1947-06-19, #3: Doctors' Trial (early afternoon)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 19 June 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record the absence of the defendant Pokorny, who has been excused to consult with his counsel.
Counsel may proceed.
EUGEN HAAGEN — Resumed
EXAMINATION (Continued)
BY DR. WEISGERBER (Counsel for defendant Sievers):
Q: Professor, in view of your long years of teaching at Universities, you can assuredly answer the following question. What role does the scientific draftsman play in a dissecting room? Does he have complete insight into his chief's activities; does he have an opportunity to see reports that this chief has drawn up; and, above all, is he capable of understanding their contents completely?
A: That question cannot be answered so easily. It depends, first of all, on what position this draftsman occupies, what special training he has had and, of course, it is important also, what his personal relations are with the professor in question. Now, just what the relations are in this case, I unfortunately cannot tell you. It is to be assumed, of course, that if the person is making drawings of such a specialized field he probably is in pretty close contact with his superior because there will be things to discuss; but, as I said, I cannot give you details about this.
Q: If this man is a professional draftsman who has taken this position in a dissecting room during the war, in 1941, however, one might assume that the contact with his chief was not so very intimate that he would know all about the chief's activities? I am referring, as you may notice, to the situation at the Strasbourg University. Do not these facts I just mentioned also play a part?
A: Certainly; in judging such personal matters these things are important. If this draftsman visited his chief all the time and entered and left the room all the time, they may have had pretty close relations. But, as I said before, I cannot tell you how close they were.
Q: Did Professor Hirt ever tell you that he had informed Sievers of your work?
A: So far as I know he did this only in the course of his correspondence that dealt with the vaccines he was asking for.
Q: No other cases that you know of?
A: No.
Q: Do you assume that in other cases Hirt might have informed Sievers of your work?
A: No, I don't believe he did.
Q: Thank you. I have no further questions.
DR. KRAUSS (Counsel for defendant Rostock):
Q: Professor, did the research assignments in typhus and hepatitis which you were given by the Reich Research Council bear Professor Rostock's signature?
A: I cannot recall ever having seen Professor Rostock's signature.
Q: Professor, when you applied to the Reich Research Council, for financial reasons, for a research assignment, did you then deal with Professor Rostock?
A: No. These applications were always made in writing and were sent to the Reich Research Council as an organization, or to Dr. Breuer.
Q: Did you send written reports on your research to Professor Rostock?
A: I do not believe so I cannot remember that I did.
Q: Did you ever report on such things to him orally?
A: At most it is possible that we might have spoken about these things at the hepatitis conference but I cannot recall that we did.
Q: Did you ever visit Professor Rostock in Berlin?
A: No.
Q: I must refer briefly to the affidavit that your former secretary, Miss Eyer, signed. This is Document No. NO-883, Exhibit No. 320. In it, under No. 8, Miss Eyer made statements to the contrary in this matter. I shall have the affidavit put to you and ask you to read No. 8, which is on page 104 of Document Book 12.
A: Yes, I see this, but Miss Eyer says "I think." She says:
Professor Rostock was in constant touch with Haagen and they made numerous oral reports to each others; Haagen used to visit Rostock in Berlin.
Q: Please read No. 8 and then I will put a question to you.
A: Very well.
Q: Professor, the witness, Weltz, has corroborated in its major points what you have just said. Can you also state, with absolute certainty, that this is an error in memory on the part of Miss Eyer?
A: Yes, that is the only way I can construe this because Miss Eyer must have known to whom I wrote letters and from whom I received them.
Q: Then you Did not send or receive letters involving Professor Rostock?
A: No.
Q: Thank you. No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other questions of the witness on the part of defense counsel? If not, the prosecution may cross-examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION
BY MR. McHANEY:
Q: Witness, did you know the position held by the defendant Rostock in the office of the defendant Brandt?
A: I can say about this only that from letterheads that I have seen I knew that Rostock did something in Brandt's office.
Q: Did you know what this "something" was?
A: No, I didn't.
Q: Where did you see these letterheads? I understood your testimony about two nights ago to have been that you had no correspondence with Rostock.
A: Just at the conclusion I said that I had no correspondence with Rostock in this matter. That is just what I got through saying. I received a few letters from Professor Rostock. These letters were concerned with the training of a technical assistant and it is from them I saw the letterheads I just mentioned.
Q: Did you have correspondence with him about anything else?
A: No, I can't recall that I did.
Q: What about the electronic microscope?
A: I never had an electronic microscope.
Q: And you can remember that you definitely had no correspondence with Rostock concerning the electronic microscope?
A: I cannot recall ever corresponding with Rostock in that matter.
Q: You knew that Rostock was chief of the office for science and research under Karl Brandt, didn't you?
