1947-06-28, #4: Doctors' Trial (early afternoon)

AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 28 June 1947)

THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the defendant Rose may proceed.

MR. HARDY: It is my understanding your Honor, that Document Book Rose Number 1 and Document Book Rose number 2, and Document Book Rose Number 3 have been completed, that is, the introduction of documents, and now he is proceeding to supplement the Document Book Rose Number 2.

THE PRESIDENT: Is that correct, counsel?

DR. FRITZ (counsel for the defendant Rose): Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: You are now proceeding with Rose Supplementary Document Book Number 2.

DR. FRITZ: The first document, namely, Document 49, which will be Rose Exhibit 48 in this supplementary volume, is an affidavit by Professor Ernst Nauck. It is not my intention to read this affidavit. It concerns itself with making available of material to another research man or an institute, and states specifically that the deliverer bears no responsibility for what the recipient does with the material. The next document is Number 50 which will be Rose Exhibit 49. This likewise is an affidavit by Professor Ernst Nauck. This concerns itself with the question of whether malaria tertiana is a dangerous disease, and it says that very frequently experiments on human beings have been carried out in malaria tertiana. Let me remark that Professor Schilling also worked in malaria tertiana in Dachau.

The next Document is Document Rose 51 which will be Exhibit 50 is an extract form "Etude Seriolegique de l'Infection Palustre" by Dr. Henry. Perhaps the Tribunal will recall that in the cross-examination of Dr. Rose he was shown a document in which Schilling asked that he be sent the spleen from a person who had died of malaria. This document shows that the spleens of persons who have died of malaria are used in order to terminate the reactions, not only by Schilling but by many others.

Document 52 will be Rose Exhibit 51. This is an excerpt from the book by Dr. Reiner Mueller entitled "Medical Microbiology" which was published in 1946.

The statistics contained in this excerpt show what a danger typhus is, particularly during war-time. I have to put these statistics in for the purpose of my final summation.

Document 53 will be Exhibit 52. This too is an excerpt from the book "Epidemics due to War" by Professor Schlossberger. I can say regarding this extract the same that I said for the previous extract just mentioned.

Docutment 54 will be Exhibit 53. This is an excerpt from the book "Epidemics Resulting from Tars" by Dr. Frinzing. This excerpt also makes manifest the hazards of typhus.

Document 55 will be Exhibit 54. This is an affidavit by Professor Doctor Otto, and there is appended to this an excerpt from the "Clinical Weekly". This document shows what the typhus situation was during the First World War.

Document 56 will be Exhibit 55. This is an excerpt from the book which was published in 1935 in London by Hans Zinsser entitled "Rats, lice, and History." This excerpt also makes palpable the danger of typhus and points up the dangers that threaten the state through a typhus epidemic, and it also uses elucidates the importance of that danger for the future.

The next document is the document put in by the prosecution in the Flick Trial. It was put in as NE 5222, which in this trial I shall put in as Rose Document 56 and it will be exhibit 55. This is a letter —

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, this last Exhibit number should be Exhibit 56. You already had 55.

DR. FRITZ: Correction, Exhibit 56. This is a letter from the president of the Land Labor Offices Westphalia to the District Group Anthracite Mining Ruhr of the Economic Group Mining, Essen, and is dated 3 February '42. This letter throws light on the typhus epidemic among the Russian prisoners of war in German imprisonment during the Second World War. On page 1 of this document, it states, among other things:

Typhus has until recently caused 15,000 deaths daily. In one camp in Westphalia over 900 prisoners of war died during December.

The next document is Document 57, a Report by the Society of Biology by Blanc and Baltazard. Human being experiments are discussed here in which control groups are used.

The next document is Document 58. This is a reprint from the "Tropical Diseases Bulletin." I shall put this in as Rose Exhibit 58. This shows that during the Second World War in Africa in a period of two and a half years three and a half million protective vaccinations were given with living typhus vaccine. It can further be seen from this this paper that five to six cases bf typhus developed per thousand as a result of these vaccinations. That would mean that roughly twenty thousand people became ill with typhus as a result of these protective vaccinations.

