1947-05-23, #1: Doctors' Trial (early morning)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 23 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 courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, 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.
Counsel may proceed. Dr. Marx, if because of your injury you find it inconvenient to stand you may conduct your examination seated. Arrangements can be made for a microphone for you. There will be no objection to your examining the witness from a chair instead of standing.
DR. MARX (Counsel for Becker-Freyseng): Mr. President, I thank you but it will be possible for me to stand. With the permission of the Tribunal I shall continue with the direct examination of the witness, Dr. Becker-Freyseng.
DR. HERMAN BECKER-FREYSENG — Resumed
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY DR. MARX (Counsel for the Defendant Becker-Freyseng):
Q: Witness, we stopped yesterday with the question that you from your personal point of view, from your personal scientific point of view, were of the opinion that these experiments were not necessary but that on the basis of your office you had to participate in the preparations and plans for these experiments.
Please comment briefly and tell us what motives you followed here.
A: The last thing I said yesterday was that there were, first, medical considerations, second, economic and technical considerations, finally, military considerations. The medical considerations affecting me personally, I have already described. I need not go into them further. In contrast to my opinion, Professor Eppinger considered further experiments necessary in order to determine whether berkatit should be introduced or rejected. I need not go into all the scientific reasons which Professor Eppinger gave at the time. I can only say briefly that Professor Eppinger had seen Dr. Von Sirany's experiments in Vienna, and in the meeting on the 25th of May in Berlin he pointed out that in Sirany's experiments he had observed that one or several of the experimental subjects Sirany had shown a salt concentration in the urine which was far above what science had normally assumed up to that time. Therefore, a number of reasons of scientific theory he considered it possible that with the aid of berkatit the body was enabled to tolerate large quantities of salt such as are contained in sea water, without damage. Eppinger insisted on his point of view and he persuaded Professor Heubner, the second important scientist present, to join him in his opinion.
Q: Witness, you have explained the medical point of view. What about the technical one?
A: I touched upon that briefly yesterday. I should like to sum it up as follows: If it had been possible to introduce a drug just as good as wofatit, that would have been a great advantage. For this reason, of course, it would have to be tested again.
Q: Now, please go into the military point of view briefly.
A: The military point of view in the summer of 1944 was characterized by the fact that the Luftwaffe as well as the Navy were in an unfavorable position, in such a position remedies at sea are more important for an air force than when it is victorious.
On the other hand, I have the point of view that if the wrong decision is reached the consequences of this wrong decision will be carried not by Mr. Christensen or the technical office or myself but the flyers in distress at sea. For this reason I considered it my absolute duty to do everything to convince the technical office and Professor Eppinger that berkatit could not be introduced.
Q: Witness, you have just said that, on the basis of Professor Eppinger's opinion, it was decided that further experiments were necessary. Did that solve the duties of this conference of the 25th of May?
A: That solved one point — the question of whether further experiments were necessary. The second question was how these experiments were actually to be carried out.
Q: The final conditions for the experiments then did not agree with those in the letter written by the Technical Office. Please describe briefly the conditions set down on the 25th of May, 1944, but please be as brief as possible so that we can get on.
A: First of all, the conditions given in this report of the Technical Office could never have been seriously discussed by doctors. The conditions decided upon on the 25th of May were as follows: The whole experiment was to be carried out in various series of experiments. Every experimental group was to contain seven or eight people. All the subjects were to be given a careful physical examination before the experiment. Before the experiment proper, there was to be a preliminary period of eight to ten days. In this preliminary period the subjects were to be kept under careful observation and also they were to be fed with the fliers' ration of the Luftwaffe which contained 3500 calories per day per man with about a hundred grams of fat and eight grams of protein. Also the necessary urine and blood tests were to be taken in this preliminary period. For all who were to drink sea water the total amount of sea water was determined and the amount of the individual doses; that is, the amount of sea water taken at one time. The first group was to drink 500 cc of sea water per day with Berkatit. The second group was to drink 1,000 cc of sea water per day, also with Berkatit, and there was to be a control group which was to get normal drinking water, 1,000 cc per day. This normal drinking water was later produced during the experiment by treating sea water with Wofatit, Schaefer's drug. But I want to point out that this was not a test for Wofatit because no one, not even any representatives of the Technical Office, had any doubt of the effectiveness of this drug.
