed to accompany him. It is quite possible, or rather, it was quite impossible for anyone, even an SS member, to enter the camp without the permission of the camp commander, or to move around freely within the camp. In my experience which lasted six years, I think that is comparatively out of the question.

BY THE PRESIDENT:

Q: Witness, a good deal of reference has been made to Room 11. What was the physical nature of that room? Was it a ward room or an operating room?

A: I assume that it was a ward room. It was certainly not an operating room. Later, the room was rebuilt into a dining room for the nurses. The equipment there would seem to indicate that it was a normal ward room.

Q: Have you any idea as to what was done to the camp inmates who were taken to Room 11?

A: The American liberators, the military authorities, concerned themselves greatly with this question. This Room 11 was one of their major problems, and to get right to the point we fetched bearers of corpses who went to this room, but this room was used as a dining room for nurses from 1943 on and, in the meantime, the bearers of corpses who were the only ones who had entered the room, had disappeared on transports, so we had very little to tell and we wanted to be helpful to the American authorities but we could not ascertain, despite the fact that the American authorities asked almost every old prisoner about this matter and heard: "Yes, room 11 was a death room." However, the method, the methods that were used there could not be ascertained and I was very anxious to help in this matter myself. I believe even a representative of the American War Department was there and I really wanted to help out in this affair. We did everything we could to investigate this matter and tried to find some one — not some one who had heard about it but some one who had actually been there — who had carried bearers from the room. Unfortunately, the people had disappeared. We wanted to find physicians who had been there, but when the basic question was asked: "Were you there or not" the answer was in the negative. Polish stretcher bearers who had done service in Room 11 could not be found now after the liberation. Many had disappeared on transports and names were written down and we tried to look them up.

We even applied to the Russian authorities, a representative of whom came to Buchenwald and the American Security Office looked into this matter, and since these were Poles from Eastern Galicia; namely, the area occupied by Russia, we spoke with them, as I say, and our delegate who was in Warsaw as a delegate to a congress of freed prisoners also could not find any of these Polish stretcher bearers who had been used in Room 11.

Q: What was the general reputation and report concerning this Room 11 before it was converted to a nurses' dining room?

A: The reputation was of the worst.

Q: Just what do you mean by that?

A: It was a death room.

Q: How long did it bear that reputation, if you know?

A: What one experiences there one wants to forget quickly and when the room was remodeled as a dining room, even as early as 1944, there was no further talk about its previous reputation and prisoners who got there in 1944 and 1945 perhaps had not even heard about this reputation that Room 11 had.

Q: Do you know of any persons who were eliminated in Room 11 as the result of any action taken by any physician — any camp physician?

A: I can name no one. I was once told about a homosexual German writer whom I did not know personally, but I really can name no one.

Q: By whose order would any people be taken to Room 11?

A: The specific order — I have already answered that indirectly in my classification of the SS. It is certain that people were killed in the camp and I am convinced that these measures which might be considered under the euthanasia — I am sure that these were orders by the highest SS authorities and Gestapo authorities. However who actually chose the prisoners — I believe that that actually took place in Buchenwald, but who did it, that I do not know; and when I heard that in other camps the SS doctors paid a visit once a week for instance, in Mauthausen, Auschwitz and other camps — where the policy was that very ill prisoners were particularly selected for extermination — then I must say that in this period in Buchenwald that is, from December, 1941, on, that such an action as this, that an SS doctor went through the hospital and picked out those to be exterminated, that did not happen in Buchenwald.

Even if I didn't visit the rooms myself, I would have heard of such a thing had it happened and I can say that they were not selected in that manner at that time. Now, before that period, there was a doctor by the name of, I believe, Eisele, of whom it was said — this took place before the period when Hoven was there — and it was said that he did select the prisoners who were to be exterminated.

Q: Was he a doctor?

A: Yes, he was a camp doctor and I believe he was the chief camp physician.

Q: Who administered the lethal doses or whatever was given to cause deaths in Room 11? Were they administered by a physician?

