1947-06-03, #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 3 June 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.

THE MARSHALL: 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.

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

THE MARSHALL: 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. Do I understand that the witness Franz Vollhardt will first be called on behalf of the the defendant Becker-Freyseng?

DR. MARX: With the permission of the Tribunal, Mr. President, I should like to call Professor Vollhardt whom the Tribunal has permitted to appear as an expert witness on behalf of defendant Schroeder and Dr. Becker-Freyseng, and which has also been allowed to testify on behalf of defendant Dr. Beiglboeck.

THE PRESIDENT: The marshall will show to the witness stand Franz Vollhardt.

FRANZ VOLLHARDT, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:

BY JUDGE SEBRING:

Q: Hold up your right hand and be sworn, please, repeating after me the oath:

I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.

(The witness repeated the oath)

JUDGE SEBRING: You may sit down.

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY DR. MARX:

Q: Professor, please, would you state your full name.

A: Franz Vollhardt.

Q: Where and when were you born?

A: Munich, 2 May 1872.

Q: Please, would you briefly tell the Tribunal what your scientific activities have been and regarding which special field and since when you have taken a particularly great interest?

A: I am Professor of Internal Medicine at Frankfurt and predominantly, I have dealt with the question of circulation, metabolism blood pressure or kidney diseases.

Q: Which are the German Universities where you have been a lecturer?

A: Halle and Frankfurt.

Q: Have you been an author of scientific work regarding this special field of activity?

A: Yes.

Q: Have they been circulated and translated in foreign countries and in foreign languages?

A: Yes, they have been translated in Russian, behind my back.

Q: Considering the facts you have just stated, would it be right to say that you have had honors allotted to you in this country and abroad, so would you please tell the Tribunal what types of decoration you have received abroad.

A: I really have to?

Q: Which foreign academies and Foreign societies have you been a member of? Professor, I really want you to answer my questions because I am sure my questions pursue certain purposes.

A: I am Honorary Doctor at the Sorbonne, Paris, at Gottingen and Freiburg; and, as far as societies are concerned, there are a lot of them, Medical Society at Edinburg, at Genf, at Luxemburg.

I am an Honorary Member of the University at Santiago, and so on and so forth.

Q: Thank you very much. Then I would be interested to hear from you whether you had connections with the NSDAP and what sort of connections they were and whether the Party persecuted you in any way. Perhaps, you might answer the last question first.

A: When I was lecturing in Spanish in South America and when I was giving a lecture in Cordoba Argentina, before a medical Congress, I received a telegram to the effect that I had been relieved from my office and the reason given was lack of anti-semitic attitude.

Q: When was that?

A: 1938.

Q: And since when have you once more been reinstated and are you active again?

A: Since 1945.

Q: As a full professor?

A: Yes, as full professor for Internal Medicine at the University of Frankfurt.

Q: Now, Professor, a few questions regarding your own research work. You have dealt particularly with hunger and thirst treatment in the case of kidney diseases. Is that correct?

A: Yes.

Q: So that you have personal medical and scientific experience regarding the observation of human beings when they undergo hunger and thirst treatment?

A: Yes.

Q: Mr. President, before continuing with the examination of this expert witness I should like to permit myself to make a suggestion. There are two types of possibilities for the examination of Professor Vollhardt regarding questions which interest us here. One possibility, the one which I myself consider the correct one, is that Professor Vollhardt should give us a continuous expert opinion regarding the entire complex of questions which are of interest here, and that at the end I would then permit myself to put a few concluding questions to the expert here as, of course, any defense counsel and prosecutor is entitled to do, too. The other possibility would be that I put a number of individual questions to the expert which would deal with the subject chronologically and technically from a medical point of view. But, that would distort context and would not give as clear a picture of the situation as would the first possibility. I should like therefore, Mr. President, for you to make a decision whether the expert is to give an opinion in the form of one lecture first.

THE PRESIDENT: If counsel would propound to the witness a hypothetical question covering the basic facts which here are at issue, and if the witness would answer that hypothetical question without further question from counsel and make his response brief and to the point, and without enlarging too much upon the fact that salt water is not fit to drink and is injurious, which the Tribunal very well knows, we might proceed that way as suggested by counsel.

The hypothetical question should cover the facts here at issue, that experiments were tried upon a group of people, a control group, a non-control group and others, then the witness may answer that question without further interruption by counsel if his answer is, as I said, brief and not enlarging too much on generalities.

