Otherwise, I had to take care of the organizational questions for three or four hundred people and this kept me fully occupied.
Q What other conferences did you attend during the war?
A. I did not attend the first and the second conferences; but the third mentioned the sulfonamides and the fourth was at my place at Hohenlychen. That was the general conference which took place.
Q May it please the Tribunal, I now come to the discussion of those experiments, in which the defendant Gebhardt was not directly participating, but in which the indictment charges him with special responsibility. The first two documents to which I refer are located in Document Book 6. They are sterilization experiments and these are exhibits of the Prosecution No. 216 and 215. The documents are located on pages 56 and 60 of the English Document Book. I am now handing these two documents to you, and these are are two file notes which the defendant, Dr. Rudolph Brandt, compiled, and which quite apparently referred to that same conference, that is the conference which took place in early July, 1942, and which you have already mentioned with regard to the sulfonamide experiments; and now I would like for you to tell the Tribunal who was present at this conference and what subject was discussed there and what agreement was reached.
A May I say in advance most certainly I did not have anything to do with sterilization experiments, and I did not attend meetings in which sterilization of Jewesses was discussed. The uncertainty and the change in this file note, which was made later on, I believe results from the fact that it is a notation which was compiled on two occasions when I remained behind, in order to discuss the execution of the sulfonamide experiments, at Ravensbrueck with Inspector Gleucks and in order to see that men were to be sent into the womens' camp. I have already stated last year that, without knowledge of these documents, at these conferences I had to oppose a plan of Himmler to establish a big research institute here from the very beginning; and it was ordered that this was to be connected with some woman physician, without, of course, being able to remember any details.
As far as I can remember, the situation was as follows: At the first discussion there was Grawitz, Gleucks, and I, and that here, as I have already described, it was decided that the experiment was to be begun with men and that it was to be carried out on a small group. It is correct to say that Himmler then called Gauberg, who wanted this big institute with regard to hereditary questions and who wanted to become a member of my staff. This was impossible from the very beginning, because we were occupying ourselves with men and because we had agreed on this little group only. I can still only remember that Gauberg also received a research assignment. On the other hand quite certainly in the second part of the discussion Grawitz and I were absent and I believe that this is also indicated by the letter which arose from this file notice and which then several days later was directed to a different distribution and not to me. The file note in this form is incorrect.
Q The defendant Dr. Rudolf Brandt was not present at this conference?
A No. May I perhaps say that to my knowledge tho reports are compiled in such a way, that the men which are ordered to see the Reich Fuehrer Himmler go by way of tho adjutant Grothmann. He has a list of tho names there and it is shown in what order were to report. As far as I know this list reached Brandt in tho evening. It also contained additional notes by Himmler, which wore written on a scrap of paper if he didn't roach immediately a decision. Apparently Brandt only wrote tho final letters which he wanted to compose by himself. Brandt certainly did not attend our discussion.
Q In the same Document Book No. 6 there is on page 1 an affidavit of tho co-defendant Dr. Rudolf Brandt. Prosecution has presented this document as Exhibit 141. It is document NO 440. In this affidavit it is stated under paragraph six, "Dr. Karl Gebhardt apparently carried out surgical sterilization in the camp of Ravensbrueck". Is this statement correct? Was it necessary for you at all to carry out surgical sterilization experiment, and were you yourself interested in them, or was this only a general surgical problem?
AAs a specialist I did not have any special experience in this field, nor the desire to improve my knowledge. The problem was not discussed at all from he surgical point of view. And, the uncertainty of all statements by Brandt - that he knows that I was there during those days, that something; that was discussed - possibly still remembered tho location of Ravensbruck but it is important that he did not mention the experiments which began continued for three months, the discussions between Grawitz and myself, and the report to Himmler. He does not mention those things at all. I have never occupied myself with sterilization.
Q The next document which I intend to submit to tho witness is contained in Document Book 11 and is on page 57 of tho English Document Book. This is document NO-409 which has been presented by the Prosecution as Exhibit 249. It is a letter from tho Physician-SS Dr. Grawitz to the Reich Fuehrer-SS Himmler of the 29 of August 1942.
