1947-06-17, #4: Doctors' Trial (late morning)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand that counsel for the Prosecution has concluded his direct examination of the witness.
MR. HARDY: I have one or two questions in summation to ask the witness, if it please the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed.
BY MR. HARDY:
Q: Mr. Vorlicek, have you ever appeared before a Tribunal as a witness before?
A: Yes.
Q: Before this Tribunal I want you to understand that you can clearly testify as to any facts which you have knowledge of concerning the activities in the experimental station at Dachau wherein the sea water experiments took place, and I want you to feel perfectly at liberty to express any opinions you have concerning the experiments and any of the activities in connection with the experiments. Now in summation, Mr. Vorlicek, it is my understanding that you state that the subjects used did not volunteer for the experiments, is that correct?
A: I can't imagine volunteering in a camp.
Q: By any stretch of the imagination could you imagine that they were volunteers in the true sense of the word?
A: No, I can't believe that.
Q: Did the experimental subjects themselves tell you whether or not they volunteered for the experiments?
A: They told me that they did not volunteer.
Q: Who told you the story concerning the special Kommando that they volunteered fur while in Auschwitz?
A: The Czechs told me about that.
Q: How often did you talk to the experimental subjects?
A: Every day.
Q: And you were certain from your conversation with these experimental subjects that some of the subjects were Poles, some of them were Czechs, and some were Austrians and Hungarians?
A: Yes.
Q: Were there any Russians among the experimental subjects?
A: I do not know that.
Q: Were there any Germans among the experimental subjects?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you have anything further you wish to tell the Tribunal concerning these experiments?
A: No, I have nothing else to say.
MR. HARDY: No further questions, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Defense counsel may cross examine the witness.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY DR. STEINBAUER (For the defendant Beiglboeck):
Q: Witness, how often have you been examined as a witness on the sea water question?
A: Once.
Q: But I have two affidavits, both from the 9th of May. Who took down these affidavits and why were there two?
A: That statement was given at that time to Dr. Alexander only once.
Q: But we have two affidavits which were signed by you. I have them here.
A: Probably there are just two copies.
Q: Did you dictate it or did you just sign it?
A: I dictated it myself.
Q: Now I must ask you, long before that in the spring of 1946 weren't you examined once by someone else?
A: Yes, but nothing was written down.
Q: Well, that was a long time ago. The Vienna police took a record because I read it myself.
A: That is possible, but I didn't sign anything.
Q: Well, you were examined by the Vienna police, too, you remember that?
A: Yes.
Q: Now I should like to ask you the following: As soon as the gypsies arrived, did they come to the experimental station or later?
A: About a week later.
Q: And what happened during this week?
A: I don't know.
Q: Were people already undergoing the experiments? Were the people already drinking sea water or starving, or what was going on?
A: I don't know. I only know that when I came there new experiment were begun.
Q: Is it right that you came there because your friend Pillwein asked the professor to take you in and this facilitated the situation for you?
A: Whether that went through Beiglboeck I don't know, Pillwein came and got me himself.
Q: I don't imagine Pillwein had the authority to take people into the experiments on his own initiative, that is, as nurses?
A: I was not taken as a nurse.
Q: You were an assistant nurse.
A: No, I was not an assistant nurse. I was a patient. I just helped Pillwein.
Q: You helped the nurse?
A: Yes.
Q: And what was the name of the station? What number did it have?
A: I don't know.
Q: Perhaps you remember that it was roman numeral one over arabic one?
A: I cannot say.
Q: Do you know a station I a?
A: No.
Q: But at what station were you yourself when you were in the hospital?
A: In 9/4.
Q: Do you know the typhoid station?
A: Yes.
Q: What was the number of that?
A: I don't remember.
Q: Now you say:
Before I came there, a Yugoslav nurse who was on night duty was thrown out because he left the key in the door and therefore the patients were able to go out and drink water.
And then you go on to say:
Afterwards one of the greens — that is a criminal — came who beat the people and he was transferred too.
A: No, he was before the Yugoslav.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, may I request that the affidavit signed, by the witness Vorlicek be submitted to him so that he can follow Dr. Steinbauer.
THE PRESIDENT: The affidavits may be submitted to the witness.
(The witness is given the affidavits.)
BY DR. STEINBAUER:
Q: Do you have it? One of your statements begins:
At the time of the occupation of Austria—
and the other one begins,
After I was arrested in 1939 by the Gestapo—
A: Yes.
