1947-05-22, #1: Doctors' Trial (early morning)

Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal I in the matter of the United States of America against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany on 22 May 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, will you ascertain that the defendants are all present in court?

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

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

Counsel may proceed.

MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, it has been called to my attention by defense counsel that next Sunday and Monday are German holidays, namely, Whitsuntide. The defense counsel desires to have the court adjourn on Monday that they may observe this holiday.

THE PRESIDENT: That, I understand, is this coming Monday?

MR. HARDY: That is the 26th.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would be inclined to head the request of defense counsel if they desire that Whitsun Monday be observed as a holiday. The Tribunal will cooperate with them and hold no session next Monday.

Do you know, what the other Tribunals have done in connection with this matter?

MR. HARDY: I understand that Tribunal No. 2 downstairs will have no session on Monday as to the decision of the other Tribunals, I believe the Tribunal wherein Defendant Flick is being tried is having no session on Monday.

THE PRESIDENT: Tribunal will recess tomorrow evening until Tuesday morning in compliance with the request preferred by defense counsel.

Counsel may proceed.

HERMANN BECKER-FREYSENG — Resumed

DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)

DR. TIPP (Counsel for the Defendant Becker-Freyseng): Mr. President, some technical remarks first. My colleague, Dr. Marx, has returned today and has recovered sufficiently in order to again take over the case of his client, Dr. Becker-Freyseng. For technical reasons we have decided that I finish the question of typhus and yellow fever, and I think that after the morning recess Dr. Marx will come in and take over the seawater case.

THE PRESIDENT: Any arrangement satisfactory to the Defendant Becker-Freyseng and his counsel will be approved by the Tribunal. Dr. Marx may resume his active position as defense counsel when it is agreeable to him and to you.

DR. TIPP: Thank you, your Honor.

BY DR. TIPP:

Q: Doctor Becker- when we concluded yesterday we had arrived at the question of the Chief of the Medical Department of the Research Institute who the Prosecution asserts was. I think you have clarified this point sufficiently and shall now pass over to another point upon which we have already touched on at one time. I want to talk about the material which you found in your Referat regarding Haagen's work. If I remember correctly you said that you only remember interim reports from Haagen. In that connection, however. I have to put to you a document from the Prosecution from which I think they concluded that you also had knowledge of Haagen's final report. This is Prosecution document from Book 12, on page 88 in the English copy. It was submitted under Document Number NO 123, and bears the date 9 May, and the Exhibit Number 303. It is a letter written by Dr. Haagen to the Hauptamt [main office] SS through Professor Dr. Hirt, Anatomical Institute of the Reich University Strasbourg. The letter starts, and I quote:

I enclose herewith a carbon copy of a paper on our experiments with a dry typhus vaccine. The paper was sent as a manuscript to the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Service with the request for permission to publish it.

Obviously it is a final report of Haagen's in the form of a scientific publication, which was subsequently submitted to the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe. Since we are here concerned with a research matter, I assume that the Prosecution will charge you with having had knowledge of this report. Did you know of this report or do you remember it?

A: I do not remember this final report of Haagen. However, let me point to a number of matters in that connection. It becomes clear in this document presented by the Prosecution what I have already said about the reports made by the researchers who have received research assignments by the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Service. I said that the researchers mostly submitted their final reports in the form of manuscripts or in the form of reprints. Haagen says here specifically the paper was sent, the manuscript, for permission to publish it. Professor Haagen was a researcher and certainly wasn't as well familiar with the bureaucratic regulations as I, since I sat at a desk for almost five years in a bureaucratic agency. Just as there was no Hauptamt SS, such as is mentioned in this document, the work of medical officers of the Luftwaffe did not have to be submitted to the chief for approval. That at any rate was not true in the year of 1944. The agency which carried out, and which had to carry out the censorship of scientific work before its publication was the Lecture Unit for Science and Research at the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe. This agency, to be sure, sent the purely aviation medical papers to the Referat Aviation Medicine for its information. All other papers, however, were not sent to the Referat Aviation Medicine but was handled by the Lecture Unit for Science and Research alone.

