Q On the basis f the Breslau conference, it is determined then, until that time, experiments were only carried out on animals?
A. Yes, in the course of the Breslau conferences only experiments on animals were discussed.
Q I now request you to read page 3. It is a letter of the Reich Physician SS Grawitz to the Reichfuehrer-SS, Himmler. It is Document No. 010 of the Prosecution. That letter states the following. "The work, namely, the research for the reason of Epidemic Jaundice has been so far carried cut by Oberstabsarzt Doctor Dohmen within the Research Laboratory of the Army Medical Inspectorate, and with the cooperation of Robert Koch Institute, in conformity with results obtained by other German Scientists. This research has led to the discovery that infectious Jaundice is not caused by bacteria but by a virus. In order to extend our knowledge which to date is based only on innoculation of animals with germs taken from human beings, the reverse is now necessary, namely, the innoculation of human beings with virus cultures. Cases of death must be anticipated."
I now leave out the next sentence, and I continue: "Eight persons condemned to death -- young if possible,-- are needed in the prison hospital of Concentration Camp Sachsenhausen."
The next letter of the Reichsfuehere SS, Document No. 011, on page 5 of Document Book No. 8, contains the approval of the Reichsfuehrer SS that eight criminals condemned to death at Ruschwitz should be used for these experiments. It further contains the approval of Reichsfuehrer SS that Doctor Dohmen should carry out these experiments at Sachsenhausen. You will see that the letter is of June 1943. That is one year before the Breslau conference. You have testified that Dohmen has reported at Breslau about experiments on animals. Do you know anything about the fact that Doctor Dohmen had worked at the Concentration Camp Sachsenhausen?
A I have already stated in the course of my last examination that the Reich Physician SS Doctor Grawitz showed a very lively interest in obtaining the cultures from Doctor Dohmen in order to personally carry out experiments with these cultures on human beings.
Doctor Dohmen told me about this thing. Dohmen refused to hand these vaccines over, and I supported him in his refusal because Dohmen did not want to lose control ever these cultures and because it appeared a scientific proposition for him and because he had cultivated these cultures. After Dohmen had refused to hand ever these cultures Grawitz himself urged him to personally carry out the experiments which he had previously intended to carry out himself, and carry them out at Sachsenhausen. In order to appease Grawitz, and in order to avoid, unpleasantness Dohmen decided, after he had been urged several times, to work at Sachsenhausen, but not as Grawitz wanted to -- infect human beings there. He only wanted to work there in order to make things look proper to the outside and in order to appease Grawitz in this manner. Therefore, in the end he carried out sabotage against what Grawitz had wanted. Then we always discussed our respective Hepatitis research from time to time. Doctor Dohmen always reported about his work at Sachsenhausen. He made examinations there on the prisoners who had been placed at his disposal, in the some way as this was also carried out in field hospitals and hospitals, in the case of people who are suspected of having Jaundice and those who have had it already. Then he also carried out preventitive infections of the liver by use of vitamins, which is also a common medical practice, but he never infected human beings as far as I know.
Q I want to repeat: Doctor Dohmen, when he reported at Breslau, did not refer to these experiments and did not press them?
A No.
Q As far as you know about this work at Sachsenhausen, did you ever discuss this work with Professor Handloser?
A No, I never did that.
Q You have stated that Doctor Dohmen in the year 1944 was assigned to Strassburg by Schreiber. Do you know anything about the results of this journey or the discussion with Haagen?
AAs far as I know, Doctor Dohmen carried out some dicing experiments with virus at the laboratory together with Doctor Haagen.
He only spent a few days there. I do not know anything about any farreaching results of this collaboration.
Q After the journey had been completed, was there anything mentioned about the fact that he had been at Natzweiler?
A No, I did not know anything: about it.
Q Do you know where Natzweiler is?
A I did not know anything about it previously. I did not even know the name. I have new discovered that apparently it was a concentration camp. I, myself, have never been at Natzweiler. I do not know it. I have never visited any concentration camps at all, and I do not know anything about the composition of the concentration camps or anything about their organization. I have never visited any concentration camps.
Q At the beginning of your examination, you have also mentioned Typhus as a specifically and particularly serious disease, as far as the Army was concerned. Did you discuss the problem of Typhus research or Typhus vaccine with Professor Handloser at the end of 1941?
