A. I did not try to get these offices. In 1934, the late Reich Leader of Physicians, Dr. Wagner, asked me to give up my practice and work for the German Red Cross. I was later to become its President. I agreed because I could not carry on my practice and carry on health politics at the same time, and believed that I would be able to do good work in this new position. In about 1936, I had to leave the Red Cross, because Himmler wanted to get influence over the Red Cross and make Reich Leader SS, Dr. Grawitz, President. It was said that the German Red Cross was supposedly too reactionary in its personnel, and I had not taken the necessary steps against it. Grawitz told me later that he had to clean out the place with the aid of the Gestapo. The question why Wagner happened to select me, I can explain as follows: Wagner was a man with both feet on the ground, who never overestimated his own knowledge and ability. He also had the .../... auality to detest so-called breatures', that is, willing tools in the hands of their superiors.
He therefore selected for his close associates men with opinions of their own, and courage. He thought he had found such a man in me, and I do not believe that I disappointed him in this respect.
Q Witness, the witness whom we heard yesterday, Dr. Kosmehl, told us that it was mainly a matter of instruction for doctors which you were interested in. Was that one of the tasks on account of your office and what most essential accomplishments did you do in this respect? Would you please tell us about this?
A The post-graduate training of doctors was among my duties as deputy-post-graduate in medical training. Until the law for the establishment of the Reich Chamber of Physicians in 1935, post-graduate studies were up to the choice of the individual doctor. Most doctors had not participated in any such course in their whole life. On the basis of the experience of Dr. Wagner and myself as practicing physicians, we considered it right, in the interest of public health and also in the interest of each doctor, to make post-graduate study a duty for the doctor. That was done in the law which I have just mentioned. Every German doctor had to take a three weeks course every few years. This was in general medicine. All doctors had to participate in this training with the exception of Government officials, university teachers, heads of large hospitals, and similar people. Specialists also had to participate in this general training, for it had been discovered that the specialists, in particular, lost contact with general medicine in the course of years and decades, and considers, more or less, only his own specialized field and neglects the overall picture of the human being; and in addition to this general post-graduate study which was a duty, I created a num ber of voluntary medical courses.
I knew that in the beginning the doctors would object to this compulsory post-graduate study, but in order to convince myself that my arrangement was right, I openly called upon all German doctors who were taking a post-graduate course to report to me directly, personally, and not through official channels, to tell me their impressions and their experiences in connection with these training courses.
I received hundreds of letters. They said at first we were afraid of it, we opposed it, but all the letters closed with recognition and approval of this new organization. It is interesting to note that in spite of the compulsory post graduate study, voluntary training in special fields increased enormously throughout Germany. This was characterized especially by the fact that more foreigners than ever attended our medical post graduate courses.
Q Witness, in connection with your aims to raise the standards of the medical profession and of the medical science, the witness Dr. Kosmehl, I believe it was, told us yesterday that an international congress for medical instruction courses in August 1937 was organized by you; is that true?
A Yes; that is true.
Q How many nations were there in this congress?
AAfter a medical post graduate training in Germany had begun with obvious success, I decided on the third international post graduate medical training congress in Berlin, 1937, I myself was president of this congress. 44 nations participated in this congress. I had an opportunity to acquaint all these foreign representatives with the new medical arrangements in Germany, and on the basis of the recognition of these international circles I decided to submit a motion to the congress; that is, that an international academy for post graduate medical studies should be created. This suggestion was accepted without objection, and for the coming year, that is for 1938, the establishment of the academy in Budapest was decided upon. This ceremony took place in Budapest in 1938, and numerous nations participated; and at this congress, after the charter which I had suggested was accepted, I was elected president of the permanent bureau of this academy.
Q Witness, about the Third International Congress in the year 1937, which you mentioned, we have a report, which I have in my hands, with contributions of a number of medical scientists, German and foreign. One of these contributions is your own, with the caption: "Organization of the German post graduate medical training." This article is yours?
A Yes.
DR. SAUTER: For this trial, the most important thing, Your Honor, you will find in the supplement volume of Document book Blome, page 1 to 4, Document 9. It is an excerpt from the report of this congress. I have here, Your honor, this book, which I should submit to the Tribunal, but as I have this letter--I received this book from a library and I have to give it back. I don't know, Your Honor, whether under these circumstances it is necessary to submit this book and not see it again. That I would not like, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Was things book been exhibited to the prosecution?