Q: Now, I am taking the one which begins:
At the time of the occupation of Austria—
You say,
About July 1944 I was transferred to the experimental station.
A: Yes.
Q: (reading)
These experiments had in part already been started when I came there.
A: Yes.
Q: And now comes the story about this man with the green insignia and the Yugoslav. Is it not true that it was the other way around?
A: No, no. First the green one and then the Yugoslav came.
Q: Well, please read what it says in the affidavit. It says exactly the opposite.
A: There must be a mistake here.
Q: It's incorrect what it says here.
A: Yes.
Q: Can you remember the name of this man with the green insignia?
A: Only his first name: Max.
Q: Max — oh, yes, that famous Max. Then you say:
The experimental subjects were divided into groups. One group was injected with a red serum.
I have asked so many people and nobody knows any red serum. Are you color blind, Mr. Vorlicek?
A: No, I was wrong. That was when the blood was taken.
Q: Yes, that is very important. There is a red poison. You have to be very careful. Then this red serum is wrong?
A: Yes.
Q: And what did you think it was?
A: I had no idea.
Q: Could it have been blood which had been through the centrifuge?
A: I don't know.
Q: Then you obviously withdraw this testimony that one group was injected with red serum as being incorrect?
A: Yes.
Q: Now you tell the incident about the guinea pig. You say that Beiglboeck used to yell at the gypsies frequently. Why?
A: Because they didn't do what they were supposed to.
Q: Well, if you were in charge of an experiment or in charge of a labor detail and the people were always doing something else than they were supposed to do, would you praise them or reprimand them?
A: Certainly, I would scold them.
Q: Then can't you understand that Beiglboeck reproached you for helping the prisoners drink water?
A: What did you say, doctor?
Q: Do you admit that Beiglboeck had a certain justification in making charges against you and reproaching you for helping the prisoners drink water?
A: I cannot say.
Q: How did Beiglboeck treat the people who were not in the experiment?
A: He treated them well.
Q: Did he take an interest in their food?
A: Pillwein and I went and got the food.
Q: And you certainly saw to it that your comrades were fed decently.
A: Decent food means something else to me.
Q: Well, today we don't have enough to eat either. It always depends on the circumstances. You and Pillwein distributed the food?
A: Yes.
Q: Did Beiglboeck see to it that it was distributed correctly?
A: No, he didn't.
Q: Did he have any reason to mistrust you?
A: No.
Q: Do you know that he threw Max out because he distributed the food unjustly?
A: I only heard that.
Q: Do you really think you can say that Beiglboeck would have made you into a guinea pig?
A: Yes.
Q: Why?
A: That was a matter of course in the came. If one had anything to do with the SS—
Q: Was Dr. Beiglboeck in the SS?
THE PRESIDENT: The translation didn't come through.
BY DR. STEINBAUER:
Q: You have to wait, witness, until the translation comes through. I ask you, was Professor Beiglboeck in the SS?
A: I assumed that he was.
Q: What uniform did he wear?
A: Brown.
Q: A brown uniform?
A: Yes, yellowish brown.
Q: And what kind of shoulder insignia did he have?
A: I don't remember.
Q: Did Beiglboeck ever beat anyone?
A: No.
Q: Did he threaten anyone with a revolver?
A: No.
Q: Did Beiglboeck give the people cigarettes?
A: Yes.
Q: How many cigarettes did the people in the experiment get?
A: I don't know exactly — two or three.
Q: Two or three cigarettes. In addition to these two or three cigarettes, did Beiglboeck give them other cigarettes?
A: I don't know.
Q: Do you consider it possible that he did?
A: Yes.
Q: Did he help the gypsies in any way?
A: I don't know.
Q: Do you know that one of the gypsies had a so-called escape point on his insignia?
A: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Wait a minute, witness. After your counsel propounds a question to you, you must wait a moment before you answer the question so that the interpreters may complete the interpretation of the question.
THE WITNESS: Yes.
BY DR. STEINBAUER:
Q: Witness, if someone performed an experiment well, didn't Beiglboeck give him more cigarettes? Think it over.
A: I don't know anything about that.
Q: Now, let's come back to this escape insignia. Did one of the gypsies have this escape point?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you perhaps remember his name?
A: No.
Q: Was there a gypsy who had two escape points?
A: I can't remember that either.