It was not necessary to include Wofatit in the experiment. A fourth group was to drink sea water without any addition, and a fifth group was to get nothing at all to eat or drink. I must explain something about the last two groups. The group which was to drink only sea water was chosen in order to determine what was to be done if, for technical reasons or reasons of raw material, the Wofatit could not be introduced and, for medical reasons, Berkatit was not taken. The opinions of practicing physicians, as well as the scientists, as to whether it was better to go without water entirely or to drink small quantities of sea water, were divergent. Some thought it better to go without water entirely. Others thought there would be certain advantage in drinking small quantities of sea water. In order to get a decision, these two groups were included in the experiment.
Q: Now, how about food?
A: The four first groups had the full fliers' ration with 3,500 calories a day for ten days before the experiment. During the experiment they were given the emergency rations. These emergency rations contained 2,474 calories and consisted of chocolate, zwieback and dextrose. I happened to be in a position to give the number of calories of the English sea emergency rations of 1943 per man per day. This was 448 calories per day.
Q: How many?
A: 448 calories a day. Considering this figure, the German emergency ration, which included 2,274 calories altogether, would be equivalent to the English ration for five and one-half days. In an affidavit submitted by the prosecution, it was said that during the experiments the people got only a little chocolate and some zwieback, but chocolate and zwieback are very concentrated forms of food. That is best shown by the composition of the English emergency rations. The 448 calories of the English emergency rations are composed of one ounce of biscuit, one ounce of pemmican, one ounce of milk tablets, and one ounce of chocolate. This is not very much in quantity, but it is very concentrated food.
Q: In this connection, I offer the affidavit of Dr. Hanson in Document Book 3, #41, on pages 165 to 167, which will be Becker-Freyseng Exhibit # 28. I should like to read excerpts. Dr. Hanson is a renowned physiologist who, since the 1st of July, 1945, has been working at the Physiological-chemical Institute of the University of Halle. I read # 2:
For cases of distress at sea, the German Luftwaffe had the following facilities at their disposal:
a. The emergency ration containers in rubber lifeboats.
b. The sea emergency ration buoys dropped by plane. One emergency ration container in a rubber lifeboat contained the following items: mineral water, windproof matches, cigarettes and Pervitin Army biscuits, chocolate and Dextro-energizers. Total calorie content of the food: 2,474 calories.
Then I continue with #3:
The food supplied to the flying personnel of the Luftwaffe in action at the front consisted of the general basic ration and the airmen's special ration. The first consisted, in 1943, of 3,700 calories per day per man, in 1944 of 3,500 calories with 97 grams of protein, 81 grams of fat, and 569 grams of carbohydrates.
A: Perhaps I may explain briefly the fact that the fifth group, which was to get no water, got nothing to eat either. To a laymen that may sound rather cruel. In reality, it's the other way around. Yesterday I explained briefly that with out food we take in a number of substances, or rather that a number of metabolic final products are created in the body, from the food, which must be eliminated through the urine. If I do not give the body any liquid, but do give food, the need for water will be increased and that will subjectively increase the thirst. It is therefore quite general medical experience, from thirst cures, that they are much more easily tolerated if no food is taken during them. The same experience is reported in all cases of shipwreck and, as an example, I should like to quote only one source.
That is the paper by a German Navy Stabsarzt [Staff Surgeon] Dr. Baer in the magazine "The German Military Doctor" from July, 1944. It is a report on three shipwrecked persons who were rescued after thirty-seven days: I quote:
Because of the extremely small quantity of water, after four to five days the majority of the shipwrecked persons could no longer eat the biscuits since they remained in the mouth as a dry powder and it was not possible to swallow this powder without any liquid.
I believe this brief quotation shows why we decided that this group would not be given any solid food.
Q: Witness, we now come to the duration of the experiment. Were definite times set, which had to be kept? Please be brief since you have already spoken about the length of the experiments. I mainly want to know what was decided on the 25th of May in this respect.
A: No, the duration of the experiments was not determined before hand, because that was the purpose of the test; that was what was to be determined.
Q: Witness, you know that the Prosecution finds the main charge against you and your co-defendants in the fact that, according to the so-called minutes which we have quoted before, an experiment was to be carried out with a definite duration of twelve days.