Perhaps it was sometimes sent to the consulting specialists for their attitude on that work. I may point to what Professor Rose testified in this witness stand. He said that he had read that paper and that he assumed a position on it. Furthermore, let me point to the document of the prosecution, NO-128, Exhibit 307, page 97 of the German. and page 93 of the English Document Book 12. This is a letter by the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe, which I just mentioned, Lecture Unit for Science and Research, and constitutes the reply to Haagen's request in order to permit the publication of his paper as it is mentioned in the document before us. Since file references seem to play such a considerable part here, I may also draw your attention to that. This is file reference #5, which concerns all published literature. At no time was the file reference #5 handled by the Referat Aviation Medicine. In addition, it becomes evident from this letter that the work had been sent back to Dr. Haagen.

Q: Witness, you are now speaking about the last document which you just cited?

A: Yes, I am speaking about Document NO-128, Exhibit 307. It says here:

Annex — one manuscript, two copies.

That Haagen sent more than two copies of this manuscript is highly improbable. It is thus very improbable that the Lecture Unit for Science and Research had sent a copy of this manuscript to the research files, for instance but even assuming that this rather impossible situation was true, I may add that if Professor Luxemburger, who was the director of this Lecture Unit, when censoring that work, had not had the suspicion that it dealt with something inadmissible, I am sure that no such suspicion would have arisen within me. Apart from that, I certainly would have hardly read any such specialized bacteriological paper from the beginning to the end since neither I nor anyone else in the world would have derived any benefit from that.

Q: Witness, you were just speaking of the Document NO-128, this letter by the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe, dated the 7th of July, and you mentioned the name of Dr. Luxemburger.

There is no such signature in the German document book and since I have not received the photostat copy I don't know whether any such signature is apparent in the English document book. I assume, however, that the original document does bear that signature. If then the Tribunal may have any doubts as to whether this document was actually signed by Dr. Luxemburger, I would ask the General Secretary to submit the photostat copy of the original to the Tribunal. Unfortunately, I was not in a position to obtain the photostat copy in the Information Center. It had been given out somewhere and I couldn't ascertain to whom.

THE PRESIDENT: If Counsel will inform the Secretary General the Clerk is absent at present — that the Tribunal desires that this document, the original photostat be produced before the Tribunal, the Tribunal will be obliged.

BY DR. TIPP:

Q: Yes, Mr. President.

In this connection, Mr. President, let me offer as the next document the Becker-Freyseng Document #37 from Document Book #3. This can be found on Pages 156 to 138 of the Document Book and is an affidavit by the just mentioned Professor Dr. Luxemburger, dated the 24th of February, 1947. I shall quote briefly from this document.

THE PRESIDENT: What exhibit number do you assign to this?

BY DR. TIPP:

Q: This will receive the Exhibit number Becker-Freyseng 23.

Professor Luxemburger states, after the customary introductory formula:

At present I am a nerve specialist at Munich, and consulting psychiatrist at the Catholic Institute for the Care of the Young.

Until 1941 I worked at the German Institute for Psychiatric Research, the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute attached to the University of Munich. As I was considered politically unreliable By the Nazis, I had to leave this institute in 1941. In January, 1944, I was drafted to the German Luftwaffe, at first as an Assistant Physician.

After having been with the Medical Inspectorate of the German Luftwaffe in Berlin until 1944 as a psychiatrist, I became Instruction Group Commander at the Luftwaffe Medical Academy in Berlin in the summer of 1944, and at the same time, consulting psychiatrist under the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Service, with the rank of Oberstarzt [Colonel, Medical Corps.].