Q: Do you know that Professor Beiglboeck tried to help these people get rid of their escape points?
A: Pillwein told me about that.
Q: You heard about it, then. Now about the nationality of the people: In your affidavits you said that you think — look at your affidavit — that they all spoke German?
A: Most of them.
Q: Most of them spoke German; even the Poles spoke a little German. Then can one not conclude that these people might have been from Eastern Silesia or from West Prussia?
A: I cannot say.
Q: Then there were three Czechs. Mr. Vorlicek, I think you are of Czech descent, aren't you?
A: Yes.
Q: But you are from Vienna.
A: Yes.
Q: It is possible that they were Czechs who were not from Bohemia?
A: They told me that they were from Czechoslovakia.
Q: Couldn't they have been from Slovakia; from Bratislava; for example?
A: No, from Moravia.
Q: Very well, Moravia. Then you said there was one German. Do you think that's right?
A: No, I think there were two or three.
Q: I can tell you that there were more.
A: It as possible.
Q: Then your statements are not quite correct, are they?
A: One can't always remember everything so well.
Q: The papers of the gypsies, about their nationality, you didn't see.
A: No.
Q: Was it customary in a concentration camp to keep one's papers?
A: No.
Q: Where were the papers kept?
A: I don't know.
Q: But everyone had a number?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know what triangle these people wore?
A: Black triangles.
Q: Who was given black triangles in the camp?
A: The asocial people.
Q: Aha! Do you think it is possible that Beiglboeck tried to help his people but that the bad people in the camp administration didn't keep their promises?
A: I cannot say.
Q: Now, I must put to you that you said the following to the Vienna police —
(Witness looked through the affidavit.)
Q: (Continuing) — it doesn't say that in there.
After the liberation I met a gypsy in Munich who told me, 'I am getting along very well; no one died from the experiments'
— and now comes the important thing:
'but many died later during a famine.'
Now, think carefully, so that we don't have to get the police records from Vienna. Do you remember saying that?
A: I can take an oath that I did not say that.
Q: Do you think that the Vienna police official invented it?
A: In the first place, I wasn't in Munich; I was only in Dachau.
Q: Maybe it says a gypsy from Munich.
A: That's right.
Q: I ask you above all, did you more than a year ago when it was officially written down, say that people later died in a famine?
A: Yes.
Q: Who kept the records in the camp during the experiments?
A: What kind of records?
Q: Records as to the course of the experiments, how much water was drunk, whether people had fever, and so forth.
A: The records of fever and pulse, partly Pillwein and partly myself.
DR. STEINBAUER: Mr. President, might I ask that the fever charts be produced, inasmuch as the witness said he helped to record them, that they be shown to him for identification? They are right here.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, the fever charts may be shown to the witness.
(Charts handed to witness and examined by him.)
Q: Are these the records which you kept at the time?
A: Yes.
Q: Who compiled these records?
A: Pillwein and I.
Q: Didn't some of the prisoner-doctors write some of these records?
A: I don't know.
Q: Were the people weighed?
A: Yes.
Q: Who weighed them?
A: Pillwein.
Q: Did he always record the weight?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you show me where he recorded the weight and tell me. in particular who entered these final weights at the right, at the top?
A: I was never present when that was done.
Q: You don't know?
A: No.
Q: How were these people quartered? What kind of accommodations were they given? Were they in dirty barracks, or in clean beds —
A: They had nice beds.
Q: Did it look like a stall or like a decent hospital?
A: No, it didn't look like a stall, but one can't say that it looked like a decent room either.
Q: I am afraid I don't understand you.
A: It was more like a camp.
Q: But it was clean and neat.
A: Yes, it was clean.
Q: And then when the people left the experiment, were they given food that was more than the camp food or less?
A: It was the same as the regular camp diet.
Q: Weren't they given additional food?
A: I don't know anything about it.
Q: Didn't you give out milk just after the experiments were finished?
A: I don't know anything about it.
Q: But you must know about it, if you helped to distribute the food to these people every day.
A: I wasn't there every day.
Q: Oh, you weren't there every day? You have already said that nobody died during the experiments, is that true?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, when were the experiments finished?
A: Three weeks later, when I came.
Q: When was that? Can you give us the date?
A: I can't say.
Q: Was it January, February, March or August?
A: It was in July or August.
Q: Couldn't it have been September? Look at the charts. Look at the charts. The date is on there.
(Examined by the witness.)