A Generally I discussed the treatment of Typhus with Professor Handloser by diagnosis.
Q. Can this be explained by the fact that in 1941 for the army and the medical agencies of the army, for all these agencies, typhus was only a question of medical treatment?
A. In 1941 the research institute for typhus had already been established at Dachau; and there the well-known lice vaccine which had previously been introduced was manufactured. That was the Weigel vaccine. It had proved itself; and as far as it could be produced in larger amounts, the troops who had become endangered were vaccinated with it. Therefore, the typhus vaccination was nothing new for the army; and when typhus made its appearance for the first time, only a certain period of time passed until technically sufficient vaccine was produced in order to innoculate all the troops in all the units.
Q. Did you at any time receive an order to carry out research with regard to typhus?
A. No.
Q. Did Prof. Handloser ever make an expression towards you that it was a necessary in the field of typhus research to make use of experiments on human beings?
A. No.
Q. It has been stated here that on the 21st of December, 1941, a conference is alleged to have taken place which was attended by Prof. Gildemeister, Prof. Reiter, Dr. Conti, Prof. Mrugowsky, Dr. Brandt, and still others; and the prosecution claims that in the course of this conference Prof. Handloser in his capacity as representative of the Wehrmacht suggested then to carry out typhus research through experiments on human beings and to continue them in this certain way by infecting human beings to bring typhus research to completely different fields than had previously been done in accordance with the medical profession and science.
I am now asking you, if Prof. Handloser had actually considered this problem in December, 1941, would he have discussed it with you?
A. I assume that I would have found out something about it. Actually, however. I did not hear anything about these things.
Q. How long were you consulting internist with Prof. Handloser?
A. During the entire time when Prof. Handloser was the army medical inspector.
Q. That is, until the 1st of September, 1944?
A. Yes.
Q. Then why did you not have any more official contact with him afterwards?
A. Because I was consultant to the army medical inspector and Prof. Handloser from that period of time on -- and I do not know the exact date -- became chief of the army medical service.
Q. Does this show that the chief of the medical service in that capacity did not have any consulting physicians?
A. The chief of the medical service did not have any consulting physicians.
Q. Was he able to issue any direct orders to the consulting physicians of the Wehrmacht branches?
A. He was not able to do that directly as far as I know. I had not received any direct orders from him as chief of the medical service.
Q. Your contact with Professor Handloser makes it possible for you to judge him as a physician, as a soldier, and as a human being. In this trial it will be important for Professor Handloser that a picture of his personality be gained. For this reason I would ask you to describe to the High Tribunal from your own personal knowledge how Professor Handloser appeared to you and to others as a soldier, as a physician, and as a human being.
A. In my opinion, judging Professor Handloser as a clinical man, he was not only a soldier. I cannot judge the qualifications of a soldier because I have always worked in civilian life and because I have not been an active soldier, but I have always belonged to the reserve. I can only judge his particular medical attitude. He did not only personally take care of the organization but I have personally seen and have always heard that in many instance he took personal care of the sick and wounded. That is something which was not always done by all medical officers. As a man I believe that Professor Handloser had a very noble personality and that he had a flawless character.
Q. Now, my final question. From your knowledge of the personality of Professor Handloser are you able to say whether Professor Handloser in his orders and directions had followed any other rules than the acknowledged rule of medical ethics?
A. I have never personally seen any indications of the fact that Professor Handloser had violated the rules of medical science or that he had issued orders which would lead to it.
Q. I thank you very much.
DR. NELTE: I do not have any further questions.
EXAMINATION BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q. Witness, how many times during the course of your professional career have you actually come into personal contact with Professor Handloser?
A. At the beginning of the war I had been conscripted for military service. I was conscripted from my civilian activity. I was immediately assigned as consulting physician of the army medical inspectorate.
That was without any activity on my part. My first chief was Generaloberstabsarzt Professor Waldmann. Waldmann became ill and was retired. He was succeeded by Professor Handloser. From that moment on I was subordinated to Professor Handloser as his consulting physician. During the time when professor Handloser was chief of the army medical inspectorate I was also at all times his consulting internist.
Q. That continued over how long a course of time?
A. I do not completely remember the exact dates. I believe from December 1940 on. I think that is the date when Professor Handloser became army medical inspector.