Document 59 will be Rose Exhibit 59. This is another affidavit by Professor Otto which deals with the concept "subsequent infection". The concept, subsequent infection has played a large role in the work that Professor Hagen did, and this word "subsequent infection" frequently appears in Hagen's publications and in his correspondence, among other things, his correspondence with the defendant Rose.

In addition I have turned in an affidavit by Dr. Knorr to be translated, but it has not yet been translated and is consequently not here contained. This affidavit also deals with the concept subsequent infection. I should like to state now that later I shall wish to put this document in evidence. I have the original here and perhaps it could be given an exhibit number now.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I suggest that he put the document in now. It seems to have a notary's certificate on it and file the English copies with us later, and then we won't have to bother to go back to it.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well, that procedure may be followed.

DR. FRITZ: This then, will be Rose Exhibit 60, and finally, Mr. President, I have three French papers here, two papers by Sergeant and his associates and one paper by Tersa and Wassel. In these papers typhus infection of non-vaccinated persons is described. I have not yet been in a position to turn these over to the translation department. Professor Rose has asked me also to put these papers in evidence.

THE PRESIDENT: During the noon recess I consulted with the translation department. They will do the very best they can, but there are limits, I fear, to what they can do. They promised to expedite the documents and send them in to the Tribunal at the earliest possible moment, but documents that have not yet been turned over to the translators may possibly not be translated in time to be used.

DR. FRITZ: Perhaps the effort could be made, however, if I give the documents to the translation department by Monday. Then if they are translated in time I can put them in.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, I would certainly advise that they be given to the translation department this afternoon. Do you have the documents there in the original French?

DR. FRITZ: Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: Pass them up to the Tribunal. Let me look at them.

DR. FRITZ: Not the entirety of these articles is to be copied and translated, but only the parts marked, only excerpts in other words, the parts that are marked in pencil.

THE PRESIDENT: I understand. I note the markings. I think that these documents could not be admitted and numbered and the translations furnished, the English translations furnished when they are made. You might show these to counsel for the prosecution. Have you any objection, Mr. Hardy?

MR. HARDY: No, I have no objection, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDENT: They are from scientific magazines, medical magazines. I suggest that they be numbered. The furnishing of the English translations would be a matter that could be accomplished as soon as the translator finishes them.

DR. FRITZ: Then the work by Tersa and Wassel will be Rose document 61, Exhibit Number 61. The first work by Sergeant and associates will be Rose document and exhibit 62, and the third, the other publication by Sergeant, will be Rose document and exhibit 63.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, of course, understands that the translation of these documents is only the first step; that they must then be mimeographed and furnished. The translation is only one phase of the process.

DR. FRITZ: I am quite aware of the difficulties involved, your Honor.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal now understands that this completes finally Rose's documents?

DR. FRITZ: That is so.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, before we proceed with the introduction of documents on behalf of the defendant Poppendick, the prosecution wishes to announce that they will call two witnesses the first part of next week and, if permissible with the Tribunal, we will be in a position to call them on Monday as rebuttal witnesses. One is a man named Broers and the other a witness named Nales. The prosecution will file the notices conforming to the regulations of the Tribunal. These two witnesses will testify as to the activities of Hagen at Natzweiler.

THE PRESIDENT: Very well, those witnesses may be presented Monday. Any further witnesses desired to be called should be presented at the earliest possible moment, because that would, to some extent, compensate the delay for the production of documents.

MR. HARDY: Other than those two witnesses, your Honor, it is possible that the prosecution may call one other. However, that is merely possible at this point. It may develop that those two witnesses will be the last witnesses called on behalf of the prosecution for rebuttal.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the defendant Poppendick.

DR. DUERR: First of all I should like to give the Tribunal four English copies of supplemental volumes 1, 2 and 3. As first document I should like to put in HPO 16, an affidavit by Dr. Blaschke. This will be Poppendick Exhibit 15. Here the development and structure of the office Reichs Physician SS is described and Poppendick's position in it is also described.

I should like to read a few passages. At first the witness concerns himself with the structure and organization of the office Reichs Physician SS and then he, on page two, first paragraph, discusses the reorganization in 1943.

In 1943 Himmler promised to lot him have only a few departments, among other things the pharmaceutical service and hygiene. At the same time Grawitz obtained from Himmler the authorization for the establishment of some subdivisional offices within his formerly unorganized staff. In this way I too became an office chief as Chief Dental Surgeon. My entire staff consisted of myself and one dentist acting as my assistant; I had to share a clerk with Dr. Poppendick. I myself was often absent as I had my private dental practice.