The rest of Dr. Luxemburger's fate during the war does not interest us in that connection and I shall therefore skip the next few sentences. I shall continue to quote from paragraph 2 on page 2 of that document:

Each medical-scientific work to be published as medical literature had to be submitted when ready for printing, to the Instruction Group of the Luftwaffe Medical Academy of which I was Chief. The checking, insofar as it was done by me, was carried out in the case of non-psychiatric works only from a military point of view. Special experts approved them as to their scientific content. The author of the work was informed, of the expert's criticism in full or in part, in a letter of approval or rejection, which I signed.

3. Generally, these manuscripts did not have to be submitted to the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Service. Only works in the field of aviation medicine were regularly submitted to the office of 'Chief of the Medical Service'. The other works were only checked from the medical point of view by the appropriate consultants or other experts.

4. From none of the manuscripts which were ever submitted to me in the course of my duties could I gather or assume that human experiments were being carried out on concentration camp inmates or, in any, case, on persons who were unwilling to act as subjects. Although my checking of non-psychiatric manuscripts extended only to military formalities and I could not judge them as an expert, I still think that clear and distinct reports on experiments which had been carried out forcibly would have struck me.

There follows the signature on that document and the certification.

Witness, let us now go over to another point. Let us turn to the research list which has been so often mentioned here. This is Document NO-934, Prosecution Exhibit 458. The document is not contained in a document book. It was submitted to Professor Schroeder during his cross-examination. In this research list there are contained the research assignments by the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe and Research Guidance of the Reich Ministry for Aviation and Supreme Commander of the Luftwaffe. As the reviser the Stabsarzt [Staff Surgeon] Dr. Becker-Freyseng is mentioned. On page 7 of that document under IV we find the title "Hygiene." Under 2 we find the assignment to Mr. Haagen. Let me quote this short paragraphs:

The manufacture of typhus vaccine (secret). Hygienic Institute, Strasbourg, Oberstabsarzt [Chief Medical Officer] Professor Dr. Haagen.

Witness, you know that the prosecution maintained and concluded during the cross-examination of Professor Schroeder that since this research assignment was kept secret there must have been some valid reason to keep it so, and the prosecution naturally assumes that the Medical Inspectorate knew that Haagen was carrying out experiments on human beings which, therefore, had to be kept secret. I have already discussed this list with Mr. Ruff on the 29th of April, 1947, on page 6716 of the German and 6622 of the English record. Since you are listed here as the expert dealing with that list I must ask you to give us your opinion about it and, in particular, why this research given to Dr. Haagen is listed as secret.

A: Well, let me say at first that all the documents which have so far been submitted by the prosecution regarding Haagen's research assignment have shown time and again that this assignment was entirely open to the outside world. Now, suddenly we see this research assignment is secret. I cannot remember that this research assignment was suddenly changed over to a secret one, but perhaps professor Haagen personally will be able to talk about that when he takes the witness stand.

Q: Let me interpolate a question in order to clarify this point: since you were the expert in that case, did you give a directive to whoever was compiling this list to insert this assignment a secret or did you previously issue a general directive that this assignment be converted from open to secret?

A: If anyone could have done any such thing this could only have been done by my department chief. I could have made a suggestion to that effect, but the research assignment had been issued a long time ago, and this would have been a subsequent change in the Summer of 1944, which I cannot remember.

Q: At any rate, you don't know, witness, how this word "secret" was inserted?

A: It is remarkable that the next assignment by Haagen, namely the manufacture of a yellow fever vaccine, is also designated as "secret" here. The Prosecution itself has submitted a document here which we shall later discuss, that this assignment for the manufacture of a yellow fever vaccine was stopped by the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe in the summer of 1944.

Q: For purposes of clarification I may say that the document which was just mentioned by the witness as the prosecution Document NO-297, Exhibit 316, and it can be found in Document Book 12 on page 112 of the German and the English text. As you were already saying, Dr. Becker, we shall revert to this document when discussing the yellow fever experiments.

