1947-04-03, #3: 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 Nurnberg, Germany, on 3 April, 1947, 0930, Justice Beals Presiding.

THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room 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 court room.

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, have you ascertained that the defendants are all present in court?

THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honors, all defendants are present in the court.

THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court.

Defendant Mrugowsky — Resumed CROSS EXAMINATION

BY MR. HARDY:

Q: Dr. Mrugowsky, after the completion of the series of experiments, Dr. Ding made a report at the medical conference at the Military Academy in Berlin in May, 1943. This report contained the results of his experimental work. It was given before Rose, Eyer, Schreiber, yourself, and others. Now, can you more specifically tell us who was in attendance at that meeting?

A: At this session of the third meeting of the consulting physicians there were about thirty or twenty five persons present. They were hygienists of the Army, some members of the Waffen SS, that is those who had to make a lecture, and I believe there were a few university professors, people who were not in uniform.

Q: Now Rose was there?

A: Yes.

Q: Professor Eyer was there?

A: Eyer was there too, yes.

Q: And Schreiber was there?

A: Schreiber was in charge of the meeting.

Q: He was the chairman of the meeting?

A: Yes.

Q: And now at this meeting the only thing which was discussed was the work of Ding at Buchenwald?

A: No, it was quite an extensive program. Dr. Ding's report was one of many. It lasted perhaps a quarter of an hour. The report of the meeting a brief excerpt from his speech. I believe you have submitted it as a Prosecution document. It is a very brief speech.

Q: Well now Ding tailed about the effectiveness of the four vaccines didn't he?

A: Ding spoke about the effectiveness of, I believe, it was six vaccines. That is clearly shown by the report of the meeting. I can't tell you exactly from memory.

Q: Well, did Ding make it very clear that the experiments were being conducted on prisoners in the Buchenwald Concentration Camp?

A: No, he didn't say a word about that. The lecture was similar to the report which I revised on the 5 May 1942. It was not necessarily evident that there were experiments on human beings. That could be seen only from Professor Rose's objection.

Q: Well, couldn't any intelligent doctor sitting in the audience have realized how they conducted these experiments?

A: No, certainly not.

Q: Well, how did Rose happen to object?

A: He was informed about the matter. He had visited Buchenwald himself. He said that much more important than the series of experiments in themselves and what Ding had told him about it, was something else, the comparative observation of the patient in the sick bed.

Q: Well Schreiber knew about it, didn't he? He could have undertook it from the meeting.

A: I can't tell you. After Rose had spoken and after Ding had answered briefly, Schreiber commented more or less to the effect that the legal questions were not up for discussion. That this question had been settled by very high government authorities. Those were not his words, but that was the sense of his words, and he did not want this part of the discussion to be put down in the record. There was no objection, and it was not recorded.

Q: Well now, doctor, who told you that Rose had objected?

A: I was there myself. I heard it.

Q: You heard it?

A: Yes.

Q: Do you recall on November 1, 1946, when asked by Mr. McHaney and myself whether or not any one objected at this meeting in May, 1943, that is, at the meeting at which Ding reported on his activities and experiments, and you said: "Nein"?

A: I can't imagine that. If I said that I didn't understand your question.

Q: All right, I will call to your attention that a day or two previous to that, we had interrogated Rose at great length, and we asked you whether or not any one objected, whether or not any one was strenuously opposed to the work as outlined by Ding and you said nobody said a word. Do you remember that?

A: Yes, and that is quite true. Nobody had any objection to the paper which Ding had written, but that was something else than the speech which we were just talking about. You shouldn't confuse that.

Q: I am not confused a bit, Doctor; you were very clear in that interrogation and I have to introduce it into evidence here in a few days. You were very clear in that interrogation that you did not know of any objections, at least you stated that at that time. Now who has refreshed your memory in the meantime, other than Professor Rose?

A: As far as the meeting was concerned, I always knew that Professor Rose had objected, but you were just talking about a paper which Ding had written. I assumed that our conversation was about that, and no objection was made to that.

Q: All right. You knew that Rose, according to the Ding Diary, had visited Buchenwald prior to this meeting, that is, in about April of 1943. The meeting was in may. Pardon me, it was April or May of 1942 that he made his visit.