Then I should like to skip a paragraph and read the next paragraph.

Grawitz himself had an adjutant and a female secretary at his personal disposal. This secretary, who was in charge of Dr. Grawitz' ante-room, was the most important person in the building. She gave information, acted as receptionist and arranged appointments with Dr. Grawitz. She had worked for him since 1939, and he had complete confidence in her. In her room there was also Dr. Grawitz's strong-box, to which, however, only he had the key. She also handled the mail too, dictation, and did all the filing. The amount of incoming mail was very small. Grawitz often complained that he had so little to do.

Since 1943 there was also an office called Personal Office but it existed only on paper, and never played any real part. It could not actually materialize, as Grawitz himself and with his secretary attended to everything. This office was probably only supposed to keep up appearances because as previously, discussions took place always with Grawitz in strict privacy even if they were quite unimportant which was almost always the case with mine.

At any rate Dr. Poppendick was never present at my discussions with Grawitz. So far as I know, he was, in fact, mainly in charge of the library.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, please proceed more slowly. I fear that the reporters are rather in difficulties.

INTERPRETER BROWN: Your Honor, the reporters have the document before them.

THE PRESIDENT: Proceed, but a little more slowly at that. The Tribunal might be in difficulties following it.

DR. DUERR: (reading)

His most important activity, however, took place outside the building. He was senior physician in the Race and Colonization Office. He was not a very conspicuous person, was very quiet, and worked unobtrusively in his room. I always received the documents I had to work on straight from Grawitz, they were also marked only by him, and in the same way I handed in my replies to the Secretary direct and she passed them on to Grawitz. When I had to get a letter direct, from Grawitz, he had me called by his secretary and took the document from his briefcase and discussed it with me. Grawitz thought he could do everything better and, therefore, he wanted to do everything himself. The reason for this was probably to be found in his most predominant characteristic: a burning ambition to get on in life.

He could get on only through Himmler and, as he was not on very good terms with him, he apparently tried to impress him by his officiousness. When in 1944, following the air raids on the city, almost all offices were removed from Berlin, he retained his office in Berlin despite the fact that his work, already insignificant, now shrank to almost nothing. I suppose he wanted to appear to Himmler as the courageous undaunted man. He was as an individual exactly the opposite — inwardly hesitating, always with an eye to his superiors, and with an almost grotesque fear of provoking the displeasure of Himmler. As I concluded from hints given by Grawitz, he hoped to achieve through Himmler the position of chief of the whole medical service.

This affidavit is correctly certified.

Now comes HPO 17, Poppendick Exhibit 16.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, I do not know what this exhibit is but it is scarcely necessary to read into the record anything save the important portion of these affidavits in your brief it would be your duty to call to the attention of the Tribunal, the portions of the affidavit upon which you particularly rely.

DR. DUERR: This affidavit is a cross-affidavit from Dr. Gerhard Schiedlausky in reply to the affidavit which the prosecution put in with the document NO-508. I shall not read it. I should like to draw the attention of the Tribunal beginning with the paragraph beginning with the words, "From my own observation," which is the most important passage of this affidavit.

This next document is HPO 18 which will Exhibit 17. This also is an affidavit by Fritz Schwalm. This affidavit deals in detail with Poppendick's activities in the Race and Colonization Main Office but I shall read nothing from it.

The next three documents, HPO 19, 20 and 21, are excerpts from the transcript of Case IV which have been certified by the Secretary General and concern themselves with the testimony of Kogon. I do not believe that it is necessary to give these documents a special exhibit number — or am I wrong?

THE PRESIDENT: They should be numbered in order that reference could be made to them in your brief or in the brief of opposing counsel.

DR. DUERR: Then HPO 19 will be Exhibit 18, HPO 20 will be 19, and HPO 21 will be 20. I shall just forgo any reading of any portion of these documents. Supplemental volume 2 consists of one single document HPO 22 which be Exhibit 21. This is an affidavit by August Meine.