A: Now, in the document which you have just designated it becomes evident that this assignment for the production of a yellow fever vaccine very clearly was a non-secret matter. In addition, not even the prosecution has asserted that subsequent to 1942 yellow fever experiments on human beings were carried out. If in the year 1944 this assignment, which had been stopped in 1943, is really designated as secret, then it either constitutes an error or there were certain reasons for that which certainly cannot indicate the planning or the execution of any experiments on human beings. But now let us turn to the yellow fever vaccine assignment itself. Unfortunately it is not knows to me where the Prosecution received this document from. It bears no signature, the person who sent it is not mentioned, no recipient is mentioned, and it is quite impossible to conclude from where this list originated. I remember exactly that in the course of the summer of 1944 a similar list had been compiled, in my Referat. It was the ordinary list of all research assignments, which was usually available in the Referat and which had merely been brought up to date. Since I, in the meantime, had taken over Dr. Benzinger's work in the Research Guidance of the RLM, the medical research assignments of the Research Guidance of the RLM were also included in the list. The list, or the supplementation of the old list in its form as it is before us, was compiled by ay instructing my secretary, who was in the Research Guidance office in Berlin, to corns out to Saalow for a period of 2 or 3 days, which was about 15 kilometers outside Berlin, and I gave here all the research files, the entire material under file reference 55, and on the basis of this material and the old list she carried out the new compilation, bringing the list up to date.

Q: If I understood you correctly — to return to the Haagen case — these were all the letter, reports, etc. filed at the referat. I would imagine that all these documents were filed properly in one filed according to date, as it is customary in every army throughout the world?

A: The latter is true, but naturally these files were not kept in the Referat, but as is customary everywhere else these were kept in the Registration office. I, after all, only had one little office, and I hadn't enough room there to keep all my files in that office. Furthermore, I can remember that this list, in the course of the summer or fall of 1944 was sent upon request to various other agencies. I believe I remember that one such copy had been sent to the Reich Research Counsel, and I think it possible that one copy was also sent to the office of Herr Professor Rostock. It may be possible even that one copy was sent to the Office of Generaloberstabsarzt [Chief Medical Officer] Handloser. I am sure there were a number of other offices too; however, I cannot tell you that in detail. When Dr. Ruff was sitting in this witness stand you discussed a number of errors with him contained in that list. In addition the errors were discussed with Ruff there are, in the allegedly true copy which is before us here, as well as in the photostat copy, a number of other errors.

Q: May I interrupt you briefly, witness. Did I understand you to say that even here, when compiling the documents for the document book and when mimeographing this document which is before us, a number of mistakes were made, typographical errors, which means that the photostat copy does not quite correspond to the allegedly true copy as it is contained in the document book before us?

A: Yes, that is just what I wanted to say.

Q: Well, in that case would you explain these errors to us?

A: Unfortunately, we only received the photostat copies only after you had discussed this allegedly true copy with Dr. Ruff. After only looking at the photostat for once I found out that all the errors which refer to the research assignments given to Dr. Ruff are not contained in the photostat copy, but that these are errors which resulted from the copying of that photostat copy when this "true copy" was made.

Q: If I understand you correctly, Witness, these are obviously pure mistakes in copying?

A: Yes, furthermore even in the photostat copy there are a number of mistakes caused by negligence, which, however, are all so striking to anyone who knows the subject as well as I, that upon the first reading of the document I guarantee that I would have notices them immediately. For instance, the name of Herr professor Weltz —

Q: Now, let me ask you, witness, to speak slowly here and always mention where the point can be found in the document which you happen to be discussing.

A: For instance, on page 2 of the document under 1-10, there is an assignment given to Professor Weltz. This name was copied as Weltze. This is obviously a very simple matter, but had I looked through this list in the year of 1944 I am sure this would have attracted my attention. Another mistake, which could easily occur in the case of a layman but which I should have noticed, can be found on page 10 of this document. Here, under VIII — 3, there is a research assignment mentioned and I may quote:

The significance of individual factors in measuring distances.