A: Yes, August —
Q: And — look carefully.
(Charts again examined by witness.)
A: August, September.
Q: That's right: August and September. The last man finished drinking his sea-water and then what happened?
A: Then special experiments were performed.
Q: Mr. Vorlicek, you don't understand me. When the experiment proper was finished, completely finished.
A: Yes?
Q: Then what happened? Did they all stay together? Was the laboratory left there or were things taken away?
A: No, it was dissolved. The people were sent back to the Block.
Q: That's the time I want to talk about. Who packed up the things, the bottles, equipment, scales and so forth?
A: I don't know.
Q: Did you not help?
A: No.
Q: Were the gypsies still there?
A: I don't know, because I went back as a patient.
Q: When did you leave?
A: I can't say that.
Q: Was the hospital where you were sent far away from Station 11?
A: There were five Blocks between them.
Q: Did you have an opportunity during this period to see one or another of these people at the beginning of September, the middle of September?
A: No.
Q: You didn't see any of them?
A: No.
Q: You didn't see Pillwein either?
A: Yes.
Q: Who examined the blood?
A: They were Frenchmen.
Q: Did they know how to do that?
A: I don't know.
Q: Were they locksmiths, electricians?
A: No, they were doctors.
Q: I see, they were doctors. Now we will talk about the weighing. Did the people gain weight or lose weight?
A: They lost weight.
Q: How long did they lose weight?
A: All the time.
Q: As long as they Were in the experiment?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you know, since you helped to write the records, whether, at the end, after the people were out of the experiment, their weight was higher or lower?
A: That I do not know.
Q: Did you see anybody with a high fever?
A: At the most, up to 38 or 30.
Q: 33, or 39. Was that at the beginning of an experiment or at the end?
A: I can't remember that.
Q: Were you ever present when an experiment was stepped or changed?
A: Yes.
Q: How was that done?
A: The patient was sitting and Dr. Beiglboeck undertook the experiment and when the patient began to cry —
Q: No, that is not what I want to know. I want to know how the experiments were stopped in the case of the individual persons. Were they given something to drink, or to eat, or did they just say "You can go now?" Did they give them an injection? What happened?
A: He went back to bed.
Q: When he was given water again, did he recover quickly, or did it take days?
A: I don't know.
Q: Pillwein says in his affidavit that at the end of the experiment all the experimental subjects were still there and they were given a few days special care and then released for labor.
Can you confirm this sworn statement of Fritz Pillwein?
A: No.
Q: Why not?
A: Because I didn't take any interest in it.
Q: Do you consider it incorrect?
A: No.
DR. STEINBAUER: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any questions of this witness by any other defense counsel? Any re-direct examination by the Prosecution?
DR. HOCHWALD: No further question on the part of the Prosecution, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness is excused from the witness stand, there being no further questions to be propounded to him.
Does the Tribunal understand that the witness, Haagen, is now available?
MR. HARDY: The witness Haagen is now available, your Honor, and will be called by the defense counsel.
DR. TIPP (Counsel for the defendants Schroeder and Becker-Freyseng): With the permission of the Tribunal I should like to call the witness, Haagen, for my two clients.
THE PRESIDENT: The marshal will summon the witness, Haagen.
DR. TIPP: Mr. President, the witness has been brought from French custody. It is to be expected that he will be put before a Military Tribunal in France. I should be grateful if the Tribunal would inform him that he does not have to testify anything that will incriminate himself, but that, whatever he does say must be the truth, in the customary form.
MR. HARDY: Before the Tribunal advises the witness, may I request how long Dr. Tipp anticipates the examination of this witness will take on his part and how long it will take on the part of defense counsel Fritz for Rose and if any other defense counsel will want to examine him?
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel enlighten us upon that point?
DR. TIPP: I will need about a day and a half, Mr. President. I believe that Dr. Fritz will not take very long; I think 2 or 3 hours will cover Dr. Fritz' questions, but I cannot say for sure. I also knew that my colleague, Dr. Nelte, for Handloser, would like to ask a few questions, but this will not take very long.
MR. HARDY: It seems to me, Your Honor, that a day and a half will be a considerable length of time for examination of this witness. I should think the defense counsel could cooperate with one another and substantially reduce the time.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal would appreciate defense counsel expediting examination of this and other witnesses to the greatest possible extent.
EUGEN HAAGEN, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q: Witness—do you hear me?
A: Yes, I hear you.