A: Yes, it was a year before.

Q: All right, now actually, according to what you have told us before, Rose talked to you about his visit to Buchenwald, didn't he?

A: No, I cannot remember it. I don't believe so.

Q: Well didn't you and Rose more or less agree in a conversation, or a conference, that the Behring Werke vaccine wasn't any good and that it was not to be used any further?

A: The Behring vaccine was not produced any more before the time of this meeting. I believe that was brought about by the State, by Gildemeister, I believe, who was the competent man in the Ministry of the Interior.

Q: Well, now, doctor, regarding the objection of Rose at this meeting in May of 1943, after the objection, it became obvious to all in attendance that the work of Ding was on concentration camp inmates at Buchenwald, did it not?

A: Yes. Ding stood up afterwards and made an explanation. He said that first of all these experiments were carried out on criminals who had been condemned to death, and secondly, he said, that the approval, etc. had been given by the highest government authority, and it is possible that he mentioned the name of Himmler but I am not certain about that. In my opinion this information was absolutely sufficient for those present. Everyone knew that for many decades, in all countries of the word, similar experiments had been conducted on criminals condemned to death. Why shouldn't it be done in Germany, too, and doubtless the audience relied on this information of Ding's.

Q: Well, after these objections, and after it had been explained to everyone at the meeting that concentration camp inmates were being used, did anyone make an attempt to stop further experimentation at Buchenwald?

A: I cannot say from my own experience. No one came to me. But I know from Dr. Rose that a large proportion of the audience talked to him about the question of permissibility. He says that, too, in the affidavit which is in my document book. Whether any objection was made to any competent agency, to Grawitz, or to Ding himself, I do not know, but it is possible that something was said to Ding about it, because Ding was quite excited for days afterwards.

Q: Well, then, no one at that meeting interfered in the work of Ding or made an attempt to stop it, so that on 27 August 1943, he started another series of experiments wherein 53 of the persons subjected to the experiments died. Is that it?

A: I do not know what you mean by "prevent." If a person is to prevent something he has to be in a position to do so. If I learn of some murder, say committed by somebody in a different city, I do not approve the murder, although I am in no position to prevent it, because it has already been committed, and I cannot prevent further murders. The only thing I can do is to refrain from committing murders myself. Not a single person in all this audience was in any position to exert any influence on the course of events. Please believe me that Himmler and Grawitz would not have let anyone interfere in their decisions. It was not so in Germany that everyone could make his opinion prevail. If any one of the high responsible men had made up his mind, he did not deviate from the orders which he had given.

I have a great experience in this field, and rather sad experience, with my superior Grawitz.

Q: Well, we won't discuss the authority of Mrugowsky to intervene any further. It is obvious from the orders, from the reports, from the diary, from all this evidence here, that Mrugowsky could have interfered if he so saw fit. We will go on. Spotted Fever Vaccine Experimental Series No. 8. This is on page —

You still have the German document book before you?

A: No.

Q: It will be on Page 49 of Your Honors' Document Book. This is the entry 8 March 1944 to 18 March 1944, pertaining to the experiments with the Copenhagen Vaccine. Do you have it doctor?

A: Yes.

Q: The first entry states:

Suggested by Colonel M.C. of the air-corps, Prof. Rose (Oberstarzt [Chief Physician]) the vaccine 'Kopenhagen' produced from mouse liver by the national serum institute in Kopenhagen, was tested for its compatibility on humans.

Now do you know anything about this suggestion by Professor Rose?

A: That this vaccine series was carried out supposedly at the suggestion of Mr. Rose, I saw from the document here.

Q: Do you know whether or not this entry is correct?

A: The fact that the vaccine series was carried out I should consider true. I have no evidence to the contrary.

Q: Did Rose ever approach you, to have you order Ding to carry out these experiments, or to have you take care of the matter?

A: No. That would have had no purpose. I had no influence on Ding in this respect. I have told you repeatedly how the situation really was. You are assuming something that was not the case.

Q: Now suppose Rose actually did suggest experiments be conducted to determine the efficacy of this Copenhagen Vaccine — would he have approached. Ding directly?

