In 1944 there was no ticket available for me any more. With the approval of Grawitz I went to Hohenlychen on my own and tried to get accommodations there. I managed to get billets and I listened to a few of the lectures. I was not an official participant of the second meeting and the lists which have been submitted show this. I am listed only on the billet list but not on the list of participant.
Q These lists, the accommodation lists and the participant lists, are No. 619, Exhibit 236, on pages 96 and 106 of the German Document Book. Did you talk to one of the co-defendants who took part in these conferences at one of these conferences?
A No, I didn't know any of them well enough at the time.
Q You were only a listener at these conferences but not a participant in discussions, or consultations, or decisions, or work?
A Yes, I merely listened to a few lectures, not even all of the lectures, only the ones in which I was interested. Only the specialists, who were interested, participated in discussions and formulation of decisions, and I was not present because that did not interest me. The people who have merely listened to the lecture left before the discussion.
Q Were there current consultations in the office of Grawitz of the leading physicians of the SS Main Offices?
A Yes, in 1942, perhaps, when Grawitz tried to get the medical system of the Main Offices under his control, he called the doctors together about every month, but that was a forced matter; generally some report was offered and the people concerned hardly had time to appear, therefore, only part of them were present as a rule, and at first representa tives were sent and later the people concerned remained away altogether.
And so after about 6 or 7 meetings these meetings stopped again. No experiments on human beings or anything like that were ever discussed at these meetings.
Q These discussions, were they carried on at regular intervals until the end?
A No, it lasted only a few months. I believe it was in 1942.
Q The prosecution makes you responsible, especially for the high-altitude experiments; in the time of these experiments which is approximately from March 42 to August 42, were you then chief of the personal office of Grawitz?
A No.
Q What activity did you carry out during this time?
A I was leading physician in the Race and Settlement Main Office at the time, and I was working also in the Sippenamt, the genealogical office.
Q During this time did you receive an assignment of work of a duty which was in connection with so-called experiments of rescuing in high altitudes?
A No.
Q Did you know of a visit of Grawitz to Dachau in order to inspect experimental arrangements of Dr. Rascher, or did you even participate in such a visit?
A I did not know about it and I did not participate.
Q Did Grawitz take you along on such visits to concentration camps?
A No, never.
Q How often did you visit concentration camps and to what purpose?
A I was in a concentration camp twice, that was Dachau. The first time was in 1936, rather 1935. There was an inspection for SS officers.
The worshops were visited, the kitchens, the bread factory. They all made a great impression, the prisoners were well nourished. Of course I was curious and looked at them. It made the impression of a modern barracks. There was strict discipline but there was nothing noticeable, at least as far as the things I saw at the time were concerned. Then I was in Dachau again for a short time about in the summer of 1941 for one to two hours. Grawitz had a specialist for tuberculosis whom he had sent to the hospital at Dachau to examine the X-ray pictures of the station of Von Weihern. Someone had said that the doctor in charge had mixed up X-ray pictures and apparently Grawitz was afraid that the Reichsfuehrer might hear about this. Therefore this specialist for tuberculosis was to check the matter, and I was sent along.
I was in the X-ray room of the hospital; and we looked at the X-ray pictures. I did not interfere in any way. It was in 1941. I was wearing the uniform of the General SS; and I was therefore treated as a civilian. The X-ray room was modern. Everything was very clean. I glanced at the tuberculosis ward which was next door. We had to go past it. The patients were lying in single beds. The beds were not one above the other. The patients looked like the patients in the tuberculosis ward in any hospital; and I didn't see anything else. At least I had no unfavorable impression in any respect from these visits of mine, which, I admit, were brief visits; and I was never in any other concentration camp.
Q. Did you have anything to do with the personal relation of Rascher between the transfer of Rascher to the Waffen SS?
A. No.
Q. Did you ever take part in a conference which was hold in the Reichsluftfahrtministerium, the Air Ministry, about experiments of Dr. Rascher.
