Q. Herr Brandt, how do you explain that the extermination if some sixty thousand Germans, using your own figures, in the euthanasia program was common knowledge in Germany as the proof in this case has shown, while a man in your high position did not know that Jews numbering in seven figures were being executed?
A. I do not believe that a number of seven figures was generally known in Germany.
Q. Well, will you make an admission about something less than seven figures?
A. No, I do not want to do that either, but I only want to point out in this way that the number as such is not the decisive factor because if sixty thousand insane persons were known, then, of course, the seven figure number of the Jews would most certainly have been generally known, but this has not been the case. The fact that euthanasia became public -- that can be traced back to the opposition by the church and the fact that the church discussed these questions, and therefore it became known more concretely with regard to the Jews. I have not heard anything like it. I am convinced that the number of these who had never heard of it or who did not know anything about it within the Reich will be enormous, certainly within the Reich.
Q. I take it from your statement that the reason for that is that there was no opposition to the Jewish extermination?
A. It just was not known.
Q. Herr Brandt, did you issue orders directly or indirectly to the Patients Transport Corporation for the transfer of inmates?
A. No, I did not issue any such orders.
Q. Is the name Blankenburg familiar to you?
A. Blankenburg, yes.
Q. Did you give Blankenburg orders directly or indirectly for the transfer of inmates of insane asylums to euthanasia stations such as Grafeneck, Hadamar, Hartheim, Bernburg?
A. No, I did not give him any such orders.
Q. After the euthanasia program allegedly came to a stop in 1941 did you ever issue orders directly or indirectly to one of the euthanasia stations that inmates of insane asylums should be transferred to these stations?
A. No.
Q. I would like to put to you Document NO-892.
MR. McHANEY: If the Tribunal Please, it might be appropriate to take the afternoon recess at this time until she can locate the exhibit.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be at recess for a few minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session. May it please your Honors, Defendant Oberheuser is absent this afternoon having been excused by the Tribunal earlier today.
THE PRESIDENT: The absence of the Defendant will be noted for the record, absence pursuant to excuse.
BY MR. McHANEY.
Q. Herr Brandt, I want to put to you Document No-892. Herr Brandt, this is a letter on the letterhead of the General Patients Transport Corporation dated Berlin, 20 July 1943, to the mental institution, Hadamar near Limburg/ Lahn. It reads as follows:
"In the course of the evacuation of institutions situated in the Western territory of Germany endangered by air raids, I order transfers of insane persons to your institution also, this by order of Professor Brandt, the Commissioner-General of the Fuehrer for Medical and Health Services.
"You will get the 26th of July, 1943, one hundred fifty insane women from the mental institution Warstein if the Reichsbahn will furnish the necessary cars as requested. The Transport will be accompanied by about twelve persons as nursing personnel. I request you to provide for housing and feeding of the accompanying personnel if they are not able to leave your institution before the following day in order to return to their original institution.
"In all matters of bills and expense accounts which might result from the transport of the patients, I request you to address the Central Clearing Office for Mental Institutions, Tiergartenstrasse 4, Berlin W 35, referring to the fact that the transfer has been carried out by the General Patients Transport Corporation.
Heil Hitler."
And I submit to you that the signature is Blankenburg. In view of this letter, don't you now wish to change your testimony to the effect that you never did issue any orders to Blankenburg concerning the movement of insane persons to an Euthanasia station?
A. This letter certainly cannot be considered to be in connection with the Euthanasia station.
In the year of 1943 the Air Raid Precautionary Committee, which I touched upon yesterday, was already activated. This was an institution which was activated according to a Reich decree. In this Air Raid Precautionary Committee there were Dr. Conti, and I was also a member of that Committee, and in this Air Raid Precautionary Committee I was included because I was already in charge of these special hospital institutions.
If in this case the Chartiable Patients Transport Company participated, they did so because of their transport facilities, because otherwise no transport would have been available. This morning it was already mentioned that this transport which was available had to be specially committed during the winter catastrophe of 1941-1942 with the Group Center. I assume without remembering the details in that connection that we are here concerned with the same thing, namely, that considering the hospital damages which we had in the West and which then extended to the rest of Germany, a transfer had to be carried through. The name of the Institution Hadamar became known to me through the trial last year, and I do not know where the Institution Warstein is located.