DR. MARX: Very well, Mr. President.

Q: Now, Professor, do you have sufficient insight into the planning and carrying out of the so called sea water experiments in order to give an expert opinion on that subject?

A: Yes.

Q: What documentary evidence did you have?

A: I had the original records prepared by Beiglboeck which I had seen.

Q: I shall first of all deal with the character and type of the experiments. Are there differences between the character of these sea water experiments such as experiments with artificial infection with malaria and cholera and; if there are differences, what are they?

A: You can't compare the two at all, because in the case of the sea water experiments you have things so perfectly under control and can interrupt so instantaneously and because the experiments had been planned at short notice, it could be excluded with absolute certainty that no damage could be done. In the case of artificial infection you can not do that.

Q: You are saying that in the case of sea water experiments, providing they are interrupted in time, danger to health and body can be avoided with certainty or bordering on certainty?

A: Not the latter. I said with absolute certainty.

Q: I shall now come to the planning of these experiments. Did Professor Eppinger's participation and the participation of Professor Heubner during the meeting decisive for the planning of 25 May 1944, which I assume you know about, did they give a guarantee for purely scientifically and medically proper treatment of the problem?

A: No doubt they did. Professor Heubner is a leading scientist and an extremely critical person, and Professor Eppinger was one of the leading clinicians in the world and a most outstanding expert, and I assume both of these gentlemen had reasons for allowing these experiments to be carried out, presumably in order to strengthen the back of the medical men, vis-a-vis the technicians. And, secondly, it seems to have been in Eppinger's mind that during such extreme experimentation conditions might be possible that the kidney would suffer more than up to that time and it might have been that Berkatit which contains vitamins might support the work of the kidney.

Q: Professor, what is your opinion about the individual experimental groups?

A: I think that scientifically speaking the planning was excellent and I have no objection to the entire planning. It was good to add a hunger-and-thirst-group because, we know by experience thirst can be suffered better than hunger, and if people are suffering from hunger and thirst too, they do not suffer from hunger, but do suffer from thirst and that resembles what people in the sea would be subject to because he is only suffering from thirst. It was excellent that Wofatit was to be introduced into the experiments too, although it was expected from the beginning that this wonderful discovery would prove itself. It did turn out that groups treated with sea water according to Schaefer just reacted as a group that were subjected to a reasonable hunger treatment and did not suffer from any great discomfort. In the hunger cure of 12, or, we should say 8 days, because the people still ate during the first 4 days, that is a minor affair, and we carry that out innumerable times for medical reasons. There exists a sanitarium where people are made to hunger for four weeks, and as long as they get water in the shape of fruit juices, they still carry on well and often with enthusiasm. Group 2 was Schaefer's group, groups 3 and 4 was the group that received 500 cubic cms. of sea water once without and once with Wofatit. Group 3 was the ones who had drunk 1000 cms. of sea water. That one could only use volunteers for this group is an obvious fact, since the cooperation of the experimental subject is indispensable. Without their good will such an experimental arrangement is impossible. That sufficient volunteers could be found for a case was a matter of course, since a period of ten days of excellent food before and after the experiment was before them and since one could assure them with the best of confidence they would not or could not bring any danger.

Q: We will come to that, Professor. You have just started to speak about food, nourishment. What is your opinion about the food before, during, and after the actual experiments?

A: Well, before the experiments it was splendid. During the experiments it was meager corresponding to ship wrecked people and afterwards quite excellent. In my opinion during such brief experiments nourishment doesn't play any part.

MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, might I inquire whether the witness is now testifying to facts as he has ascertained them from studying graphs and charts made by Professor Beiglboeck or is he testifying from hearsay that food was given to these inmates or what is the basis of his knowledge that he is eliciting here?

A: I was giving my testimony based on the records which I have studied.

MR. HARDY: Thank you.

A: But I don't attach any importance to the meager food served during the experiments because that is an insignificant point which as I have said we have allotted to others many times.

THE PRESIDENT: Witness, when you referred to this examination of the records, state briefly just what records you examined.

A: The original records.

THE PRESIDENT: Comprising the charts that were taken from day to day during the experiments?

A: Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: I would ask counsel for the defense if those charts are available here in the Tribunal?