A: No, probably not. Probably he would have contacted Grawitz.

Q: He would never think of going directly to Mrugowsky, Chief of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS?

A: If he had come to me I would have sent him on to someone else. I would have said "My dear man, that does not have anything to do with me."

Q: He would not have come to the man who Hoven thought was the Chief of Ding in Block 46, who Ding assumed was his Chief, who Kogon said was chief, who Kirchheimer said was the chief, who you own witness, Dr. Horn, said was the chief of Block 46? Mr. Rose, if he wanted that vaccine tested, would not go to the man that everybody that we have had in this courtroom said was the chief of Ding in his capacity as the chief officer in charge of Block 46 — Rose would not go to you either, would he?

A: Everything that has been said here was not said from the knowledge of these persons, but if you investigate carefully you will always discover even in what Dr. Kogon said or what Dr. Horn said, that it all goes back to one person, that is, the statements of Dr. Ding; and if you question them carefully they all say "Ding told me" or "I heard from Ding." An assertion which is false does not become true by being repeated a hundred times. In my opinion there is no proof whatever for this assertion. It is not a fact, only an assertion.

Q: Well, now, doctor, it states here in connection with this experiment of the Copenhagen vaccine that 20 persons were vaccinated for immunization by intramuscular injections and 10 persons were contemplated for control and comparison. Now that means 30 persons were to be used in the experiments, and of course on the next page we see that 6 people died as the result of the experimental series. Now, where were these 30 persons obtained?

A: I cannot say in detail, certainly not from the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS. They were from a concentration camp. No member of the Waffen-SS had any influence on the organization of these camps. It was a completely separate organization.

Q: Well did you, Mrugowsky, ever write a letter requesting 30 inmates to be used, or 30 subjects to be set aside for Danish vaccine experiments?

A: I was not in a position to issue any orders in this connection.

Q: I asked you did you ever write a letter requesting that 30 prisoners be set aside for use in these experiments?

A: Not that I know of.

Q: Did you ever receive a letter stating that the 30 prisoners or 30 people would be set aside, say, for instance, from the man who allocated these people, SS Obergruppenfuehrer [Lieutenant General] Oswald Pohl?

A: I certainly did not receive any letter from Pohl in this connection. I never corresponded with Pohl.

Q: Did you receive a letter from anyone?

A: If you mean that a report was sent out about this matter, it is possible that it went through my institute.

Q: I am not referring to a report; I ask you clearly and distinctly do you know anything about the selection and allocation of these thirty people who were subjected to the spotted fever vaccine series No. 8, as outlined in the Ding Diary? You know nothing about that?

A: I don't remember anything about that.

Q: Let us refresh your memory a little bit, we will introduce Document NO-1188, which will be offered for identification as Prosecution Exhibit 470. Now, this letter is dated:

Oranienburg near Berlin, 14 February 1944. Secret. Subject of the Letter: Testing of a Typhus Vaccine. Reference: Your letter dated 26 January 1944, Diary No. 82/44 — Dr. Mru/Schm.

That is Dr. Mrugowsky. Your letter of 26 January, 1944, this is the answer to it:

To the Reich Physician SS and Police Chief Hygienist.

You sent a copy of the letter to Grawitz, The Reich Physician SS and Police. The text of the letter reads as follows:

The requested authorization for testing the protective effect of a Danish vaccine on 30 inmates has been given by the SS Main Office Chief, SS-Obergruppenfuehrer and General of the Waffen-SS Pohl; the experiments must be limited however, to gypsies.

Thirty appropriate gypsies will, therefore, be turned over to the Institute for Typhus Research at Buchenwald at an early date.

/s/ The Chief of the Medical Service of SS Economic Administrative Main Office and Head of Office Group D 111, SS Standartenfuehrer [Colonel] Lolling.

Now, you know nothing about these thirty inmates, or 30 people, set aside for this experimental series, Doctor?

A: No, I did not see this letter.

Q: Now, did they use the gypsies, Doctor?

A: I don't know.

Q: How about this letter; the reference to your letter of 26 January, 1944 — ?

DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, I object to this Document. I should like first to see the original. The letter is addressed to the Reich Physician SS and Police, Chief Hygienist, that would be Mrugowsky, but at the bottom it says copy was sent to Mrugowsky, SS-Sturmbannfuehrer [Major], on 21 February, 1944.

(The original document is shown to Dr. Mrugowsky.)

Thank you, I have seen it.

BY MR. HARDY:

Q: Now, Doctor, do you know whether or not these thirty gypsies were used in this experiment?

A: No, I don't know. This was the time when assignment was made by the Reichs Criminal Police Office. This assignment of prisoners from the year of 1943 on had been done exclusively by the Reichs Criminal Police Office, and for this purpose a Kriminalrat [Criminal Council] went to Buchenwald, but as I know now the prisoners were not only taken, from Buchenwald but also from various other camps for purposes of experiments, and I assume that this was something similar.

Q: In this connection, referring again to the letter I just exhibited to you, I am not clear on whether or not you sent a letter requesting thirty inmates on 26 January 1944, as stated in the subject reference here; did you, or did you not, send a letter requesting authorization for testing the protective effect of the Danish vaccine on the thirty inmates to the SS Main office?

A: I cannot remember this matter, it would be the first time that I would have forgotten such a thing, it has never happened in the entire examination, therefore I consider it quite impossible.

Q: You maintain that when the Reichs Criminal Police Office took over the allocation of inmates to be used in experiments that was no concern of yours; that you did not know anything about it because you were not Dr. Ding's superior in that respect. These inmates that were taken over, or allocated, to Block 46, were they all prisoners condemned to death?

A: I don't know. The authorities who assigned them must know. I never saw any files on these people, but this much is certain that the Reichs Criminal Police Office was in charge only of criminals and that is possibly the case throughout the world.

Q: Well, now, suppose they decided to set aside prisoners to be used for experiments; would they not notify you first, and then you would relay your information on to Ding, and he had the authority to a certain number of inmates?

A: No.

Q: I have another Document, Doctor —

THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, are the German copies of Prosecution Exhibit No. 470 available?

MR. HARDY: Yes sir. Now, I wish to introduce Doc. NO 1188, which is offered for —

THE PRESIDENT: I understood when you read this Document to the witness that at the end there was a name written, these copies have SS Standartenfuehrer without any name under it.

MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor, on the original you will find the signature of Ding, written in his original hand writing. Please exhibit the original to the Tribunal.

(The original of Doc. NO — 1188 is handed to the Tribunal.)

THE PRESIDENT: This apparently contains the signature of Lolling.

MR. HARDY: Lolling is the writer of the letter.

THE PRESIDENT: That is then the signature missing from our files?

MR. HARDY: Yes sir, you will see Ding's signature down in the left hand corner.

THE PRESIDENT: Here is the original.

BY MR. HARDY:

Q: I now wish to introduce Document NO-1189 as Prosecution Exhibit 471 for identification.

Now the first section of this document is most interesting, Doctor. This is an order of 27 February 1944, secret addressed to the Chief of the Security Police, signed by Heinrich Himmler, stating:

I agree that professional criminals be taken for experiments with the typhus vaccine. But only those professional criminals should be chosen who have served more than ten years in prison; that is not with ten prior convictions but with a total penalty of ten years.

SS-Gruppenfuehrer [Lieutenant General] Nebe is to supervise the disposal of these inmates. I don't wish the physician: to pick out inmates without my counter-control.

/s/ Himmler.

What is this business about choosing prisoners condemned to death, Doctor?

A: I was speaking of professional criminals.

Q: Oh, then the persons used in these experiments at Buchenwald were not condemned to death?

A: I don't know. I don't know the instructions which the Reich Criminal Police Office had; and I don't know the instructions which the camp of Buchenwald had for the selection before that. I never saw them. I can only repeat what Grawitz and Ding told me about the matter. They told me that the people were condemned to death.

Q: Well, you were aware of this order here signed by Himmler? You received it?

A: No.

Q: This letter was addressed to you, to the Director of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS, SS Standartenfuehrer Mrugowsky. I will read further. It is dated 29 February 1944.

A: Yes.