Q Do you know whether these one hundred fifty insane persons were exterminated at Hadamar?
A I don't know that and I don't believe it, and it is not known to me that the patients would have to be sent there. This letter does not clarify the situation at all. I merely wanted to point out what it says at the top, the evacuation of air-damaged territories. Maybe you could tell me where Warstein is located.
Q I do not know, witness. However, you will recall, I think, that the form letters issued from the Patients Transport Corporation concerning Euthanasia in 1940 and 1941 usually carried such words as, "Due to planned economy, we must order the transfer of so many patients to such and such a plance." You recall that don't you?
A Yes.
Q Do you deny that this letter is in fact an order from the same Patients Transport Company, transferring insane persons from an asylum to the Euthanasia station at Hadamar?
AAccording to the letterhead we are concerned with the Chartiable Patients Transport Company, GMBH, one of the sub-department of T-4.
Q And, moreover, T-4 covered the movement expenses, didn't they?
A The expenses of the entire Euthanasia Program were dealt with by an advance of Reich Treasurer Schwarz, and these were then accounted with the State. It says here that questions of account have to be dealt with that agency, that is, with reference to transport.
Q Well, Schwarz advanced monies to T-4, did he not?
A Yes. Yes. That was so.
Q And T-4 was paying for the transfer of these insane persons to Hadamar was it not?
A Yes. It was so as can be seen from the letter.
Q Did you have any supervisory control over insane asylums in Germany, either during the operation of the Euthanasia Program up until 1942, or thereafter by virtue of being General Commissioner?
A No, I certainly had no supervisory duties regarding these institutions.
Q Did you have any authority to give orders and instructions to the doctors of such insane asylums?
A I do not remember ever having issued such an order to any such mental institutions. I cannot remember any one such event.
Q Did you ever issue any such orders to director of asylums through the Reich Committee or any other agency of the Euthanasia Program?
A I do not remember. He could have been concerned with questions of information. Although, I do think that they would have been passed on to Doctor Linden. However, I do not remember any such incident.
Q Did you ever intervene for victims of the Euthanasia Program, so that they might not be killed?
A Since I was only in one way concerned with reference to these Euthanasia institutions, such a question could only refer to a conversation I had with Pastor Bodelschwing regarding his patients. That, according to my recollection occurred in the year of 1940 -- 1940 or 1941, I am not quite sure.
Q Now, Herr Brandt, you have had sometime to consider this subject very carefully. I am asking you if you ever intervened for the victims of the Euthanasia Program so that they might not be killed?
A I do not believe that I intervened in that matter since I was always in full conformity of the idea of Euthanasia. We can only be considered with discussions in Bethel, as far as I think, that is where I spoke to Pastor Bodelschwing. And, this discussion which I carried on with him was decisive, not finally decisive but helped to decide the stoppage of the entire action. I do not remember having intervened on any other occasion or in any individual case, or having given any normal directive. I really cannot remember.
MR. MC HANEY: If the Tribunal pleases, I have put Document No. 0892 to the witness, and would like to have it admitted in the record at this time as Prosecutions's Exhibit No. 442. Heretofore, it seems that the proper procedure would be to marke the exhibit for identification with a number, admit it as an exhibit later.
Does the Tribunal think it would be desirable to put an exhibit number on it for identification or would the identification number 0892 be satisfactory. My own point of view is I have noticed Heretofore that the Tribunal desired that tho Defense Counsel have their documents normally admitted during the Prosecution's case. I do know that before the IMT that the Prosecution's documents and as far as I know also the Defense documents were, in fact, admitted into evidence during the Defenses case. And, I am just afraid there might possibly be some slip up in the latter stage of the trial and we might not formally get these documents into evidence. If the Tribunal sees any serious objection to it, I am perfectly ready to reserve until a later time to put them in, but it might be best to have them normally admitted at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal is of the opinion the better method would be to mark it for identification with the number it would have if it was now received as an Exhibit, and then held by the Prosecution to be offered as an exhibit at the appropriate place at a later time.