Q: You are now about to be sworn as a witness before this Military Tribunal I, trial of the case, the United States versus Karl Brandt and others. I desire to inform you that you are not required to answer any questions which may be propounded to you by any party or by the Tribunal itself if, in your judgment, answering those questions would tend to incriminate yourself. Do you understand that?
A: Yes, I have understood that.
Q: If at any time you are in doubt upon any matter you are privileged to ask the Tribunal's advice upon that subject. Do you understand?
A: Yes, I understand that.
THE PRESIDENT: The witness will now be sworn.
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Hold up your right hand and be sworn, repeating after me the oath:
I swear by God, the almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and all nothing.
( The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE SEBRING: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY DR. TIPP:
Q: Professor, you are here as a witness for the first time before this Tribunal. To avoid difficulties I should like to point out to you, purely from a technical point of view, that to make the translation easier you will have to make a pause between question and answer and wait for the interpreter.
Now, Professor, your name is Dr. Eugen Haagen. You were born on the 17th of June 1898 in Berlin. At present you are a prisoner in the Court Prison in Nurnberg. You are a doctor of medicine by profession and your specialty is hygiene and bacteriology,—is that correct?
A: Yes, that is correct.
Q: Now will you please describe briefly to the Tribunal your medical training and career?
A: From 1919 to 1923 I studied medicine in Berlin. In 1923 I took the State examination. In 1924 I was licensed as a physician and at the same time received the Degree of Doctor of Medicine. After that I studied internal medicine as an intern and later as an assistant at the First Medical Clinic, at the Charite, in Berlin, under Geheimrat [Privy Councilor] Hiss.
Q: Now, professor, please describe your specialized professional training.
A: In 1926 I became a scientific assistant in the Reich Health Office in Berlin, in the Bacteriological Department in Berlin-Dahlem. There I founded the department for virus and tumor research, a new field of research, which was to be set up in the Bacteriological Department of the Reich Health Office at the time. Already as an assistant I did quite a bit of — I may say — fundamental work in the field of experimental virus and tumor research in this position. In 1927 I already became a member of the German Central Committee for fight against cancer. In 1928 I received the annual prize of the Reich Health Office. Since I was very much interested in learning the American methods of virus research, I went, in 1928 as an assistant to the Rockefeller Institute for medical research in New York, where I remained for about one year. There I worked with Dr. Rivers on experimental questions of smallpox and herpes, especially immunology research with the aid of tissue cultures. As a result of this work —
DR. TIPP: Please speak more slowly with this difficult material, witness.
A: The result of this work was published in American scientific journals. During this time I was merely on leave from the Reich Health Office. In 1929 I returned there. In 1930 I became Regierungsrat [governing councilor] and was appointed Extraordinary Member of the International Health Department of the Rockefeller Foundation in New York, with the assignment to work at the yellow fever laboratory of this Institute and to try to breed the yellow fever germ, work which had been attempted already for years without any success. I succeeded in 1931-32. This work was published in American and German journals. I succeeded, for the first time, in making artificial pure cultures of the agent causing yellow fever. Important work of American scientists Was built up on this, and this culture made it possible to develop a vaccine against yellow fever which is used throughout the world today and was of great significance for the Allies in tropical warfare.
After this 3-year interruption of my work in Berlin I returned to the Reich Health Office and was appointed a member of the Reich Health Office. There I continued to work in the Bacteriological Section as head of the department for virus and tumor research and when in the course of the incorporation of Prussia into the Reich the Bacteriological Section was dissolved, my colleagues and I moved to the Robert Koch Institute which is also in Berlin. On the 1st of March 1936 I became department chief and professor there. I continued to work there too in the same research field; that is, virus and tumor research. In 1933 I received the Hans Arendsen prize for my work in the field of infectious diseases. On the 1st of October 1941 the Robert Koch Institute made me a regular professor of bacteriology and hygiene at the University of Strassbourg where, at the same time, I became director at the Hygiene Institute. I remained there until Strassbourg was taken in November 1944.
For reasons connected with the war, on approximately the 1st of September 1944 I already took part of my institute to Oberschreiberhau and, when we had to evacuate this town, we went to Thuringia — that is, Saalfeld on the Saale — where in April 1945 I was captured and put under arrest by the Americans.
Q: May I ask you witness to tell the Court briefly about your fate after you were taken prisoner.