A: Let us assume that during this period — now, please remember this is an assumption. — Let us assume that Dr. Hoven did that. Now, who did away with these prisoners after Dr. Hoven left? For instance, that Polish Consul whom I frequently mentioned here. At that time Dr. Hoven had already left. At that time Dr. Schiedlowsky most assuredly did not do it. I summed that up this morning that the people who did this are unknown. There were other SS doctors there — other medical officers there, but if you please —

Q: (Interrupting) I understand that you said you had no information as to what particular person administered the lethal measures — whatever they were — but do you consider that they must have been administered by a doctor?

A: I can't even say that. It was unclear to us in the camp just how this took place. There were, of course, rumors throughout the camp.

Q: What were the rumors?

A: Well, the rumors that the people were killed or the prisoners also told various stories. They always assumed that Block 50 was perhaps not there simply for purposes of vaccine production and that it was used for other purposes. A large team worked there. It is possible that some of the prisoners had chemical experiments carried out on them but, in general, these were fantasy stories, and regarding Room 11 there were tales also, as I have said. Some people accused Dr. Hoven but, as I said, who actually carried out the killings in this period when I myself was in the dissection room, and this was a time when Dr. Hoven was not in the camp, and Dr. Schiedlowsky, as chief physician, certainly did not do it.

Q: What were the other purposes for which it was reported that Block 50 was used besides the production of vaccines?

A: The only other matter that can be taken seriously was the matter of putting a corrosive on the skin, but I don't know what to think about this whole business because small wounds were unimportant and large wounds we would have known about. That was about all that was heard about Block 50, but I would like to say that we regularly visited Block 50 because the main library was there and we doctors met in the evenings and discussed matters and heard lectures. These were Dr. Hoven's orders. All physicians could, from all nations, enter Block 50 and I never heard from the doctors that they had heard anything different from the fact of this vaccine production except this one thing I mentioned.

Q: If euthanasia, or any similar process was employed in Room 11, who would have selected the subjects for that euthanasia — a physician or someone else?

A: That I do not know, as I have already said. How were the persons chosen? Well, the, political Gestapo department had a good deal to do with this, certainly. There can be no doubt of that; anyone who knows the situation in the camp must be convinced of that. Whether the political department chose all the prisoners who were used for euthanasia, or whether also the illegal management chose some of the indecent prisoners, that I cannot tell you.

Q: The use of the word euthanasia pre-supposes a physical condition which is very low, does it not?

A: A person whom one should help by putting an end to his sufferings. Let us say that a man is very weak; then an ordinary injection of morphine would be enough to kill him. But I never concerned myself without euthanasia.

Q: We understand your position on that subject, doctor. Was it or was it not a common report or rumor or matter of talk around the camp that Room 11 was used for the purpose of elimination, regardless of whether the subject might be considered sick and unable to recover health and therefore be subject within the meaning of the term euthanasia?

A: Yes, there was talk of that, that these persons were done away with. Many prisoners believed and spoke of the fact that prisoners perhaps were not decent, or at least that these prisoners were designated as not decent and that these were the ones that were done away with through euthanasia, but how true this was I cannot say. In the interests of justice one really should be called upon to be more precise but I am sorry to say that I cannot be.

Q: In your testimony this morning you referred to the food furnished the prisoners and the weight of the daily allowance. Could you estimate, doctor, the caloric content of a day's allowance of food—an average day's allowance of food,—during the year 1942?

A: I already described that but I may point out to you that the amount of the calories itself is not an essential point in this connection.

Just take the example of two people who weigh the same, who have the same blood pressure, who have the same physical composition and who are doing the same work. One of them may die within the space of a few weeks, getting 2,000 calories, which are normal, because there is something wrong inside his body. That can lead us to say that in the years of 1942 or 1943 the amounts of food received were more or less adequate. However, in the years of 1944 and 1945, and even part of 1943, the amount of food received was completely inadequate.

Q: I understood your testimony to that effect this' morning, doctor, but I did not remember that you estimated the caloric contents of a day's ration.

A: On the occasion of an inspection of the kitchen with Dr. Hoven, and reading the directives, we saw that 30 calories were allowed for each 1 kilo of the weight of an inmates, which amounted to about 2100 calories. But that was only in theory. In reality we got much less. At that time one could estimate the ration amounting to 1500 calories but that is merely an approximation but later, especially in the years 1944 and 1945, hunger symptoms became apparent and then, I think, we had under 1000 calories per day.