MR. MC HANEY: Very well, your Honor, I would like for the record to show that Document No. 0892, which was the letter I have already put to the witness, be marked as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 442 for identification.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal calls the Counsel's attention to the fact that the copy of the document submitted to the Tribunal is incomplete. It does not correspond with the copy of the document the Counsel read to the witness. Some paragraphs are lacking, apparently.
MR. MC HANEY: I will be glad to have that checked into, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: It is the same in substance, but it is not identical with what the Counsel read.
BY MR. McHANEY:
Q Witness, in view of the testimony you have just given, I wish to put the document to you, Document No. NO 890, and I will ask that the record show that this Document has been identified as Prosecution's Exhibit No. 443 for identification.
(A copy of the document was handed to the witness.)
Herr Brandt, this letter is dated Berlin, November 16, 1943, and from the letterhead of the Reich Committee for Research of Hereditary and Constitutional severe Diseases. It is marked confidential, and it is addressed to Oberarzt Dr. Schmidt, Sanitorium Eichberg. You remember Dr. Schmidt's test* money before the Tribunal?
The letter reads as follows:
"Re: Inmate Anna Gasse from Frankfurt/Main "Dear Dr. Schmidt:
"On the basis of a letter directed to Professor Dr. Brandt concerning the above mentioned I request an elaborated diagnosis about the mentioned Anna Gasse who is reported to be at your institution at present. At some time the Oberpraesident at Wiesbaden was concerned with that matter. It seems that the relatives of Anna Gasse try to obtain her release by every possible means. If from a medical point of view such release is warranted, one could take into consideration whether one should not perhaps comply with such request in the interest of the good reputation of the institution.
"Heil Hitler "Signature:
illegible."
Now, Herr Brandt, will you not again have to change your testimony? Did you not, in fact, intercede for punitive victims of Euthanasia? Did you not in fact, get in touch with the Reich Committee and through them, with the director of the Eichberg institution?
A I assume that we are concerned here with a letter directed to me by a member of the Gasse family, and I think I probably passed this letter on with the directive and request to submit a detailed diagnosis about the condition of the child, probably in order to enable me to inform the parents about this matter or let the doctor inform the parents. Since I know nothing about the further developments of this letter, I cannot make any other statement about it. This letter can only express that I personally passed on the letter which was directed to me to the agency which dealt with the question of research of hereditary and constitutional severe diseases; nothing else, as far as my opinion goes, can be seen from this letter. I cannot remember the incident with that child, nor do I know whether I received any concrete reply in that connection.
Q But, witness, it is true that you were injecting yourself into euthanasia matters at as late a date as November, 1943, is it not?
A I would probably even have done that in February of 1945. If I was addressed personally I always tried to deal with these matters and reply personally and if I had perhaps the impression that something was not quite in order or quite clear it would have been a matter of course for me to investigate such an incident. I believe that quite concretely I have done so in this case. The letter starts, "On the basis of a letter directed to Professor Dr. Brandt". Certainly, some such letter was directed to me personally. I didn't merely put it away, but in this case I requested to receive an elaborated diagnosis.
Q But, Doctor, I have put the question to you whether you had any authority in regard to these matters. You state "No", and now you tell me that you gave instructions that there would be an elaborate diagnosis of the possible victim, Anna Gasse. Isn't there a little inconsistency there?
A I see no inconsistency. It is a matter of course that whether I have authority or have no authority that whenever I gain the impression that something is not quite in order that I should try to do something and clarify the matter as far as I can. In what way exactly I did that probably differed according to the special situation which prevailed. I don't know to whom I passed this matter and I assume this letter is correct. The signature of this letter is not very clear. It is certain, however, that after this matter was pointed out to me through this letter I did everything in order to clarify it. This has nothing to do with the authority as such.
Q But, in any event, you forwarded a letter to him without knowing who he was?
A I probably passed it on to Dr. Linden.
Q What would you have done if you had ascertained that there had been an improper diagnosis in the case of Anna Gasse?
A That is a question which retroactively after a period of four years or three and a half years I could not answer very clearly. In any event I should have tried to find a correct way of dealing with it - a correct and simpler way - but I cannot say what we were concerned with at that time.