DR. SAUTER: The prosecution will not be interested in the latter part of the book. The parts that are of interest are in the Document Book Blone, Document 9.
THE PRESIDENT: I understand that, counsel, but the prosocution will be entitled to know where the printed volumes could be found if they desired to consult it at some future time.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I have no objection to an admission of the extract if Dr. Sauter certifies that this is a true extract and gives a sketch of just what the book is, and where I was published and where it may be made available.
DR. SAUTER: If the prosecution authorities would like to borrow this book for some time, in order to examine it or have it examined by the medical experts, and to submit excerpts from it themselves, then of course the book is at the disposal of the prosecution, only I would like to have the book back.
THE PRESIDENT: Is the information requested by the prosecution contained in your document book?
MR. HARDY: Yes, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well; counsel may proceed.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Dr. Blome, in this book, in this report of which we are talking now, you have, as I can see, with special emphasis, pointed out two things, and I herewith ask you whether that is correct? So that I don't have to read the whole report and thus save time, the first point is, that also the practicing physician and the licensed doctor must go through a certain training in order to reach the necessary heights of science, and the other point, which I can see from your reports is your special emphasis that also the specialists must not only treat one part of the body, but that every doctor must always face the problem of wholeness, of completeness of the body, of the human body; is that correct as I see it?
A Yes; that is correct. The specialist gradually developed to be too specialized, and it is beyond all doubt that an eye disease cannot be considered merely from the point of view of the eye, but that very frequently other parts of the body, Other organs are connected with this disease, and it is the same in the case of other specialties. Therefore, - considered it important that every doctor in this compulsory study should refresh his knowledge, and should learn the new things in the field of medicine as a whole. In addition to this I gave him an opportunity which had never before existed, to train himself as a specialist.
Q Your Honor, the excerpt from this book, of which I would ask you to take notice so that I do not have to read the whole, is Document No. 9 in the Document Book Supplement, Volume Blome, page 1. With your permission I shall give it Exhibit No. 2.
Dr. Blome, as you have heard from the opening speech of the Prosecution, you are reproached for activities in connection with the home for doctors Altrese. You remember that the witness Dr. Kosmehl spoke about Altrese yesterday. In supplement of this could you tell us some more? Could you tell us some details which would be necessary for the Tribunal- anything of significance?
AAltrese was the leader school of the German medical profession. It was the institution and property of the medical profession. It was not a matter of the Party. Wagner and other important people in the medical profession after 1933 decided that the training of doctors should be taken into our own hands and not left to any training officials of the Party. The law on the establishment of the Reich Chamber of Physicians says that it is the legal tasked the Reich Physician leader, first of all, to give post--graduate training to doctors, and in the second place, to train them in health politics. This matter was of post-graduate training, the purpose of Altrese. Altrese was under me. The responsibility for what was done there and taught there is borne by me alone and I am glad to bear this responsibility. What was taught there was decent and good. It was morally and medically on a high level and it can be defended before the world. Lectures on human experiments not given there as the Prosecution assumes. The main purpose of this training was to take the doctor away from materialistic things into which he was unfortunately forced after the period of the first World War by all the unfortunate conditions. In this connection I should like to mention one more thing I have noticed - that two defense counsel have asked their client here on the witness stand "Did you attend any training course at Altrese?" And, the defendant truthfully said, "No." I can understand this question of the defense counsel only for, of course, I have thought about it - to mean that the Prosecution has asserted that everything criminal in the German medical profession was taught to them by the training at Altrese.
I should like to state very briefly in this connection and to make it unnecessary for other defense counsel to ask the same question which two already have asked. None of the twenty doctors in the dock with the exception of myself ever participated in any course at Altrese either as a student or teacher. The Prosecution has asserted that the criminal spirit of doctors of the Third Reich was taught there under my responsibility.
Q Witness, in connection with this medical school Altrese the Prosecution authority in session of 9th of December, obviously meaning you, have said, I quote: "The so-called comrade relationship and sports activities was only a camouflage for political supervision and espionage and further what the participation in these courses became a duty - one had to go through five years training - every year a few weeks training. One has reproached yet on part of Prosecution authorities. Will you answer this?