THE PRESIDENT: I have no further questions. Has any defendant any questions to propound to the witness concerning the examination after the examination-in-chief?

RE-DIRECT-EXAMINATION BY DR. GAWLIK:

Q: Doctor, who established the amount of rations to be given?

A: These directives were issued by Berlin. It was a general directive emanating from Berlin.

Q: Who in the camp was responsible for the nourishment?

A: Did the defendant Hoven take measures in order to improve the nourishment as far as he could, since that in itself did not belong within his jurisdiction?

A: It was very normal, I think it was a matter of the SS doctors. I was in England, in France, and later in Switzerland, visiting many European countries, and I knew that it was always the administration that established the amount of rations to be given to the populace. The physician only exercises a control—a quantitative and qualitative control. That is how we got Dr. Hoven into the kitchen. Whether Dr. Hoven achieved it or not, I cannot say, but it was in connection with Dr. Hoven's inspection—by the way, Schidlausky never went into the kitchen—that the 3 cooks were sent to the concentration camp of Dachau where it was said that even the ritabaga, that is this beet-root, was prepared in a better manner, and the peas were prepared better. The cooks came back and reported that in the concentration camp of Dachau they saw that the vegetable ration which was used in the kitchen could be used in a better way and that a third of that ration was keeping back, milling it in a raw condition, and then adding it to the cooked, vegetables and then letting it all boil for a short time, which procedure allegedly improved the quality, that is to say, the vitamins. This procedure was carried out by order of Dr. Hoven. Unfortunately we could not judge the effect because our entire diet lacked vitamins; but the physicians in the camp were satisfied that at least something was done and at least a little attention was given to the improvement of the food.

Q: Do you know that the Defendant Hoven get supplemental rations for all of the inmates—heavy worker's ration?

A: Yes, we received, such supplemental ration but I cannot say whether this was a measure taken by Dr. Hoven or whether this was done in connection with the change of the camp into a labor camp and that this was done in order to keep the inmates fit for work.

Q: During the cross-examination the hygienic conditions were discussed. I understood you to say, and please tell me whether I understood you correctly, that during the time of the Defendant Dr. Hoven, the sanitary conditions in the concentration camp of Buchenwald were satisfactory?

A: Yes, you understood me correctly.

Q: Furthermore, it is correct that the defendant Hoven increased the number of beds?

A: Yes. The 200 beds in the 2 barracks were put there on the basis of his request and by his order. Even the hospital in the so-called little camp could not be considered to have been a bad hospital, considering the beds that were there; but of course, after these huge numbers entered that camp in the years 1944 and 1945, they were no longer sufficient.

Q: This little camp does not interest me as that was started after Dr. Hoven's time.

A: The little camp was already built at the time of Dr. Hoven; the sties were there. I use the word "sties'. I cannot imagine that this form of construction could ever be used for a hospital. It did not even have any windows. I cannot conceive that it was ever intended for human beings. I do not believe that Dr, Hoven asked for these sties to be built as a hospital but they were built in his time. Dr. Hoven only worried about the proper hospital and whether the little camp or hospital was built in Dr. Hoven's time or later does not make much difference since it was furnished under the best possible circumstances. There were provisions there for warm water and electric heating and I know this was done on the basis of Dr. Hoven's request. When this camp was first used as a branch camp, we still managed, but when later on enormous amounts of inmates were sent there, who all suffered with diarrhea, then of course the facilities were inadequate.

Q: Is it correct that the improvements in the field of medical care carried out by the defendant Hoven were done for the benefit of all inmates?

A: Yes, all inmates benefited by them.

Q: Is it furthermore correct that every patient or that every inmate who registered or reported sick was admitted into the hospital?

A: The admission into the hospital, and I am now speaking of Dr. Hoven's time, was carried out by nurses. In the case of the refusal to admit a patient, and I am speaking of the time when there were 15,000 people in the camp, the liaison man or the medical orderly concerned himself with the matter.