A. No.
Q. Did you have any knowledge of any kind of criminal high altitude experiments at Dachau?
A. No, I learned of that here.
Q. You are furthermore charged by the prosecution with co-responsibility in freezing experiments during the time of the finishing of these freezing experiments, according to the prosecution. That must have been May 1943. You did not have the title "Chief of the Personal Office"?
A. No.
Q. How did it then come about that you, as the records of Rascher state, took part in that discussion between Grawitz and Rascher. This is Document 320, Prosecution Exhibit 103, English Document Book 3, page 115.
A. I did not attend this conference from the beginning. As a rule Grawitz talked alone to his visitors. I was called in later; and there was a special reason for that.
Q. Did you as a rule take part in these discussions, the discussions which took place in Grawitz's office?
A. No. As I have already said, in general he talked alone to his visitors; but a few times it happened that he called someone in, some officer who happened to be in the building. That was connected with his fears that he might have difficulties with Himmler if he noticed that the other side had some influence with Himmler; and if there were difficulties in such a discussion, then he had the secretary call someone in.
Q. Why did Grawitz do that?
A. Probably from the experience that his position with Himmler could be influenced unfavorably by one-sided reports.
Q. Had you known Rascher before?
A. No, I did not see him either before or after.
Q. What was the course of this discussion as to Grawitz after you had been consulted?
A. After I had been called in Grawitz instructed me briefly. He said that this was about Rascher; that this man had experience in the field of freezing; and that the Reichsfuehrer had told him to draw up a memorandum on cold for the troops. In the course of the discussion while I was present, there was a very tense tone on both sides. Grawitz was opposed to a doctor working independently in the Ahnenerbe without his having any knowledge of it; and he required of Rascher that he should at least inform him. But Rascher refused to do so rather energetically; and he clearly said that the Reichsfuehrer had given him the assignment and that he was directly under the Reichsfuehrer. Then I myself said that as doctors in the Sippenamt we had been independent up to 1939 but that then we had been put under the Reichsarzt as it was generally customary in the military that all medical matters should go through the same channels.
Then Grawitz said he could not publish this memorandum unless there was extensive experience with the troops themselves in the east. It was the completely new formulation of the directives for the treatment of cold, completely different from what had been customary up to then. That much for the discussion. Later I did not hear anything about any memorandum or about Rascher's further experiences.
Q. But you were supposed to have found out at this discussion what experiments Rascher had made?
A. As far as I was personally concerned, nothing was said about experiments which Rascher had conducted.
DR. BOEHM: In accordance with these discussions I herewith submit a photostatic copy of the Document 1578-PS, page 5 to 9. By the document 1578-PS these are notes made in handwriting by Dr. Rascher, which refer to the same discussions which were mentioned in the former examination. Like in document 320 this is on page 36 of the Document Book, HPO. I offer it as Poppendick Exhibit number 4. In order to expedite matters I shall not read this document.
Q. Witness, what impression did Rascher make on you in his behavior and his attitude towards Grawitz?
A. The visitor was a young doctor. His conduct was noteworthy. He was arrogant; he treated Grawitz like an equal. He must have had protection somewhere.
Q. Do you remember in the minutes referring to Rascher of a quotation: "Yes, I've asked the Standartenfuehrer Sievers to come to my place on various occasions in order to receive information. After all, all medical matters end with us."
A. No I could not have said that in that form. I did not have any opportunity to call Sievers in to me, since he was not a doctor and belonged to quite a different agency.
Besides, I do not recall that before 1944 I ever talked to Sievers. He will probably be able to tell us about that when he is examined.
Q. When was this discussion between Rascher and Grawitz at which you were later consulted?
A. That was in January 1943 shortly before the cold experiments were completed.
Q. Did you ever receive a report about these cold experiments, or did you have anything to do with Rascher after this discussion had taken place?
