I never heard at any time that he had been there, and in view of the position Professor Brandt had it seems unreasonable to assume he was there.
Q. I should like to ask you a question for my colleague whose client is Dr. Rose. Do you know that at the beginning of 1942 Dr. Rose visited the typhus station at Buchenwald being lead by a camp officer?
A. Yes.
Q. From what you know of the situation is it possible to find out during such a visit that the conditions prevailed in the camp such as you have here described?
A. No, that is not possible.
Q. On such a visit would not the hospital-like atmosphere in Block 46 lead one so visiting to come to the conclusion that everything was in order here?
A. I saw the hospital equipment in Block 46 only twice myself, but so far as I know the equipment there was perfectly in order.
DR. MERKEL: Merkel for Genzken.
BY DR. MERKEL:
Q. Dr. Hoven, in your affidavit of 24 October 1946, Document No 429, Prosecution Exhibit 281, page 2, Document Book 12 you say inter alias that at the beginning of this typhus experiment Ding had lots of conversation with Genzken in Berlin, and you say Genzken was particularly interested in this matter and Ding sent him various reports. How do you know all this?
A. From Dr. Ding.
Q. You then are simply reiterating what Ding told you?
A. Yes. That is so and I said so during my interrogation.
Q. You are not here reporting facts of your own personal knowledge.
A. No, I didn't know Genzken at all.
Q. In the same document you said that Genzken in January 1943 ordered the experimental station to be enlarged, what do you mean by "enlarged"?
A. I wished to refer to Ding's sphere of activities which was to be enlarged and also the production plant for vaccines. That was what the order for enlargement referred to.
Q. Then Ding's sphere of activities was to be extended by setting up a production center for vaccines in Block 50?
A. Yes.
Q. It was then affiliated to the hygiene institute?
A. Yes, that is what I mean.
DR. MERKEL: Thank you. No further questions.
DR. FLEMMING: Flemming for Mrugowsky.
BY DR. FLEMMING:
Q. Dr. Hoven, in your affidavit which was just mentioned, Document No-429, Exhibit 281, you said that the channels of command for Ding would have been "Grawitz, Genzkin, Mrugoswky and Ding;" to what activities of Ding's were you referring to when you made this statement?
A. To his activities in Block 50. That is the only contact I had with him.
Q. What do you know about Ding's personal relations with Grawitz?
A. Ding was a friend of Grawitz. He always liked to make friends among such important people. I know that he once told me proudly, this was in 1942, that Grawitz, on the occasion of the birth of Ding's daughter, made his automobile available to Ding's wife. Then Grawitz had some book that dealt with his work in the Red Cross and he drew up a one page long dedication to Ding.
Q. While you were in Buchenwald how often did Professor Gildemeister visit there?
A. Four or five times.
Q. During the time you were in Buchenwald?
A. Yes.
DR. FLEMMING: Thank you, No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any further questions to the witness by defense counsel?
There being none the Prosecution may cross-examine.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q. Dr. Hoven, during the course of your time in the United States in the early 1920's you stated that you were an agricultural inspector would you be more specific and tell us just what you mean by that title?
A. Yes, I was on a dairy farm in New Jersey, the farm being owned by an acquaintance of my friend near Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Q. What were your duties as agricultural inspector?
A. I worked there.
Q. Did you have to make out reports?
A. No.
Q. Did you have to know the English language at all?
A. The owner had been a German immigrant and I spoke mostly German in the family.
Q. I see. Then you were actually merely a farm hand, you worked around the farm?
A. No, I was an inspector. I can only give you the expression that was used there, as I remember, namely I was called "boss".
Q. When were you drafted into the Waffen SS, Dr. Hoven?
A. 28 August 1939. That is when I received my drafting order.
Q. At that time were men being drafted into the Waffen SS direct, or was that your draft order for the Wehrmacht?
A. I was drafted directly into the Waffen SS. I think I received an order from the regional induction office. That was a printed form and at the top it says on such and such a date you are to report, etc.