Consequently, I can't answer the question which you put to me.
Q Well, witness, isn't it perfectly clear what we're concerned with. I take it that the question was whether Anna Gasse was to be improperly executed. Her relatives - her parents were showing some concern in that matter, and I ask you if you had ascertained that there had in fact been an improper diagnosis and that she was about to be improperly subjected to euthanasia what would you have done?
AAt first I would have made a report to the Fuehrer and in any case I would have notified the Reich Ministry of the Interior, in this case Linden's agency, but all these are assumptions. But one cannot see from this letter that any such question could have arisen. It only appears from this letter that the members of the family had some desire that this child be released, but it could well have been that I wrote to the parents after I had confirmed that request, and I think that is a matter of course that I would have tried to convince them about the correctness of euthanasia. But the decisive thing is that with reference to the children belonging to the Reich Committee the approval of the parents was necessary. It may be that in this connection the parents did not give an approval and for this reason a letter came to me.
Q Dr. Brandt, are you seriously suggesting that no children were subjected to euthanasia without the consent of the parents?
AAccording to my knowledge the approval of the parents was absolutely necessary and had to be given, and it was the task of the agency of Linden to establish connection with the local physicians in order to get that approval. At that period of time I heard of no case where a child received euthanasia without the approval of the parents. The fact that the parents were told that it was done on the basis of approval is something completely different.
Q Now, witness, this is the first time that I have ever heard mentioned in connection with the euthanasia program that anybody's consent had to be obtained and I take it that it is a rather fundamental matter. Are you ready to swear to this Tribunal that the Reich Committee never performed euthanasia on children without obtaining the consent of the parents of the child?
A I said yesterday that the approval of the parents was necessary for the euthanasia of children, and I am of the opinion that such an approval was actually given,
Q Was the approval written approval or verbal approval?
A That I don't know. I cannot say that.
Q Have you ever seen any written approval?
A I believe that during the first period, when this authorization was submitted for signature to Bouhler and me, all the other papers were together with it, such as approvals, etc. It may be that during the later period we were only concerned with the authorization papers and that the other papers were left with the Reich Committee. However, I did see such letters of approval but I don't believe that they were in every case in writing but I think they were partly given orally through the local physician or other agency which dealt with that case.
Q Well, witness, let's look at this letter again. I find some difficulty in reconciling your testimony about the necessity of consent by the relatives of the child with what's written here in this letter. For example, the third line reads. "It seems that the relatives of Anna Gasse tried to obtain her release by every possible means." If, witness, it was necessary to obtain consent why was there any question about releasing Anna Gasse?
A I cannot say that either. According to my opinion, the child could not be kept in an institution if the parents wanted it at home.
Q And the last sentence which reads, "If from a medical point of view such release is warranted, one could perhaps take into consideration whether one should not perhaps comply with such request in the interest of the good reputation of the institution." Don't you find that language just a bit restrained, witness?
A Yes, I think it is very restrained.
Q Let's pass on to another matter.
What happened to the insane asylums in Poland and in Russia in the areas which were overrun by the German army?
A I cannot say what happened to these institutions. I saw one single institution in Winiza which was completely evacuated since Wehrmacht units had moved in. Otherwise, I saw no other institutions for mental patients and I don't know what happened to them.
Q Doctor, you had authority under the order of 1 September 1939 up until the Spring of 1942. By that time all of Poland and a substantial part of Western Russian had been overrun?
A Yes.
Q Didn't you obtain information about what was being done with the patients in Polish and Russian asylums?
A No, I received no information about it.
Q Do you know what happened to them?
A No, I don't know that either.
Q Do you know whether euthanasia was extended to such areas?
A It is not known to me that euthanasia was extended to these territories.
Q Suppose we get your reaction to Document NO. 1758.
Witness, the document which has been handed to you consists of extracts taken from the diary of General Halder and I would like to direct your attention to some of these excerpts.
I ask that this document be marked as Prosecution Exhibit 444 for identification.
Do you see the excerpt taken from Volume VII, page 92 of the original, dated 21 September 1941?
A Yes.