In the first part of this affidavit the affiant Heine makes statements about Documents 1639A, 1639 and 214, all of which were put in by the prosecution. I should like to point out to the Tribunal, the summary at the end of this section. In the second part of this affidavit, the witness speaks of Professor Clauberg's activities as approver of application for marriage licenses and in the third section we hear something from Meine regarding the procedure in certifying copies in the SS, copies of documents.

I have annexed to this affidavit of Meine's a photostatic copy of Document NO-214 for the convenience of the Tribunal, It is here in the German original and you can see the handwriting of this document to which the witness Heine refers in his affidavit. In the English translation that the Tribunal has of this document these individual handwritten remarks are not noted. That is why I have made this photostatic copy of the original available to the Tribunal so that they can more correctly evaluate Meine's affidavit.

As last document I put in HPO 23, Exhibit 22, an affidavit by Professor von Kennel. This is a statement made by the prosecution during the examination of Poppendick when the prosecutor accused the witness von Kennel of lying. I do not intend to read this affidavit since it is very long but I should like to draw the Tribunal's attention to the first two paragraphs.

That will conclude the case for Poppendick; but I should like to point out the last document in Document Book No. 2 here.

This is Document NO-1300, which has already been put in by the prosecution. There was an error in translation which distorted the meaning of this document in its English translation. Consequently, after having communicated in writing with the prosecution and after receiving the prosecution's approval of this alteration, I should like to put in this document N0-1300 in a correct translation.

THE PRESIDENT: Can you furnish the Tribunal with the prosecution's exhibit number of this document?

DR. DUERR: I don't know what the number is at the moment.

MR. HARDY: I am afraid I have missed the significance of the change that Dr. Duerr wishes to bring to the attention of the Tribunal, I believe. Will you kindly repeat that again? I can't understand which words he is referring to.

THE PRESIDENT: Counsel did not state to the Tribunal the changes which have been made. I understood him simply to say that the change had been approved by the prosecution. Will counsel state the change in translation which appears in this document?

DR. DUERR: This is a change in the second paragraph, the paragraph which begins:

SS Standartenfuehrer [Colonel]—

MR. HARDY: I see Mr. McHaney's signature, your Honor. Apparently, it is all in order. I hadn't been familiar with particular document and the change.

THE PRESIDENT: Have you the prosecution's exhibit number of this document?

DR. DUERR: Exhibit 289, your Honor. Should this document be given a special exhibit number by me or is it all right to leave it as is?

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, as Mr. McHaney points out in his memorandum to the office of the Secretary General dated 17 May 1947 in connection with this document — he stated:

I return herewith the file requested for correction of transcript. Prosecution has no objection to the changes requested by Dr. Duerr.

They are for the most part insignificant mistakes and it is considered unnecessary to return translations of the affected documents;

so if it is possible the defense counsel could at this time read in the change he wishes to make in the original and indicate the change and then there won't be any necessity of renumbering it or giving it a new exhibit number.

THE PRESIDENT: I think this document should bear the Poppendick document's exhibit number so it may be identified and referred to. What number would you give this document?

DR. DUERR: 23.

MR. HARDY: I wish —

THE PRESIDENT: 20 or 23?

DR. DUERR: Yes, 23.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, the changes are merely —

THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, until we straighten out this matter of the documents. I have the last number 22. Number 23 appears to be correct.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, then the prosecution, even though they have agreed to this change, will not rectify their briefs and refer to the new page number in the record where this document is contained.

THE PRESIDENT: The burden will rest on the counsel for defendant Poppendick to call attention to that matter in his brief.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, the changes I submitted are merely as follows in the original documents as presented by the prosecution. The second paragraph states, "SS Standartenfuehrer Dr. Lolling informed me" and the rest of the sentence; and the change by the defense is, "SS Standartenfuehrer Dr. Lolling gives the information." That is the change.

THE PRESIDENT: Is that the only change?

MR. HARDY: That is the only change.

DR. DUERR: I can explain why I consider this change important. This document is signed by SS-Standartenfuehrer Dr. Lolling in the German text, and it reads, "As SS-Standartenfuehrer Dr. Lolling says," and not, "As SS-Standartenfuehrer Dr. Lolling tells me". In order not to create the impression that there was regular correspondence between Dr. Lolling and the defendant Poppendick, I should like to have this change incorporated in the document.