A: I have just told you that I do not know exactly what position Rostock occupied in Brandt's office
Q: Did you know whether it had anything to do with research?
A: That I assume.
Q: Did you know that Rostock in August of 1944 classified your typhus research as urgent?
A: Of that I knew nothing.
Q: I understood your testimony to be that from the time you went to Strasbourg in October 1941 until the summer of 1943 you were not a member of the Luftwaffe.
A: From 1 October 1941 until the middle of 1943 I was on leave from my military duties. I had leave to carry on work.
Q: And you did no work for the Luftwaffe during that period?
A: No.
Q: I am under the impression that you received an influenza research assignment in 1942.
A: That is so, yes.
Q: And you did nothing about it?
A: How am I to understand you to mean that, that I did nothing about it?
Q: As I understand it, you testified that from October 1941 to the summer of 1943 you were on leave from the Luftwaffe and had nothing to do with them. I point out to you that in 1942 you received a research assignment on influenza from the Luftwaffe. I have some difficulty reconciling these two propositions.
A: You have to discriminate between two things here: on the one hand, my military activities, and on the other hand my activities as professor and scientist. I received this assignment not as a member of the Luftwaffe but as a researcher and specialist in this field.
Q: But you were working for the Luftwaffe in whatever capacity, weren't you, Professor?
A: I received this research assignment from the Luftwaffe but that does not justify you in saying that this research assignment was for a specific office of the Luftwaffe. I have already told you that when we wanted research assignments we turned to whatever office could provide us the funds.
Q: Professor, I am not interested in that. I am just inquiring from you whether you were doing research.
We will leave it to the Tribunal to decide whether or not any of the defendants in the dock were responsible for that, but your testimony had left the impression that from October 1941 until the summer of 1943 you weren't doing anything in connection with the Luftwaffe and I just wanted to point out that is not quite accurate. Now, when you were on active duty with the Luftwaffe, you were subordinated to the Air Fleet Physician Reich, were you not?
A: On leave I was not subordinate to him.
Q: During the period when you were not on leave.
A: Until 1 October 1941 I was subordinate to the Air Fleet Physician; from 1 July 1943 I was again subordinate to him.
Q: But he could issue orders to you, couldn't he?
A: He could give me no orders.
Q: Couldn't give you any orders?
A: No.
Q: Did he have any disciplinary rights over you?
A: No.
Q: Then you really weren't a member of the Luftwaffe? You had no commander, no one to issue orders to you, is that right?
A: The Air Fleet Physician was not my superior and could not give me orders, nor was I subordinate to him disciplinarily.
Q: Did anybody give you orders in the Luftwaffe?
A: Yes.
Q: Who?
A: The Luftgau [Air District] physician No. 7 in Munich.
Q: He could issue orders to you?
A: That is right.
Q: And he could discipline you for any infractions of the regulations, is that right?
A: That is so. Of course, he could give me disciplinary penalties.
Q: And if Luftgau physician No. 7 indicated a desire that you carry out research on typhus.
I assume that you would comply with that, would you not?
A: It is my opinion that research assignments cannot be ordered and I don't believe any superior could have been found who would have given such orders.
Q: Well, I don't recall that I used the word "orders" but you were a virus expert. I don't assume they would come to you with a problem on surgery but if they indicated a desire you work on typhus, as distinguished from epidemic jaundice, I am asking you if you wouldn't comply with that request.
A: I should not have had to accord with this request unless the request had interested me.
Q: But I assume you were a patriotic scientist working for the benefit of the German war effort and if Luftgau No. 7 and the chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe felt that typhus research was a particularly important problem, I am asking you if you wouldn't work on it and subordinate any personal interests you might have in other fields. Isn't that right, Professor?
A: If someone had asked me to do this, that would have had to be a specialist in this field and the Luftgau physician who could give me orders was no specialist and would have left the decision up to me whether or not I wished to work in that field.
Q: Well, did you ever get any such suggestions from anybody?
A: No, no such proposals were ever made to me.
Q: What did Rose suggest to you in 1943?
A: Yesterday and today I explained what Rose and I talked about; to wit, the taking over of a vaccine manufacturing plant.
Q: Well, then he encouraged you to do that, didn't he, and also to develop an effective vaccine which you would produce?
A: That is so. We spoke of the vaccine that was to be produced.
Q: From what office were your research assignments by the Luftwaffe issued?
A: The research assignments that I received from the Luftwaffe were, since they were in the field of hygiene, primarily directed by the hygiene Referat, namely, Stabsarzt [Staff Surgeon] Atmer, as I have already said.
Q: You are testifying that Stabsarzt Atmer issued the research assignment to you, is that right?