Q. You didn't have any alternative? It is my understanding the draft into the Waffen SS didn't start until a much later date, that on this date, August 1939, it was called selective service or whatever it is in Germany, had the alternative to go into various branched of the Luftwaffe; did you choose to go into the Waffen-SS, rather than the Luftwaffe or the Army or the Navy?
A. I would have preferred the Army and Navy to the Waffen SS, but this was a military order given in the same terms as the Wehrmacht orders. As I said, this came from the Regional Induction Office and I had no choice of any branch of the service.
Q. Now, Doctor, I want you to attempt to recall the interrogations of last October, wherein you and I drafted up this affidavit document, No. 429, which is at considerable issue here during the presentation of your case. Do you recall on the 22nd day of October, 1946 that you were called to an interrogation and at such interrogation Mr. DeVrie and I were present?
A. Yes, I remember. Shall I use the English document book here or the German?
Q. Yes, you might use the English, Dr. Hoven.
Now at that particular date, the 22nd October, 1946, you were asked if you could speak English; is that correct?
A. By you?
Q. Yes.
A. Yes, I said that I could more or less carry on a conversation.
Q. And then were you told that we would talk in English during that interrogation and if you did not understand anything just to let us know and we would try to clarify it in German?
A. It was not quite that way. You were good enough to ask me whether it would be alright if we talked in English, I said O.K., and tried to carry on some conversation in English. You then asked me a few questions which I answered in English, and then we breached questions which concerned my activities or matters which you wanted to know about. We both saw then that we could not continue in this way and from then on we both made use of the services of the interpreter.
From then on, I spoke a mixture of German and English.
Q. That is right, whenever you were confused I always had the interpreter explain it to you in German; did I not?
A. This was not an interpreter, it was Mr. DeVrie, who was an interrogator.
Q. Well, we were using him as an interpreter?
A. That is so, yes.
Q. Now, when the interrogation first began we ran over generally the activities and conditions at Buchenwald; did we not?
A. Yes.
Q. After having covered the conditions generally, did I not then inform you that I had drawn up a draft in the form of an affidavit and that I desired that we go through each section of the affidavit to determine its correctness and truthfulness and at the completion thereof, I would like to have you sign the affidavit for me; is that correct?
A. I can tell you that in much greater detail, Mr. Hardy.
Q. Just a moment, Doctor. I will read you the question as I put it to you at that time and see if that refreshes your recollection so that we can be brief here. After we had discussed the various details, I said to you; "I will go over this in detail with you. I want to get you to verify these facts for us. We will check these facts; that is in the form of an affidavit. I want to go over each section of the affidavit. If it is true, I would like to have you sign this affidavit for me." and you answered "Yes;" do you remember that?
A. Yes, but then you did not do that, you were called away.
Q. Just a moment. Doctor, I have the interrogation here, which will refresh your recollection.
Then, Doctor, I proceeded to go through various sections of the affidavit with you in person. I went through paragraph 1 of the affidavit pertaining to your biographical data and you answered specific questions there and you said to the first question, I read the first sentence of the affidavit:
"I, WALDEMAR HOVEN, being duly sworn, depose and state:
"1. I was born in Freiburg in Breisgau on the 10th of February 1903."
Your answer: "That is right."
I took up each sentence in that paragraph with you; did I not?
A. No.
Q. Is it going to be necessary for me to read each sentence?
A. No, we do not have to so burden the Tribunal's time. I can make perfectly clear what I am referring to Mr. Hardy. What you are now saying is that you twice interrogated me. Once you said that in regard to this affidavit I did not understand at the moment. At any rate, it was a summary. You said explicitly that Mr. DeVrie would go through it with you and by the next day it would be in order. That must be in the record.
Q. Let us go over it now by questions. I don't want to go over each point in rebuttal. I will go over in the full transcript of the interrogation which is found as rebuttal evidence in the Prosecution Document Book. At this time I want to refresh the memory of the defendant on certain incidents which happened during the interrogation.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, proceed.