Q: It says:

For information, to SS Standartenfuehrer Dr. Ding, at Buchenwald, Weimar.

Original to you, copy to Ding, I presume. It states as follows:

Please take notice of the foregoing decision of the Reichsfuehrer-SS concerning the inquiry on experimental subjects for the testing of typhus vaccine. According to our discussion, Criminal Counsellor Otto, official of Office V, Reichs Main Security Office, will arrive in Buchenwald Concentration Camp on March 2nd, 1944, with the appropriate material. He and Dr. Ding will pick out the subjects to be experimented upon, according to the Reichsfuehrer's order. I suppose you have informed Comrade Dr. Ding by teletype as agreed upon (Signed) Nebe.

Now, Doctor, the second sentence of this letter states:

According to our discussion, Criminal Counsellor Otto will arrive in Buchenwald.

You had a discussion with Nebe, didn't you, according to this letter?

A: That's true, yes; and I can tell you exactly what we talked about.

Q: Just a moment. You had a discussion concerning the use of experimental subjects at the Buchenwald Institute according to this letter.

A: The discussion was on quite a different subject.

Q: We won't go into it, Doctor; we won't go into it. The last sentence states —

THE PRESIDENT: The witness may explain if he desires. The witness may make an explanation if he wishes.

THE WITNESS: Since the spring or about the beginning of 1944 I had been in contact with the Reich Criminal Police Office and the Criminal Technical Institute, the head of which was Dr. Hoess because I had been asked by them to produce certain diagnostic sera for combatting illegal butchering and poachers; and there is a certain procedure for testing blood and discovering what kind of animal it comes from. We were supposed to do this work for that institute. Nebe called me to see him one day to discuss the matter in which Nebe was particularly interested. That was the subject of our discussion. When I was about to leave, he told me: "By the way, another doctor was here recently. His name was Dr. Ding. He came to see us about the assignment of prisoners; but there was no order from the Reichsfuehrer on the subject. However, I think that I will receive such an order in the next few days. Then a Kriminalrat, a Criminal Counsellor from my office, will contact Ding." I told him that probably had something to do with something for which my chief Grawitz was responsible. Then Nebe said that he had no personal contact with Grawitz. I don't know why, of course. He asked me to inform Grawitz of the matter. That was the discussion I had with Nebe; and it is possible that I received this letter which, according to our agreement, was sent on to Grawitz.

Q: Now, the last sentence says:

I suppose you have informed comrade Dr. Ding by teletype as agreed upon.

Did you do that?

A: Yes, it is quite possible that I told him that Himmler had not approved it and that the matter still had to be settled and that Grawitz' office was to inform Ding of the discussion. I myself was in no position to do so because I did not have a teletype machine in my office.

DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, I object to the submission of this document until I have seen the original. From the photostatic copy which has been handed to me, I see that at the bottom at the left there is a notation, "Certified true copy." That is signed by Ding. Therefore, this is obviously only a copy. This is not an original. We do not know what it was copied from. It is not a document which conforms with the rulings of the Tribunal. There is no certification. There is no oath. So that in my opinion this document cannot be used as evidence.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I won't comment on the objection of counsel inasmuch as it isn't substantive; it isn't substantial here, I'll just pass the document up for your perusal. That is the original signature of Ding on it.

DR. FLEMMING: If one can give any significance to Ding's signature here at all, Ding merely certifies that this copy conforms to some original, some other document which he had; but he does not certify that he received the original of this document, nor does he certify that the original is in the file anywhere. He merely certifies the correctness of the copy.

MR. HARDY: This is a teletype, your Honor, received on the teletype. It states at the top "Copy, teletype"; and the teletype is not a letter.

DR. FLEMMING: No, but the lower part is a letter.

THE PRESIDENT: Just above the signature Ding appears certain letters, initials. What do they signify?

DR. FLEMMING: The letters mean Fuer die Richtigkeit der Abschrift, "F.D.R.D.A.," "for the correctness of the copy." But that does not prove where this document which was copied came from; whether it was a copy of a copy or a copy of an original, or what it was.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I further submit in this connection that I am only offering it for identification at this time; and the formal objection can come up when the prosecution has introduced the document formally.