A: Yes, in collaboration with Guenzel, who was in charge of the funds.
Q: Well, all of the research assignments that we have in our documents carry the Referat number 2 II B — that is, Arabic 2, Roman 2, capital B — or 2F. Becker-Freyseng has testified that up Until sometime in 1944 Anthony was chief of that office and thereafter he was chief of it.
A: I have already said that from the purely formal point of view the research assignments were worked on there but that the real decision on them was made by the hygiene Referat.
Q: I didn't ask you who made the decisions. I asked you who issued the assignments. You testified that Atmer didn't. The fact is that Becker-Freyseng's office, the Referat for Aviation Medicine, issued them, isn't it?
A: I never saw that any research assignments emanated from his office.
Q: Then Dr. Rose wrote you a letter in June 1943 saying something about Anthony being away and that he wished him to issue you the order when Anthony returned. You remember that, don't you?
A: I remember that and I also have just stated that this office worked on these assignments in a purely formal way. I also said that I am not intimately acquainted with the internal structure of the Medical Inspectorate so I cannot give you the precise data on this matter, but I can tell you that Becker-Freyseng had nothing to do with any research assignments.
Q: They just came formally through his office; that is all he had to do with them; is that right?
A: That is all I know about it.
Q: And from whence came the money? Didn't that also formally come out of 2 II B and 2 F?
A: I spoke only with Amtsrat Quenzel about financial matters, and he provided the money.
Q: That department was he in?
A: I don't know what the name of the department is. I do know that he took care of the financial matters.
Q: Never called Anthony or Becker-Freyseng about that?
A: No.
Q: How did you account for the moneys that you received from the Luftwaffe?
A: The money was paid into the University treasury and I had to carry my accounts through the University treasury.
Q: You mean to say that when the Luftwaffe granted you a research assignment and 4,000 marks, that then they delivered the 4,000 masks to the University of Strasbourg?
A: It was sent to the Strasbourg University Treasury and they made the necessary payments, and so forth.
Q: What do you mean, they made the necessary payments? Suppose you made a trip to Natzweiler or Schirmak and it cost you 50 Reichmarks. How did you got your money back?
A: The trip to Natzweiler was made by car. The gasoline was purchased and a bill sent you a voucher made to that effect.
Q: And to whom did you turn over the voucher?
A: They all went to the Medical Inspectorate to Mr. Quenzel.
Q: They went to the Luftwaffe Medical Inspectorate?
A: They went to Quenzel, who was taking care of the finances.
Q: And did you render an accounting? You didn't send in each little bill, I assume. I guess you ran for a three month period or some such period like that and then tallied up the items and made an accounting, didn't you?
A: That, of course, is true. Not every little bill was sent in, but when the sum allotted was almost used up, a final account was drawn up and sent to Mr. Quenzel.
Q: And was he with the Strasbourg University or the Luftwaffe? I am a little confused here.
A: He was a member of the Luftwaffe.
Q: And did you show these trips to Natzweiler on these accounts you turned an to the Luftwaffe?
A: In the accounts there was only mention of the gasoline I bought at some gas station.
Q: I am asking you if the accounts you turned in were in such detail that they could see that you were incurring expenses in connection with trips to Natzweiler and Schirmek?
A: No.
Q: Didn't you ever make any telephone calls to Schirmek or Natzweiler, long distance calls?
A: Yes, I did.
Q: You didn't charge those up on the expense account?
A: I didn't include them in the expense account because that was taken care of by my phone bill with the University.
Q: You worked with the Luftwaffe for some time and I take it you rendered a lot of these statements. You are pretty clear in your testimony about this, that you couldn't tell from these statements that you were making trips to Natzweiler and Schirmek concentration camps?
A: The Luftwaffe could not see from these accounts that I was making trips to Schirmek or Natzweiler.
Q: Where was Schirmek in reference to Strasbourg?
A: Schirmek is west of Strasbourg in the Bosges Mountains.
Q: How far?
A: Approximately 35 to 40 kilometers.
Q: Schirmek was a concentration camp, wasn't it?
A: Schirmek was officially a Sicherungslager, that is, a camp to house persons under security detention.
A: That is a concentration camp, isn't it? It is like Naztweilar.
A: There must have been some difference because one is a concentration camp and the other is called a security detention camp.
Q: How big was Schirmek?
A: I can't tell you. You probably want to know how many inmates it had, but I can't tell you.
Q: Can't you give us a rough estimate?
A: That is terribly difficult. I should prefer to refrain from doing so.
Q: How often, were you in Schirmek?
A: In Schirmek maybe four or five times, if I am estimating correctly.
Q: When did you go there first?
A: I can't tell you the exact date. I really can't be definite about that. We did our vaccinating in May, 1943, but when I was there for the first time I can't tell you. That was too long ago.