BY MR. HARDY:
Q. Now, you will recall, Doctor, that after I had discussed the first two paragraphs with you, I stated or reread paragraph 3, which is now the paragraph contained in Document NO-429; in that I said:
"Now, due to these various positions in Buchenwald during this period of four years that you were there, not quite four years, but nearly four years, you became acquainted with all the phases of the medical activities that went on at Buchenwald; now, therefore, you are able to make these statements?" Referring to the Draft, and you stated, "Yes."
Do you recall that I stated to you, "I want you to correct me when I read if the facts are not correct," and you answered, "I understand you."
A. You mean when you were reading the English?
Q. That is correct.
A. Yes and as I said I certainly over evaluated my knowledge of the English language in paragraph 6, I think...
Q. Just a moment, Doctor, we will get to paragraph 6. You did, did you not, when I told you would have the opportunity to correct anything that I read that you thought would be incorrect; and I did tell you that in the interrogation; did I not?
A. That may be, yes, I don't remember it though. At any rate at that time I did not know who you were or what was going on. You were very friendly and gracious to me, but I really did not know what was cooking. I did not know this was an official thing of some sort, but when somebody is very friendly and nice to me, I also make in the form of a conversation statements which are not as exact as the statements one would make when making an affidavit. If I had known I was deposing an affidavit in this conversation I certainly would have had it given to me in German translation and would have thought about it for a day.
It is perfectly true that your personality made an enormous impression on me.
Q. You saved me a considerable amount of time, Doctor. I want to go now to the particular section of our interrogation wherein I asked you if you would assist in giving us information concerning the activities of which you had knowledge; do you remember that?
A. That could be, I of course cannot remember the details of the conversation that took place eighth months ago.
Q. Well, you have stated here that you were not certain whether or not we were going to have a trial. Is that right? At the time of this interrogation?
A. I said that at that time?
Q. No, you said that here on the stand; isn't that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you recall when I was later orally asking you to aid us in finding out facts concerning the activities at Buchenwald and I stated that we are going to have a trial; do you know that you answered, "Yes"? Then, I stated to you, there is no reason for holding you as a prisoner unless we have a trial; do you remember that?
A. I really did not get the impression I was to have anything to do with this trial; you were so extraordinarily polite and nice to me that you were really acting like my defense counsel and I did not think you were going to be the Prosecutor.
Q. Well, now Doctor, in this course of going over the affidavit, do you recall that we went over the affidavit do you recall that we went over the affidavit to the extent that I discussed with you the selection of inmates to be used in the experiments, not Mr. DeVries?
A. I certainly talked it over with Mr. DeVries, but I cannot remember that I did with you.
THE PRESIDENT: I think Mr. Hardy, we will take our recess now. The Tribunal will be in recess for a few moments.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, this morning when I was making an attempt to ascertain the duration of the defense, I apparently misunderstood just the length of time the defense case would take. Am I to understand that the case of Pokorny and his three witnesses will take two to two and half days, and in addition thereto, the defense counsel as a whole will require four additional days to put in their supplementary document books?
THE PRESIDENT: Is counsel's understanding correct concerning the case of defendant Pokorny?
DR. FLEMMING: Yes, your Honor, the defense will need three and a half to four days to submit its supplementary documents.
MR. HARDY: Does the Tribunal intend to sit on Saturday of this week on the 4th of July, and on Saturday of next week?
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will convene on Saturday of this week. Announcements concerning the end of next week will be made at some later date.
MR. HARDY: Thank you, your Honor.
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. HARDY:Q.- Dr. Hoven, would you kindly turn to paragraph number 4 in your affidavit?
Now, in your affidavit you will note in the last sentence of paragraph number 4 -- this is on page 2 of Document Book Number 12, Document NO-429 -- in that sentence the affidavit reads as follows: "From my association with Dr. Ding I understood that the chain of command in the supervision of the spotted fever experimental station was as follow: Reichsarzt-SS Grawitz, Genzken, Mrugowsky and Ding."
Now, do you recall that in the course of the interrogation I stated to you the following questions; one, "From your conversations with Ding you believed the chain of command was Genzken, Mrugowsky, and then Ding?"