DR. NELTE: May I perhaps say that in December he became deputy of Professor Waldmann and in January 1941 became medical inspector.
A. Until his final appointment to the medical service. As far as I know, that was on the 1st of September, 1944.
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q That was a period of more than three years, is that true?
A Yes sir.
Q And during that time how often did you actually come in contact with Professor Handloser, either in a social personal way or in a professional way where problems, professional medical problems, would be discussed between you, as often as once a week for example?
A There were no regular meetings, it was done in such a way that whenever a medical necessity appeared within the Army, Professor Handloser called me and then in accordance with my duties, asked me about these things, but it was also vice-versa, that when I, on my trips or otherwise, in field hospitals, or by means of reports from other consulting physicians, if I had to report something of importance to him then I went to see him or I submitted a report in writing. There was no procedure which called for regular meetings once a week. Sometimes several weeks passed. Therefore, the meetings and the discussions or conferences took place from case to case.
DR. NELTE: May I ask a question in order to complete the subject?
BY DR: NELTE:
Q Do you know what functions Professor Handloser had?
A First of all he was Army Medical Inspectorate and at the same time he connected with this the so-called Chief Medical Officer of the Army.
Q In order to explain and clarify the previous question, every time that Professor Handloser visited Berlin was it the procedure that he would discuss the most important questions with you by asking you to report to him or that you went to see him when you knew that he was in Berlin?
A Not every tine when Professor Handloser was in Berlin was I called to see him. I have already stated that the discussions took place from case to case. If he had something important he called me. If I happened to be in Berlin I went to see him. When I was in my clinic in Breslau I would receive a telephone call telling me to come to see him at Berlin, and whenever I had something of importance to discuss with him, then when Professor Handloser was not at Berlin I would report this to the Chief of the I G with the request to pass it on to Generalarzt Dr. Schreiber, and when he had sufficient time for me I would go to see him personally.
Q May I phrase the question in conclusion as follows: In the course of the acquaintance which you had with him, in the course of the three years, was it sufficient that you can judge his character and his understanding of his duties, and that you can give a clear picture of them?
A I believe that as for as the fields were concerned in which I dealt or negotiated with him, I can make myself a clear picture of his personality as a whole. It was three years, which is a long period too, and I cannot state now in numbers just how many times I saw him, but in the course of the three years, of course, I had frequent opportunity to have such discussions with him.
DR. NELTE: I do not have any further questions.
ATTORNEY FLEMING: (Counsel for the Defendant Mrugowsky) BY DR. FLEMING:
Q Professor, on 23 January you gave me an affidavit. It's contents have already been clarified for the most part by the questions which have been asked up until now. I only want to ask you the following: Do you know the defendant, Mrugowsky?
A I do not know Mrugowsky very closely. In the course of the war I have seen him at the conference of the consulting physicians and I have also talked with him there but we do not know each other very closely.
Q In the course of your hepatitis work was the name Mrugowsky ever mentioned?
A No.
Q Did you hear in any way that he occupied himself with hepatitis research?
A I do not know that. It never became known to me.
Q Do you believe that you would still remember if the name had been mentioned in that connection?
A I believe, yes.
Q And I still have one more question. Attorney Nelte has just told you that the Prosecution claims that on the 29th of September, 1941, a conference had taken place, at which, amongst others, Handloser and Mrugowsky had been present, and whore the experiments on human beings with typhus were decided on.
You have already been questioned as to your relationship to Dr. Handloser. Do you believe that Professor Handloser would have discussed the typhus question with you, and particularly the question if you considered it appropriate to carry out experiments on human beings, after such a discussion had taken place on the 29 December 1941?
A I believe that I have already answered this question that I would personally believe that if experiments on human beings with typhus had been planned, that Professor Handloser would have told me something about it and that if he said anything I have already stated I have not heard anything about it.
DR. FLEMING: Thank you, I have no further questions.
BY DR. FRITZ (defense counsel for the defendant Rose):
Q Professor, what did Dohmen do in his civilian capacity, in what institute, and where else did he work before he was conscripted?
A He was assistant of the Hamburg Clinic for Internal Diseases.
Q Can you tell me the reason that he was especially selected for hepatitis research?