A. No, I did not learn of the cold experiments through a report or in any other way.
Q. Did the Reichsarzt receive an invitation to the conference of the doctors in Nurnberg?
A. I myself know nothing about this. According to the evidence which has been submitted here, no one was present from the office of the Reichsarzt.
Q. Do you know the two SS participants Petersen and Murtung?
A. I know both of them slightly as SS doctors.
Q. Did these two not report to you about this meeting or make any remarks about criminal activities?
A. No, I saw these two only rarely and spoke to them very little.
Q. Did Murtung and Petersen report about this meeting to Grawitz?
A. I know nothing about that.
Q. The prosecution charges that you demanded such experiments with cold and drying as assistant of Grawitz.
A. That's out of the question. I had nothing to do with the technical matters in these discussions. I was merely called in as a witness. Besides, no experiments were mentioned while I was present. It is true that Grawitz emphasized that extensive experience was necessary, especially with the troops in the east, before this new method of treatment could be introduced.
Q. Did you know that SS doctors and Mountain troop doctors collaborated on these questions?
A. No.
Q. Did any orders exist as to this which went through your hands?
A No.
Q Did you know about Grawitz having freezing experiments carried out in his presence or also, perhaps, what orders he gave to this effect?
A No, I know nothing about that.
Q Here you are charged by the prosecution with malaria experiments which took place in dachau from 1942 to 1945. Were you at Dachau at that time?
A No.
Q The witness Vieweg spoke about written reports of Schilling's which sent to Grawitz. Did you know anything about this correspondence between Grawitz and Schilling?
A Only because in 1942, I think it was, I frequently saw letters sent from Schilling to Grawitz; but these letters were marked "Personal" and were opened by Grawitz himself.
Q During later years did you notice anything about the correspondence between Grawitz and Schilling?
A No. At least I did not notice it later. It must have been in 1942 when I noticed a few such letters.
Q These letters, therefore, did not go through you, so that in this correspondence between Grawitz and Schilling you had no knowledge?
A No, these letters went directly to Grawitz personally. Even the secretary did not open them.
Q Did you know Prof. Schilling?
A I knew that Prof. Schilling was one of the well-known specialists for tropical diseases. I also knew that he was working at the Robert Koch Institute for Infectious Diseases. I believe that in 1942, I once saw him at Grawitz's Office.
Q Did you speak to him?
A He didn't know me.
Q Did you have anything to do with him?
A No, I had nothing to do with him. I did not knew him.
Q What did you know of Schilling's activities in Dachau?
A I somehow heard--I think it was from Grawitz himself--that Schilling was carrying on special investigations concerning immunity in malaria which he had begun in Italy and which he was continuing in Germany. It is possible that Dachau was mentioned.
Q Did you know that Schilling infected human beings with malaria?
A No.
Q Did you not know then from the fact that Schilling worked at Dachau--did you not have to know from this fact that he infected inmates?
A I had no impression of his special research. I am not a specialists in this field; and I did not think of it very much. To me Schilling was a famous man; and it never occurred to me that what he was doing could in any way be illegal.
Q Did you know that Grawitz had been with Schilling at Dachau as becomes evidence from the documents in this trial?
A No, I never learned anything about that, Grawitz occasionally went on trips as president of the Red Cross. He visited his provincial offices or Red Cross hospitals. And I assume that he went there when he was on such a trip.
Q According to a copy of the documents submitted by the prosecution a man called Ploetner must have worked with Schilling. Did you know a man by that name?
A I knew Ploetner superficially. I knew that he was a lecturer at the University of Munich and that he was a SS doctor. I don't remember what he looked like. I'm sure I would not recognize him. I saw him once or twice in Grawitz office.
Q At what occasion was this?
A Once I was called in to a discussion in Grawitz's office between Sievers and Ploetner. This was the case of Mrs. Del Franco, which was discussed on this occasion.
Q What was it about this woman Mrs. Del Franco?
A Mrs. Del Franco advocated a new cancer cure. Grawitz had obtained some of this drug from her and had it tested. If I remember rightly, iodine and bismuth were contained in this drug. Then Grawitz sent me to Prof.