Q: All, you were, there for a time or two before, you carried out your vaccinations in May, 1943, is that right?
A: I cannot say that for sure.
Q: You didn't visit concentration camps very often, did you Professor? I should think you would have a pretty keen recollection about your trips to concentration camps.
A: Please don't forget that I was also in Natzweiler, which was very nearby, and that altogether I paid a lot of visits.
Q: Any besides Natzweiler and Schirmek?
A: No.
Q: Who gave you permission to enter Schirmek?
A: The camp management.
Q: Did he come to see you or did you go to see him?
A: As I said yesterday, the camp commander of Natzweiler and his adjutant of Natzweiler with which Schirmek was affiliated and the camp physician came to me.
Q: What was the purpose of Becker-Freyseng's visit to Strasbourg in July 1944?
A: Becker-Freyseng's visit to me in Strasbourg in 1944 was made because I had previously spoken to Professor Schroeder about the difficulties I was having to get animals, and he promised me that Becker-Freyseng would get in touch with me on the question of acquiring more animals. For this reason Becker-Freyseng came to me in Strasbourg.
Q: What kind of animals?
A: Our laboratory animals, primarily mice and also rabbits?
Q: Any guinea pigs?
A: I don't believe I asked for guinea pigs. Only mice and rabbits.
Q: He was not with Schroeder on the occasion of Schroeder's visit to see you in Strasbourg?
A: No. Dr. Becker-Freyseng was not with Prof. Schroeder at the same time in Strasbourg.
Q: And when did Schroeder come?
A: Schroeder had been there before.
Q: Do you remember in what month?
A: I said yesterday that Prof. Schroeder was with me in Strasbourg at the end of May.
DR. TIPP: Mr. President, for ten minutes Mr. McHaney has been asking questions, all of which have already been asked in the direct examination and have been answered. The Tribunal wished explicitly that the examination of this witness be limited to the necessary minimum, and I object to his putting questions which I have already put. Perhaps the reason is that Mr. McHaney wasn't present during that part of the direct examination, but the questions really are not necessary, and I object to their being put.
THE PRESIDENT: This is a cross examination. Counsel may proceed.
BY MR. McHANEY:
Q: Has Rose with Schroeder on the occasion of his visit to Strasbourg in May 1944?
A: No.
Q: And when did Rose see you in 1944?
A: Professor Rose was there at a different time. It was also some time during the summer, but not at the same time that Schroeder was there.
Q: And Rose also visited you in 1943?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you remember any other visits by Rose, other than these two?
A: Rose paid me no other visits.
Q: How many research assignments did you get from the Luftwaffe on influenza?
A: I had one research assignment from the Luftwaffe, and this was then subsequently extended, when the fund's were used up.
Q: Well, including the original assignment, plus the extensions, there were three, were, there not, beginning in '42? Another one in '43 and another one in '44, is that right?
A: No, you can't put it that way because I only asked for such funds when they were exhausted. It was all the same research assignment which in each case was extended.
Q: It was extended twice then, once in 1943 and once in 1944?
A: That is possible, yes.
Q: And were you using a living virus in the influenza vaccine? I understood you to testify that you were.
A: I explained very carefully yesterday that in the influenza vaccine a living virus was used in the same way that vaccine is manufactured in other countries, such as America and England.
Q: Now, Professor, couldn't you have answered that question "yes" without the three or four sentences?
A: Yes, I could do that too.
Q: I would appreciate it if you would. Now, how many trips did you make to Schirmeck in connection with the influenza vaccinations
A: For the purpose of influenza vaccinations I went to Schirmeck twice.
Q: And you vaccinated twenty women?
A: Yes.
Q: What was the purpose of the second visit?
A: The second visit was to ascertain whether there had been any reaction. In other words, to look into the tolerability of the vaccine.
Q: And you found out the tolerability was good?
A: Yes, the tolerability was good. No one's ability to work was in any way interfered with.
Q: Do you remember how high their fever went?
A: The temperatures hardly rose at all. If they had risen at all it certainly would have struck me.
Q: How much influenza vaccine did you have available?
A: About enough for 250 to 300 persons at that time.
Q: Was influenza vaccine generally available in Germany?
A: Various agencies were concerning themselves at the time with the manufacture of influenza vaccine, just at that time.
Q: Was there any concerted effort to have large scale influenza vaccinations carried out on German soldiers or on civilians?
A: Many vaccinations were made at that time, particularly on civilians and soldiers.
Q: I have some difficulty in understanding why you went to Shirmeck and vaccinated twenty women with this vaccine.