AAt some earlier period Dohmen apparently had been assistant of Gildemeister or worked with him. I personally do not know that exactly. However, I believe that was the case. I believe that at the time Dohmen was recommended by Gildemeister as somebody who was acquainted with hepatitis research and I have stated earlier that in the course of the clinic work with reward to hepatitis, the necessity had resulted to appoint a physician who was acquainted with virus research in order to find the cause for the jaundice.
Q Professor, can yo.u tell me when Dr. Dohmen was assigned to the Robert Koch Institute?
AApparently that was in the year 1942.
Q And do you know how long he was assigned there?
A Until the destruction of the Robert Koch Institute, until the loss of the cultures which had been cultivated by Dohmen. I believe this was in the fall of 1943. I do not know the exact month any more.
Q And with when did Dr. Dohmen collaborate in the Robert Koch Institute?
A He worked in the laboratory of Professor Gildemeister and was advised and supported by Professor Gildemeister in his work.
Q Do you know if Dr. Dohmen had anything to do with Professor Rose?
A I have never heard anything of it. I do not know.
Q Do you know after the destruction of the Robert Koch Institute, do you know where Dohmen continued his hepatitis research?
AAfter the destruction of the Robert Koch Institute Dr. Dohmen went to Giessen by order of the Commander of Army Group C, to whom he was subordinated, and in Giessen he worked in a laboratory which had been placed at his disposal there by the German University.
Q Can you tell me, Professor, when and where and why Dr. Dohmen lost his hepatitis cultures?
A In trying to find the cause for hepatitis on animals Dr. Dohmen in the course of the experiments was very unfortunate. Already in the year 1942 he frequently had had difficulties by animal epedimics and plagues and in the year 1943 he suffered from bombing attacks and then he always lost his material and his cultures. And then when he finally went to Giessen it was again attempted to transfer human material on animals by puncturing livers of patients suffering from jaundice and these cultures did not have any effect on the animals because apparently the available animals were unsuited and there were also difficulties in procuring the animals. Various races of mice reacted differently to these vaccination experiments. These are the apparent reasons: When Giessen was completely destroyed through air attacks again all material which then existed was destroyed.
Q Do you remember the incident between Professor Hogen and Dr. Dohmen which was caused by the fact that Dr. Dohmen refused to hand over his cultures?
AAt the conference in May 1943 Dohmen spoke about his experiments an animals and his cultivation of the bacteria and Hogen also attended this conference. After the conference Hogen ordered Dohmen to hand over his cultures to him so that he likewise could carry out such experiments. At the time Dohmen felt toward Hogen exactly the same way toward Grawitz. He refused to turn over the cultures to him in order to avoid putting the material into hands which would be removed from his control.
MR. HARDY: If the Tribunal please, this same ground has been covered by the witness when being questioned by Dr. Nelte and I can't see any reason for further questioning along these lines.
THE PRESIDENT: Since the Tribunal considers that the position of Prosecution is correct that the witness has testified at considerable length these matters, the Tribunal does not desire to limit your cross examination but it should be confined to any material which is not already in the record.
BY DR. FRITZ:
Q. Professor, did you ever collaborate with the defendant Rose on hepatitis?
A. No.
Q. As far as you know did Professor Rose take any active part in hepatitis research?
A. I did not hear anything about it.
Q. Do you know that Professor Rose did not participate at the hepatitis conference at Breslau?
A. I believe that he was not there.
Q. At that Breslau conference ail the leading hepatitis research men had been invited of the Wehrmacht and who from the members of the Luftwaffe can you remember attended?
A. I already stated that Hogen was there. Then Kolb attended. also Buechner. And there was the pathologist Lester there because it as also a pathologist's meeting. There were certainly other members of the Luftwaffe but I do not know the exact names. If I would be asked for certain names I might be able to give you more information about them.
Q. That Professor Rose, as a scientist and member of the Robert Koch. Institute, had to be interested in the result of your hepatitis research, just like for any other progress in the fields of infections disease, is of course natural, Now, I want to ask you, Professor, in excess of that would you consider Professor Rose as a specialist for hepatitis and would you mention his name if you mentioned all the German hepatitis specialists?
A. No, I would not consider him a hepatitis scientist.
Q. Have you ever heard a lecture by Professor Rose about hepatitis?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever seen any scientific article in medical literature on the subject by Professor Rose?