And your answer was, "And Grawitz." And then I said, "Yes, Grawitz. He came above both of them", and your answer "yes". And that occasions the reason why we put the chain of command in paragraph 4 to be Grawitz, Genzken, Mrugowsky and Ding; is that correct?
A.- Yes, as far as Block 50 is concerned, that is correct.
Q.- Doctor, would it be more convenient for you to follow me in English, or would you rather follow me in German through the interpreter during the course of this interrogation concerning the affidavit? Which ever you wish to do would be perfectly convenient for me.
A.- Do you mean right now?
Q.- Yes, if you would rather follow me in English you may do so, or if you would rather follow me in German through the interpreter, you may do that also.
A.- I have learned a lot during the seven months that I have been in this trial and listened to the examinations, but it would be rather catastrophic for me to speak in English. I don't understand that much. I prefer to speak in German.
Q.- Well now, in connection with the paragraph number 6, you have stated on direct examination that you took exception to the words "very friendly" at the time of the interrogation; is that correct?
A.- No, Mr. Hardy, that was when we read this paragraph, I said to Mr. de Vries, "Very friendly". I don't mean that. I mean for the "friendship of expediency" And then Mr. de Vries said something to you, and I didn't understand what he said, and then he told me, "That's the same thing. The meaning is the same." You were present at the time.
Q.- That's right, And when I proposed the sentence which is now in the affidavit, I proposed it in the following manner: "Inasmuch as you were constantly associated with Dr. Ding and your work in the medical field was of common interest, you became very friendly." Then we later struck out the proposal of mine, "That is, your work in the medical field was of common interest" And in answer to that you stated, "I got very friendly with Dr. Ding for a certain purpose in mind, namely, to protect certain prisoners who otherwise would have been shipped to a concentration camp at Auschwitz.
Through friendship with Ding I managed to give a certain number of prisoners a position in the institute of Dr. Ding where they worked, and because of their work therefore could be declared vitally necessary." Now, isn't that the gist of what you meant by "very friendly"?
A.- You mentioned yourself at the beginning of your statement that I said that there was a purpose, and from that it is apparent that it was a friendship for a certain purpose, and that is what I meant, a friendship formed only for a certain purpose. If you mean it in that sense, it is correct, if you understand it.
Q By virtue of that friendship you were able to gain knowledge of some of his activities.
A On the basis of friendship formed for a certain purpose, yes.
Q Now, then, also at that time I asked you to write down the names of some of those inmates, that is three or four inmates, you wished to help and protect and you supplied me with the following names in answer to that you supplied me with the names: Henry Pieck, Jan Robert, Prof. Dr. van Mimger, August Cohn, Fritz Kirchheimer, and you stated five other Jewish prisoners: is that correct?
A To what station is that referring to 46?
Q I am referring just in general to the entire situation. I asked you to write down some of the names of inmates whom you attempted to protect and you gave me those names, is that correct?
A Yes, I said that I know more but at the moment I couldn't remember their names.
Q That's correct. Well now we turn to the section in paragraph no. 6 where you state in the affidavit: "As a matter of fact, Dr. Ding had to go to Berlin for discussions with Dr. Mrugowsky and others, nearly 3 days out of every two weeks, and on such occasions I was in charge of the Spotted Fever Institute. However, when Ding went to Berlin the experiments were discontinued until he returned." Now, isn't that substantially what you told me in the interrogation and didn't we check over this language in draft form of the affidavit at that time?
A Mr. Hardy, it was like that: When this was spoken I said, "Ding told me that way." It can be that he went to Berlin and used that as an excuse or he had a personal purpose in Berlin and had the ticket made out that way, for at that time only to get such a ticket one had to be on an official trip. Maybe it is that he stated he went to the Hygiene Institute and actually didn't go and I said expressly that is what Dr. Ding told me. That is correct. Then perhaps I assumed not enough knowledge on your part as to the actual conditions.
It was, as I already told you, in this typhus station in block 46, that I took part at the request of the prisoners in order to undertake the revision of the selection of the experimental subjects and that was my reason for doing so.