A: A camp is always particularly vulnerable when there is a possibility of an epidemic breaking out because people are packed so close together in the camp that the epidemic is likely to spread very quickly. In any camp there is always a group of persons who are particularly likely to spread such an epidemic of influenza, namely, those who move from one barracks to another, taking care of food, transportation and so forth. Now if one such person is infected with influenza it is very easy for the person to travel from one barrack to another and spread it and that is why I vaccinated those twenty women who were designated to me by the camp commander as people who were endangered in this respect.
Q: It is your scientific opinion and you want the Court to understand that in a camp the size of Schirmeck vaccinating twenty women was a good prophylactic measure to keep down influenza in Schirmeck, is that right?
A: Of course, I should have preferred to be able to vaccinate more people but my production capacities were small in this respect, so consequently I vaccinated only those who were particularly dangerous. In Schirmeck it was these women and in Strasbourg it was the 200 employees who were vaccinated because here again the danger existed that these 200 nurses and doctors in the hospital, namely, the ones who were vaccinated, would transmit the disease. They themselves were particularly in danger of contacting the disease because they worked in the hospital.
Q: So that your testimony is that the camp doctor of Schirmeck came to you and said that there is danger of an influenza epidemic in Schirmeck. Won't you come there and help us out, and you had no interest in testing this vaccine at all, but you did go there and vaccinated twenty of the most susceptible carriers with the influenza vac cine, is that right?
A: The camp physician didn't ask me. I from my own epidemiological knowledge saw this danger and since the camp management was agreeable to this I was able to carry out these vaccinations.
Q: You went to him then. He didn't come to you?
A: In the case of influenza vaccinations I went to him.
Q: Which took place first, influenza or typhus?
A: Typhus, that was May 1943.
Q: He had already come to you in connection with the typhus danger and after you had made his acquaintance you suggested the influenza is that right?
A: I didn't suggest it. I told him I thought it would be a good idea if he had this vaccination in the camp. He saw the truth of this and then I could do the vaccinating.
Q: And these tests you carried out there were no different from the other 200 you carried out on students and assistants in Strasbourg, is that right?
A: This was not an experiment but a regular protective vaccination and was exactly the same sort of thing which I did with my personnel in Strasbourg.
Q: And you were not interested in making any observations on the reaction against the vaccine, you were vaccinating like we give a small pox vaccination, is that right?
A: That is right.
Q: And this had nothing to do with your research assignment from the Luftwaffe, of course?
A: It had nothing to do with it, no. That was my own initiative and my own idea.
Q: Just protective vaccination?
A: That is right.
Q: Well, I assume you didn't charge this to the Luftwaffe then, is that right?
A: How am I to understand that: "Charge it to the Luftwaffe?"
Q: Well, you had received money from them to do something for them in the way of influenza, research. I haven't heard much about what you did but you said these protective vaccinations didn't have anything to do with it and I am asking you if you charged whatever expenses you incurred in connection with it to the Luftwaffe?
A: As I said, all of the things I did for the Luftwaffe I charged them for. When I was in Schirmeck, of course, I charged them for the gasoline for the trip.
Q: But you didn't do these vaccinations for the Luftwaffe?
A: That is correct, I didn't.
Q: Well, let's look at the charge sheet you did submit to the Luftwaffe. You made two trips to Schirmeck in connection with this influenza vaccine, is that right, Professor?
A: Yes, two, in winter 1943.
Q: Well, let's see what this shows.
A: Yes.
Q: Now this is a statement of expenditures, on your influenza research, isn't it, Professor? This is document NO-3450, a statement of expenditures on your Luftwaffe influenza research, isn't it?
A: Yes.
Q: The first assignment on the 22nd of January 1942, and then that was continued again in 1944, which shows that it came out of the office II F, that is Becker-Freyseng's office, isn't it?
A: Here I see the date of '43 to '44, if I am reading correctly.
Q: Yes, I think that is true. You testified that you made some trips to Schirmeck?
A: Yes.
Q: And called over long distance telephone also on the 28 October 1944, in connection with these protective vaccinations. Did you find that, the 28 of October 1943?
A: Yes, I see that.
Q: You charged that to the Luftwaffe, didn't you?
A: Yes, that is included in the phone calls.
Q: And way down in '44, the 12th of February, you made another trip to Schirmeck, didn't you, 25 marks, in connection with these protective vaccinations?
A: Here I see the 12 of February one entry return of two boxes.
Q: The 12th of February, 1944?
A: Ah, here it is. Here it is, that other one, two trips to Natzweiler, because Natzweiler and Schirmeck were more or loss all one thing. That is the way to explain that.
Q: That is the way to explain what — that you called Natzweiler "Schirmeck"?
A: In Strasbourg that is the way we called them and I wasn't the person who wrote those things, I just dictated this Natzweiler or Schirmeck to my secretary and as I told you, there were all one thing.