Auler. He was the director of the Cancer Clinic at the University of Berlin in the Charitee. I knew him from the time when I worked at the Charitee. I was to ask Prof. Auler about his opinion on this drug, whether there was any prospect of success. Prof. Auler said to me that he himself had no experience with it but he knew that in the early history of the treatment of cancer doctors had tried and recommended this drug. He himself would conduct experiments at his clinic with it on patients who had been given up and who were suffering from cancers on the surface, which were easily accessible. If I am correctly informed, however this was never done because soon thereafter the Berlin clinics, including the clinic of Prof. Auler, evacuated their patients away from Berlin.
Q. Was this the end of this discussion?
A. No. Grawitz talked about other medical discoveries. He mentioned a number of examples where medical advances were due to nonmedical people and were later accepted by doctors. He also pointed out frequently about white pills --- accident played a role in research. He mentioned the discovery of insulin by two young American doctors after the World War. It had been known for twenty years what would cure diabetes, what the cause was; but all attempts to obtain an extract had failed, although many well-known scientists had tried to obtain it? and now these two young Americans who had come back from war had the good fortune to discover an effective substance because they happened to combine the proper ingredients.
I believe they took the glands from animals and put alcohol and some acid on it; and that happened to be the secret. This prevented the digestive juices from destroying the insulin. Grawitz discussed that at some length. He was a metabolism expert. Then he said that one should not reject everything that is suggested by laymen just simply because it comes from laymen but one should test it with the necessary critical attitude.
Q. At this discussion Sievers was also present. Did you know Sievers?
A. Yes, Sievers was there; but I know him only slightly; and aside from this discussion I believe I saw him only once. Then there were the few times I talked to him on the telephone when he called up our office.
Q. What did the entry mean which Sievers made in his diary, 3546PS, Exhibit for the prosecution 34, page 34, page 142 of the 8th of September 1944: "Ploetner remains at our disposal." Apparently that was a telephone discussion.
A. I cannot say what that means exactly; but I do remember that Sievers called me to the telephone a few times.
He called up from his office--I believe it was in Southern Germany--and wanted to talk to Grawitz. In these cases Grawitz was himself talking on the telephone at the time. Grawitz used to carry on very long telephone conversations. Sievers had been waiting for some time on the telephone and was afraid that his conversation would be interrupted. Then he had me called to the phone and asked whether I couldn't go in to Grawitz's office and ask him what Sievers happened to want to know. This must have been one such case.
Q. On the 23rd of October 1944, on Page 281, the entry, "By telephone with Poppendick transfer of biological experiments with Ploetner. First of all, as submission Prof. Friese for discussion." What does that mean?"
A That was no doubt a similar case he also called up and wanted to talk to Grawitz and then talked to me. He was afraid the telephone connection was to be broken. He used me to ask Grawitz. Today I cannot say, of course, what it was about.
Q Do you know what biological experiments were those of Professor Friese?
A No, I cannot say that either. It is possible it was pectin research.
Q Was this Professor Friese only on pectin experiments, did he not have anything to do with the N-question?
A Professor Friese, was a chemist, I believe, from the Brunswick Technical College. He was in contact with Grawitz. I did not know him well. I saw him perhaps once. I believe he was to pass an opinion on this N-substance.
Q Did you know Professor Friese?
AAs I said, I saw him perhaps once briefly in the office of the Reich Physician.
Q Did you otherwise have anything to do with this matter, or did you receive any further knowledge about it?
A No, I have nothing to do with the technical matters. I just happened to be called upon briefly in such matters.
Q Therefore, you did not have to deal with this matter particularly?
A No.
DR. BOEHM: As evidence as to the entries in the Diary of Sievers I submit as Document Exhibit HPO 6, which is affidavit of defendant Sievers, which is on page 12 of the Document Book Helmut Poppendick, and I offer this document as Poppendick Exhibit No. 5. Because of knowledge of the High Tribunal I shall not read it in order to speed up matters.