Q Well, you were, were you not, ordered or requested to supervise Block 46 at this time when Ding was in Berlin?
A No, Mr. Prosecutor, for this doesn't make any sense to put me in charge of the supervision since I did not understand anything about it. He had already given Kapo Dietzsch instructions and regarded 46 as his own domain.
Q Well, had you ever seen any of the experiments conducted in Block 46?
A No.
Q Now, Dr. Hoven, just a moment. Here in paragraph 7 I asked you or proposed to you the sentence which is therein contained at this time in Document NO-429, and is the first sentence "The experiments at Block 46 in the Buchenwald Concentration Camp were conducted as follows." And when I put the question to you, I said, "You know this from talking to Dr. Ding", and you answered "Sometimes I have seen them, too." You remember telling me that?
A No.
Q And this answer you gave when I asked you whether you knew about the conduction of experiments in Block 46 from talking to Dr. Ding, you answered: "Some times I have seen them, too."
A What do you mean, whom do you mean I saw?
Q The experiments?
A I certainly didn't mean that. I couldn't have meant that at all because events in block 46 naturally were talked about among the prisoners and we had some information about this.
Q And you state that you did not say that to me during the interrogation. I will read the questions I put to you and answers you gave to me. The question is as follows. Referring to the rough draft of the affidavit we had. I quote: "The experiments in block 46 in Buchenwald concentration camp were conducted as follows: You know this from talking to Dr. Dinb?" You answered "Sometimes I have seen them, too." This meaning surely that you saw the experiments. Very clear, isn't it?
A No, I did not mean that.
Q You don't doubt that you said that, do you?
A Well I can't tell that anymore now but I only know I can't have meant it. I didn't see them.
Q Well let's go down to the section of paragraph 7 wherein you discuss the percentage of inmates who died in the course of the experiments. First of all, I stated to you, in a question which compares somewhat to the third sentence from the end of paragraph 7. I stated: "Between the autumn of 1942 and the summer of 1943 approximately 500 inmates of the Buchenwald concentration camp were used in these experiments." And when I proposed that sentence you stated: "That is a rough estimate." Consequently I struck out the word "approximately" and put in the word "about". Is that correct?
A Well, you see, Mr. Hardy, as far as it is concerned statements you yourself named the figure 500 at the time. I felt that the conversation with you was in the form of a conversation and when you mentioned this figure 500, I then assumed that you had more knowledge than I. And you can see that in my opinion it was really a leading question. When you named this figure to me and I let you influence me and I said "I have no information about it, but according to my entire knowledge of concentration camps, I assume that is correct."
Q Well, when you stated this. That is a rought estimate" -didn't I strike out the word "approximate" and put in the word "about" -is that correct?
A If you say so that must be correct. Of course, at the moment I can't recall exactly what happened.
Q Well, now concerning the last two sentences in paragraph 7 which refer to the percentage of deaths or the mortality rate, I asked you the following questions:
"How many of those died as a result of the experiments? How many would you say died of your own knowledge?" And you answered "I estimate for that particular period about 10% died as a result of the experiments but after 1943 a greater percentage died." And then I said "What percentage would you say?" And you answered "I heard from other sources, from inmates in the camp, that after 1943 the percentage of people who died as a result of the experiments amounted to 18 or 20%." Do you recall telling that to me?
A It may be but I got both figures from statements of prisoners and I recalled them approximately.
Q I see. Then the two sentences which are contained in paragraph no. 7 were not my idea, were they? They were given to me from my conversation, with you, is that correct?
A Yes, certainly, and I reproduced them from conversation with prisoners.
Q Now, in connection with paragraph no. 8 which refers to the selection of inmates to be used for the purpose of medical experiments in Block 46, did I understand you to state in direct examination here, yesterday, that you didn't have anything to do with the selection?
A I never denied that I had something to do with the selection. I only said that at the request of the prisoners I took part and told that to you, too. I had not had anything to do with that and I was expressly asked by the illegal camp administration and foreign prisoners to take a part in that. That is, to have my name as camp physician used for this revision of the selection because the revision of the selection was done by German political prisoners and foreign prisoners. I believe that is how you understood me but I assume then there were mistakes made in the translation.