The institute which obviously received this assignment is mentioned here as the institute for Physiological Anthropology of the University of Marburg/Lahn. In reality we are here concerned with the Institute for Psychological Anthropology, which is well known to me. In copying, the difference between "physiological" and "psychological" always causes great difficulties, and we have often had that experience when dealing with one another here and compiling our document books. psychiatric clinic has a collection of mutilations of its name, and the word "psychiatric" is very often misspelled.

MR. HARDY: I don't believe it is necessary to take up the time of the Tribunal on a insignificant matter such as this. If there are some errors in the German document books when it was mimeographed the defendant may call them to our attention. These are so insignificant and so minor that the Prosecution deems the documents may speak for themselves. The Prosecution resents some of the remarks of the defense.

THE PRESIDENT: It appears to the Tribunal that this matter may be corrected for the Tribunal by a conference between the defense and the Prosecution without taking up the time and covering the records with such matters.

DR. TIPP: I am naturally prepared to adhere to the wish of the Tribunal, but I believe that counsel for the Prosecution misunderstood the aim I have pursued in this matter.

I am not concerned with proving that the copy in the German document book contains mistakes, which are not in the photostat, but I am concerned in showing that in the photostat copy, in the original, there are already errors. This may sound somewhat like an argument, but I must clarify that it is our intention to prove that there are actual mistakes contained in the list, the list which the Defendant Becker-Freyseng had had compiled, Furthermore we want to prove that this list was not compiled by an expert, but only originated, as was already stated by the witness, from an unskilled and medically untrained typist who just copied something from some documents, and for that reason the inaccuracies are contained in the list. I think this is something that must be discussed with the witness and cannot be clarified by a mere discussion between the defense counsel and Prosecution. But, I think, witness, that we can adhere to the Tribunal's wish, and drop the matter.

MR. HARDY: I must point out that it is of no interest here what the capabilities of the secretary of Becker-Freyseng were. If she made the mistakes in the original list, it seems to me that is the negligence of the defendant in not checking the secretary's work.

THE PRESIDENT: The defendant, however, could show that the secretary did incorrectly transcribe what he had given her to copy or what he had dictated to her.

DR. TIPP: Mr. President, I am in a fortunate position to give you this proof in a minute, Witness, you heard the Tribunal's decision and you heard what I said, but I think that we are in full agreement. If you have something to say, would you please express yourself briefly.

THE WITNESS: In connection with the reprimand by the Prosecution, I must say I always was very careful in reading over what my secretary had written and I am sure that such silly and noticeable typing mistakes would have drawn my attention. There are a number of other mistakes contained in that list, for instance at one time Haagen's name was spelled with one "A" and once with two "A's." I am sure I would have noticed that.

I do not believe that this list is the same list which was typed by my secretary, which I am sure that I read through very carefully. I assume that we are here concerned with a copy.

BY DR. TIPP:

Q: Do you mean that this document, which is before you now, is a copy of the original list, which you ordered to be compiled?

A: Yes, this must be a copy made by one of the offices which received the original list from us. Furthermore, I may say that our secretaries were well versed on the difference between physiology and psychology after they had been with us for some time. This error may have occurred with new secretaries during their first few weeks, but not later. However, enough of that.

Q: Let us finish then. Mr. President, in this connection let me offer a document from Document Book Becker-Freyseng 3. This is Document Becker-Freyseng 38 and can be found on page 139 to 161 of the document book. This will receive exhibit No. 24. It is an affidavit.

MR. HARDY: May it please, Your Honor, this document contains the same subject which the defendant has been discussing here for nearly fifteen minutes. The prosecution deems it irrelevant and I object to any further introduction of documents along these lines.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has not read the document. What is the probative value of the material offered in this document, counsel?

DR. TIPP: This can be settled briefly, Mr. President. This is the secretary who had typed and compiled the list by order of Becker-Freyseng, and she states how she compiled the list. She says that Becker-Freyseng gave her all the material for that list and that she could not see anything about experiments on human beings from this list. She further more says, it is quite possible that in her haste she overlooked some errors contained in the list. It is not my intention to quote anything from that document and I think Mr. Hardy is correct in saying that this point has been sufficiently clarified. Witness —

THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, counsel.