A: I went into that in considerable length yesterday, I need not repeat. I can only say briefly that these twelve days figured in the deliberations because it was said that the drug, which was to be taken, had to be tolerable for at least twelve days. That is, of course, something quite different than saying that the experiment had to be continued for twelve days even if the drug cannot be tolerated.
Q: What was to happen to the subject after the experiment?
A: The experiment proper was to be followed by a period of ten days, during which the subjects were to be kept under careful observation again so that any damage could be recognized. Secondly, during these ten days, they were again to get the fliers ration of food with three and one half thousand calories a day. Third, the final consulting tests were to be taken.
Perhaps one word on the possible harmful effects. According to everything that medical science knew then and knows today, no such after effects are to be expected. This as only a precautionary measure in order to overlook nothing.
Q: Witness, in the conference of the 25th of May was it said that the experiments would be carried out on prisoners?
A: No, that was not mentioned for the following reasons. First of all, both my department chief, Oberstarzt [Colonel, Medical Corps.] Dr. Merz, as well as I, expected that Professor Eppinger and Professor Heubner would not consider further experiments necessary.
Secondly, for this reasons we had done nothing to decide the question of the experimental subjects. Besides, my departmental chief expected that we could get the necessary subjects from the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe. Finally, Generaloberstabsarzt [Chief Medical Officer] Schroeder was on an official trip in France at that time and only he could decide this question. On the 25th no such decision had been reached yet.
Q: At the conference of the 25th of May was it said who was to carry on the experiments?
A: Yes, that was discussed, Professor Eppinger suggested the chief physician of his clinic, Professor Beiglboeck.
Q: Did you know Professor Beiglboeck personally at that time?
A: No, I did not know Professor Beiglboeck, but I knew his name from literature of course.
Q: On the 25th of May, was it not considered that the experiments might be carried out in the clinic of Professor Eppinger in Vienna.
A: Professor Eppinger suggested that, but when it was discovered that it would require 40 subjects for a period of four weeks he withdrew his suggestion again because that would not have been possible in his clinic.
Q: Did Professor Eppinger want to supervise the experiments himself?
A: Yes, he wanted to and he was supposed to.
Q: Witness, did this discussion of the 25th of May go off without any disruption?
A: No, there was a little disturbance in the morning of the 25th of May. There was one of the feared American daylight raids on Berlin, which forced us to continue the discussion in the air-raid shelter, which is perhaps significant as this divided us into several groups and it is possible that not everyone heard every word that was spoken.
Q: Your Honors, to prove what has just been said regarding the meeting, the Defense Counsel of the defendant Schaefer will submit an affidavit by the Berlin Professor Dr. Jeubner and the Kiel Professor Dr. Nette.
We therefore need not go into this question any further.
Witness, what happened after the discussion of the 25th of May?
A: After the discussion on the 25th of May it had been decided that the experiments were to be carried out. My departmental chief told me to find out whether we could get the necessary subjects from the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe or from a Luftwaffe hospital. I did not succeed. At the end of May on the 29th or 30th, Generaloberstabsarzt Professor Schroeder came back from his trip and in the presence of my departmental chief I reported to him on this matter and he decided that he himself would first talk to the commander of the Berlin Medical Academy and to the biggest and best equipped Luftwaffe hospital in Brunswick in order to carry out the experiments at one of these two places. After a few days, I was called to the chief again and I heard that his efforts with the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe in Berlin and with the Luftwaffe Hospital in Brunswick had been unsuccessful. Together with my departmental chief, I suggested to Generaloberstabsarzt Schroeder that we should try to get prisoners as experimental subjects; a question which was completely new to Professor Schroeder.
Q: Witness, did you not inform Dr. Schroeder that you personally had already tried in vain to obtain these 40 subjects from the Medical Department of the Luftwaffe and from the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe?
A: Yes, I told him that in my first report.
Q: Will you please continue then?
A: I told Professor Schroeder what I knew myself at the time about the prisoners. First that there were a number of examples in the medical history of the world of such experiments being carried out on prisoners. I pointed out that under his predecessors, Generaloberstabsarzt Professor Hippke and Holzloehner, such experiments had been carried out and finally I pointed out that the sea-water experiments were absolutely harmless, that nothing could happen to the subjects and that I was convinced that we would find enough volunteers among the prisoners for these experiments because before and after the experiments they would get especially good food.