I told the medical orderly that all patients were to be admitted into the hospital irregardless of whether they were decent inmates or criminal inmates. I told them to do that because of the danger of infectious disease. I said it might only look like angina pectoris but it really may be an infectious disease which may endanger the entire camp, or a throat angina can under circumstances mean a serious disease.

All the inmates had to be examined. It was clear that I represented that point of view and I listened to every inmate's complaint. All inmates stopped me and asked my advice and now and again I found that the medical orderly, or the eldest in a block, did not so care for all inmates but that was only true of a very few cases.

Q: I now come to speak of the Jewish transport which was discussed during cross examination. I am speaking of the transport during which the Jew named Cohn was to be sent away. Who ordered this transport?

A: I already told you the entire organization was such that not even the camp administration could have ordered them. It must have come from the outside; I am sure it came from Berlin.

Q: Yes, may I repeat the following question in order to make everything quite clear —

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, the subject of the Jewish transports was brought up in direct examination; the situation of the particular inmate named August Cohn was taken up then; I took it up later extensively in my examination and I don't see any reason for the continuation of examination about this Jewish transport here.

THE PRESIDENT: If the counsel is propounding the question which concerns any of the activities of the defendant Hoven in connection with Jewish transports, the question may be asked. Otherwise the question is objectionable.

BY DR. GAWLIK:

Q: Was the activity of the defendant Hoven, regarding that Jewish transport, only in preventing the transport of a part of these Jews?

A: The transport was ordered in such a manner that the normal channels were not used at all. People were included for the transport from the various details. They were taken from the hospital, and as I said before, the Jews who were to be transported away from the hospital were often hidden around some corner.

Q: And this was done by the defendant Hoven?

A: Well, you cannot imagine that the inmates could take such measures without the interference of Dr. Hoven. These matters could not be discussed, it was all kept very secret. It may be that he knew about it and I think he must have known about it.

Q: During your direct examination you were speaking about the SS attributes of the defendant Hoven. Were you speaking about his uniform?

A: I was speaking about his uniform, about his having to obey directives, about the fact that orders came from Berlin to the camp. I meant that Dr. Hoven had to obey all directives and orders.

Q: How about Dr. Hoven's conscience? What was his attitude in regard to his conscience? I mean his political conscience and I am not speaking about his activities, I am speaking about his political opinion.

A: I have spoken to Dr. Hoven on frequent occasions and he came to our room when we were discussing all sorts of matters. On one occasion a German political inmate was in the room who always left the room rather abruptly, the reason being that he said, "I am prepared to discuss all matters with Dr. Hoven but not politics." Then he made some utterance to the effect that the political education of Dr. Hoven had not left the form of an embryo or some such utterance, and if such political opinion was already born, then it is already an infant's political opinion. This was the opinion expressed by some political inmate who was a delegate in some Rhine territory.

Q: Is it correct that Dr. Hoven only permitted you to instruct him for a relatively short time in the technique of performing an operation?

A: What do you mean by that question?

Q: Technique on how to perform operations. I am asking you if he then lost interest.

A: We had started with the elementary points of surgery. He started to assist but on a few occasions he was called away from the operation and then the matter dropped more or less on its own accord.

Q: After he did not want you to instruct him any longer on the way of performing operations, did his attitude toward you change in any way?

A: No, no.

Q: Is it correct that the defendant Hoven was arrested by the Gestapo after September 1943 and for that reason he could no longer be active as an SS physician?

A: I was asked whether he still exercised a certain influence in the camp and I answered because I knew the administration that he no longer had justification to that. I cannot imagine for it to be any other way. How can a nan who is imprisoned by the SS and is in prison exercise jurisdiction in the camp?

Q: Then I am asking you is it correct that the defendant Hoven was an inmate of the Gestapo?

A: Well, I will answer it in the following way. He was a prisoner in Weimar where inmates from the camp Buchenwald were used as construction workers and in various artisan fields. These prisoners informed us that Dr. Hoven was in the police prison there. Whether this was in effect a Gestapo prison or a SS prison, I can't tell you, but we knew he was in prison there.