THE PRESIDENT: Of course, counsel is correct in that statement. It would still be subject to objection when formally offered. While under some circumstances the objection might be well-taken, the witness has himself identified the document; and it bears the certification of the witness Ding. It is the opinion of the Tribunal that the document would be admissible. — I should have said that the witness recollected the substance of the document in connection with the subject matter referred to in the document.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, may I request some instructions at this time? During the course of our entire cross examination of the defendants, we time and again encounter objections of documents being put to defendants or witnesses; and the admissibility of the document is not being ruled on at this time inasmuch as they are only being marked for identification and not formally.

Now, by that I am inquisitive to find out whether or not it will be necessary for us to go through these long arguments again when we formally introduce each document. Now, if that is so, it will just be a repetitious affair on two different occasions.

THE PRESIDENT: That would depend on the particular circumstances of each case and whether the Tribunal has at the time it was offered for identification ruled upon its admissibility or not.

THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE SEBRING): You see, Mr. Hardy, in regard to the first document, generally speaking the objection urged by Dr. Flemming might be well-taken; but we have here a situation in which the defendant himself, although he does not recollect having seen the letter or having received the letter, apparently recollects clearly the transaction delineated in the letter and has asked leave of the Tribunal to explain in detail the various phases of the transaction. It would seem that under those circumstances the formal objection to the effect that the letter was not properly certified would become immaterial.

BY MR. HARDY:

Q: Now, Dr. Mrugowsky, I presume that you recollect that the witnesses Kogon and Kirchheimer — and I cannot recall whether Roemmhild agreed — but those witnesses stated that to their knowledge none of the experimental subjects at Buchenwald were prisoners condemned to death. Now, this particular document that's just been introduced and is signed by Himmler states that professional criminals who had a total penalty of ten years or more should be used for the experiments. Now, to you taking this into consideration and having once seen — or you should have seen — this order of Himmler, do you think that condemned persons were used in the experiments at Buchenwald?

A: In Germany at that time Himmler was the Reich Minister of the Interior and the Chief of the German Police. He was the most powerful man in Germany. If at that phase of the war an order comes from that man and he makes a decision, it is certainly not my duty to express any opinion on this order from a higher authority. My name is not Himmler; my name is not even Grawitz. I had no opportunity of influencing Himmler directly. I was much too far removed from him.

If Himmler issued an order he presumable issued this order for certain reasons, and presumable can take the responsibility for it, I don't know, but quite certainly I am not responsible for what Himmler does.

Q: Well, now, Doctor, were you of the opinion that professional criminals were being used in these experiments, and not criminals condemned to death?

A: I know that professional criminals were used. At least I was always told so, and until 1944 it was my opinion that only persons condemned to death were used. This letter, of course, indicates clearly that was not the case, but that people were merely professional criminals. At that time during the war such a decision was nothing unusual. It was during the air war at the time, and great danger to every person in Germany. Any person who has had the experience itself can understand what that means. The higher State authority decides only professional criminals with long sentences are to be used for a certain purpose, that was quite in accord with the situation at the time. Especially since another high Reich agency was included, that was the Reich Criminal Police Office. I do not know the order of business of this agency. I did not belong to it, and I had no close contact with the criminal police. If a criminal councillor is assigned for some particular purposes, this fact had to be sufficient for me. I had to believe that this was a special put will of the State. A criminal councillor in Germany is a man in a rather high position, and that is the thing what is due of any other definite councillor in the office, he is quite a high official and not subordinated in some way.

Q: Now, Dr. Mrugowsky, we will go into the deal of poison bullet experiments, or poison bullet executions. You stated that this poison bullet action was not an experiment but an execution?

A: It was not an experiment in the sense of medical experiments, but as I was told at the time it was the use of a special type of ammunition in the execution.

Q: Well, how long have you been a member of the execution staff in Germany? How is it you happened to be attending executions?

A: I never belonged to any such society. I have already told you in my direct examination how this came about.