Q It reads "General Wagner (Quartermaster General)" and then Item d says, "Attitude towards the inmates of insane asylums in the occupied territory." Do you find that?
A Yes.
Q And then on page 100 on 26 September 1941 "General Quartermaster Wagner" Item h "Insane asylums in area of Army Group "Nord". Russians consider feeble minded people holy. Despite of that, killing necessary."
A Yes.
Q And on page 106, "October 1, 1941, General Wagner (Quartermaster General).......Insane asylums Nowgorod.........." Does this document indicate to you that Euthanasia was extended to asylums in Russia?
A It says here, "Despite of that, killing necessary" that is under the 26 of September 1941. I did not speak to General Quartermaster Wagner nor with Mr. Halder regarding these questions. I did not speak to him nor did he approach me so that I can say nothing further regarding these 3 indications than what is seen anyway. I do not know who was supposed to carry through this killing and I do not know what this one word "Insane asylums Nowgorod", that is the 1st of October 1941, means; this is just one word. It can well be the case that this was merely discussed or that something should happen there, but I do not know.
Q Herr Brandt, how much time did you spend in the Fuehrer's Headquarters on the Eastern Front?
A From 1939 until 1942, with very short interruptions, I was there. Later, the reverse was true. I was there on lesser occasions and was more on the way -- on journeys.
Q And you also have related to the Tribunal that you made an inspection tour in the front areas of the Russian Front before Moscow in 1941, the winter of 1941?
A In the winter of 1941, that is from the 7th until the 10th of January, I was there.
Q And you were never consulted in the Fuehrer's Headquarters about extending euthanasia to asylums in Russia?
A No. I did not take part in any conference where General Oberst Halder was present. I did not participate in any conferences where General Quartermaster Wagner was together with the Fuehrer. All this took place--those discussions of this kind, which were called discussions of the situation -took place somewhere else and I did not participate in them.
Q Do you find it curious that euthanasia was extended to Russia without consultation with one of the leaders of the euthanasia program in Germany itself?
A I must say that I was not included in that program and I was not informed by the Fuehrer about this question. It was never under discussion.
Q Herr Brandt, after 1942, don't you think that you had sufficient power and authority to put a stop to killing of Eastern workers in euthanasia institutes?
A I did not know anything about it. I did not know that Eastern workers were killed in euthanasia institutions. Consequently it was not possible for me to do anything against it in any form whatsoever. If I had learned that healthy persons were killed in these institutions I am sure that I would have done everything to prevent it, not only because these were institutions for the sick.
Q Herr Brandt, let's move along to a different subject. I listened to your testimony with respect to your own power and authority as General Commissioner and Reichs Commissioner and also as to the power and authority of the Defendant Handloser and the Defendant Rostock, with great attention, and from the picture you have drawn it seems that one must conclude that you had very little authority and very little power; and that although Handloser was appointed as Chief of the Medical Services of the Wehrmacht in July 1942, he really was not Chief of the Medical Services of the Wehrmacht because he didn't have any power; and although Rostock was Chief of your office for Science and Research, he had no concern with matters of science and research and that that was just a gross misnomer, and was really concerned only with the matter of economy and the allocation of medical supplies, except that it may have had some passing concern with trying to keep medical schools open. I would like to investigate with you some of those matters now and I suggest that we first discuss for a moment the position of the Defendant Handloser. He was the Army Medical Inspectorate from 1941 until September 1944, was he not?
A You must take into consideration the double position which he held by being Army Physician and Amy Medical Inspector. In his capacity as Army Physician he was tied to the OKH; in his capacity as Army Inspector he belong to an institution which belonged to the Home Territory. Since Generaloberstab sarzt Handloser was tied to the OKH, his position as Army Medical Inspector was administrated by him together with the OKW and this position he held, I think, up until August of 1944, when, on the strength of a new decree, this union was separated and he himself became, in 1942, the Chief of the Medical Services of the Armed Forces.
Q Witness, which branch of the Wehrmacht had the largest medical service?
A Certainly the Army and for that reason at that time, in 1942, the Chief of the Medical Service of the Army was promoted to Chief of the Medical Services for the Armed Forces, which includes all branches.