Q: Furthermore, the rumors were discussed which were circulated in the camp. You were in the camp for sometime, and could you, therefore, answer the following question: Are there any rumors or were there many false rumors circulating in such a camp, rumors that are not in accordance with the truth?

A: Well, it is a matter of course, that wherever there are masses of prisoners, that a number of rumors must circulate, for instance, to the effect that the German inmates would be released on the occasion of Hitler's birthday and things of that nature. On the other hand, there are other rumors, rumors which have something to do with mass psychology.

Q: You further mentioned that you had to sign a chit saying that you were not allowed to enter the room No. 11, do you know who presented this piece of paper to you?

A: In order to clarify that matter, we had to sign a piece of paper that we were not allowed to enter the barracks ALM, and in this barracks ALM there was a room 11. Again we signed a piece of paper that we were not allowed to enter this barracks. This piece of paper was typewritten and was given to me by Capo Busse. Three physicians were mentioned in this piece of paper, Matorschek, Seila and I.

DR. GAWLIK: Thank you. I have no further questions.

THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other questions of this witness on behalf of the defense counsel concerning the recent examination?

Has the Prosecution any further cross examination in connection with the examination subsequent to termination?

MR. HARDY: I have no further questions.

THE PRESIDENT: The witness will be excused from the stand.

The defendant, Mrugowsky may resume the witness stand.

The witness is reminded he is still under oath.

Are there any questions to be propounded to this witness by any of defense counsel?

DR. NELTE: (Counsel for the defendant Handloser) BY DR. NELTE:

Q: Professor Mrugowsky in an affidavit which you made for the defendant Handloser, which is document HA 17, and exhibit Handloser No. 5, you stated the following:

Fundamentally and generally the medical service of the Waffen SS was not subordinate to the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service There was only a limited supervision exercised by him which referred to the medical service of the frontal troops of the Waffen SS during their commitment with the Wehrmacht.

In the very same affidavit you state:

No official connection to the Medical Research Institute of the Waffen SS and the SS generally did not exist. The institute subordinate to me for typhus and virus research at Buchenwald had nothing to do with the chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, or the Army Medical Inspectorate, and had no official connection to them. It was neither subordinate to them, nor was there a supervisory duty exercized by the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service.

Is that correct?

A: Yes, these statements are correct.

Q: Now I should like to clarify whether the statement made in that affidavit also holds true of the Hygienic Institute of the Waffen SS which was under your charge?

A: Yes, it referred to all of the Institutes of the Waffen SS which was subordinate to me.

Q: Although there was no supervision exercised by the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service or the Army Medical Inspectorate, I assume that certain points of contact existed, considering the SS divisions which were committed at the front, is that correct, and what type of contacts were they?

A: This assumption is correct. The divisions and corps of the Waffen SS were parts of the armed forces committed to the front. The soldiers of the Waffen SS, therefore, had to be cared for in the hygienic and prophylactic field and had to come up to the requirements which affected the rest of the armed forces. They mainly referred to protective vaccination, to delousing measures, to certain measures of quarantine when returning from the front, et cetera. For those reasons it was always necessary that a representative of the medical service kept in touch with the operational head office of the Army Inspectorate.

Q: Is it correct if I say that we were concerned with questions of medical tactics and medical service?

A: Yes, only questions of that nature.

Q: In other words, these were points of contact which referred to a cooperation. There was no point of contact which went beyond that, which indicated a cooperation of the medical service with the other armed forces?

A: No, that was not the case.

Q: In the Ding diary which was mentioned here, the Weigl typhus vaccine is repeatedly mentioned, which originally was used by the OKH Institute at Krakow or Lemberg. I should like to clarify that in spite of the use of that Weigl vaccine in Block 46, this can not be explained by saying that there was a connection between Block 46 and the Institute at Krakow of the OKW, that there was any relationship as to the furnishing of the vaccine. I ask you to tell me whether there existed an official directive of the SS which settled generally the delivery of vaccines?

A: Since 1936 or 1937 there was an order of the Medical Service of the Waffen SS, one of the first orders in that field, which became known to me, to the effect that the units of the Waffen SS did receive their medical requirements or drugs or vaccines only from the central medical depot of the Waffen SS which was in Berlin. A direct requisition from any firm or any other producer was prohibited. I also know on the basis of what the Chief of that medical depot told me, that repeatedly serious difficulties occurred with army physicians who, for some reason brought about by personal connections, ordered such medicines directly from the firm which produced them, and that was prohibited.