Q You are charged with special responsibility in sulphanilamide experiments; before this conference of consulting physicians in the year 1943 did you have anything to do with sulphanilamide experiments, or did you know in anyway of such experiments from the manner of which Gebhardt said they went to Grawitz?
A No, I learned nothing of that.
Q Did you know before that a lecture on such experiments had been intended on this conference?
A No, I learned that only at the meeting itself, as all the people present did.
Q And what impression did you have of this lecture or this paper?
A I knew Professor Gebhardt as one of the leading scientists in the field of surgery. I had the impression that this was a purely scientific investigation to clear up an essential war problem. I learned of details only then. That is insofar as I learned of them at all here.
Q But Gebhardt has expressed that these were experiments to be carried out on persons who were sentenced to death.
A Yes, he said so.
Q What is your answer to this question to carry out experiments on people sentenced to death?
A I cannot pass judgment on the right to carry out such experiments. I must leave that to the leading scientists and the state authorities, but I can imagine that in times of emergency, such as war times, if problems cannot be solved in any other way, such experiments may be justified. The state, of course, had to create the legal basis for it.
Q Did you know the defendant Fritz Fischer well who held this lecture at this conference of the Military Academy?
A No, I had just seen him.
Q Did you know the defendant Fischer at the Reichsarzt?
A No.
Q Did Fischer talk to you about these experiments either before or after? 5572
A No.
Q Did Professor Gebhardt talk to you about sulphanilamide experiments at any time?
A No, Professor Gebhardt did not talk to me either.
Q And also not later, after the conference of consulting physicians in 1944?
A No. My connection with Professor Gebhardt was only a very superficial one. He hardly knew me. He did not speak to me. I was not an equal.
Q Did Grawitz carry out experiments at Ravensbruck at which you accompanied him?
A I knew nothing about any such visits of Grawitz to Ravensbruck. At least I did not accompany him.
Q During the time of the ending of these experiments of sulphanilamide did you bear then the title of Chief of Personal Office?
A No, I received the title of that in March of 1943.
Q Your only knowledge of sulphanilamide experiments, therefore, if I may summarize, comes from the lecture of Fischer at the meeting in 1943, which you attended, as many other people did?
A Yes.
Q According to the indictment you are charged with responsibility for sea water experiments; did you know the correspondence between Grawitz and Himmler of June or July 1944, in which experiments are mentioned carried out on gypsies and other inmates, there where they also made use of sea water?
A No, I learned of those letters only here.
Q Did you know anything about a correspondence between the authorities, where it is charged by the indictment about making drinkable all sea water?
A No.
Q Did you have anything to do with the planning or carrying out of such experiments at all?
A No, I did not.
Q In a letter from Sievers to Grawitz, No. 182, Exhibit 137, English Document Book 5, page 23, the adjutant of Grawitz is mentioned with whom the co-defendant Biegelbeck is supposed to have got in touch; did the adjutant tell you anything about this matter at all?
A No, the adjutant did not talk to me about it.
Q Did you know one of the parties in these experiments of the Luftwaffe who are made responsible by the Prosecution for participation in these experiments?
A No, I knew none of them.
Q I may therefore in conclusion ask you, you have no knowledge whatever of such experiments as have been mentioned here, which were carried out on inmates at Dachau in order to make sea water drinkable?
A No.
Q You are also charged as particularly responsible in Jaundice experiments; did you know of any connection between the Reichsarzt with other people in order to carry out experiments on inmates for research in the epidemic jaundice?
A No, I knew nothing of such negotiations.
Q Did you know Dr. Dohmen who was mentioned in connection with such experiments?
A No, I did not know him.
Q Did you know anything about the transfer of cultures of hepatitis germs?
A No, I never heard anything about it.
Q Did you know anything about experiments made on inmates for the research on the epidemic jaundice?
A No, I never heard anything about experiments on prisoners.