A. No.
Q. Have you ever heard him speak in any discussion during any scientific meeting about the subject of hepatitis?
A. No, I can't recall such an occasion.
Q. Do you know anything about human experiments on hepatitis by Professors Hogan and Kelb?
A. I do not know anything about the execution of such experiments.
Q. You have previously stated, Professor about the intended human experiments which were planned at Breslau. What else do you know about hepatitis experiments on human beings?
A. I know only of two experiments. One was carried out in 1942 by assistants of my clinic. In these experiments it was discovered for the first time that with the duodenal liquid of the patients and by placing it in the stomachs of the people that this disease could be caused. That was the basic experiment in order to show that hepatitis can be transferred through duodenal liquid and that it is infectious when transferred from one human being to another. This experiment was carried out by assistants and students of my clinic as a uniform group. The second experiment was carried out on me personally. I experimented on myself. That was at the beginning of 1943. I bearly infected myself with the bacteria cultivated by Dohmen because I wanted to be able to judge whether the bacteria cultivated by Dohmen were the actual cause of hepatitis. The result was a very light case of the disease on myself and that the whites of my eyes became slightly yellow. In that respect I was certain that the cultures were the actual cause of hepatitis. From any other side I did not hear about such experiments on human beings, whether such assistant experiments or personal experiments were carried out.
In any case I do not know anything about it.
Q. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any further cross-examination of this witness by defense counsel?
BY DR. BOEHM (Counsel for defendant Poppendick)
Q I'm going to submit to the witness a publication regarding the typhoid treatment with acridin by Dr. Ding. This is Document No. 582, Exhibit No. 286.
JUDGE SEBRING: What book, please?
DR. BOEHM: Exhibit No. 286. It was not in any document book. It was presented singly.
BY DR. BOEHM:
Q Professor, did you have sufficient time to investigate the acridin work by Ding so that you can state your expert opinion before the Tribunal today?
A I read it, yes.
Q Among others, you particularly dealt with questions of infectious diseases?
A Yes, that's right.
Q Is it correct to say that you wrote a book regarding infectious diseases where in particular you worked on experiences made during the last war?
A Yes.
Q As a consulting physician in the Army Inspectorate you must have gained experience in the field of typhus research, in particular, regarding the circumstances which deal with the originating of epidemics.
A Yes, I dealt with that question.
Q The document which was submitted to you bears the stamp "No objection from a medical point of view". There is a signature, i.a. Poppendick - by order of Poppendick, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Well, is that thesis a typical report as it is made to a superior agency or does it have the form of a publication in a professional periodical
A It has the form of a publication in a professional periodical.
Q How do you see that?
A I can see this by the letter head - by the head of this work. Furthermore, I can see it because of the scientific discussion which deals with use of other authors regarding the same field. That is at the end of this thesis.
Q Was it customary with the army to approve scientific works in that form?
A With the army it was customary to establish the medical harmlessness of the work.
Q Now, as an expert in typhus research, if one looks through this work does one have to come to the conclusion that one is here concerned with intentional artificial infection of human beings as it is described in this work?
A One does not have to come to that conclusion of necessity. The only passage which may perhaps indicate that is List No. 1 where the treatment there used is laid down in the case of two patients where it was started on the first and third days of the incubation period. That is only possible when one is concerned with a small epidemic which is carefully observed and where one can exercise the daily control regarding the lice with reference to all the affected persons and where a louse was still found in the person of some human being who appears to be healthy. If therapy is started on that day, then you can find out on the first or second incubation day and you can start treatment. For instance, in the case of transport where delousing has taken place -- that is, carefully delousing -- and where these people arrived at their destination with lice, you can, during a typhus period, assume that the infection took place on the day the journey took place. That is to say, in the case of well-observed epidemics it is possible that treatment starts on the first or second incubation day but there are only only very few such occasion
Q Thank you, that is sufficient.
According to your knowledge is Poppendick an expert in the field of typhus research?
A Poppendick is a physician dealing with internal diseases - internal medicine. I don't know that he specially dealt with typhus cases.
Q Now, if you just examine this thesis as a non-expert and if you read it through could you come to a conclusion or suspicion that criminal experiments are being described in that thesis?
A I don't think that is possible.
Q Thank you, I have no further question.
A Because in that thesis you can, at no passage, find that there is any artificial epidemic in question. It says here "typhus research with acridin" and then it further says "within the framework of an epidemic".