Q: I didn't understand you testified anything about having made any influenza protective vaccinations in Natzweiler, did you?
A: No, none were done there.
Q: Well, this bill here has nothing to do with typhus. We are only concerned with influenza here.
A: Perhaps the title of this is influenza but that doesn't mean a thing. If I made a trip to Natzweiler, I could have put that down under influenza. Everything wasn't done as carefully as all that. The secretary made the notation and then put it down.
Q: You didn't tabulate your expenses in connection with your influenza work separate from that in connection with your typhus work? Isn't that right, you just lumped them all together?
A: Yes, perhaps in the typhus accounts there are things that really should have been in the influenza account, and vice versa. That is quite possible.
Q: So you deny to the Tribunal that you went to Schirmeck 12 February 1944 in connection with influenza, is that right?
A: That is certainly the case. I did not go to Schirmeck on account of influenza.
Q: And on 29 February, "long distance telephone Schirmeck 108", what is that telephone number? You undoubtedly know that very well.
A: Yes, that was Schirmeck, too. I guess I telephoned Schirmeck for something or other — wanted to know something about the fever graphs from before. That is all quite possible. All these were serological examinations that had been sent in to us about which I telephoned back.
Q: You are positive that Schirmeck 108 is the telephone number in the Schirmeck camp, is that right?
A: That I can't tell you for sure today. That might have been Natzweiler.
Q: Well, do you know whom you were calling when you called Schirmeck 108? Whom did you get on the telephone?
A: My secretary made the connection and I just don't remember the numbers. Once the connection was made then she put me on the wire.
Q: Who did you talk to?
A: I talked with my secretary and she made the connection.
Q: I mean who did you talk to in Schirmeck or Natzweiler. You made a telephone call. Who did you talk to?
A: Spoke to the camp physician.
Q: I think you will find that Schirmeck 108 is the Natzweiler number. You made a call on 29 February, on 28 March; on the next page on 18 March you will find long distance call Schirmeck 108 Natzweiler. Find that?
A: One long distance call Schirmeck. Yes, that must have been Natzweiler. With the best will in the world I can't tell you what the number was; I am very sorry.
Q: And on 25 April, 5 May, and 6 May you made additional calls to Natzweiler, is that right?
A: If the number is here, then we made the calls.
Q: But that has nothing to do with influenza?
A: No, it didn't. The secretary just put it down here as having some connection with research assignments.
MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal please, I do not know the next exhibit number in order.
THE PRESIDENT: You can ascertain that during the recess period and properly advise us later.
MR. McHANEY: Very well, Your Honor, I will offer this document at that time.
BY MR. McHANEY:
Q: Didn't this co-mingling of your influenza expenses with your typhus expenses cause any confusion with the Luftwaffe?
A: I don't think so. The same person was concerned in both, namely myself. I was the one to whom the assignment had been given.
Q: Well, but if the Luftwaffe decided to give you 4000 marks for typhus research and 4000 marks for influenza research weren't you taking a slight advantage of them when you spent 3500 marks of the influenza money on typhus and raising the total of research money of typhus to say 7500? Wasn't that sort of imposing a little bit on the Luftwaffe?
A: No, you can't put it that way. All these were scientific assignments that I was working on and if the money in one fund was a little short why we could make it up from money out of the other fund.
I know no misgivings were expressed about that.
Q: Now on epidemic jaundice for a few minutes. As I understand your testimony, you admitted that you were planning to carry out epidemic jaundice experiments on human beings, is that right?
A: Yes, I spoke of that planning yesterday.
Q: And this was to be in collaboration with Kalk, Buechner, Zugschwert, and Dohmen.
A: Who was the first?
Q: Kalk, K-a-l-k.
A: Oh, Kalk, yes, that was our work circle.
Q: Now, was Dohmen included in this work circle.
A: No, he didn't.
Q: Now, these human experiments were discussed in the Breslau meeting in 1944, presided over by Schreiber, weren't they?
A: Yes, Schreiber was chairman.
Q: Well then, I am sure it won't come as any shock to you that Schreiber later got in touch with the defendant Mrugowsky in January 1945 and asked him to arrange for 20 concentration camp inmates in Buchenwald. Do you know anything about that?
A: No, I don't.
Q: For what reason was your proposed plan to carry out jaundice experiments abandoned?
A: The war situation determined that. My opportunity to work in Strasbourg stopped around August, September because student companies were sent off, the reserve hospitals were changed into army hospitals, and there were no more chances to work there.
Q: Now you testified that you planned to use volunteers from the student companies of the Wehrmacht at Strasbourg, Freiburg, or Heidelberg, is that right?
A: Yes, that is so.