DR. MARX: Mr. President, those charts are not in my hands. They are held by the defense counsel for the defendant Beiglboeck.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I have the charts in my hands at this time. I will pass them up to the Tribunal for their perusal. I haven't had an opportunity yet to peruse them, therefore, I don't know what they mean.

THE PRESIDENT: It is not necessary to submit the charts to the Tribunal at this time. I would ask counsel for defense if these charts purport to be the complete record of these experiments from the beginning to the end?

DR. STEINBAUER (For the Defendant Beiglboeck): Mr. President, I am in the most fortunate position of having been able to study Beiglboeck's records in his previous office and to find his additional material which he used for the composition of these records. I found some of these in Vienna and brought them along at Christmas and immediately showed them to Dr. Alexander in the original. Dr. Ivy was here from America at that moment and dealt with these records, looked at them carefully and then in the presence of the defendant returned than to me.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, my question was whether or not these charts purport to be a complete record from the beginning of the experiment to the end of the experiment. That was the only point contained in my question.

DR. STEINBAUER: Yes, at the time I was looking for them, the tables of weights were missing. I started looking for them and I have found the original patients' histories, made up for each individual patient from 1 to 44, so we can prove, in great detail, how these experiments developed. Now, these tables are available. The Professor composed them in a weight table which is contained in Document Book 3 because it had been impossible to copy these things.

THE PRESIDENT: I understand that, Counsel. But these charts purport to be complete to the end of the experiment? That's the point in which the Tribunal is interested.

DR. STEINBAUER: Yes, they are.

MR. HARDY: May I ask a question of counsel, Your Honor? The prosecution desires to know whether or not these charts and records purport to be those charts and records made during the course of the experiments, or whether Professor Beiglboeck completed them after the experiments?

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel will answer the question propounded by the prosecution.

DR. STEINBAUER: Yes. That's quite out of the question since Professor Beiglboeck didn't even know where the documents were. He is a typical professor who leaves things lying everywhere. I managed to gather them together — bits of paper, notebooks, all sorts of things. I got it together with much pain. I brought it to Nurnberg and I didn't part with it until the witness saw them, and by comparing the handwriting, this can be ascertained. It's quite out of the question that anything could possibly have been altered in these notes.

MR. HARDY: What disturbs me, Your Honor, is that on one of the charts the name of the subject is erased. The subject's name appeared here and now it has been erased from the top of the chart, and throughout the charts I have been unable to read the German language and I only received them about thirty minutes ago.

THE PRESIDENT: Such a matter as that can properly be taken up in cross-examination.

With the understanding that these charts contain a complete record from the beginning of the experiment to the end of the experiment, counsel may proceed with the examination of the witness.

BY DR. MARX:

Q: Professor, how do you judge the individual examinations carried out by Professor Beiglboeck? Were they adequate for the solution of the practical question whether Berkatit was sufficiently useful and a preferable thirst treatment, and was it sufficient to judge the daily condition of the experimental subjects so that the right time to interrupt the experiments could be ascertained?

Did you get my question?

A: Yes, I've got it.

I thought that the arrangements of these experiments was splendid from the scientific point of view, and, apparently with tremendous industry and great responsibility Beiglboeck devoted himself to the carrying out of these experiments which he had been ordered to do.

Q: Would it be right to say that a personality such as Beiglboeck, as a professor of Interior Medicine and chief medical officer at a clinic for many years, on the basis of daily examinations and through his personal consideration and examination of the experimental subject, would be in a position to recognize any threats to the health of the person before such threats could actually become serious.

A: That was a matter of course. Beiglboeck is an excellent internal medical man and the great care with which he carried out these experiments shows that he was fully conscious of his responsibility. Only, it's hard to imagine that, during such brief experiments, serious damage could have occurred at all.

MR. McHANEY: I object to the latter part of the answer and ask that it be stricken from the record. This man is an expert and, as I understand it, he knows nothing whatsoever personally about the manner in which these experiments were conducted. I therefore take it he is not in a position to state how Dr. Beiglboeck conducted the experiments.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal understands the knowledge of the witness and the objection will be overruled. The record may stand.

MR. McHANEY: While I am on my feet I would like to observe that of course the testimony of this witness is of supposed probative value at this time. The records upon which he is basing his testimony have not been admitted in evidence. They have not been, in any way, identified.

THE PRESIDENT: That is understood. That is the situation before the Tribunal.