DR. BQEHM: Thank you, I have no farther question.
BY DR. STEINBAUEK (Counsel for the Defendant WILHELM BEIGLEBOCK):
Q. Witness, last week you shortly mentioned liver punctions. In a publication of the First University in Vienna, I read the following sentence: "The Liver punctions, when local anesthetic is used, is painless and hardly interferes with the patient's health." I ask you, do you share that opinion?
A. Yes, that is also my opinion.
Q. Do you know that especially at the Clinic Eppinger in Vienna this method was worked upon a great deal?
A. In the Clinic of Eppinger, as they became known, liver punctions were often used.
Q. Do you know from literature or personally, the Defendant Dr. Beiglbock?
A. I know him personally, and because of attending scientific meetings.
Q. Would you say that he scientifically exercised this method and that he is fully acquainted with it?
A. I think that everybody can learn that method who is skillful manually.
Q. Is is correct that the Danish scientists, Evensen and Roholm, performed this liver punction on even quite healthy human-beings?
A. I do not remember that exactly. I believe, however, that pictures o quite normal livers are contained in the monography which has appeared on that subject. But I do not remember it quite well. I do not remember whether liver punctions were performed on perfectly healthy human-beings.
Q. Tank you. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any further cross examination of this witness by any of the defense counsel? There being none, the Prosecution may cross examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q. Witness, you have stated in direct examination that you were consulting physician with the Medical Inspectorate of the Army and that Handloser held that position as Medical Inspector from January 1941 to September 1944. Now the Tribunal has asked you how many times did you consult with Handloser. I ask you again, how many times did you physically contact Handloser in the course of your duties as a consulting physician to him?
A. I have already said that I cannot say that I spoke to him once a week; sometimes it occurred once in 3 weeks, other times once in 4 weeks, and sometimes I saw him one week after the other. That is, a physical contact, as you said.
Q. Well, the, witness, would you say that you saw Handloser 10 times a year?
A. Yes, I could quite say that.
Q. More or less? Witness, I am simply asking you how many times do you estimate that you saw Handloser in the course of a year 5, 10, 15, or 30 times? That isn't too difficult to remember, is it?
A. I should say that I met him 10 times a year, but it may well have been 13 or 14 or 15 times; I am sure that it differed in the individual years.
Q. Thank you. You were also attached to the Military Medical Academy as I understand it?
A. Yes.
Q. You have stated that Generalarzt Dr. Schreiber was the commanding officer of the Military Medical Academy and that you were subordinate to him in that connection. Is that correct?
A. Yes. He was not the commander of the Military Medical Academy but the commander of the so-called Training Group C of the Military Medical Academy which is a part of it.
Q. Now the Military Melical Academy was under the control of the Medical Inspector of the Army, was it not?
A. The Training Group C was subordinated to the Military Medical Academy and its commander; and the Military Medical Academy and with it this Training Group C, was subordinated to the Army Medical Inspectorate. The head of the Army Medical Inspectorate was the Army Medical Inspector.
Q. Hence, Dr. Schreiber, as chief of this department in the Military Medical Academy, was, in fact, a subordinate of the Medical Inspector, Handloser, during the time Handloser held that position as Medical Inspector, is that correct?
A. Yes. In the final analysis, all medical officers were subordinates of the highest medical officer; that, of course, also includes Generalarzt Schreiber; as the commander of the so-called Training Group C he was the subordinate of the Army Medical Inspector.
Q. Now, witness, in addition to the duties you have outlined in the direct examination, did you ever receive questions in scientific research from the Reich Research Council?
A. Would you please repeat that question more precisely? I did not quite understand.
Q. Did you ever receive requests or questions from the Reich Research Council on matters of scientific research?
A. On occasions I was asked by the Reich Research Council on numerous medical matters; this was mostly done by writing and I then defined my position to the questions by writing. These questions concerned numerous fields. For instance, I remember one question about a proposed treatment of typhus. It was intended to treat it with certain bathing processes -- warm bathing processes. There were also other questions I had to deal with -- questions concerning certain treatment of diseases, whether a certain method of treatment proposed by some one had any value according to my opinion so that it could generally be exploited and used. The selection of certain drugs was dealt with by me by request of the Reich Research Council.