It refers to the bio-chemical treatment of sepsis. This document came to your knowledge, didn't it? And this is shown by a note by you which reads as follows: "Seen at Ravensbruck on the 3rd September 1942.
Signed Karl Gebhardt."
Did you know beforehand of the execution of these experiments and did you agree with then?
A I did not have any previous knowledge of these experiments and especially with regard to this document may I state somewhat more in detail what it shows. This is a letter to Himmler. Dated the end of August, and it was signed by Grawitz. It was never mentioned that I was to receive this letter or that this letter was to bo routed through me. It does not have any note from me that I countersigned it, or was in agreement with it, in this form. It was not only discussed in Berlin, and, in particular, on the 3rd of September where this discussion took place between Grawitz and me, because of the second group of our sulfonamide experiments. Grawitz, who at that time came in order to show us that ho was not in agreement with us, as far as I can recall, brought this description along from Dachau, and wo discussed it in detail, because on my part there were many reasons to raise the sharpest protest against it. And, may I point out how much it can be seen from this document how Grawitz planned to publish experiments or describe them in contrast to my procedure. I was gone at that time. Under the point which states, "SS-Hospital, Dachau" - and it actually looks in general as though this were a hospital report. And, most of the case histories also speak in favor of that which I mentioned here. For example, the reference in point 3 to a "joiont plastic". It certainly is a big operation which can certainly only be carried out in a hospital. On ho following page there is "artificially inserted sepsis". On the second page, the cases of sepsis on the must part were artificially provoked. Then on the other side it is stated that in fatalities we do not have cases of sepsis that were artificially provoked, but ton are mentioned. And, I have proved to Grawitz, that especially on this page how he wanted to describe a mixture between experiments and clinical results and camouflage.
Later on when somebody reads it and comes to tho word "artificially provoked" Then he cannot decide it any more. Then there was a point with regard to all persons concerned. This was the impossibility to carry out this experiment in accordance with this statement, because it is stated on page 3 that tho drugs wore to bo taken every five minutes, even at night. At the time I didn't even think to give tho report to Grawitz. Then I drew a logical conclusion with regard to Himmler and Grawitz in which I not only in this connection concluded Grawitz's influence on our experiments, but I also turned to Himmler and asked him how those bio-chemical experiments wore brought about. I requested permission of the Tribunal to permit me to describe the manner of thinking of Himmler with regard to such experiments, and to draw the conclusion from this how impossible it was in certain cases, in spite of obtaining knowledge of it, to effect any change. For, a person who has studied school medicine it is impossible to believe that through homeopathic way of giving of sulfur and phosphorus surgical case histories, like internal case histories, and metabolistic disease, can be influenced. However, in medicine one can take a completely different point of view, and that is the basic conception of bio-chemistry up to homeopathy to which Himmler completely adhered. And we have two sentences where it is described here, that all the elements, that appear in nature, also have traces in the human body. Now, if one small element is lacking, then a human being is suffering from some disease or other. Therapy and manner of treatment of the bio-chemist is the exact contrast of medicine as practiced by a person who has studied it at school They make test experiments on human beings, and they discover what element is lacking in that human being and no matter from what disease he is suffering the patient is treated with minimum doses of the element which he lacks. Never in the world has it been possible that a typical school practitioner and a bio-chemist have agreed because they want to treat tho human being completely in contrast to each other.
From this example you can see now that when I came to Himmler, what madness it was that not only in experiments, but also with patients, ten or twelve different cases should bo treated with the same medicine. Then Himmler told me ho has one of the most experienced bio-chemist, and a layman, Mr. Lave. And, that is absolutely convinced that this manner of treatment is correct. And, Himmler always attempted to discover old fashioned forgotten remedies, and this experiment, in spite of my objection and in spite of my proof that my surgical patients would suffer from it, was executed for such time until I succeeded in bringing Dr. Lave and Kieselwecker from Marburg, who had all of Himmler's confidence in this case, these two ment to Hohenlychen, and then to make a similar experiment with them on my patients, in order to show that this manner of treatment was not possible. But I was not able to achieve my purpose with Himmler, because afterwards it was said we had not applied the medicine properly, and so on. Therefore, I request one can conclude from this, that it was not so, that Himmler adhered to one certain medical concept, and that, if one accidentally hoard of some fitting experiment, one could convince him.
Himmler had a hostile attitude toward school medicine, and from natural science to biochemistry he was accessible to every thought, and when Laue convinced him of the fact that this drug was of decisive importance, then the experiment was carried out. May I state in that connection, that the knowledge of this document had the following three results with me: That Grawitz, who was ready to make up compromises as is shown here, did not allow anyone to tell him anything at all about the sulphanilamide question; that I gave Himmler clear knowledge of the false idea without being able to convince him, because of his favorable attitude toward biochemistry; and that the experiment would perhaps be discontinued, mainly on account of subsequent examinations at Hohenlychen, and I shall give evidence of that as soon as I receive the appropriate testimony of witnesses.
Q You are also charged with special responsibility in the freezing experiments --
DR. SEIDEL: May it please the Tribunal, the next document which I will hand to the defendant is located in Prosecution Document Book III. It is on pago 108 in the English text. It is Document No. 314, three one four. It was presented by the prosecution as Exhibit 98. It is a letter from the defendant Rudolph Brandt, which he wrote on the 13th of November 1942 to Dr. Gebhardt. In this letter he notified him that the Stabsarzt of the Luftwaffe, Dr. Rascher --
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, will you please again refer me to the page of the English document book No. 3, on which the document is found?
DR. SEIDEL: It is in Document Book No. 3. It is located on Page 108.
Q This letter states Dr. Rascher is to report to you. When did Dr. Rascher actually report to you, and did you know him before?
A. I have never seen Dr. Rascher until May 1943. I did not have any contact with him. I was not a member of the Ahnenerbe, and did not have access to any of the special scientific institutes of Himmler. I was not in the so-called circle of friends of Himmler, which financed the whole thing. However, at sometime or another I received this letter and waited for Rascher to come and see me.
In this report both of the two experiments are mentioned, without any further documents. Furthermore, Himmler addressed me as a surgical advisor, and mentioned a visit to Finland. At that time I did not go to Finland. That was the time when the last experimental group was under way. Then for a short period of time I was at Stalingrad. I was in such condition I lacked all interest at that time. I did not take any action on this and cannot remember the letter, however, I am quite certain it reached me. But Rascher came to me in the spring of 1943.
DR. SEIDEL: The next document which I am going to hand to the defendant is also contained in Prosecution Document Book III. It is on page 140, in the English text. It is Document No. 241, and it is Prosecution Exhibit 113, one one three. The subject of this letter is the Notification of Rudolf Brandt to Rascher, that he is to establish contact with him, and that you have already received a report from Rascher about the cooling in air.
Q What was the contents of this report? In this connection I would like to add that this report was not presented by the prosecution.
AAt the time I received the so-called Rascher sheet of experiments collected for the front, which formed the basis for our discussion, that is by means of dry cold experiments. At the time he made certain suggestions to Himmler with regard to the troops at the front, and this report does not contain anything new except the warm baths and this had been used previously. This document, which had been already mentioned, I received the report, no fatalities or anything much was mentioned. On the other hand, writing about freezing experiments on human beings, I did not know before. Later on Rascher came to see me on this subject.
DR. SEIDEL: The next document which I am going to hand to the defendant is located in Document Book III, on page 145 of the English text. It is Document No. 231. It was presented by the Prosecution as Exhibit 116. It is a report by Dr. Rascher to Sievers. It is dated the 17th of May 1943.
Q In this report we see first of all that you treated Rascher very badly in the morning, and that you stated toward him that you would throw out a student in the second semester if you gave him such work, and that you further told him that at 3 o'clock in the afternoon he could again leave by train for Berlin.
On the other hand it is apparent that in the afternoon of the same day you received him once more and were in much more of a conciliatory mood at that time. Now, what caused this difference in your behavior?
A I believe that I can only remember the main situations of this discussion, and of course it did not exactly take the course which was decided by Rascher, because he had the possibility, I not only said it here, to not only hand his letters to Himmler directly, and have two copies with any objection Himmler was already informed about the whole question. On that occasion I saw Rascher for the first time. Two days before he went to the Third Conference, and from all my conflicts and disputes with my experiments, and now finally the Stabsarzt came to see me from the Luftwaffe, and who first of all brings along a surgical work on the basis of experiments in my field, which was to be recommended to the troops at the front. And it was so stupid aside from the experiment on human beings, that something like this could only be suggested at home, and Rascher, I know, this, was in contrast to the customs of the German Wehrmacht. He recommended joint bathing facilities for the front, like Sauna bathes, and I know a scheme like this would not be carried out in the East. Rascher did not have any experience in regard to the warfare in the open, and then subsequently he carried out the experiments on his own initiative. For the infantry warfare in the East he constructed mats, which I objected to from the very beginning second, it can be seen very clearly from this letter that I was of the opinion if he wanted to become a surgeon on my staff, then he could be under the orders of the consulting surgeon Gebhardt and from there under Grawitz, and from there under Himmler. However, it would be impossible that by way of the Ahnenerbe that he could submit suggestions in regard to troops. In addition to this he had received surgical training in the same clinic I had attended at Munich, and had attended any surgical training at the front.
He wanted to rehabilitate himself as a surgeon, and I, as professor, was to help him achieve that purposes. It can already be seen by the statement from Rascher with my energy at the time I have tried to obstruct Rascher in a 11 directions, because of the sheet which he submitted, because of the experiments, in everything he tried to do.
ch-A-JP-16-1-Karrow (Int. Garand) Now, when ho was finally able t say a few words at the end and finally, he lifted me out of the saddle and then he emphasized in his planning that everything that he had done, the whole experiment had been ordered by Himmler and that this had only been planned by a few people with him.
I believe this was the cause cf a telephone call of Grawitz, intervened, in some manner, and that the whole being suddenly was sanctioned and what I had been promising him - that he couldn't habilitate in this manner, and everything for which I had reproached him was suddenly being covered by my superiors. And as I did not trust him, did not know him, I called Grawitz during lunch time and now the situation had, of course, changed very much. I know for certain that Grawitz told me that the whole thing was somehow the desire of Himmler but he said, when I asked him: "How far are you involved?"," I cannot say that." In any case, the situation was as it would be for any officer. If I see that my chief approves something which I consider impossible then I was unable to argue with my subordinate. But I let him go and it seems rather improbable to me that I was as kind to him as stated here if I had a discussion with Grawitz and Himmler about this Rascher. Therefore, it can be explained what advance work Rascher did with Himmler in regard to his visit with me an already, since he was involving Himmler, every object was impossible. When he speaks of my ambition - as if one man in the world would have liked to have Rascher as a subordinate, and he limits the question that he should remain with the Ahenenerbe and that he did not want to come under my authority. That it hits Himmler at this point - I may point out the exact spot here in paragraph 3 in which he states that such methods which break with previous clinical experiences cannot be tried cut, and when he speaks about the schooling in my case. That is, he tells Himmler everything which he had to tell him in order to have him agree to this. "Here i a man from a University; he only believes in the school medicine and that we were not modern enough" and he again approaches Himmler with his ideas by means of this letter. The result is that he is transferred to the Waffen-? but that he also remains with the Ahnenerbe. That is, without any control on my part, he remains there as a surgeon.
Grawitz was very cautious towards him from tho very beginning in the direct reports to Himmler.
Q And subsequently what was your contact with Dr. Rascher? Did you never write a letter to he Defendant Brandt where you discussed tho work of Dr. Rascher and where you stated this work was done very superficially and it first would have to bo evaluated?
A In this argument I demanded that he should send me tho basis of tho previous medical work ho had done. Tho whole report seemed so strange to me that I wanted to see where he came from. However, at the end ho already stated that if ho could not habilitate as a surgeon on my staff, then with his other secret experiments - I can state here under oath that I did not have any documents about that and I would not have any documents about that and I would not have taken it upon myself to evaluate them afterwards - and as ho writes himself that ho could have a position with Dr. Pfannenstiel by the sanitorian and then he was cautious enough not to submit the documents to me which I had demanded and somewhere in the document ho hints that tho documents were underway and he gives a very short description of his surgical work. Then he admits that this was only a short intermediary report and while there were previously submitted to Himmler, as instructions for the troops - that; is, as a decisive report - and that ho would work out tho details as soon as ho obtained tho necessary equipment. At tho time, it was clear to me, and I believe that I contributed to a great extent that Rascher was unable to carry out the next experiments until wintertime and if I had had my way he would have gone to tho front. Ho did not habilitate either and after his visit to no his chances were absolutely nil.
Q Tho next document which I shall hand to tho defendant is located in Document Book 11 of tho Prosecution. It is located on page 19 of the English text - page 19. It is Document N). 612. It is Prosecution Exhibit 241. It is a letter from tho Defendant Rudolf Brandt to the Defendant Sievers. It is dated the 29th of September, 1943, and ho refers to tho blood clotting drug, polygal #10, and amongst other things he stated, and I quote:
"The matter Polygal #10 did not develop as quickly as you and SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher expected. The Reichs Fuehrer SS has Gruppenfuehrer Professor Dr. Gebhardt. He allowed to become convinced that, for various reasons, it is still necessary to make thorought tests at Hohenlychen which are previously to be discussed by SS Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher with a competent physician at Hohenlychen or SS Gruppenfuehrer Dr. Gebhardt personally. I shall also write a few lines to that effect to ss Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Rascher and I shall ask him also now to remain objective and cool because things cannot be done as quickly as he originally thought."
What impression did you have of the blood coagulating drug polygal and what way was it tested at Hohenlychen?
A The drug Polygal - I believe that was the occasion when in November, 1943 I really discussed the whole question of experiments with Himmler and I request permission that I can state here clearly and also that I can describe what possibilities I had in all of the experiments and also with regard to polygal. It was never so that at the beginning, in the execution that I had any part in tho way this question was asked. I was not the distributor either because otherwise I would not always come too late and not go in such wrong ways. However, I have already shown some occasions where with the frontal surgeons these things, were done. The same thing was tho case with polygal. In 1943, polygal was most certainly sent to our field hospitals and to some of the hospitals at home. In any case, I found this blood coagulating drug somewhere and I know for certain that I heard a reason which caused mo to object to this drug from tho very beginning. Then when I discovered that Dr. Rascher was. involved, then in November I took action. Dr. Rostock has correctly stated that for surgery at home, which is called aseptic art surgery, it was an involved problem to find hotter drugs in order to facilitate the operations. I also want to state that this drug was better that the others, as I saw in subsequent tests, and that were sent to us in 1944 were a major improvement over this art surgery at home.
However, at the front it was recommended to us differently and, through an accident, I hoard that Himmler thought and that this was described as a patent medicine for the front. Himmler always had a very primitive thought. He wanted to have all drugs to enable his troops, oven if not totally injured, so that they would come through the combat without severe results occurring. He was trying to give them a patent medicine so that they would not catch any contagious diseases. Now, all of a sudden, the idea had come to him that a man at tho front could not bleed to death any more if previously ho took tho polygal tablets. That is an idea which, of course, is stupid because the bleeding problem does not even exist at tho front. That was in tho Middle Ages and since that time we have mastered the bleeding and the man dies from shock and infections the big bleeding is a mechanical problem. If a big pipe suffers a whole and a lot of blood spurts then it does not make any difference if he bleeds a little or a lot because he will bo dead in a few minutes. But I had the idea that Himmler had to be convinced differently. I used this occasion of patent medicine at tho front in order to discuss with Himmler this whole question of experiments. And with this surgical example could not talk about homeopathy or biochemistry or any other witchcraft. And I forced him to finally, in my surgical field, to stop all experimentation and, above all, to prohibit Rascher from carrying out any experiments. The most important part in this document is the conclusion.
The good Brandt, who always had to pass on the general feeling without putting his own personal attitude into it, had to be the intermediary so that Rascher would not come to me without warning: He was to be careful and he was to stay on the subject, he was discreetly given a reference to a specialist with whom he was to discuss the subject, so that I would not do him any harm, and the opportunity is given to him to perhaps discuss the whole problem of carrying out any further experiments. At that time the whole experimenting by Rascher came to an end. I have the impression, and I do not want to argue here, where my influence started and I cannot say either what my influence was, but I intervened in the problem of the experiments, and by sacrificing my person and my name I still managed to achieve a definite order as far as this can be said of such a terrible field. However, I did not sit there like a fat bee, as the Reichsfuhrer-SS said in one translation, and I did not suggest how thousands of people could be killed through useless experiments. At the time I told Himmler what I believed in for the future, and therefore I am proud that I even forced a man like Himmler to introduce a certain order by proving to Himmler, by means of this example, that naturally it had to be recognized by us, and I have already paid for it, that the order and the decision in the totalitarian State is given by the highest authority; However, that it is completely out of question that individual men, without knowledge of a specialized subject, can approach Himmler, and that he decides about the experimentation. In this discussion, and I beg that this be believed, he also had very good arguments on his side. Of course it was not so that Himmler only caused damage with regard to the experiments. Himmler had a very simple method of working -- without consideration to the fact whether it was decent or cruel. In all the fields, where former experience had been accumulated according to the literature and according to the human beings, he assumed that something could be discovered here and immediately told one or two people that this task had to be carried out. For the most part, whenever he used two or three people for that purpose, he did not inform them of the ether's work, so that he would have a result which was not influenced in any way.
Of course, he did not only occupy himself with medicine. For example, may I point out that he had dealt with the whole question from porcelain to gold and this was tested in Germany, amidst great ridicule, and in the end a porcelain box was finally manufactured which was free of any faults. He interfered, moreover, in diets, and the SS was the only unit which obtained food like the English and the Americans, for example that in the morning they would receive porridge, that they would receive oatmeal, and that they would receive their own mineral water. Experiments were, in part, terrible; all of a sudden whole frontal divisions had to drink water only. There was much resistance. On the other hand he established quite a few good things. Concentrated foods and vitamin foods, without any doubt, first originated with the SS. The camouflage jackets, that is the camouflage suits which were given to the troops, also originated with Himmler. The modern winter fur clothing originated as a result of an experiment by Himmler. Well before the beginning of the war in Italy he saw the first amphibious car, and he always developed that with all means, because he felt the future war would certainly be decided by amphibious cars and cars which were able to climb hills, and so on; we had the impression that if he had refrained from carrying cut all the experiments on human beings and if he had built amphicious cars, then we certainly would have landed in England. He ruthlessly burdened his people. He already used live ammunition to shoot over the heads of his troops in maneuvers before the war; that is, if troops were attacking and machine guns were more highly effective than with other arms, no real ammunition is used within the 80 meter zone because there will be some casualties. At every maneuver and at all times in times of peace, the SS had casualties through this measure, which always thinks of the unit and never of the individual. All this is characteristic of this man and that, of course, cannot be terminated all of a sudden through a single objection. The eternal subject of dispute 'the Reichs Sport Insignia' which he demanded of every man-- that every man had to pass a test for the Reich Sport Insignia if he wanted to receive a promotion.
I will immediately close my example, and I only wanted to show that Himmler collected ideas in an unlimited field, had these ideas tested, and always somehow carried them out the last consequence. Part of them concerned medicine, and he used exactly the same method in this field. He collected old family recipes of which he heard, and suddenly tuberculosis was tested without any medical men from the school ever hearing about it. He depended on bio-chemist research, and he also had this carried out on his own patients and in the concentration camps, without consideration to any objection by any specialist. He used the valuable Polygal and had it used at the front in quite a different manner and he did the same thing in many other fields. It was not possible that we medical men, who had been educated at school, were able to prevent him by objections, because we did not find out these things for the most part; when we discovered them he always had the concept and stated "I know that you school medical men are opposed to it, but this recipe has become lost and now I am going to develop it particularly against all objections of the school medical men." Now it would be false, no matter what one thinks of his personality, to say that everything he did was nonsense. On the other hand, of course, with regard to human beings, every mistake results in a catastrophe, which has now brought us into the present terrible situation. Therefore, in connection with this document, which shows that fundamental discussions were to take place now and that this was to be brief, and I explained this to Himmler as clearly as I could. I do not believe that I made a very great impression on him. The matter of Polygal was very unpleasant to him, but otherwise ho maintained the point of view which he always had, that I knew something about my own little field of work, and at Hohenlychen he always called us the unreliable, liberal company which could not be trusted with anything-- we always brought word back that we only could work in our own little field, and these were things which could not be explained to him.
However, at the time, in spring 1944, I did have a certain amount of influence, and I believe that I impressed him by pointing cut to him how well known my experiments were abroad.
Already before I appeared at the rental conference, which has already been mentioned, I had discussion about this in Switzerland; and then in the fall cf 1943, in Italy, my clientele was such that it was on the side of those who went over to the English, as well as to the other. Here I could tell Himmler very clearly how the people, who knew me, thought about the fact that we were involved in such matters. I believe that this was the protection of these women. As far as I could I pointed out how necessary it was to create a certain order here and to slow the development.
I would like to claim for myself that new experiments did not take place after this discussion, that is towards the year 1944, that they were not carried out any more in the sense of a large-scale experiment. Apparently these old bacteriological experiments continued - I do not know that. However, I do not believe either that experiments were still carried out o? ??reigners. That is also aside from the rest of the bacteriological side. I can state under oath that no surgical experiments took place any more after that time. It certainly was not in connection with my person or in any connection with the Waffen-SS, and I believe that I was able to make it clear to Himmler what basic principles he should adhere to, if he was to continue with any experiments on human beings. This approximately is the basis which later on led to the decree of May 1944.
DR. SEIDL: May it please the Tribunal, the next document which I am going to hand to the witness....
JUDGE SEBRING: Doctor, you have made some statements about being able to bring these human experiments to an end by your influence with Himmler, and I believe that you also said that prior to the time of your sulfonamide experiments on human beings, the experiments on human beings had been conducted without documentation or without official records being made of the matter. Is that correct? Did I understand that correctly, or not?
May I exactly express once more what I tried to say. I know how these scientific experiments were brought about, that is to say if any medical authorities or if any important specialists, for example, Fielding, and how he turned to Himmler I do not know. I would not have boon able to oppose them. However, I could not have felt myself justified to do that either. If the Chief of a medical agency suggests it, then he does that of his own responsibility, as the chief agency of this branch of the Wehrmacht. What I was fighting against, was that there was still quite another way. If, for example, these official experiments of the Luftwaffe were completed, then Rascher or somebody else involved himself in those experiments, and we have all heard in the course of of time how many things were being done and they were able to refer directly to Himmler. I even had the impression that things were done which never even reached Himmler; and I believe that this way of making decisions certainly stopped at that time as far as I am able to overlook it. I cannot give any information whatsoever about what agreements were reached with regard to other experiments.
Q. How could it bo possible for experiments to bo conducted on a large scale, such as for example high altitude experiments, freezing experiments, sea water experiments, and these other experiments that have been talked about in these documents, how could it bo possible for these experiments to be conducted, unless they had either the approval of Himmler, or had the approval of the head of the particular branch of the Wehrmacht, for whose benefit the experiments were being conducted? I seem to be confused about that. Perhaps you can straighten me out on it.
A. That certainly was not possible. That is what I call the large scale experiments. I am convinced that in the high alt itude experiments, and in the water freezing experiments, which were carried out officially by the Luftwaffe, that somehow some contact had been officially established with Himmler, and that Himmler approved them.
On the other hand, without any doubt, in connection with the experiments of the Luftwaffe, Rascher now continued to carry out these experiments. Certainly not, however, under the control of the Luftwaffe, and certainly not under the control of a physician of the SS, and he himself, or through his wife, immediately wrote to Brandt or to Himmler. That is what I would call the illegal side channel.
Q. How is it possible in the German Army or any other army, for an inferior officer, an officer of small, rank, a lieutenant or a captain, to go over the head of his major and his Colonel and his General, and the Commander of his Army, or his Corps, and go directly to a man at the top of the Government and carry these things on; that is something I can't understand?
A. That is the exception which was possible in the case of Rascher. Rascher was a member of the Allgemine SS. His wife was a very good friend of Himmler, and from the correspondence it can be soon that everything I say now I only know from the documents here, so that I can only draw conclusions. However, it is my impression that there is no doubt that the Luftwaffe experiment was terminated, and that this was reported correctly, and that responsibility went from the higher agencies to tho lower one, and that the top societies were in contact with Himmler. On the other hand it can be seen from the correspondence, that Rascher was writing to Himmler about his private contacts, that he complained about the Luftwaffe, that he requested his transfer, and that he does not come under my control, but that he comes under the scientific society, the Ahnenerbe, which was directly subordinated to Himmler.