Q: How far is Freiburg from Strasbourg?
A: About one hours train ride.
Q: How many kilometers from Strasbourg?
A: I guess it is about 60.
Q: From Heidelberg?
A: Heidelberg — one and one-half to two hours train ride.
Q: How many kilometers would you say Heidelberg was from Strasbourg?
A: I should estimate 90 to 100.
Q: And you feel that those two cities are in the vicinity of Strasbourg, is that right?
A: Yes, it was very easy to reach them by car.
Q: Did it ever occur to you to use the words Strasbourg, Heidelberg, Freiburg in this letter concerning these jaundice experiments on human beings when you used instead the term Strasbourg and vicinity?
A: Yes, as I said yesterday, this was only a planning which was discussed with Professor Kalk.
Q: And the "in the vicinity of Strasbourg" could by no stretch of imagination mean Natzweiler?
A: No, not in this connection at all.
Q: Natzweiler, however, was a little bit closer to Strasbourg than either Freiburg or Heidelberg, wasn't it?
A: That is so but in this case very precise clinical observations had to be made and, as I said yesterday, we had to be able to rely on what vaccinated persons told us. Therefore, it was better to use medical students who had better interest in this matter.
Q: Well, now, were these student companies available for this purpose that you, were planning to use them for? After all, they were studying; they had other things to do.
A: That is so, yes, but we could be perfectly sure that they would make volunteers available to us.
Q: You were sure that the Luftwaffe would make these people available although they had a lot of work to do and other duties, is that right?
A: Yes, but they also had vacations and we could very well have done this work during vacation.
Q: Who told you could use them or who led you to believe that they might be available for that purpose?
A: Professor Kalk was also of this opinion. He knew the mentality of the students and he believed that we would certainly receive the necessary number of students.
Q: Well, was Kalk in a position to know. I find it difficult to believe that you could get these students, Professor.
A: Mr. Prosecutor, we certainly should have got them.
Q: And what about clinical facilities and weren't they crowded? I also find it difficult to believe that you could have carried out your experiments in the clinic because of the crowded conditions.
A: I can sure that in the serve hospitals we could have done the necessary work. The students didn't have to stay in the hospitals very long and I believe that in this important matter certainly the space would have been made available.
Q: You are quite clear about that? You really want the Tribunal to believe that?
A: Why shouldn't they believe it? In other places also they carried on investigations with volunteers on hepatitis epidemica.
Q: And there was no regulation of the Wehrmacht preventing the use of these students or of soldiers?
A: I know of no such directive.
Q: Well, if there had been he would you known of it?
A: Since we should have to turn to the Chief of the Medical Service anyway, we should have been told something about such a directive if the had existed.
Q: And you can testify that you certainly could have carried out these experiments without going to a concentration camp, is that right?
A: It is certain that we could have done that with volunteer students.
Q: About how long would it have taken to carry them out?
A: How long would have taken until what?
Q: To have carried but these experiments.
A: That probably couldn't be said in advance. You would to ask a clinician, and it depends what the period of incubation is and how long the illness last. It could take a little while or it also could last a very long while. I can't tell you anything about it.
Q: Well, would it last at least weeks, do you think?
A: I can't tell you.
Q: Suppose you tell the Tribunal who Wimmer was.
A: Wimmer? Wimmer was one of Hirt's assistants.
Q: A member of the Luftwaffe?
A: Yes, I think he was a Stabsarzt in the Luftwaffe.
Q: To whom was he subordinated?
A: I can't tell you.
Q: Don't know?
A: No, I don't know.
Q: What about Graefe?
A: Graefe was assigned to me in the Hygiene Institute, and then from 1942 on he was also an assistant in the Institute.
Q: He was a member of the Luftwaffe, wasn't he?
A: Yes, he was a Stabsarzt in the Luftwaffe, although he was detailed to me by the Luftwaffe.
Q: To when was he subordinated?
A: Militarily he was subordinated to Luftgau Physician #7.
Q: Technically to you?
A: Scientifically or technically subordinate to me, yes.
Q: Who was Krediett?
A: That was a Dutch prisoner doctor in Natzweiler.
Q: He knows all about your experiments, doesn't he?
A: Yes, he assisted in them.
Q: Where is he?
A: I can't tell you. I assume he is in Holland.
Q: Who was Paulsen?
A: A Norwegian internist. The chief internist in the Natzweiler hospital. .
Q: He was an inmate, wasn't he?
A: Yes.
Q: He also knows all about your experiments, doesn't he?
A: Yes, he does.
Q: And if he said you infected the experimental subjects with virulent virus he, at least, was in a position to know, wasn't he?
A: Yes he was. He certainly was because we talked over the whole thing.
Q: And what about Meyer? Who was Meyer?