DR. TIPP: Mr. President, I did not quite understand you. Mr. President, did you ask a question of me?

THE PRESIDENT: No, I just requested you to wait a few moments until we examine the document.

MR. HARDY: The whole list of this seems to me to be as follows. This document NO-934 contains a list of the assignments which come from the office of Becker-Freyseng. Now, Becker-Freyseng is maintaining that this list is just a copy of the list which originated from his office and that his secretary made typographical errors and he points out that such errors are made like spelling the name of Weltz with two "E's" instead of one "E", etc. Now this document is introduced to show that the entry concerning the work of Haagen with typhus and after that entry is the number designating the word "secret". The prosecution has made an issue of the word "secret" and he is now attempting to introduce that she erroneously put down the word "secret." That is the list of this entire affidavit and the context of this argument.

THE PRESIDENT: Is there available there in the original photostat of the Exhibit which came from the defendant's office?

DR. TIPP: Yes, Your Honor, I have the original photostat of that list.

MR. HARDY: The section in issue, your Honor, is quite obviously in the photostat as checked in pencil marks.

THE PRESIDENT: If this No. 934 which is now in evidence?

DR. TIPP: Yes, Your Honor, Perhaps I may say in that connection that the defendant has not been asserting that the remark "secret" was erroneously transcribed but he says that he does not think that this photostat copy is a carbon copy of the original list but thinks that it is just a transcribed copy of the original. He thinks that there are two possibilities, one that his secretary, Miss Wagner, by mistake inserted the remark, or it crept into the original in some way; or it is further possible that the person who is unknown to as and who has transcribed the original list has made that error. It is in no way contested that the photostatic copy submitted here contains the remark "secret."

DR. SEBRING: You are attempting to show that a list was made by this defendant's secretary and under his direction but that the list that was directed to be made by him on the one hand or that may actually have been made under his direction, did not list these projects us secret. Is that the thing you are trying to establish, that as a matter of fact they were open subjects?

DR. TIPP: Yes, according to our knowledge, Your Honor, the Haagen assignment was open. We have a wealth of letters by Haagen and directed to Haagen which was material submitted to us by the Prosecution, which so far as they concern the Luftwaffe are always open, and now suddenly we have the remark "secret" from the year 1944, and we don't think that Haagen's assignment was suddenly converted into a secret one.

I personally have another explanation, which, of course, cannot be proved, but may interest the Tribunal if I may mention it briefly. At one time we discussed the fact that all reports of cases of typhus had to be kept secret throughout the entire Wehrmacht. In other words, any typhus case which occurred anywhere in Germany had for military reasons to be reported as "secret". It is quite possible that Miss Wagner knew about this regulation and it is also possible that somebody else knew about this regulation and told her that since this concerns typhus the assignment must be secret. Since I myself was a soldier and had to deal with German military correspondence, I know it happens very often that something can become secret simply because somebody just at random put "secret" on a document. In my opinion that proves nothing at all. I think that too much significance is attached to this point and I only refer to it because the Prosecution seemed to have attached so much value to it. Otherwise, I certainly wouldn't have put that to Becker-Freyseng and asked him for half an hour about the significance of this little word "secret."

THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit No. 24 offered by defendant Becker-Freyseng will be admitted in evidence and the objection is overruled. Counsel may proceed.

BY DR. TIPP:

Q: Witness, we have now concluded the question of typhus. I have no further questions to you in that connection In conclusion, as the last document in the connection I may offer Becker-Freyseng No. 36, which is the last document in Becker-Freyseng document book No. 2. This will be Exhibit No. 25 and can be found on page 153 of the document book No. 2. This is an affidavit by a certain Dr. Halbach, which was made at the Chiemsee on the 27 January, 1947, and was certified in the proper way.