Q I was reading what you said to me, doctor. I proposed the same paragraph which is now contained in Document NO-429. I read that same paragraph verbatim to you in the interrogation and after reading the paragraph you stated, "Yes", and then I read another section of the paragraph and you said, "Yes", and then I said to you, "What have you got to add to that?" After I had read the paragraphs to you I asked you what you had to add to that and you stated to me, "In selecting prisoners in Buchenwald for experiments to be carried out by Dr. Ding it was not officially necessary that I make such a selection or sign these lists. This meant Dr. Ding could have ordered Schober to make the necessary number of inmates available. However, I personally occupied myself with this selection, because I had been requested by the inmates to do so so that I did not desire the inmates become victims, since I tried to select those people who were stated to be criminals.
After I left Buchenwald the same system of selection was not maintained and inmates were made available to Dr. Ding, simply through Schober." And then I again referred to the paragraph and said, "This is basically true "and you said, yes", now is that what you want to be put in the record, that answer you gave me?
A.- Yes, well, Mr. Hardy, at the moment I cannot tell any more, but what you have just read as to what I was supposed to have said is, in no connection at all with the actual contents of paragraph 8 as it reads now. It says on page 4 in the English text, for example, the words "at random" and the interpreter told me that meant "willkuerlich" in german and I believe that is a word I never used in my record. And you say that is the meaning of what I said in my direct examination that I took a part in it, and if I used that word it doesn't mean that I did it, it means that I put my name under it. That was my affair and if it would have had any unpleasant consequences I would have had to bear them, because I said that I was responsible for the prisoners, for this action. The main object was to prevent that German political and foreign prisoners would be used for the experiments.
Q.- Now, Doctor, the persons used in the experiments - that is, the persons selected, whether they were removed later by you or otherwise, were they volunteers?
A.- I don't understand, Mr. Hardy. It's like this. The selection had already been made by the Gestapo or the camp administration.
Q.- Then the experimental subjects were not volunteers. I am trying to convey this question to you, Doctor. When these inmates were selected to be used in experiments in Block 46, were they volunteers in the sense that we mean volunteers as set forth as issue at this trial.
A.- Those who had been selected by the Gestapo and the camp administration. I don't believe that they were volunteers. However, it happened a few times that there were volunteers among them but I don't know for sure any more in which experiments. But these lists which the Gestapo and the camp administration selected, the revision was by the prisoners, by the trusted men of the German and foreign prisoners and they were revised in case there were German political prisoners or foreign prisoners on these lists, and thereupon these political prisoners were taken out of the list, under some pretense be it that I said they were sick, for my hospital, or some other pretense, and then I or the prisoners put exclusively informers and traitors in their place, and these, of course, were not volunteers.
Otherwise, I am of the opinion that prisoners anyhow cannot decide about volunteering as long as they are prisoners. It is only a conditionally voluntary action if they are prisoners.
Q.- Well, then, Dr. Hoven, if they had been volunteers for the experiments then it would not have been necessary for you to occupy yourself with the selection so that undeserving inmates would not become victims? Is that right?
A.- Yes, that's quite right.
Q.- Then, can't you positively state that the majority of these inmates were not volunteers? That they were forcefully being used in the experiments?
A.- Mr. Hardy, I did not concern myself with that in detail. I merely had the order, in agreement with the resistance groups of the German and foreign prisoners, as I have just reported it to you to take them out of the experiments. Of course, you are right, if they had been volunteers in these experiments, where I undertook this revision of the prisoners who had been selected, then there could not have been any volunteers, that is certain, but beyond that it is certainly correct, because probably in those experiments where they volunteered I would not have revised the lists. It is quite certain there were volunteers for some experiments, but I have already said I don't know for which ones or how many.
Q.- Well now, in the event that you saw fit to take the names of certain deserving political prisoners off the list so that they would not be subjected to the experiments, did you then select other people to take their place on the list?