DR. MARX: Mr. President, I do want to say a few things about that. Professor Vollhardt, after all, is an internationally recognized scientist who, particularly with regard to the field in which we are interested here, namely that of thirst and water supplies, is the international capacity, as one puts it, so that he is in a position, on the basis of these clinical records of Professor Beiglboeck, to form an opinion regarding the way these experiments were carried out. I can't imagine that such a man would not be in a position, on the strength of such material, to form an opinion.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, it is not a question of the ability of the witness to form his opinion, but the records upon which he is basing his opinion are not in evidence before the Tribunal. They have not been subject to examination and cross-examination, and the witness' testimony is based upon the supposition that those records are correct, and they are not even before the Tribunal at this time. That was all the statement of counsel was intended to convey. If the records had already been admitted in evidence, and been examined, and people examined and cross-examined on them, the situation would be different, but the testimony of the witness is based upon the hypothesis that the records are correct, and they are not before the Tribunal.

Counsel may proceed.

BY DR. MARX:

Q: Professor, a little earlier you had already briefly dealt with the question of starving — of hunger or of thirst for the purpose of treatment, and I now want to ask you whether the administration of hunger and thirst cures of several days is a medically recognized fact, and also how long would you consider that hunger and thirst with complete refusal of food and liquid could be administered without putting someone's health in jeopardy?

A: It depends who it is. Initially, I recommended hunger and thirst treatment in the case of acute inflammation of the kidneys, but there people have a great deal of water in their system and the water is absorbed during such a cure. Astonishing as it may seem, a cure is effected very rapidly. In such cases, three, five, seven and even more days of hunger are employed. In other cases, where no water surplus is in existence, we would only apply six days of hunger treatment. During the time when I had to be interested in these particular experiments, there were four women in my clinic, all who were there because of high blood pressure. They were aged 50, 51, 53 and 63 years. One had a blood pressure of 210/100, and, six days later, it had been reduced to 170/100. The third had a blood pressure of 280/160 and, six days later, it dropped to 180/100. The loss of weight amounted to three or four kilograms and the patients naturally, during those days, suffered from thirst and felt weak at the end of the sixth day, but they were so happy about the improved condition that they considered the unpleasantness of the recent days as being worthy of forgetting.

Q: Is it correct that when water is withdrawn, nourishment should also be withdrawn?

A: It's easier to suffer thirst when you are also hungry because the supply of nourishment makes claims upon the kidneys and, if you exclude salt in the nourishment, the water loses further humidity.

Thus, appetite disappears when you are thirsty. Therefore, it is definitely better to be hungry and thirsty simultaneously.

Q: Professor, is it right to observe the individual doses in order to prevent diarrhea, and, if individual quantities of less than 300 cc are admitted, can you prevent diarrhea?

A: In the case of sea and bitter water you only suffer from diarrhea if you drink a large quantity at once. If you distribute it over a day you suffer from constipation.

Q: Yes, but you didn't quite answer my question. I inquired about the individual doses.

A: Yes, well, I'm trying to say that if you spread it out over a day, giving smaller individual doses instead of all at once, then there isn't any danger of diarrhea.

Q: Can you describe sea water as poisonous at all?

A: Absolutely no. There is a trend towards the treatment with sea water which is increasing, and people are drinking half a liter of sea water, every day, for weeks. There can't be any question of poisonous quality. In fact, people say they are feeling splendidly. The only difference is that in the case of such cures fresh water is administered too in the manner of tea, coffee and soup so that the dehydrifying effect of the sea water is done away with.

Q: Professor, I wonder if you would speak a little more slowly and make a pause after individual answers in order to enable the interpreters to follow.

Has there been an experiment during which a dose of 500 to 1,000 cc of sea water daily was taken and it is to be described as dangerous providing the experiment is discontinued as soon as there is a threat of a danger to health?

A: There can't be any question of there being any danger to health during the first few days. The only question is, how long can the body stand up to this continuation of the deprivation of humidity?

Sea water has a three percent salt water content. Generally speaking, at least so far, we have assumed this to be so, that the kidneys cannot deal with such a salt concentration so that salt will remain in the system which is anxious to collect water from the tissues. In the beginning, this is of no importance; but after six or seven or eight days, this becomes unpleasant and it is to be expected that after the twelfth day there is some danger, but there have been cases of sea rescue when oven seventeen or more days afterwards recovery was achieved, but one would generally say that I would never continue such an experiment — dare to continue such an experiment beyond the twelfth day, and in this case with which we are concerned, all experiments were discontinued after the sixth day, so that danger to health during that period was out of the question.