Q Did you know anything of this, that eight men who were sentenced to death, criminals, that these criminals were to infected artificially?
A No, I knew nothing about that.
Q Did Grawitz ever talk to you about these questions?
A No.
Q You know no facts therefore from which you can conclude that such criminal experiments for research of epidemic jaundice were made?
A No.
Q You are furthermore charged as particularly responsible in the element of sterilization; did you know any of the persons who were mentioned by the prosecution in connection with sterilization experiments?
A No, I knew none of them.
Q Did you know Gerlang?
A No.
Q Did you know Dr. Maddaus?
A I had read the name "Maddaus" in the Medical Journal.
Q Did you know Dr. Koch?
A No, I did not know Dr. Koch.
Q Who was Schopper, in Document NO-054, Exhibit 144, English Document Book 56, page 6, in the name Schopper was mentioned?
A Schopper was a young SS doctor who was with the Reichsarzt for a few weeks. That was about 1942. He had fallen ill at the Front. If I remember correctly Wille knew him. After he had been released from the Hospital at Berlin he was not to go back to the Front directly. He was to be assigned to an office first where he could recuperate. In this way Dr. Schopper came to the Office of the Reichsarzt briefly, where he likewise had nothing to do.
Q Schopper applied to the Personal Staff of Himmler obviously after he received knowledge of Document NO-036, Prosecution Exhibit 143, Document Book 6, page 5, after he received knowledge of this document; how could this happen considering that Grawitz kept secret such delicate matters, and dealt with it himself?
A This matter about sterilization by drugs which I saw here in the trial for the first time, is an open matter and nothing can be seen from it except that there is perhaps a new method of sterilization of people who legally had to be sterilized. How Schopper got this letter I do not know, perhaps he saw it when the adjutant had it and took an interest in it. He must have had a personal friend in the Personal Staff to whom he turned. That is something quite unusual, and was actually forbidden.
Q From the first letter from Himmler to Pohl, NO. 036, which is Prosecution Exhibit No. 143, it becomes evident that Pohl supposedly was to get in touch with the Reichsarzt in order to carry out experiments; from the evidence material here it seems to become evident that Pohl had no connection with Grawitz, but that the matter was only discussed with him by his leading assistant, Dr. Lolling; did you know this man Lolling?
A I knew him slightly. I often saw him at Grawitz' office when he was leaving after he had talked to Grawitz.
Q Did Lolling speak to you about this or any experiments in concentration camps?
A No, I had no connection with Lolling.
Q Did you know about experiments in concentration camps about sterilization with X-ray?
A No, I knew nothing about that.
Q Did you know Dr. Schumann?
A No, I did not know him.
Q Is Professor Klauberg known to you?
A Yes, I knew Professor Klauberg. In 1941, approximately. Himmler in the case of a number of SS wives and fiances had ordered treatment by Professor Klauberg. They were cases when these women were sterile, according to the opinion of the doctors. In these cases the doctors expressed misgivings, which were recorded in the opinion of the Sippenamt doctor, but all cases where there were misgivings had to be turned over to Himmler for his personal decision; and then in about six or eight cases Himmler wrote on the records, "Treatment by Professor Klauberg, Koenigshuette." These women were then sent to Professor Klauberg for treatment, but this stopped pretty soon. After 1941 I heard no more about these cases.
Q What kind of a method was this which was used by Professor Klauberg?
A It was a kind of hormone injections. It was a special system which he had developed.
Q In a letter of Dr. Grawitz to Himmler about treatment of female sterility there were a number of other doctors mentioned, Professor von Wolf, Professor Ehrhard, Professor Schulze, and so forth; do you know anything about that?
A Yes, Grawitz had officially informed the Race and Settlement office that in the future in the treatment of sterile wives of SS members these doctors who were named were to be called upon, and there was a specialist for women's diseases for each district of Germany named.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, defense counsel just made reference to a letter from Grawitz to Himmler regarding sterilization. I would like to be in formed to what he is referring to.