A: He was the administrative inspector and was in my institute in Strasbourg.
Q: Meyer was in the Hygiene Institute?
A: In the Medicinal Research Institute — that was part of the institute, or rather, I was also in charge of that particular institute, and of this Medicinal Research Institute which I just mentioned, Meyer was an administrative inspector.
Q: Who was Henri Pierre?
A: Henri Pierre? I think this is the first time I am hearing that name.
Q: He is a very slight young man, rather thin. Worked in Strasbourg. You don't remember him?
A: Where did he work? I can't remember the name. I can't associate the name with a person.
Q: Do you remember a man, working at Strasbourg, by the name of Bong?
A: I can't tell you for sure. That's not an unusual name, but I don't seem to remember it.
Q: Would it refresh your recollection if I told you how worked in the Anatomical Institute?
A: That wouldn't help me because I didn't know the personnel, of the Anatomical Institute.
Q: Did you know Schuh?
A: Yes.
Q: Where did Schuh work?
A: He was an assistant in the Medicinal Research Institute.
Q: And you were his boss?
A: His immediate boss was Professor Trenz, the Director and Obermedizinalrat [Senior Medical Officer] of that institute.
Q: But you were in charge of that superior of Schuh's, is that right?
A: No, I was the scientific director of both institutes, but I had nothing to say about the personnel of that other institute.
Q: I believe you have already testified that you don't remember Wagner.
A: You mean the draftsman Wagner?
Q: Do you remember him?
A: I know the name from the documents involved in this trial, but I can't remember him. I wasn't acquainted with the personnel of this anatomical Institute.
Q: How, Fraulein Schmidt — she worked with you, didn't show?
A: Yes.
Q: Do you remember an inmate by the name, of Nales?
A: No, I don't remember him.
Q: Don't remember Nales. He remembers you.
Do you remember an inmate by the name of Broers? A Dutchman, a doctor? He was in Natzweiler.
A: I only know the name, Dr. Kredit is the only doctor I know.
Q: Don't know a certain Dr. Boegaarts, an inmate at Natzweiler?
A: He was the chief surgeon in the hospital at Natzweiler.
Q: That's right. He performed the autopsies.
A: I never saw any autopsies of his. I can't tell you. I don't know.
Q: We'll come to that in a moment. How far was the Hygiene Institute from the Anatomical Institute?
A: Five to eight minutes by foot.
Q: Were you on pretty good terms with Hirt?
A: I made his acquaintance when I went to Strasbourg, and, as colleagues, we had touch with one another.
Q: And Bickenbach?
A: I had no contacts with him.
Q: Well, you know Bickenbach, didn't you, Professor?
A: Sure, I knew him, but we saw each other very infrequently.
Q: What was Bickenbach's job at Strasbourg?
A: He was director of the Internal Polyclinic at the University.
Q: Did you ever bump into him in Natzweiler?
A: No. I never hit in Natzweiler.
Q: Suppose you tell the Tribunal what you know about Hirt's gas experiments, Professor?
A: I only know what I have read here in these documents in this trial.
Q: You were in Strasbourg from October, 1941. Hirt carried out his experiments from November, 1942, until the late summer of 1944 in Natzweiler. You want to tell the Tribunal you don't know anything about his experiments with Lost gas, is that right, Professor?
A: I have already said that I knew nothing about Hirt's work and experiments.
Q: Did it come as a great surprise to you, and I suppose it did when you read these document and learned that Hirt was carrying out experiments in Natzweiler with Lost gas? Is that right.
A: I just found it our from these documents. Now I know.
Q: Did you also want to testify to the Tribunal that you know nothing about your colleague Bickenbach's experiments with Lost and Phosgene gas?
A: It was only in connection with this trial that I, for the first time, heard of those experiments. I was asked about that some time ago.
Q: And I suppose that it's pointless for me to ask you to tell the Tribunal what you know about the Jewish skeleton collection which rested in the basement of the Anatomical Institute, eight minutes away from August, 1943, until the Allies entered in November 1944? Did you know anything about that?
A: I know that only from these documents and from the reports in the papers last year, regarding it.
Q: Did that come as something of a shock to you?
A: When I read it, you mean? In November 1945, I was asked about these matters here in Nurnberg and that was the first time I heard anything about them, so I wasn't too surprised later after I found out further details here.
Q: You mean you weren't surprised really when you found out about that? You find it quite believable that Hirt and Bickenbach were capable of doing these things, is that right?
A: I didn't intend to say that. I wasn't surprised because I already know. During my interrogations here in Nurnberg these things had been brought to my attention. It was a matter course that I was surprised that such things had been done.
Q: Would the Tribunal like to adjourn at this time?
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess.
(A recess was taken)