Q: Could the aim of these experiments have been achieved with a semi-penetrable membrane?

A: I can't understand how one should imagine this. What we are concerned with is the question of how long the human body can survive without water and under the excess quantity of salt. Now, that is subject to the water contents of the body and it depends upon whether, first of all, water is only used by the intermediary tissues or whether the cell liquid too is being used up. In the latter case, there is a danger which becomes apparent through excess potassium quantities and this was also continuously observed and checked during such experiments and there were no excess Potassium quantities such as can be expected after six days.

Q: Nor would it be right to say that these experiments were planned scientifically and medically, is that correct?

A: Absolutely so.

Q: Could they have been planned differently?

A: I couldn't imagine how.

Q: Were these experiments in the interest of an active warfare, or in the interest of the care of ship-wrecked sailors or soldiers?

A: The latter.

Q: In other words for aviators and sailors who were ship-wrecked or would be ship-wrecked?

A: Towards the end of the war there was an increase in the cases of pilots who had been shot down as well as the cases of shipwrecked personnel, and it was therefore the duty of the hygiene department concerned to consider the question of how one could deal best with such cases of ship-wrecked personnel, that was the reason how this conference came about. Previously Schaefer, as we heard yesterday, had recommended not to drink anything. When together with I.G. he succeeded in eliminating salt and bitter salt from sea water through Wofatit the problem was really solved scientifically. There were, however, considerable technical difficulties and it isn't exactly simple to equip each flier with so much Wofatit in addition to everything else he has to carry in order to protect him against the danger of ship-wreck. That is no doubt why Eppinger and Huebner were in favor of the experiment, and it was unfortunate that Mr. Berka appeared with Berkatit at the same time, and impressed the technicians, because his method was more simple and cheaper.

Q: Professor, was there any reason to expect later symptoms of damage which might appear later than 10 days, after the end of the experiment?

A: It was entirely out of the question, even after the seventh day. Later damage is out of the question, because the duration of the experiments is too short.

Q: To what do you attribute the loss of weight during such experiments?

A: That is almost entirely the loss of water. As I have already told you the excess salt supply in the body deprived the body of water. The body must have a supply of water if it is to supply salt. In other words, if the body is not receiving any other water than sea water the attack against the water held by the body must take place, and therefore a loss of weight is bound to happen, which, however, can be caught up with instantly.

Q: What would you say to be expected in the way of the loss of substance of the body and how much loss of water?

A: I would say the bulk is the loss of water, but to split this up is something I consider impossible to do with certainty. You might possibly compare just how much was lost during the time applied by Schaefer when there was considerable hunger and how much was lost in the case of water.

Q: Does the speed play an important part with which the loss of water takes place?

A: Yes, of course, a tremendous part. The colored nostras is a well-known example during which disease, the must tremendous loss of water and salt takes place during 24 hours. I knew a case where 10 liters of water and 150 grams of salt had to be added intravenously through the veins, the skin and through the stomach in order to save that particular life of a person suffering from such an acute loss of water.

If on the other hand this is spread out over a period of days and if you do not have to expect such a dangerous loss of the salt, then the body can stand up to it for a much longer period. I might perhaps add that the loss of salt is just as dangerous as excess quantities of salt, and also in the event of the loss of salt which is always connected with water considerable losses of weight are suffered. It is well-known that an expedition on the mountain Monte Rose lost 5 kilograms, and the loss of salt and water, and that the weight could not be replaced in spite of the addition of water when salt was also added.

Q: Professor, according to the documents at your disposal were these experiments sufficiently well prepared?

A: It was my impression that they were extremely well prepared, and I was particularly impressed by the fact that Beiglboeck had sufficiently examined the participants carefully and had considered the use of them to be unsuitable since he found a defect of the lungs.

Q: I also want to deal with such preparations—

MR. McHANEY: I do not think by any stretch of the imagination can this witness testify from the records that Beigelboeck conducted an examination or rejected three experimental subjects. In my opinion it does not appear from the records, and he can only testify what Beigelboeck told him. Unless he can say it does appear in the records I think it should be stricken.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel has an opportunity of cross-examining the witness at the close of his testimony.

Q: Professor, would you not say that preparation for these experiments also means that certain experiments, such as experiments on oneself and animal experiments, printed preparations, if you like, must have been in existence or was that true of this case?