THE PRESIDENT: The document is admitted in evidence as Exhibit No. 23. Of course, as I said a moment ago, counsel for the defendant Poppendick in his brief may call attention in it to this change, and say exactly what significance he attaches to the change.

DR. DUERR: This concludes my defense of the defendant Poppendick.

THE PRESIDENT: We will note that counsel for the defendant Poppendick has concluded his defendant's case.

MR. HARDY: If no other defense counsel has documents to offer at this time, Your Honor, Dr. Vorwerk has one affidavit to offer, and he has another affidavit which has not been translated in toto; he has two affidavits, and he may offer one now I presume.

DR. VORWERK: The affidavit that I can not now put in is something that followed from the examination of the expert Dr. Ivy. Before Professor Ivy appeared here this problem had not arisen, and that explains why the affidavit is being put in so late. I'hat is the reason why the document is not as yet ready, but I hope shortly it will be. It will be a very short affidavit.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, the Prosecution questions the admissibility of an affidavit which affects the testimony of Prosecution's rebuttal witness. Dr. Ivy was a rebuttal witness of the Prosecution. How, can the case be re-opened by an affidavit, and a document be submitted to refute our rebuttal witnesses?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, it can, if the rebuttal witness went any further than to testify concerning witnesses of the defendants, which Dr. Ivy in certain cases did.

MR. HARDY: I am not aware of that, Your Honor.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be disposed to receive evidence concerning the testimony of rebuttal witnesses, which won't go farther than to contradict or explain away the evidence concerning the particular defendant; otherwise, then it becomes new evidence. Dr. Ivy extended his testimony over quite a considerable ground of territory.

MR. HARDY: Does this affidavit go over this extended territory?

THE PRESIDENT: I don't know. We have not seen it.

DR. VORWERK: The affidavit concerns a psychological question.

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has not limited rebuttal witnesses either for the Prosecution, or for the defense, and some liberty of action must be accorded for that reason.

DR. VORWERK: I shall put in evidence for the defendant's case an affidavit of Professor Werner Knothe, M.D., dated 22 March 1947. Only this morning did I receive the English translation and mimeograph copy of this affidavit, and I don't know yet whether the Tribunal has copies. If not, I shall make copies available. This is Romberg's Document No. 6, and will be Exhibit No. 6.

THE PRESIDENT: Just a minute.

DR. VORWERK: This is the same re-statement that I should like to read into the record. Professor Knothe says:

On the occasion of lectures which he held at Jueterbog for flying personnel physicians, Herr Hans Wolfgang Romberg, M.D., lectured about his experiences while working on flying accidents and incidents, seen from a technical, medical and aeronautical point of view. The standard of his lectures were scientifically irreproachable. I remember — it might have been in 1943 — that Doctor Romberg — mentioned in a private conversation, when we came to speak of Doctor Rascher, that he considered him a pathological liar, and besides that, an inferior individual.

This is all the new evidence I have to put in in Romberg's defense of the moment.

If we receive permission of the Tribunal, I shall put in one further affidavit hereafter.

THE PRESIDENT: This document is admitted as Romberg's Exhibit No. 6.

MR. HARDY: Your Honor, as I said before, we will be ready at three o'clock to run through the Prosecution's rebuttal Document Book No. 1, and if I can speed the process up to quarter to three, I shall endeavor to do so. Are there any other defense documents to be put in at this time?

THE PRESIDENT: Those documents have all been distributed to the Tribunal?

MR. HARDY: The document books, yes, they were filed as a matter of course a week ago, I believe. Your Honor, is it possible that some of the defendants are not going to introduce supplements to a document?

THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has no information on that matter. Is there any defense counsel who represents a defendant who has not as yet introduced any supplemental documents, and does not expect to offer any? No one volunteers.

MR. HARDY: Then, Your Honor, on Monday it will be possible for us to bring in two Prosecution rebuttal witnesses, and, then the defense counsel will be able to have their supplemental evidence ready by Monday afternoon, and Tuesday morning.

THE PRESIDENT: You may call in Monday whatever witnesses that you want and we will dispose of them as early as possible. There is nothing left but the translation and mimeographing of the documents, so you will be ready with your witnesses Monday morning, if ready. The Tribunal will now be in recess.

(A recess was taken.)