Professor Schroeder asked me whether I knew any details about how Holzloehner had obtained his subjects. I had to answer in the negative. I could only say that I knew that Rascher had said in the Nurnberg meeting that the chief of the German Police had supplied the prisoners. Professor Schroeder said that he would talk to the chief of the Medical service of the German Police.
Q: Witness, did you not tell Professor Schroeder on this occasion that they were condemned criminals; criminals sentenced to severe penalties?
A: Yes, I am sure that I said that.
Q: Your Honors, I should like to refer at this point to the affidavit of the Commander of the Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe which is Schroeder Exhibit No. 19 in the Schroeder document book on page — it is document 25 on pages 72-73 and has already been accepted as an exhibit. This affidavit confirms that the experiment was to be carried out in the medical academy of the Luftwaffe and also the Chief Physician of the Hospital in Brunswick, Generalarzt [General Physician] Harriehausen has made an affidavit which is Dr. Becker-Freyseng 42 on pages 168-170 of document Becker-Freyseng No. 3, which I should like to offer in evidence as Exhibit No. 29. I shall read the last paragraph on Page 2. I shall not read the rest of the affidavit. Harriehausen writes:
I recall very well that I was once asked whether it would be possible to carry out control experiments with sea-water, made drinkable by various methods, on patients suffering from minor complaints and the slightly wounded in the Luftwaffe Hospital in Brunswick which was under my supervision. Whether Prof. Dr. Schroeder or one of his representatives put this question to me, and at what exact time, I cannot recall exactly. It could have been in June 1944. I had to refuse the undertaking of such experiments, as I had strict orders to send all patients and wounded who could be released back to the troops; thus I did not have command of hospital inmates suitable for these experiments. Furthermore, the hospital was overcrowded at this time, and, therefore, was not suitable for scientific experiments. I can also recall clearly that, at a later time, I again spoke to Prof. Dr. Schroeder about this matter, and that he expressed his regret on this occasion that these experiments could not be carried out in the Luftwaffe Hospital in Brunswick which was under my direction.
This affidavit is signed and certified by the notary Eberhard Grimm on the 9 January 1947. This affidavit was to have been offered in the Schroeder case but the English translation was not yet available. I withdraw it in the Schroeder case and offer it as a Becker-Freyseng Exhibit.
Witness, you said that Professor Schroeder was to speak to the Medical Chief of the German Police, that is Reichsarzt [Reich Physician] SS Grawitz, do you know whether he actually talked to him and what result the discussion had?
A: Yes, I know that he did talk to him although I myself was not present, but after a few days my department chief ordered me to send a letter to the Reich Minister of the Interior and the Chief of the German Police, or rather draft such a letter, since in the meantime Generaloberstabsarzt Schroeder had talked to Grawitz. Grawitz had said that he was willing to cooperate but in order to deal with the matter officially he would need a brief letter. He said the letter need only contain the necessary information since Generaloberstabsarzt Schroeder had discussed the matter orally with Grawitz.
Q: Witness, I shall show you document No. 185, Prosecution Exhibit 134, page 16 of the German, 18 of the English document book 5, sea water experiments. This is the letter to the Reich Minister of the Interior. Did you draft this letter?
A: Yes, I made the first draft for this letter. The department chief and the chief of staff changed a few minor points before it was signed by Schroeder.
Q: And the letter has the signature of your referat, does it?
A: Yes, it says 55 and the referat 2-F.
Q: At that time you were a referent and not an assistant referent any longer?
A: I had been a referent from the 15th of May on. The letter is dated the 7th of June.
Q: When did the referent, Professor Anthony, leave this office?
A: Anthony left about the 15th of May.
Q: Now how was this salutation formulated? I mean "Highly respected Reich Minister?"
A: That was at the special request of Generaloberstabsarzt Schroeder.
Q: Your Honors, this is a letter of the Medical Inspectorate for the Reich Minister of the Interior and the Reich Fuehrer SS Himmler, which is the English document No. 185, document book 5 of the Prosecution, Prosecution Exhibit 134. Before I go into a discussion of this document with the witness I should like to point out that at the beginning of this document there is a translation which we consider incorrect. It is the first sentence which has the words "voluntary experimental subject". In the English translation, which unfortunately we do not have officially yet, the punctuations are different from the German, and the "voluntary experimental subjects" was intended to refer to the new experiments and in the English it seems to refer to the former experiments.