Q Would you say that the medical service of the army was larger than the medical services of the other branches of the armed forces combined?
A I cannot say that with certainty but I would assume that, according to figures, that is with reference to the number of medical officers, it was larger than the Luftwaffe and Navy together.
Q And didn't the Army Medical Inspectorate handle substantially all medical problems for all branches of the Wehrmacht with the exception of those medical problems which related primarily to one of the other branches of the armed forces, for instance, aviation medicine?
A The individual branches of the armed forces worked on medical questions by themselves. Because of this independent activity, remarkable happenings occurred. For instance, in the same locality, let us assume it is the Crimea, where there were certain Navy units, the same vaccination procedure was carried out which was done at different periods by the Army, Navy and Air Force. This is merely an indication that within the individual Wehrmacht branches there was a basical independency of action and it was the desire of the independent Wehrmacht branches to maintain their special position, even with reference to their own academies. Therefore, it was not the case that the Army was in any way in a leading position regarding its measures which it took within its own branch and was in any way suggestive to the measures of the Navy and Air Force.
Q Now, Herr Brandt, after Handloser was appointed as chief of the medical services of the Wehrmacht, on 28 July 1942, was he or was he not the superior of Hippke?
A He was not the official superior of Hippke.
Q Now, Herr Brandt, we are not in this trial concerned with the right of the superior to punish his subordinate or matters of that concern. I am, however, concerned and this case is concerned with whether or not Handloser could stop certain research work which was being carried on by Hippke as the Luftwaffe Medical Inspectorate?
AAccording to my opinion that would only have been possible; that is, to stop them or not to stop them, if we were concerned with matters which equally concerned all branches of the armed forces. But this word, mutual, I think, was expressly mentioned in the decree so that everything which does not represent a mutual basis was outside the jurisdiction of Handloser and was within the framework of the respective Wehrmacht branch which dealt with any such matter. It may have been the Navy or the Air Force.
Q As I put it to you, medical research on typhus, medical research on epidemic jaundice, medical research on yellow fever, are mutual problems. Could Handloser issue orders to Hippke initiating or stopping research work with respect to such matters?
A Before giving my reply may I look at the decree once more, which is relevant in connection with this order? That is the decree of the 28th of July.
(Document handed to witness).
A (Cont'd.) On the basis of this decree and its formulation and in view of the situation which prevailed, I would not assume that Handloser was in a position to give such a directive. The entire complex of science and research was not mentioned in this decree at all, and if I take into consideration the history of the creation of this decree and taking into consideration the lack of materials, a special readiness for commitment had to be gained.
In the heading of this decree, the first sentence is of importance, which says: "The utilization of personnel and material in the field of medical and health matters demands a coordinated and planned direction."
And this refers to paragraph 1, namely, the coordination of all tasks common to the medical services of the Wehrmacht, et cetera. I am of the opinion that on the basis of this decree Dr. Handloser quite apart from the question whether he had any knowledge or not, could not have been in a position to give any orders to Hippke in his field of science.
Q Well, this opening paragraph you have referred to talks of "The utilization of personnel and material in the field of medical and health matters demands a coordinated and planned direction"; is that right? Is medical research not a problem very directly concerned with the coordinated and planned use of personnel and material?
A But that is not meant in this decree. I have just said that you have to take into consideration in addition, the history of the creation of this decree. Nobody, when speaking of personnel and material, will connect this with research work as such.
Q Is that right? Well, let's look at Document NO-924 -
A I would like to ask you once more, did you ask me whether that is correct or not? I said that personnel and material questions have nothing to do with research.
Q That's exactly what I understand you to say. Now let me put to you Document NO-022 which was introduced as Prosecution Exhibit 435, and read you the words of Generaloberstabsarzt Handloser himself, and these words were spoken at the meeting of the consulting physicians of the Military Medical Academy from 30 November to 3 December 1942, approximately six months after this Fuehrer order that we have been studying was issued. He opens his address:
"Gentlemen: The demands and extent of this total war as well as the relationship between needs and availability of personnel and material require measures also in military and medical fields which will serve the unification and unified leadership. It is not a question of marching separately and battling together, but marching and battling must be done in unison from the beginning in all fields. As a result, as concerns the military sector, the Wehrmacht Medical Service and with it the Chief of the Medical Services of the Wehrmacht, came into being.