Q: Is it correct that the Weigl vaccine in the end of December 1941 was considered as the best and most approved typhus vaccine at that time?

A: In Germany we only had that vaccine available. The other products were still in their early stages and didn't go beyond the laboratory stage.

Q: Did the Weigel vaccine need any further examination as to its effectiveness at that period of time?

A: The effectiveness of this vaccine was very well known. A repeated examination was no longer necessary.

Q: In other words, wherever this Weigel vaccine appeared, it was only used for the purpose of checking the effectiveness of other vaccines by comparison?

A: At that time when the first conversation took place between Grawitz and me, mention was made of our desire to produce; and it was also mentioned that the aim of our production was that the Weigel vaccine be taken as a measure for our intended achievement. We wanted to achieve as much as the army had achieved with the Weigel vaccine; and I therefore assumed that in case of the later discussions as to the individual series of experiments in which I did not participate and about which I cannot testify, the directive was given to Ding in that form. I was always of the opinion that the Weigel vaccine need have no examination but that rather Ding had the intention of comparing the other vaccines with the effectiveness of the Weigel vaccine.

If I understood you correctly, the procedure was handled in such a manner that after Ding had received the order to carry out the experiments in Block 46 he approached the Central Medical Depot of the Waffen SS in order to get from there the Weigel vaccine which he needed for purposes of comparison. That I would assume because I know that there was always Weigel vaccine available, at least during that period of time, in the year 1942.

A: Prof. Handloser as Army Medical Inspector or as Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Services, did he have any insight into the medical research system of the Waffen SS?

I am here differentiating between official connections which do not exist.

A: No, neither did he have any insight.

Q: Did you ever have any discussions with Prof. Handloser?

A: Yes, I think two discussions took place which referred to general measures concerning the rear areas of the Eastern territories. No research questions were discussed at that time. Nothing was said about any typhus series of experiments or anything like that.

Q: Nor did you speak about the experiments that were conducted at Buchenwald?

No, for the most part I had no knowledge of them. I therefore couldn't discuss them.

Q: Now, you know that the prosecutor maintains that the experiments in the concentration camp of Buchenwald can be explained because of the instigation of the Wehrmacht. This was done on the occasion of a conference in which you allegedly participated and which is recorded in Ding's Diary in its first entry of the 29th of December 1941. I am asking you, is Prof. Handloser, in whatever capacity, mixed up in any way in the suggestions, intention, or execution of these experiments of Dr. Ding's in Buchenwald?

A: I never heard the name of Prof. Handloser in that connection. It is highly improbable that he participated in this affair in any way, for I know that Grawitz was anxiously safeguarding his own jurisdiction.

Q: As you have already testified during direct examination, it is established that the order for the beginning and the execution of these experiments emanated from Himmler through Grawitz?

A: Yes.

Q: You know the entries in the Ding Diary of the 29th of December 1941?

A: Yes.

Q: As participants in this conference, Prof. Handloser, Dr. Conti, Prof. Reiter, Prof. Gildemeister, and you are mentioned. You know that it says there that it was decided to conduct experiments on human beings. In your direct examination, you discussed the question of the Ding Diary, its probative value; and I shall not revert to this again in detail. But I do want to ask you, Is it correct if I conclude on the basis of this examination and your answers that the first diary entry of the 29th of December 1941 must of necessity have been an invention by Dr. Ding?

A: On the basis of the document submitted by the prosecution and on the basis of the document submitted by the defense counsel, we know about the real course of this conference. There weren't any more participants there than in the documents that we have available here. The conclusion is that neither any cremium had met, which Ding mentioned, nor that Ding himself participated. How he came to make that entry is beyond my imagination.

Q: The prosecution asserts that two conferences had taken place on that day, one in the Reich Ministry of the Interior, the final location of Bieber, and the other, where the people participated, in Ding's Diary was on the date of the 29th of December, 1941. What I am asking you is is, is it impossible that this actually took place?