MR. HARDY: Your Honors, this is a point of considerable importance. Indeed for such a problem as this, it's being discussed should be dispensed with as well as argumentation of it before the Tribunal and the original document should be brought into the Court room by the Clerk and turned over to the interpretation department to construe as to whether this English version is correct. The Prosecution maintains that it is one hundred percent correct. We have had it checked.
THE PRESIDENT: The Clerk will procure from the Secretary General's office the original of this document No. 185, and the document will be submitted to the interpreters for a report by them to the Tribunal.
DR. MARX: Mr. President, on the 3 of May I submitted an application through the Secretary General about this translation but no decision has been reached yet. I have, therefore, had a translation prepared and my opinion corresponds to the wording of the German original document. May I give this translation to the Tribunal because in my opinion it is vital. This first sentence is the one on which the Prosecution wants to put great emphasis. I should like permission to submit this translation which was prepared by an Englishman and then the final translation by the interpreters may be made later but it seems to me important that the Tribunal be given this translation.
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel for the benefit of the record give the name and position of the interpreter who made the translation to which counsel has just referred?
MR. HARDY: Your Honors, I might state at this time that the translation division and the interpretation division of the Office of Chief Counsel for war crimes has certainly tested all interpreters and translators before a person can qualify as an interpreter and it might be well that this version of Dr. Marx be submitted, to the interpretation department and that they can take this into consideration when they are interpreting the document.
THE PRESIDENT: When counsel for defendant has answered my question I was going to suggest that.
DR. MARX: Mr. President, I don't know personally. My staff told me that a translation had been prepared and when I asked whether prepared by a German or an American I was told by an Englishman with the necessary knowledge of the German as well as the English.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would like to be advised the name of the person who made that translation, if that can be furnished for the record.
DR. MARX: I have just been informed that it was a Mr. Dirks.
THE PRESIDENT: Does this gentleman who made the translation, this Mr. Dirks, hold any official position here with the American or British Government?
DR. MARX: As far as I know he is a member of the American Military Government and translates for the General Secretary, but I don't know exactly. I don't know him personally at all.
THE PRESIDENT: When the original document is presented to the Tribunal the translation in the possession of counsel for the defendant will be submitted to the interpreters together with the original document and the interpreters will then consider the matter and report in open court to the Tribunal.
MR. HARDY: Did the Secretary General bring in the exhibit? The interpreters can take this up during the recess I think.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has instructed that the original document be brought into court.
MR. HARDY: I am not clear whether, your Honor is giving the translation to the interpreter at the same time.
THE PRESIDENT: That is what I have instructed to be done, that the interpreter should be furnished this interpretation with the document. The interpreter will then report in open court to the Tribunal. The interpreters will consider this matter during the morning recess which will be called in a few minutes.
BY DR. MARX: Witness, please let us discuss the contents of this document. The first sentence reads:
Earlier this made it possible for the Luftwaffe to settle urgent medical matters through experiments on human beings.
What experiments does this refer to?
A: The experiments that I knew about, that was Holzloehner's experiments.
Q: Now I go on to the next sentence:
Today I again stand before a decision, which, after numerous experiments on humans and also on voluntary human subjects, demands final resolution.
The Prosecution considers this sentence so important that on 16 December 1946 on page 530 of the German transcript they said so about it. I quote:
I should like to call the attention of the Tribunal to the words 'voluntary subjects'. This proves that they (meaning the defendants) had finished their work on volunteers and had to have recourse to inmates of concentration camps.
Will you please comment on this, witness?
A: Since this seems to be the most important sentence in the whole question of sea water, I would like to go into some detail.
MR. HARDY: May it please your Honor, I don't think it necessary to go into detail in this question until we have the translation settled. It would merely take up the time of the Tribunal unnecessarily.
THE PRESIDENT: I think this matter should be delayed until after the interpreters have reported on the translation.
DR. MARX: Very well. Mr. President, may I suggest that we recess now so that I can discuss this point with Dr. Becker-Freyseng since this is one of the most important points for the case.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess.
(A recess was taken.)