A The Prosecution has apparently been misinformed. Otherwise they would not have said that I am convinced. Participation in courses at Altres was voluntary. There were so many applications for course from Party members and non-Party members that far from all applications could be considered. Moreover, there was no political supervision of those who took these courses. On the contrary ******agner and I were supervised by the SD at Altrese. Everyone could open hi******th there and express his opinions openly. Altrese was the place of out-s****ness and Wagner and I repeatedly spoke quite openly about everything the we did not consider right in the Third Reich and we quite openly object to things we did not consider right. The result was that Wagner was repeate**** called in to Bormann - was given a reprimand and Bormann said that Wagner and I should be careful - we should keep our mouths shut or something would happen to us. Wagner was not much affected by this. He once said to Bormann; "I don't give a damn. If this goes too far for me I will go to Hitler and will tell him something and he will agree with me." As far as our public opinion was concerned and the training of our doctors we had such an opportunity without the German Reich that all other professions envied us for this position of ours. Besides not only doctors were trained there at Altrese it was also available for midwives, dentists, and pharmacists.
And, if you can imagine that the highest number of participants in the course at Altrese was 128. That we had to have a vacation of three months here in the inter, then one can see that it is nonsense to say that every German doctor had spent a few weeks at Altrese every year. If that had been the case then Altrese would not have been able to accommodate 128 people per course but one would have had to put a few zeros after 128. That is how I figure it according to Adam Riese.
Q Witness, I would like to ask you - that might be interesting to the Tribunal, what was the number of German doctors, approximately?
A The number of German doctors in 1933 was about 60,000. At the end of 1944 there was 89 to 90 thousand including the medical officers of the Armed Forces and those doctors who had come to Germany through Austria and the Sudatenland.
Q Witness, you are charged by the Prosecution, as you remember, to have not let the patient chose his own doctor, even if he is a member of an association of State insurance. If he cannot pay it will be paid by this Association. In this connection one spoke about alleged attempts of the socialization of the medical profession and the elimination of this free profession. What was your attitude to these problems and how did you deal with this?
A. As for the overall question which you have put to me, I should like to add the indirect charge of the corruption of the German medical science. It is true, that in the years after 1933, there were serious misgivings about scientific development of medicine and that they were justified. I shared these misgivings myself. I never made a secret of this. The reasons were a certain opposition of the Party to academicians and also the inclination of many Germans towards nature healing and quacks. Academic medicine, that is, so-called "school medicine", was frequently disavowed by important people and the lay ***ler in Germany was admired by these people. Thus, Dr. Warner, ******the beginning of 1934, had to invite the lay healer who treated Hess to ***ecti********actors at Munich. Hess took part in the beginning of the meeting himself. But this did not prevent us, and prevent Wagner specifically, during this meeting from having this man who was treating Hess arrested by the police because of fraud which could be proved. This example is only a small contribution to the discussion of the situation in which we found ourselves. To clear up the qu***s in Germany was an aim of the National Socialist League of Physicians from the time before 1934, and it was Warner's doing that the socalled "new German medicine" was created and this was frequently made fun of, but unjustly. It is the synthesis of school medicine and nature healing, but exact science is the foundation of it. This immutable principle I frequently printed out in speaking and writing; that nature healing gave us excellent suggestions for scientific medicine and always had. I need give only a few examples that the so-called therapy of experience that is nature healing is a shot of digitalis to scientific medicine. For example: quinine, Vitamins C and D, colchicin, atroping, caffein, all the opiates, balneology, and the study of climates, which, in spite of centuries of rejection by scientific medicine, proved itself. Then the therapy in precious anemia, and, finally, exercise therapy under water in post-osteomyelitic crippling, a therapy which was introduced by President Roosevelt. Without this basis of the new German medicine with which I worked with the outstanding representatives of science, it would not have been possible that in 19.9 I succeeded in having the lay healers deprived by law of their right to practice. When the present law, in October,1938, was made the subject of a discussion with the leading personalities of the State and Party by Hess personally, I could only make my ideas prevail by referring to this new German medicine.
The defendant Gebhardt here,****the witness stand, briefly referred to this meeting. I should like to add merely that, in addition to Hess, various Gauleiters and Reichsleiters attended this meeting. Among the gauleiters, for example, was Julius Streicher, the Gauleiter of Roewer Oldenburg and whom it was intended would become Health Minister; and a number of the persons who were more or less opposed to the medical profession, when the few was almost lost I turned to Hess, who was sitting to my right, and I said to him: "It was you yourself, Mr. Hess who stood before the new German medical science by giving your name to the Rudolf Hess Hospital." I completed my statements and I said: "If you gentlemen decide that in addition to the doctor, the lay healer is to be given legal sanction, then you will be the death of the new German medical science." I don't believe that one could speak any more clearly than that. I regret that the Prosecution has not submitted any documents in this connection. The whole course of events concerning this law - I put this to one side. It was not destroyed with the other documents. It was put into American hands at my instigation. I considered it my duty to preserve these documents as a document of medical cultural history from a time when the doctor was fighting for priority in medical science. It can be proved that I have always endeavored to preserve the rights of German science and I did so with success. All German scientists and specialists of any reputation had a part in the training of the German medical profession. My office chiefs had instructions from me to get the best men as teachers with out consideration of Party membership. I expressly and repeatedly pointed out that medical post graduate training is not an affair of the Party but of specialized knowledge and ability. That training, from 1935 to 1939, was improved there is no doubt at all for any objective observer, and I believe that if German medical post graduate training had been as poor, and the level of the German medical profession as low as our opponents like to say then I would certainly have not, in November, 1938 received an official English invitation to London to give a lecture on German medical post graduate training. I received this invitation through the head of the state English post graduate training, Colonel Proctor, who knew the German training system very well and who was on the Board of the Third International Congress and who was also on the Board of the International Academy.
In connection with the training of the medical profession I must refer to two other circumstances. It is due to me that the students in their pre-clinical studies were given the obligation of performing nursing service. This was an arrangement which the prosecution witness, Professor Leibbrandt, had to acknowledge had its value, and I also introduced a three months' period of working with practicing doctors or in hospitals.
Q. The expression "Famulatur" was not understood by the interpreter. Will you please repeat the expression "Famulatur"?
A. I also introduced the arrangement that every student, during his clinical studies, had to spend at least three months with a recognized practicing physician or in a hospital as a"famulus" - that is, practicing student before his state examination. This was an arrangement which had not existed before which only helped the training of the German doctor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHALL: The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q Witness, we stopped at your explanation of the charges against you that you were partly guilty of being responsible for the decline of the standard of the German medical science; would you like to add something to this point, or have you finished with your explanation?
A I would like to lay stress on the following fact, with the fight to abrogate the right of the unprofessionals and nature healers to practise, I achieved the consumation of a wish that has been the doctor's wishes for seventy years; for seventy years any ignorant person or crack-pot could, if he wanted to, inaugurate a physician's practise, hang out his shingle, call himself a professional and thus be turned loose to the general detriment of mankind. Please let me state also the following, and this is an assertion that no one could refute if he examines it objectively; I state that if all Professional organizations and associations of the Third Reich were as decent and had been directed as decently and with such a spirit of responsibility as the German physicians, then this war that began in 1939, and the casualties that are associated with it, would not have taken place.
Q Your Honor, it was my intention to submit a book to you in this connection, which was initiated by the defendant Blome and came out in 1940, which was published by G. Fischer of Jena and bears the title: "The Latest Medicine As Seen By Their Creators." This book deals with a number of lectures, which were held by members of his Berlin Academy for medical instructions in 1940, which has been published by the Berlin academy for Military Instructors, this is the academy which the Defendant Blome created.
This book was dedicated to the German Medical Society and was supposed to instruct them about latest research in a short way and was for their information. I shall wait with this and I shall submit this book at a later print, because the translations from this book are not ready yet and there is point in giving you the German text only if the translations are not at our disposal. But, Your Honor ......
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, the Prosecution respectfully request that these books be made available for our perusal after Dr. Sauter finishes using them after his direct examination.
DR. SAUTER: Certainly. Your Honor, I would like to ask you now to take note of two documents, which are contained in Document Book Blome and a Supplementary volume 1. These are contained in Document Book Blome on Page 11 of Document Book No. 3; a letter of professor Dr. von Bergmann. I repeat Document Book Blome, page 11, Document No. 3, a letter from Professor Dr. von Bergmann, directed of the Second Medical University Clinic in Munich.
The other Document, which I shall make use of now, is a letter in the supplementary volume, page 23, Document Book Blome, page 23, Document No. 13; a letter of Professor Dr. H. Martius, Chief of the Women's Clinic at the University of Goettingen.
These two persons are well known in Germany through their anti-fascist atti tude; they are both certified by the American occupation and they have been instituted in their offices. They are two scientists who are famous all over the world, their names are famous all over Europe.
MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, both of these Documents referred to, the English copy in my Document book, contain no gurat; I wonder if the German copies have been sworn to; do you have the original exhibits, Doctor?
DR. SaUTER: No, