That could be done for three reasons, first that I had too much work and myself asked that the work be given to some one else. That was for example the reason a second hygienist was appointed in the beginning of 1944 because I had too much to do with the problem of damage from air warfare and my DDT work.
Secondly, that might happen if the Inspector was of the opinion that, for a certain question, he had a better specialist working under him or if I myself said that in certain fields I had no practical experience and that some one else would be better. In the third place, that happened if the Inspectorate did not agree with my opinion but did not want to act on its own initiative against my advice but wanted a second opinion.
Q. Can you cite any examples for that?
A. For example, the training of the Luftwaffe medical service in decontamination questions. I was eliminated from that. The reason was that when this arrangement was created in questions of gas decontamination I had represented a basically different point of view then the Inspector Professor Hippko who did not agree with me. Therefore, all those courses were turned over to the consulting hygionist of Air Fleet 5 who agreed with the Inspector. Another example, in the creation of our bacteriological laboratories for the Luftwaffe, I had opposed them. I had said we should rely on the Army laboratories. When the decision fell out against me because Medical Inspector Hippko wanted to make himself independent to a large extent, I continued to hold the point of view that one needed at least the normal equipment of an Army laboratory. Here again the Inspector wanted a solution for the Luftwaffe alone. Since I made difficulties, this duty was also assigned to another consulting hygienist.
Q. In such cases you could no longer influence those matters. could you?
A. No, I did occasionally receive reports about them for my knowledge, but no longer offered any advice in this field. One scientific advisor is normally sufficient. Then it requires merely the executive decision. Only by exception, when there are doubts, does one seek for a second opinion. I was, moreover, so overworked that I did not have any ambition to have an absolute monopoly on advice in my field. Generally, I was very happy if the work was done by some other specialist even if it was done differently than I would have done it. I am old enough to know that there are many roads to Rome and that very often one can do a thing in several ways and the final result will be the same.
Q. Were your suggestions of any influence to the Inspector? Did he abide by them of necessity?
A. My advice was in no way binding on the Inspector. The examples which I have mentioned show that there were differences of opinion on basic questions where sometimes exactly the opposite was done from what I had advised. Of course, there were exceptions. In general, my advice was accepted and my drafts. Perhaps they were revised and adjusted to the needs of the troops. If he had not considered my work in general useful, in spite of isolated cases of differences of opinion, I would hardly have remained in the same position during the whole war.
Q. Well then, how were the drafts of your suggestions worked on after you submitted them?
A. After the commanding officer of the Group Science and Research had taken notice of them and signed them, they went in writing to tie Medical Inspectorate.
There they were treated like incoming mail from outside; that is, according to significance and contents they were sent to the Chief of Staff or to one of the section chiefs and were dealt with by the referent concerned according to Instructions.
Q. Did the Inspector always receive personal notice of your attitude in those questions?
A. No, only if I had officially or expressly noted that on the opinion or if the Chief of Staff or the section chief considered the matter important enough to submit it to the Inspector himself. Whether that was done I did not learn in individual cases or I learned it only if there were inquiries or the Inspector called me for an oral report.
Q. Mr. President, in this connection I offer Rose Document No. 6 which is Rose Exhibit No. 6, the affidavit of Professor Dr. Walter Schnell, dated the 1st of March, 1947. This can be found in Rose Document Book No. 1 on pages 15 to 19. I should like to read a part of this affidavit. I am starting to quote from the third paragraph of page 15 of this document book.
''Concerning the position of the "consultants" of the Luftwaffe, I have personal knowledge since I myself was a consulting hygienist in an air fleet, without, however, being able to quote verbally the service regulations for consultants, which incidentally, were also available in print. The consultants were, in the Medical Inspectorate as well as in the various air fleets, purely scientific experts who bad no powers of command or operational powers whatsoever.
"As far as I know, the official position of the consultants in the Medical Inspectorate was exactly the same. They were not, say, superiors of the consultants of the various air wings; in fact, they had not even any direct contact with them. If any important sanitary events in an air fleet had to be reported, the consulting hygienist made his report to the wing physician who, in turn, passed the report on to the Medical Inspectorate. Whether the Chief of the medical service -- or his chief of staff decided to include the consulting hygionist of the medical Inspectorate in the ensuing discussions or not, was left to his own judgment. When the consulting hygionist was included in the discussions, his opinion was by no means decisive but it merely represented an export opinion before the Medical inspectorate.
"My experience-reports and special reports for the Medical Inspector to which had to be presented at fixed periods, had to be routed via the wing physician and were passed on to the Chief of the Medical Service, and not to the consulting hygienist of the Medical Inspectorate.
"On one occasion when I wanted to carry out largescale measures to combat malaria from aeroplanes in a territory particularly subject to malaria, I first contacted Professor Rose directly by telephone to win his assistance for the work planned by me. I did that although I know the above described division of functions within the medical inspectorate, and it was immediately obvious that even though Professor Rose agreed with me on the merits of the matter, he could not help me, nor did he know anything about my reports about the hygienic case in question.
He referred me to the official channels via the Air Wing physician and the Medical Inspectorate. This can be explained by the fact that there was a sharp division between the administrative field and the field of the scientific consultants,within the medical inspector to.
"Thus, there was within the inspectorate proper, also a hygienics expert who, as the execution agent of the chief of staff or of the department head, dealt with the day by day flow of hygienic matters, whereas the consulting hygienist only was called upon to deal with special scientific assignments, expert opinions, etc. There were no official channels between the consulting hygienist of the Medical Inspectorate and the consulting hygienist of the Air wing.
"The consulting hygienist of the Medical Inspectorate, Professor Rose, and after 1944 also Chief Physician Dr. Muhlert -- ware in no way my superiors, and I was not their subordinate, although both hold higher rank than I. They had no right to direct or supervise me in any way. The consultant of the Air wing was subordinated solely to its Air wing physician.
"On official visits to Berlin I always reported personally to, and had discussions with, the chief of the Medical Service, the department heads and the subdepartment heads, without the consulting hygienists of the Inspectorate, Professor Rose or Dr. Muhlert, taking part. If possible, however, I visited Professor Rose also in order to exchange views with him. It was not my duty to report to him. I regarded the visits as a matter of professional courtesy."
Mr. President, I shall revert, at a later period, to the further contents of this affidavit. However, at the same time I should like to offer the next document in the document book of Rose which is Rose No. 7 which will become Rose Exhibit No. 7. This is an affidavit of Dr. Ferdinand Muhlert who was repeatedly mentioned in the affidavit which I have just read. This affidavit bears the date of February, 1947. You can find it on pages 20 to 23 of my document book 1. The date is the 25th of February , 1947. Considering the importance of this matter I should also like be read this affidavit in part.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, this question as to the duties and functions of a consulting physician in either the Wehrmacht or the Luftwaffe, has been most elaborately explained to the Tribunal by Professor Hand loser and Professor Schroeder, and it seems to me that it is unnecessary for any burdening of the record with reading the fact that a consulting physician did not have the authority to issue orders as such, this his position was merely one of suggestion, etc. That is the whole point of taking up the time here now with discussion of consulting physicians and I feel certain that the Tribunal is well aware of the position of the consulting physician. Therefore I object to any further details concerning the capacity of a consulting physician.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has had no opportunity to read the affidavit. If counsel for the prosecution agrees with these statements taken by Defendant Rose as the facts stated in this affidavit, there would be no use in reading it.
MR. HARDY: The Prosecution has no objection to the affidavit, as such, Your Honor.
JUDGE SEBRING: Do you agree, Mr. Hardy, that the position taken by this defendant and prior defendants in regard to the scope and authority of consultants is as maintained by them?
MR. HARDY: No, Your Honor, the Prosecution does not agree. However, the Prosecution submits that these details have been fully explained to the Tribunal at great length and, as a matter of fact, Dr. Handloser submitted nearly a treatise explaining the position of consulting physicians.
JUDGE SEBRING: Which you say you do not agree with?
MR. HARDY: We do not whole-heartedly agree, no, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection will be overruled. Counsel may read such portions of tho affidavit as he deems particularly relevant with due regard to the matter of time.
DR. FRITZ: Mr. President, may I make one fundamental remark regarding this problem, because we shall, in the future, often revert to this matter of a consultant. He is not quite in agreement with the statements made by a number of the co-defendants or witnesses and especially since he is also responsible with Haagen in Haagen's actions, who was also a consulting physician with the Luftwaffe, he has to speak about these matters.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal understand that, Counsel. That is the reason for the overruling of the objection made by Prosecution. Counsel may proceed and read such portions of this affidavit as he deems important to his defense.
BY DR. FRITZ:
I shall at first quote from Page 1 of that document, reading the eighth sentence of Paragraph 2:
"From the outbreak of war until 1944 I was consulting hygienist with the Air Fleet Physician of Air Fleet No. 2. In 1941 I became consulting hygienist with the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Services in addition to Professor Rose and remained in this position until the end of tho war."
I shall now read from Page 2 of that document, starting from tho third paragraph:
"Professor Rose was never my superior, neither in the medical service nor with the troops. I was therefore not his subordinate.
As consulting hygienist of Air Fleet No. 2 I was subordinate to the Air Fleet Physician.
his subordinate. As consulting hygienist of Air Fleet No. 2 I was subordinate to the Air Fleet Physician. Neither did Professor Rose have any supervisory power over my activity with the Luftwaffe.
"When I became consulting hygienist with the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Services, I also had no supervisory powers over other consultants, and was not their superior. There was no Luftwaffe service regulation which obliged or entitled the consulting physicians of the Medical Inspectorate to supervise their colleagues amongst the Air Fleet physicians. The consulting physicians of the Medical Inspectorate were entitled to report personally to the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Services. They had to give their expert opinions on questions about which they were consulted. They had no power to issue orders and no right to give directives; they were also not entitled to ask for reports. They could not carry out any inspections without a special order, because such inspections would necessarily encroach on the sphere of command of an Air Fleet physician, who had his own consulting physicians.
"The military rank bestowed on the consulting physicians was to increase their authority in scientific medical matters in contrast to army doctors and other offices. For this reason, special regulations existed for the promotion of consulting physicians.
"My own reports, which I had to make as consulting hygienist of Air Fleet 2, went through the Air Fleet Physician, even if they were designed for the Inspector of the Medical Services. In the Luftwaffe no reports were made to the consulting physicians with the Chief of the Medical Services.
"It can be assumed that my reports from Air Fleet 2 were also directed to Professor Rose for his expert opinion, for information, and for exploitation. When I became consulting hygienist - in addition to Professor Rose - with the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Services, I also received reports from consulting physicians and other medical offices sent by the office of the Chief of the Luftwaffe Medical Services, with a request to express my opinion, to make suggestions, or to compile the experiences from a large number of such reports from various sources into a critical complete report. As mentioned above, this happened only very occasionally.
"I do not know how my views and reports were further utilized.
"While I was consulting physician with Air Fleet 2, Professor Rose repeatedly made official visits into my sphere. They were made on special orders from the Medical Inspectorate and the Air Fleet physician was notified. The object of those visits was not to supervise my activities but either to lecture at post graduate courses for physicians, or to see personally the conditions amongst the troops, and therefore not to be completely dependent on written reports.
"I accompanied Professor Rose on only one of these trips, because at that time he was particularly occupied with the malaria problem in the Mediterranean, and as a specialist for tropical medicine he had greater experience in this special sphere than I." End of quote.
Mr. President, the Defendant Rose pointed out to me that in the affidavit Schnell, Rose Document No. 6, which I read before, there is a mistake in the English copy, since the word "Luftflotte" which often appears, was translated with "Wing". In order to be correct one should substitute "Fleet" for "Wing" - Air Fleet - LuftflotteAir Fleet.
In the same affidavit, the rank "Oberstarzt" was translated with "Chief Physician" whereas it should be "Colonel, Medical Corps." This is of some considerable importance.
THE PRESIDENT: It would be of assistance to the Tribunal if a corrected English translation of this document be furnished to each member of the Tribunal for his document book; also for the reserve copies in the offices of the Secretary General.
BY DR. FRITZ:
Q Did you participate in the meetings of the consulting physicians?
A May I remark that the difference between Wing and Fleet is competent, because a Wing is in German, Geschwader, and is under a Colenel, where Fleet is under a four or five star general. The rank and authority of the work in this office consequently differ considerably too.
Now, about the meetings, since the meetings of consulting physicians were hold as joint meetings of the three branches of the Wehrmacht, I was also appointed to attend these meetings. The second in 1942, the third in 1943, and the fourth in 1944. I also visited the meetings of civilian scientific societies, insofar as matters dealing with my specialized field were discussed there. At the 4th meeting of consulting physicians in 1944 in Hohenlychen I was the chairman of the action for hygiene and tropical hygiene.
Q Did you have to make any official trips?
A Yes, I was ordered to make official trips by the Inspectorate, and I would do them on my own initiative too, I would make application for them. The purpose of the trips was to investigate conditions among the troops in order to avoid passing judgment on the basis merely of written information. These trips were often connected with lectures. In the first years of the war those trips were mostly to the theatres of war outside the Reich. From the middle of 1943 the homeland problem was in the foreground, because I was primarily dealing with the damage resulting from air warfare.
Q Did you have any ether military duties or any further rights?
A No, my position was the same as that of other consulting physicians. I could not issue any orders or instructions, only from the end of 1943 on was there one exception.
The section for fever therapy of the Luftwaffe was expressly under my command, and I could issue orders and instructions for it.
Q Now, if you found any deficiencies during your official trips as a result of it, in your opinion the troops were in danger, wouldn't you issue orders right there and then in order to help remove these deficiencies?
A No, that was not possible. If it were something very urgent I could inform the locally competent medical officer of my opinion. Whether he issued corresponding instructions was up to him. If they were basic questions I could report to the medical inspector after my return and I could make suggestions which were then worked out as I have already described.
Q Did you have to exercise supervision over the consulting hygienist in the air fleet?
A No, I did not exercise any such supervision. If the Medical Inspectorate considered it necessary I was merely given the written reports either merely for my information or for my knowledge.
Q In that case you were not the superior of the other hygienists of the Luftwaffe?
A No, I was in no way their superior.
Q Professor, the question regarding your supervisory right or your duty to supervise Professor Haagen was the subject of repeated examination of Professor Schroeder on the part of the Prosecution. I new hand you the transcript of the 26 of February 1947, which deals with that point. Now, if you will be good enough to look at the afternoon session you will find on page 3635, and this is the German transcript, a question propounded by Mr. McHaney: "It was Rose's duty that he would have to be continually informed about experiments in this field, isn't that right?" and Professor Schroeder's answer read, "Rose, according to the directives, which his Chief Hippko gave him probably concerned himself with these research assignments," and then the end of Schroeder's answer reads, and that is in answer to the next question of Mr. McHaney:
"It could only be done in the way that he only exercised this inspection by order of his superior." And I am now asking you, was it your duty to exercise supervision of research assignments which dealt with your field of work, and furthermore did you at any time receive an order, a special order in order to carry out an inspection of the research assignments either by Schroeder or Hippko?
A To the first question, no. I did not even have the right or the duty to supervise the activities of the hygienists or consult hygienists in subordinate positions of the Luftwaffe. Of course, I did not have any such duty of supervision of activity which was not in the service of the Luftwaffe, but in their civilian positions, for which they received no instructions from the Luftwaffe, but merely financial support. To the second question I must also say, no. Neither from Professor Hippko, nor from Professor Schroeder did I ever receive any assignment to inform myself as to the value of work at a research assignment and to report on it, and therefore I never did so. Those who had the research assignments made their own reports. If they reported orally I was not called in. If they sent in a written report, this report was, in most cases, no doubt, sent to me either for my attention or for my comment.
Q Professor, will you please look at the transcript of the morning session of the very same day and turn to page 3572, and the following sentence can be found in art answer made by Professor Schroeder, and I quote: "The consulting physicians had a right to obtain information." What do you know about this right to obtain information?
A This expression I heard for the first time in Professor Schroeder's testimony. I do not know what "right to obtain information" means, Informationsrecht; I do not know any service regulations concerning any such right of the consulting physicians, and at least I never exercised any such right.
Q What was your relationship to the other consulting hygienists, I mean according to their rank and age?
AAt the beginning of the war the consulting hygienists with the airfleet, with one exception were all older than I and also my seniors in service. In most cases they had a higher rank than I did. I began as Oberarzt d. Reserve, which is equivalent to a First Lieutenant. The others were all Stabsaerzte, and Oborstabsarzte, or captains and majors. During the war this was changed insofar with the increase of a number of hygienists younger colleagues were appointed to such positions. That changed nothing in our official relationships, however. I did not become their superior. Only when I was promoted to Generalarzt, Brigadier General, on the 1st of May 1945, that is a week before the collapse, did I become a general hygienist of the Luftwaffe, but that does not mean that on the 1st of May 1945 I became the superior of the other hygienists.
Q What staff was at your disposal in your position as consulting physician?
A I had no staff. I had one and sometimes two clerical assistants, and I did not have any deputy. The position of consulting physician in the Luftwaffe was limited to the person of the consulting physician and his professional knowledge.
Q Did you have to deal with any questions of aviation medicine?
A No, I had nothing to do with aviation medicine. This specialized field was given special attention in the Luftwaffe, of course. There were quite a number of specialists in that field. As a special consultant for aviation medicine there were special deputies and also a consulting physiologist. These people were competent for such questions, and had to divide the various fields among themselves.
I was not concerned in this as a hygienist. Since I was working for the Luftwaffe, of course from personal interest, I read Dr. Ruff's book on aviation medicine, and I regularly locked at the magazine journal for aviation medicine, but I personally was never called on officially for this Work.
Q Did you yourself write any essays for the periodical for aviation medicine?
A No, because I know nothing about it.
Q But you once wrote an essay about the spread of epidemics on the basis of air traffic; that didn't have anything to do with aviation medicine?
A I did write such an article in a textbook on hygiene, but this does not belong to aviation medicine. It is a specialized field of traffic hygiene. This is a spread cf epidemic by ships or railroads. Hygienists and public health officers everywhere and a number of aviation medical experts deal with this question.
Q. Did research assignments given by the Medical Inspectorate of the Air Force in the hygenic field come under your supervision? I mean the hygenic field now.
A. No, the hygenic research assignments were not under my supervision either. Insofar as the persons holding such assignments submitted working reports, I was generally sent these reports for my attention or comment, at least in the later years of the war, from 1941 on. There were very few hygenic assignments in the Luftwaffe and the execution of the assignments was in the hands of the research workers given such assignments. I am not aware that any kind of supervision was carried out over the execution.
Q. If any such assignments were given, somebody must have had to supervise their execution.
A. I believe that the word assignment was misused considerably. It is therefore advisable to clarify what such an assignment amounted to and what its practical effects were. First of all, at least in the case of the hygiene assignments which I knew about, without exception the initiative came from the person who received the assignment. That is the director of the Hygenic Institute makes an application that he be given a so-called assignment about a certain problem. In peace tine I myself had the German research association give me such an assignment. The only reason was that I did not want to be dependent on the approval of my president for every minor detail, but needed certain means which I could dispose of by myself without any beaureaucratic restrictions. The approval of the research assignment was necessary to secure a certain sum of money, as supervision was exercised over the use of this money so far as accounts had to be submitted, which were also checked from time to time,and work reports were demanded. If anyone had even imagined that through approval of such financial support he was undertaking penal and legal responsibility for all of the activities of the men to whom he was giving assistance, then there would certainly have been no one who would have undertaken to distribute this money. To stick to my own example, in 1938 I received a research assignment by the establishment and maintenance of an anopheles colony at the Robert Koch Institute.
The assignment was signed and approved by Professor Sauerbruch. Later he became head of the specialized department for medicine in the Reich Research Council. I am firmly convinced that Geheimrat Sauerbruch even today has no idea what an anopheles colony is, or what was done with it, but he knows who I am. He knows that I wrote successful papers or literature; he no doubt assumed so because I held this position in the Robert Koch Institute. I do not believe that Sauerbruch ever read anything which I had written; therefore, he relied completely on the fact that the applicant personally offered adequate guarantee for the sincere use of this money. In any case I, as the recipient of such an assignment, was always convinced that by accepting this money I did not in any way become subordinate and that the person giving me the money acquired no other rights than that of regular accounting about the use of the money with a report, and that he assumed no other duties toward me than to supply the money furnished at the time promised. I have considered myself responsible for what I did.
Q. Did you take part in giving research assignments in the Luftwaffe in the hygenic field?
A. I was not called upon to assist in giving research assignments and I never made any suggestions for such research assignments.
Q. How was that really handled? How were these research assignments really given out?
A. I cannot say for sure in the Luftwaffe since I had nothing to do with it. I myself never received any such assignment from the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe. From my own general knowledge of the way business was conducted there I assume that the applicant presented his application in writing and no doubt orally at the same time. Either he could have taken it to the competent section chief, which would have been the best way, but of course he could also express his wishes to the Chief of Staff or to the Inspectorate personally, but that would have been a detour because the thing had to reach the section chief eventually.
The section chief passed the natter on to the referent, if the latter had not already been called to the conference. It was actually not necessary for the referent to carry the matter through, that could only follow knowledge of the suggestions, otherwise there was nothing to work on. Then, after the approval of the application, it was sent to the Department 11-F for formal issuance and then to the budget group, which had to take care of distributing the money. BeckerFreysing no doubt knows more about these events but this is merely an assumption on my part. He will probably be able to make more exact statements.
Q. Were you not at all participating in these negotiations?
A. No, that is obvious. To decide whether influenza research is important, the section chief, after the matter has been presented to him by an expert, does not need an expert opinion from anyone else. From 1941 on, I no doubt generally received information after an assignment had been issued; then, as I have said, I received the work reports; if any were received, I no doubt generally received them.
Q. Did you not have to make any utterances about the value of that work?
A. In some cases I, no doubt, made a commentary on it when I handed a report back but the matter was as follows: If, for example, Professor Knorr received a subsidy for such research for work on a mobile drinking water apparatus, he applied for and received this assignment because for twenty years he had worked very specifically with drinking water questions, water filters, and water disinfection. He was the expert on this question and my opinion was of secondary value. If Professor Haagen reported on his work on yellow fever vaccines or typhus vaccines, then his report was justly more important in the eyes of the Medical Inspectorate than any comment I might have made. Professor Hoering testified here yesterday that in respect to yellow fever Professor Haagen was the only internationally recognized expert in Germany in that field.