A: From Saalfeld I was taken to an American interrogation camp in France. There I was interrogated about a number of questions in the field of virus diseases and from there I was sent to various American PW and internment camps.
On the 10th of November 1945 I was brought to the court prison in Nurnberg and interrogated thoroughly about my work.
Q: Professor, were you interrogated here by the Office of Chief of Counsel for War Crimes?
A: Yes, I was interrogated on behalf of this office on the subject.
Q: And the subject of the interrogations, what was it?
A: I was interrogated on the same charges which are the subject of the indictment in this trial.
Q: Were you shown documents in the course of this interrogation, Professor?
A: Yes, I was shown documents, documents which I have not seen again among the records of this trial.
Q: Can you tell us the result of this interrogation?
A: I was not told the result of the interrogation but after about two months, in January 1946, I was taken from Nurnberg to the Hersbruck internment camp. From there I was sent to Plattling. There is another internment camp. Then on the 15th of June 1946 I was released in Plattling by the American Army to Saalfeld in Thuringia and I returned there.
In Saalfeld I received a call from the Russian Military Government to head a newly founded institute for virus and tumor research in Berlin. I answered this call, and I worked in this institute which is attached to the Institute for Medicine and Biology until the 16th of November 1946 when, on the occasion of a visit at Zehlendorf in the American sector, I was suddenly arrested by a British military policeman without any warrant or any document. I was taken away by force and was kept hidden for two and a half months in an English prison in [illegible]. This was obviously a case of kidnapping.
Only in January 1947 I got out of this prison. I was turned over to the French authorities and was taken to Strassbourg where I have been in custody ever since. On the 16th of May I was transferred here.
In connection with this trial, Professor, we are interested in the military positions which you held during the war. Will you please tell us briefly what they were?
A: From 1936 to 1939 I was in the Reserve. I was always in a position of a consulting hygienist with the air force physician, of the first air Force in Berlin. On the 26th of August 1939 I was called up for war service as Oberarzt [Senior Physician] in the Reserve, again as consulting hygienist for the physician of the First Air Force. My activity a s consulting hygienist, as the name says, consisted primarily of advising the air force physician on hygienic questions.
This activity made it possible for me, even during the war, to continue working at my civilian job at the Robert Koch Institute.
When I was called to Strassbourg on the 1st of October 1941 I was first given a leave. Then I was no longer working as consulting hygienist. As late as the summer of 1943, at the request of the chief of the medical service of the Luftwaffe, through the mediation of Professor Rose, I resumed the position of a consulting hygienist, this time for air force physician, Reich, who was also in Berlin. My position was again the same advisory activity and I was able to continue my work at the institute in Strassbourg, that is, my research and my teaching activity. My activity as a consulting hygienist thus consisted of primarily of trips to check hygienic conditions with the troops; secondly, of drawing up factual reports which could be important for the air fleet physician; and I held this position until the collapse.
Q: Your military ranks, Professor? Could you list them, too?
A: As I said, on the 26th of August 1939 I was called up as an Oberarst (First Lieutenant) of the Reserve; then on the 1st of April 1941 I became Stabsarzt, (Captain); then on the 1st of January 1944 I was promoted to Oberstabsarzt, (Major).
Q: Then your promotions were quite the normal thing?
A: Yes, quite normal.
Q: And one more question on this subject, Professor: in your various positions, civilian as well as military, who were your superiors?
A: First, I shall discuss my civilian positions. As a member of the Reich Health Office my immediate superior was the president of the Reich Health Office and the next superior agency was the Reich Ministry of the Interior. As professor and department chief at the Robert Koch Institute my superior was the president of this institute and this, as long as the Institute was under Prussia, the Prussian Minister of the Interior; later, when it became a Reich Institute, the Reich Minister of the Interior.
As a professor at the University of Strassbourg, I was immediately under the rector and the curator of this university arid also under the Minister of Education.
My military superior during the way was always the same air force physician of the First Air Force or air physician, Reich, in Berlin. I may point out that, as consulting hygienist, I was not in a position to issue any orders myself, but if I wanted to have orders carried out I had to make suggestions to the air force physician which he passed on as orders to the subordinate agencies or units. My reports, mostly factual reports, went directly to the air force physician and, when he considered it advisable or when there was an order to that effect, he passed them on to the Chief of the Medical Services of the Luftwaffe.
Q: Professor, did you not hold another position which might be of interest in connection with this trial?