I consider this document to be of considerable importance since it discusses a number of points with which the defendant is concerned. I may draw your attention to the fact that Dr. Halbach is a doctor of engineering and a doctor of medicine which means he is versed both in medical and technical matters. Under Paragraph 2 of Dr. Halbach described his career and says that he studied chemistry and medicine at the University of Munich and also states he was never a member of the NSDAP. I may quote from Paragraph 3:

3) During the war I served from 1 September 1939 to 12 May 1940 as a service doctor with ground crew units of the Luftwaffe, from 13 May 1940 to 30 November 1942 with a Bomber Squadron; from 1 December 1942 to 31 August 1943, I was a specialist at the Institute of aviation Medicine, and from 1 September 1943 to 3 October 1944 a specialist in the Medical Section of the Testing Station of the Luftwaffe, Rechlin.

4) On 4 October 1944 I was transferred to the Instruction Group Science and Research of the Luftwaffe Medical Academy, the commander of which was Oberstarzt Prof. Dr. Hans Luxenburger.

5) Dr. Becker-Freyseng was at that time the only specialist in aviation medicine. Since this field of work could not possibly be dealt with by one man alone, part of the work was to be taken over by the Instruction Group Science and Research. About the end of October 1944, Dr. Becker-Freyseng therefore handed over to me all the orders for research which had, up to then, been distributed by the Chief of the Medical Services of the Luftwaffe, together with the files, reports, etc. connected therewith. The Instruction Group Science and Research was, from this time on by order of the Chief of the Medical Services of the Luftwaffe, to supervise the carrying out of those orders, since the consultant, Dr. Becker-Freyseng could not possibly accomplish this task of supervision, in view of the multitude of his other duties and of the increasing transportation difficulties. On the other hand, control had been rendered necessary by the strict regulations concerning the use of manpower and material.

6) Among the files handed over to me were the order for research given to the Strassbourg hygienist Prof. Dr. Eugen Haagen. As far as I remember, they were concerned with the production of typhus, yellow fever and influence vaccines. As far as I remember they were dated some years back (about 1940 or 1941), and, at Hagen's request, were extended annually. The order for the production of yellow fever vaccine was cancelled at the end of 1911 since there was no further demand for it.

At the written request of Attorney Dr. Hans Marx I expressly declare that neither from the orders from research given to Prof. Hagen, which had been handed to me, nor from Hagen's reports on his activities in connection with those orders, nor from any information given to me either when those files were handed to me or on any other occasion have I been led, directly, or indirectly, to conclude that Hagen carried out human experiments in a concentration camp, which were concerned with artificial infection with typhus or with any other disease.

7) The orders for research or production given to Prof. Hagen were of a purely bacteriological nature and were therefore actually dealt with by the appropriate consulting hygienist. The Referat of Aviation Medicine of which Dr. Becker-Freyseng was a member, was not charged with the actual execution of the work in accordance with those research orders which did not come within the scope of "aviation medicine", but was only concerned with the formal, administrative, financial and supply questions connected with research assignment.

All research orders bore the file number "55" which was a number allotted purely for filing purposes to the Referat of Aviation Medicine. This Referat had the reference number "2-II-A."

There follows the signature and the certification.

Witness, in conclusion of this question of typhus I may summarize that you have said that from a factual point of view you never had anything to do with dealing with typhus questions. Secondly, you said that up to the time you took over the Referat in the year of 1944 you had nothing at all to do with these research assignments in bacteriological fields, even formally. Thirdly that from no documents, from no conversations, and from no reports you received, did you know whether and to what extent experiments on human beings were carried out in connection with typhus and yellow fever, or anything else. Did I understand you correctly?

A: Yes, that is correct.

Q: Mr. President, there are only a few short questions in, connection with yellow fever, of which the prosecution has made an issue. I think that I can finish that by 11:00 o'clock. I should be grateful to the Tribunal if they permitted me to conclude that question.

THE PRESIDENT: I think the Tribunal should follow its custom of taking a recess at this time. Counsel may proceed with the matter at 11:00 o'clock.

The Tribunal will now be in recess for a few minutes.

(A recess was taken)