A: I don't think it is probable that any second such conference took place, for the simple reason that from the material which Dr. Demnitz had it can be seen that on the 6th of January I was expected back from Kiev, from the Ukraine, to Berlin.

This is a distance of more than 1,200 kilometers. In other words, it takes some time to get back by car, especially in the winter, considering the difficult situation. Therefore, it is highly improbable that I was in Berlin on the 29th of December 1941. I can say with absolute certainty that one week later I never in my life did participate in any conference of that nature. For that reason I do not believe that any second conference had taken place.

Q: Now, with reference to the conference in the Reich Ministry of the Interior, where we have Bieber's file Exhibit 54 of the prosecution and also your documents, 63, 62, reports of Dr,: Demnitz and Dr. Zahn, you know that it says in Bieber's file notation, "An experimental plan was discussed with Dr, Mrugowsky." With whom did you discuss that experimental plan?

A: This plan for experiments was discussed with Dr. Gildemeister, the head of the Robert Koch Institute, who at the same time was the typhus adviser in the Ministry of the Interior.

Q: When this conference took place on the 29th of December, 1941, had this plan of experiments already been discussed, or had discussions of that plan already been concluded?

A: Discussions had been concluded some time earlier because Demnitz already had given me the first five hundred portions of the typhus vaccines for that purpose on the 29th of December, 1941. Therefore, the experiments must have been discussed much earlier, about the end of November.

Q: Was Prof. Handloser, as Medical Army Inspector -at that time there was no Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service — or in his capacity as the Army Medical Inspector, participating in this plan for the experiment in any way?

A: No. Only two people were represented, both from the civilian sector. These were the administrative representatives for the Interior Reich Zone and representatives of the Germans who were to be sent to the occupied Eastern territories in order to execute administrative duties there. In other words, the Wehrmacht or the army had nothing to do with that.

Q: Did you discuss the plan for the experiments with Prof. Handloser, one of the representatives, or his agencies?

A: I don't remember.

Q: How is it that you were not participating in this conference of the 29th of December 1941?

A: recording to the list of participants, it was only at a conference between the Ministry of the Interior and the Industry. Since I neither belonged to the Ministry of the Interior nor was remember of the industry, there was no reason for me to be invited.

Q: Where was Ding on the 29th of December, 1941?

A: Ding at that time belonged to my institute. He had been detailed to Gildemeister a short time earlier, that is, to the Robert Koch Institute, in order to train himself in typhus questions; and I think that at that time he probably was on his Christmas vacation.

Q: He was active in the Robert Koch Institute?

A: Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, how much longer will the interrogation of this witness continue?

MR. HARDY: I might say at this time that counsel has asked the defendant Mrugowsky if he attended the meeting of 29 December 1941, and Mrugowsky has said, no. And Mrugowsky has said Dr. Ding did not go to the meeting, and Handloser was not at the meeting because he did not know of the meeting. Now he asked him about the other meeting of Demnitz, and the defendant does not know anything about that. I don't know what further information he is looking for, and I don't see any further reason for him to labor on this point.

DR. NELTE: I believe I need not to explain to the Tribunal why I want to know all of this. I am only contending the assertions which were made in the course of the submission of evidence on the part of the cross-examination of the Prosecution. With regard to the typhus conference on 29 December 1941, it is the most important question in the complex of Handloser's case, and I attach value to bringing proof on that, to bring proof on the assertion of the Prosecution to the effect that on 29 December 1941, that two conferences had taken place on that day, that is not only erroneous but can be explained by a forced certification carried out by Dr. Ding. In that connection my questions have to be a little broader than would perhaps be expedient in any other case. I shall need perhaps another quarter of an hour at the most to ask questions of this witness, Professor Mrugowsky.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I submit that counsel's contentions are right, that he is making an attempt to contest the fact of the two conferences.

He asked the witness whether any other conference, and the witness said, no. Now he is attempting to argue with the witness, and he is attempting to examine the witness on that.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning, and at that time the Tribunal will settle the pertinency of any question propounded by counsel.

(The Tribunal recessed until 0930 hours, 2 April 1947)