A: Yes, I had another position as hygienic consultant of the health director of the government in Alsace.
Q: That was after you became a professor in Strassbourg?
A: That was from 1941 on.
Q: And who was your superior in this position?
A: In Strasbourg?
Q: Yes.
A: That was the health director with the Alsatian government.
Q: And a final question, Professor, were you a member of the NSDAP?
A: Yes, I was a member of the NSDAP.
Q: Did you hold any office or rank in the party?
A: No, I had no office and no rank in the party.
Q: Now let's go on to your work, Professor. What specific fields of work did you have in detail?
A: As I have already said my work was that of virus and tumor research, including tissue cultures which has a great significance in this type of research. I dealt primarily with virus research because parts of the tumors are among the virus diseases. Here I was primarily interested in discovering the causes, that is finding the virus responsible for the various virus diseases, breeding this virus, making it microscopically visible and in connection with that, questions as to immunity. Then I also dealt with the development of vaccines against virus diseases. Virus production on a large scale, however, never interested me. Since this is not the duty of a research worker in normal times but the war created conditions so that for military reasons and also for general reasons it became necessary to accept such vaccine production assignments.
Q: Well, we will come back to vaccine production later. I should like to ask you now, witness, since when had you worked in this specialized field?
A: Since I entered the Reich Health Office, since 1926.
Q: And what diseases, Professor, were you specifically interested in?
A: In the course of the years I worked on quite a number of virus diseases. I can only mention small pox, herpes, influenza, various forms of inflammation of the brain, psittacosis, than tumor diseases and then the diseases which are of interest primarily in this trial, typhus, yellow fever, epidemic jaundice or hepatitis and influenza.
Q: Professor, your work is very important here and in connection with your work, the research assignments which were issued to you. First I should like to ask you to speak as generally and briefly as possible on research assignments in general.
A: From the files which I have seen here I have seen that the term "research assignment" has been considerably misused. The term "research assignment" is not a clearly defined term with only one meaning. It must be divided into various groups, the majority of the research assignments came about because the scientists asked for assistants because largo funds are generally not available to the institutes for research but in Germany we had the Reich Research Council which developed from the unfortunate position of German science and. during the war we had an opportunity to ask the medical inspectorate of the various branches of the Wehrmacht for research assignments. Then one made an application, one indicated the subject and the problem one wanted to work with, and the reasons why this work was important and why one needed assistance. If this application was approved, then as a rule this involved financial support but this was especially important during the war. In these research assignments we had an opportunity to obtain material and equipment which had become scarce because of the war and also an opportunity to employ additional personnel and to have some of the more important workers deferred. It also happened, but rather rarely, that the agency which I have mentioned, issued the research assignments. These were generally development assignments, especially in the field of technique, physics and chemistry. I cannot remember any such assignments in my field of bacteriology and particularly virus research. The third group one cannot call research assignments, but simply production assignments, which the institute did not like to accept, for instance, vaccine production, that was the duty of industry, in this case, the serum and vaccine industry, but during the war we had to subordinate such objections and be willing to take over production assignments.
Q: Witness, will you please look at document book 8, look at page 6, The document I should like to discuss with you is Prosecution Exhibit No. 137. It is a letter from you to the Rector of the University at Strassburg dated the 7th of October 1943. In this letter you ask that the Hygiene Institute be recognized as a war plant and under the numbers 1 to 5 you cite a number of research assignments. Will you please tell us, Professor, under which category of the question you have just mentioned the various assignments fit?
A: I will go into the individual assignments briefly one after the other. The first assignments is a production assignment for yellow fever vaccine given out by the Reich Aviation Ministry and the Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe from the Medical Inspectorate. This is purely a production assignment.
The second one also issued by the Inspectorate of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe is an assignment on typhus vaccine, again a research assignment.
The third assignment is also from the Aviation Ministry, Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe, Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, subject, influenza. It was a pure research assignment to discover the cause of the disease. It included the development of a practical procedure for the development of vaccine, a research and development assignment, but not a production assignment.
The fourth assignment was issued by the Reich Research Council and refers to typhus. It is also a research assignment.
The next one that is listed is also an assignment of the Reich Research Council on hepatitis, or epidemic jaundice, This was a subject I was especially interested in.
Q: Now this Tribunal is especially interested in the following question, witness: In working on these research assignments were you under the supervision of the offices which had given you these
A: No, in my capacity as director of the University Institute I was working only under the Rector and Curator of this University and then the Reich Ministry of Education.