Not only in matters of personnel and material, even as far as this is possible in view of special fields and special tasks which must be considered, but also with the view to medical scientific education and research, our part in the Wehrmacht Medical Service must and will be a unified one. Accordingly the group of participants in this second work conference East which I have new opened is differently composed from the first work conference in May of this year. Then it was a conference of the Army. Today the three branches of the Wehrmacht, the Waffen SS and police and labor service and the organization Todt are participating and unified."
Do you wish to change your testimony, witness?
A No, I do not want to change my testimony. If this has happened in this case and if these questions went parallel to scientific questions too, it was not something that was based on an order which was initiated by Prof. or Dr. Handloser, but it was the realization of the participating Wehrmacht branches to try on their own accord to coordinate their functions. That wasn't the case everywhere, and even on the occasion of such meetings of the East and I don't know who was detailed to attend these meetings, there was some copying done with reference to the various Wehrmacht branches.
Q Well now, Herr Brandt, I think that is actually what the situation was. Weren't the various branches of the Wehrmacht being coordinated by Handloser and weren't they being coordinated in the field of medical research as well?
A The academics were not carried on as Wehrmacht academies, but there was the academy of the Air Force, the academy of the Army and the academy of the Navy. Even the Waffen SS had later started to institute their own SS academy. That may have been earlier too. At any rate the academies are not sub-organs of the chief of the armed forces medical services but they remained institutions of the competent Wehrmacht branches and had their names. Dr. Handloser, as medical inspector and Army physician, had the Military Medical Academy and similar situation was with the Navy.
Q And he used the Military Medical Academy to coordinate research activities in all the branches of the Wehrmacht, did he not?
A We were then concerned with the meeting of the consulting physicians to which you probably point. These meetings of the consulting physicians were for the purpose of exchanging of experiences, but according to a channel of command Handloser certainly could not interfere with any of the other research branches. In such a case the respective chiefs of the Navy or Air Force would have referred to this decree which only speaks of personnel and material direction.
Q Herr Brandt, before we adjourn for the evening I would like to put some of your own words to you in connection with the position of the defendant Handloser, and I want you to recall to mind the words that you spoke at the meeting of the Military Medical Academy at Hohenlichen in May of 1944 which I need not remind you, was before the decree of August 1944 which you assert extended Handloser's powers somewhat. This is Document NO-924, Prosecution Exhibit 437. You said the following:
"Generaloberstabsarzt Handloser, you, a soldier and a physician at the same time, are responsible for the use and the performance of our medical officers." You went on to say, "I believe, and this probably is the sole expectation of all concerned, that this meeting which today starts in Hohenlichen will be held for the benefit of our soldiers. The achievements to date of your physicians, Herr General Oberstabsarzt, confirm this unequivocally and their readiness to do their share makes all of us proud, and I may also say confident."
Then you said a little later on: "It is good simply to call these things by their names and to look at them as they are. This meeting is the visible expression of it is, it shall be, and it must be so in every respect. The consulting physicians are gathered around their medical chief. When I look at these ranks you, Generaloberstabsarzt Handloser, are to be envied. Medical experts with the best and most highly trained special knowledge are at your disposal for care of the soldiers. In reciprocal action between yourself and your medical officers the problems of our medical knowledge and capacity are kept alive."
Herr Brandt, were those words addressed to a man with no power and authority over those medical experts gathered from all branches of the Wehrmacht, including the Waffen SS?
A From what I have said can be seen that again medical officers are spoken of. That is in compliance with what is meant here in the formulation of the decree with personnel. It does not mean that Mr. Handloser was in the position to direct the work done by these gentlemen in their various branches. No doubt it would have been correct if we had some central medical service, but that did not exist and that can also be seen from the fact that scientific work within the academies was carried on under the designation of the own special arm and that it was not something of the chief of the medical services of the armed forces. Otherwise the medical offices would have to be exchanged; that at the academy for Air Force, Army physicians would have to be - but that was not the case. They were clearly separated. I think it was only twice a year when they reported on their activities.