It was to be determined whether the use of these Russian Poison Bullets was the beginning of a poison warfare against Germany. You will concede that that decision was of the greatest significance to our country. If such a thing is done on a large scale, then the old number of five wounded to one dead is no longer valid, then what we had to expect at all is that the wounded would die. This question, therefore, was of significance, which could hardly be greater. The fact that such bullets were used was obvious, otherwise, on the question of responsibility the Gestapo would not have been interested and it would not have been in existence, and the ammunition would not have been there. I have told you that this question was to be investigated by means of this execution. On the question of what poison was used, that is, whether the chemical analysis which had shown a person was aconidin would be confirmed by the chemical symptoms. The question was whether it was a pure poison, or whether it was mixed, and the second place later consequence was a solution of the question whether a possibility of therapy in such an injury, are such persons doomed to die. This question was to be by me aroused whether an execution was had and to be carried out in any case.

Q: These persons to be executed were Russian prisoners of war, were they?

A: Certainly not. That is the first time I ever heard of that. I talked to people, they spoke German.

Q: Now was this execution with poison — was not this execution with poison bullets rather an atrocious manner of killing a person?

A: I have told you that the sight of these executed with poison bullets was one of the most horrible experiences of my life, and I can add that as a doctor who works with highly infectious diseases, I have seen very many people die. For me death itself is not horrible, but the picture in this case made this poison warfare, which we were afraid of, look so terrible. That this experience was one of the worse of my life, and on the other hand I am directly convinced that everything has to be done by a country in order to prevent such a horrible method of warfare.

Q: Well, these men that were executed did not volunteer to be executed by use of poison bullets, did they?

A: I don't hardly assume so. I don't know.

Q: Were they promised if they lived through the poison bullet test that they would be pardoned?

A: I can not tell you. We tried to clear up the matter, and for more than three months we looked through the files and we can not find them. The files would have to show the details. I can assure you that we are interested in it for the following reasons, interested in really clearing up things as they were, because I can be cleared only by this evidence which will show exactly what happened.

Q: Now who fired the bullets?

A: An Untersturmfuehrer [Lieutenant] who was on this staff of the camp commandant of Sachsenhausen.

Q: In the testimony that I heard in this courtroom that Dr. Ding stated that one of the prisoners attacked Mrugowsky with a knife, or something?

A: Kogon stated that, yes. I was quite interested in the testimony. It was the first time I ever heard about it. If I had been attacked, I probably would have noticed it. That is not true. I was not attacked.

Q: Now will you turn to page 50 of Ding's Diary. The English copy is page 50, which has the entry "Spotted fever vaccine experimental series No. 9."

Under 17 July 1944, it would be on page 50 of the English Document Book, document book No. 12. Do you have that Dr. Mrugowsky?

A: Yes.

Q: It states:

The spotted fever vaccine Weimar produced by the department for spotted fever and virus research of the hygiene institute of the Waffen-SS, Weimar, Buchenwald, was tested according to orders for its compatibility on humans.

Now, tests for compatibility on humans is not tests in which the Weimar virus is used, is that right, on people who are artificially infected?

A: I don't understand your question.

Q: When you test vaccine for its compatibility on human beings, you did not first infect the person with typhus, did you; there is no artificial infection actually given the person of typhus in connection with the tests for compatibility reason, is there?

A: No.

Q: Now will you turn to the next page, the entry of 6 September 1944, and I strangely note that Dr. Ding had started this compatibility test with vaccine, and then on 6 September 1944 he states that:

The 60 experimental persons were infected by subcutaneous injection of 1.10 cc spotted fever and typhus sick fresh blood each into the right upper arm.

Now is not such action as that rather inconsistent with tests for compatibility reasons?

A: It states nothing about compatibility tests here. It is possible that the translation did not come through right. The first paragraph states it is tested for its protective effect. That is not the same as "compatibility."

Q: The English copy, the first paragraph:

The spotted fever vaccine, Weimar, was tested according to orders for its compatibility on humans.

Do you see that?

A: Yes, that is in this translation. It states "protective".

Q: Well, now, if you are testing for its compatibility, if this compatibility is a mistranslation, I will ask the interpreters to check that, check the German document, please?

THE INTERPRETER: It says "Schutzwirkung", which is "protective effect".

Q: Well, now, that is a considerable difference, I would say, isn't it, doctor? If you are testing it for protective effect, then you would have to first give the persons spotted fever or typhus?