Q: In such research assignments and production assignments, was it customary, Professor, for the work of the scientists to be checked in any way?
A: No, there was no right to check the work nor any duty, as an Institute director is in an independent scientific position and no one got the idea of exercising any control. If one had a research assignment one was merely obligated at certain intervals to report on the progress of the work and with the aid of these reports the agency that issued the assignment decided whether it was worth while to continue the work, or not, that is, whether it was worth while to issue further funds and so forth.
Q: Now, was it not another duty, that is, to give an accounting of the money?
A: Yes, of course, accountings were generally given at least that was the case with us. The money was administered by the University Treasury and the accounting went through that office.
Q: Professor, you said you worked with research on small pox, yellow fever, jaundice, influenza, and typhus. Now, I should like to go on to various research work. Going over these research assignments, Mr. President, it will be necessary to use certain specialized terms repeatedly as was shown in the Rose case. In order to avoid long theoretical explanations I have asked the witness to make a brief affidavit of this subject. I believe that will serve the Tribunal's purpose better than a long discussion. I have put the document in Becker-Freyseng Supplemental No. 6, which is not ready yet. I have the necessary number of English and German copies here and I should like to ask the representative of the General Secretary's office to distribute these to the Tribunal, the Prosecution, and the interpreters so that I may read it now.
Professor Haagen was in America for many years and he has given the affidavit in German as well as in English. There are two originals. I think that is the best way to avoid difficulties. I offer this as Becker-Freyseng Document 75, it will be Exhibit 51 for Becker-Freyseng, and here is the original.
THE PRESIDENT: Copies of the affidavit in the German language will in due time be furnished to the Tribunal I assume?
DR. TIPP: Yes. I will bring it tomorrow morning. I am afraid I don't have enough right now. So that it will be understandable, Mr. President, I should like to read the most important parts of this affidavit. No. I deals with the professional concern of the witness. I have already gone into that. I needn't read that I begin on page 2.
II. Therefore I believe myself able to give the following short statement about the terms, used especially in virus research.
III. 1). Virus means originally poison or better living poison. Today virus means a group of germs of a special kind.
2). Virulence — the total action or effect of the virus.
DR TIPP: Virulent is the adjective.
3). The action of virulence is establishes essentially by the presence of a pathogen and an antigen factor.
a) pathogen — pathogen action — capacity to produce a typical manifest disease.
pathogen for human being — the virus produces a disease in human being.
pathogen for animals — the virus produces a disease in animals. A virus may be either exclusively pathogen for human being or pathogen for animals or pathogen for bath at the same time.
b) antigen — antigen action — capacity to produce a specific immunity or specific antibodies against a later infection in question.
4) One doesn't speak of a virus virulent for human beings, but of a virus pathogen for human beings.
5) Only living virus is virulent, that is to say active in some way. Killed by physical or chemical means it looses at the same time its activity or virulence, that is to say the antigen and pathogen factors disappear. Than the virus is a virulent. It is not able to produce immunity or disease.
6) Infection — introduction of a germ or active parts of it into the body without regard to the special action.
7) Not every infection must result in a manifest diseases.
8) Toxic — poisoning action.
Toxin — poisoning part of virus with a pathogen and an antigen factor.
9) The correct English term for Impfung is inoculation — artificially produced infection.
Vaccination — the purpose of the inoculation is immunization.
The German term "Schutzimpfung" corresponds with the English vaccination.
10. Immunization — production of specific protective substances or anti-bodies against a later natural infection with the respective disease. Vaccination is therefore an artificial immunization.
11. An immunization against virus diseases is possibly exclusively with living, i.e. virulent virus, which is however no longer pathogen for human beings.
12. Therefore a vaccine against virus diseases has to contain living, i.e. virulent virus, the antigen or immunizing action of which is preserved, but the pathogen, disease producing action for human beings of which has disappeared.
13. The virus used for vaccines is modified or attenuated by animal passage or culture so much that the pathogen action is suppressed, the antigen action however is preserved. The virus grown in the animals is pathogen to the, but no longer for human beings.
14. The introduction of living virus containing vaccines is therefore a real infection with virulent virus which is however not more pathogen for human beings.
DR. TIPP: There follows the signature and the certification. Mr. President, I now come to the work of Professor Haagen in detail. Since we have only five minutes I believe it would be better to start tomorrow morning.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.