A: Yes, a report from Beigelboeck about an experiment carried out upon himself is in existence which describes the condition most efficiently, in which he found himself during a sea water experiment, and this description tallies to the highest possible degree with what my volunteers have described who have submitted themselves to these experiments. I might deal with that later.

Q: What opinion do you have regarding the experiments which were carried out by Sirany in Vienna?

A: There appeared to lack a critical attitude to me. I think Schaefer had the same impression yesterday.

Q: Are symptoms recognizable regarding the planning of these experiments which would go beyond the absolutely essential practical purposes and which would lead to considerable pains or painful feelings or might have lead to that?

A: Of course it isn't fun to be thirsty, and that is the major complaint in these cases. These people are increasingly thirsty, and they are disappointed to find that the administering of sea water doesn't decrease it, but increases their thirst, and towards the end of the experiments are disturbances of the muscles and the mood doesn't exactly improve. It is the same in the salt water experiments where there are cramps of the calf, because of the lack of water, but the characteristics of that are these symptoms disappear instantaneously at the very moment when the first glass of water is drank.

Q: Would you consider it possible that disturbances of the nerve end might appear, — temperature?

A: Temperature doesn't happen at all, and I can't imagine there are disturbances of the nervous system at all.

Q: How about rage?

A: In the case of insane people there may appear insane rages, maybe, but not in the case of normal human beings.

Q: If you yourself had been placed in this condition would you consider your attitude toward medical ethics, do you have objections to carrying out the same type of experiment as was carried out here, if healthy strong young men had been at your disposal?

A: I actually did it. Since I was interested in connection with sea-water experiments. I called for volunteers among my young doctors, and five of them volunteered, amongst them my youngest son, and they drank the synthetic sea water, having the exact amount content of sea water to the extent of drinking 500 ccm; they got a little food, because they were to continue on duty during the experiment. The loss of weight varied and was around one kilogram a day. At the end of the experiment my son got pretty thin, but after having a cup of tea was fine. Two days later he had regained it fully. All five participants described the experiment in the same way as Beigelboeck described the experiment carried out on himself. Four of these subjects interrupted the experiment after five days. One carried it out for six days, and outside of the present thirst he had no complaints. Any serious disturbance or damage is out of the question, and the extraordinary fact was the speed with which all symptoms of thirst disappeared after water had been administered.

Q: Would it have been possible at all to carry out such experiments if experimental subjects had not cooperated willingly?

A: No, you can only carry out such experiments with volunteers because that collaboration is indispensable, but that does not exclude that they might treat the man in charge of such experiments, such as many educated persons will try to deceive the medical expert during such cases and they will probably eat a beefsteak during such a hunger cure or drink something during thirst treatment. In this case then there were some failures and some did get a hold of drinking water secretly.

Q: Professor, you said that the cooperative attitude of the experimental subjects is indispensable; might I ask you just why it is indispensable?

A: Because thirst, as I have told you, is not a pleasant symptom over a lengthly period. It is quite unpleasant to be able to think of water alone and dream of water and to have a dry mouth and a dry throat. Thus, you have to have a certain amount of power of resistance. I can well imagine that uneducated and weak individuals might lose their willingness to collaborate after that.

Q: But it is not right to say that for the same reason it is indispensable if the observing doctor is depending of the statements made by the experimental subjects if he cannot control and check everything that goes on in the man's mind.

A: That is correct, but the analysis later on would show that the man had something to drink during the findings.

Q: Did you see any photographs of the experimental subjects?

A: I saw the pictures, the naked bodies, and I saw they were strong, well fed and well-conditioned people.

Q: Do you know, Professor, to what extent and in what direction fliers and sailors of other nations had been equipped in order to survive the ship-wrecks?

A: There were a great variety of experiments, but I don't think that is important because they were made with water catching sails, etc., but at any rate they did not have that excellent drug Wofatit.

MR. HARDY: The witness has just testified as to the condition of subjects used in the experiments as he saw in pictures. Inasmuch as the witness has testified to that effect, the Prosecution desires to see the pictures which the witness and defense counsel has mentioned. They are in the hands of the defense counsel for Professor Beiglboeck and the prosecution thinks it is only fair that they be turned over to the prosecution at this time.

THE PRESIDENT: On cross-examination the prosecution may request to see the pictures. Counsel for defendant may exhibit the pictures to the prosecution; they have no objections.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, it would be rather late for us to study the pictures between now and during the time of cross-examination.

THE PRESIDENT: If the pictures are available, I think the defense counsel should submit them to the prosecution for examination.

DR. MARX: Mr. President, I myself do not have these photographs and I would think that later on during Prof. Beiglboeck's testimony or during Dr. Steinbauer's examination with the witness of Professor Vollhardt, the opportunity will arise to show the photographs.

BY DR. MARX:

Q: Now, Professor, the experiments we were talking about; did they have a practical valuable aim and did they show a corresponding result?

A: Yes, that is correct. For instance an important observation was made which Eppinger had expected and desired to carry out to see if the kidneys did concentrate salt under such extreme conditions to an even higher extent than one expected previously. One thought that it would be something like 2.0% but 2.6 or 2.7% and record figures of 3.0, 3.5, 3.6 and 4% are shown so that the fortunate man who is in a position to concentrate 3.6 % or 4% of salt would be able to live on sea-water for quite a long period.

THE PRESIDENT: Witness, after a question is propounded to you by your counsel, would you pause a moment before giving your answer so that the question may be translated and conveyed and when you begin to make your answer, would you speak a little more slowly?

THE WITNESS: Finally, one unsuspected fact occurred which may be connected with this and that is the result that the drinking of small quantities of sea-water up to 500 cc given over a lengthy period turned out to be better than pure thirst.

BY DR. MARX:

Q: What do you think of Wofatit generally?

A: It is a wonderful thing.

Q: Is it correct to say that sea-water really assumes the character of drinking water through it?

A: Yes, the only difficulty would appear to be to obtain the drug in sufficiently large quantities for a man who is sea-wrecked and did not have his luggage; but it is a wonderful discovery.

Q: So, you think that the result of these experiments does not only have importance in the case of a war, but is of importance for the problems of sea-faring nations?

A: Quite right, it is a wonderful thing for all seafaring nations.

Q: So that both the experiments with Wofatit, as well as the experiments made regarding the symptoms when such a drink was not available, were important to display, such for instance as the consumption of sea-water in certain given doses.

A: That is quite correct.

Q: That was only discovered by use of these experiments?

A: Quite correct.

Q: Mr. President, I have no further questions to the Witness Vollhard at this point.

THE PRESIDENT: Any other defense counsel have any questions to be propounded to this witness?

BY DR. STEINBAUER (Defense counsel for Defendant Prof. Dr. Beiglboeck):

Q: Witness, first of all may I put a formal question to you. The Prosecutors, are, as a rule, the most suspicious people. It is quite possible that these Prosecutors might state that the documents which I have submitted are collosal forgeries by Professor Beiglboeck. Let me ask you then, as a scientist, would you consider it possible that these documents which I have given you for your expert opinion are original documents or if they are forged?

A: I consider that the latter is out of the question.

Q: Thank you. You also have had an opportunity to look at the weight tables which I submitted already in document book 2; would you consider that the figures regarding weights and loss of water contained therein are correct?

A: Yes.

Q: One further question; Do you believe as a scientist that one could not have saved oneself the trouble of these experiments and satisfied themselves by animal experiments?

A: In the case of problems of water and salt metabolism that is not to be assumed for the simple reason that rabbits and dogs react differently, that is the difference between vegetable and meat eating beings. The dogs, our most important experimental animal, has no perspiration glands, and can concentrate water much more efficiently than the human beings.

Q: Let me come back to the question of diarrheas once again; Do you consider diarrheas occurring a fortnight or two later after the conclusion of the experiments as being connected with sea-water experiments?

A: I consider that out of the question because seawater experiments lead to constipation and how one may suffer from diarrhea afterwards is a mystery to me.

Q: Is it correct that during lack of water the body restrains the perspiration [illegible] and the giving off of perspiration through the pores?

A: That is correct.

Q: Would it be right to assume that the consumption of fresh water by the experimental subject would reduce the subjective and objective symptoms considerably?

A: Yes, you have to assume that. It is extraordinary how much the subjective symptoms are decreased by small quantities of drinking water.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the Tribunal is about to go into recess. I see no possible reason why counsel for the defendant should not submit these photographs to counsel for the Prosecution. I feel compelled to direct that counsel show these photographs to the Prosecution. I see no reason that they should not.

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