A: No, they are first vaccinated and then infected.

Q: I see. Well now, doctor, did you at any time ever order Ding to experimentally determine how infectious slight cases, or how infectious the blood of slight cases is, as compared with very heavy cases of typhus?

A: No.

Q: What I am getting at is in particular the examination of the protectively vaccinated persons to be compared with the persons who were not vaccinated. Did you ever order or suggest that Ding carry out experiments of that nature?

A: Ding's whole work was on this question. Ding did nothing else in his experimental station than to compare the effects of persons who had been vaccinated with the effects on those who had not been vaccinated and I told you this was done on orders from Himmler and I have explained in interrogations what part I took at the time.

Q: Well now, this entry of 6 September 1944 is one where sixty experimental persons were infected with blood after they had been vaccinated, and also twenty people in the control were infected with blood. Those were persons who had not been vaccinated and as a result he states twenty-four deaths, five of the people who had been previously vaccinated and nineteen put into the control group. Did you ever suggest that such a thing be done in Buchenwald?

A: No, where it says according to orders, that does not mean orders from me, that goes back to the basic order from Himmler which says all such vaccines are to be tested.

Q: I now wish to introduce Document 1197, this is No. 1197, which will be offered for identification as Prosecution Exhibit No. 472. Now this letter only reads — Your Honors, do you have a copy? This letter is dated 12 August 1944. This is a secret memorandum — pardon me a moment, Dr. Mrugowsky, is that your signature on this letter?

A: Yes, I wrote the letter.

Q: Thank you. This is dated the 12th of August 1944 on the stationery of the Reich Physician SS and Police Chief Hygienist, secret memorandum for SS Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Ding:

Wohlrad and Patzer claim that people protectively vaccinated, can, it is true, contact typhus, but that those are not able to infect lice. From that they draw the conclusion that in combatting an epidemic, if delousing is not possible, it suffices to undertake protective vaccination with simultaneous seizure and isolation of all typhus patients. Moser (Swiss Paper for Pathology and Bacteriology, 4, 1941) — that is May 1941 — has on the other hand established that this observation, already made by Weigl eleven years ago is not due to protective vaccination but rather to the fact that only severe cases of typhus can infect lice. Slight, especially sub-clinical cases, though, cannot, Moser concludes from this that typhus cases running a light course cannot represent a virus reservoir in typhus free periods.

And now the last paragraph:

To decide this question I request that it be experimentally determined how infectious the blood of slight cases is compared with that of heavy cases of typhus. In particular the examination of protectively vaccinated persons is interesting in comparison with persons not vaccinated.

Now that is addressed to SS Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Ding, secret memorandum.

A: This memorandum is a model of how I issued such assignments at my institute. It is quite clear that I issued my orders or gave my suggestions in writing and I remember this matter very well, and the position of Wohlrad and Patzer that persons who are vaccinated can become sick but are not infectious, if it had been true, would have had enormous significance for the control of the epidemics. It was, therefore, of great interest to determine whether that was true or not. Therefore, I wrote Ding on 12 August 1944 that he was to investigate this question as it is described here. An oral explanation was given at the same time. The explanation was that he was not to use lice because he had no way of breeding lice. From light and severe cases of typhus he was to take some blood and inject it into guinea pigs. This method was obvious because he daily performed such infections for the purpose of producing his vaccine. There was merely one variation of the customary procedure necessary. He was to determine which of the typhus patients had previously been vaccinated. Those would have been the light eases from whom he usually no doubt did not take blood for his vaccine production. For infecting the guinea pigs he probably always took that from the most serious cases in order to get a strong strain and consequently strong immunity. For this purpose he was to deviate from this custom, and now he was to take the blood from some of the lighter cases and infect the guinea pigs from people who had been vaccinated. I don't know what charge you can find in this matter against me. You find nothing about experiments on human beings and not a word about such experiments was said. It was purely laboratory instruction referring to Block 50, which was to be solved by his work with animals.

Q: We will let the Tribunal decide that, doctor.

MR. HARDY: I have no further questions, Your Honors.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess.

(A recess was taken.)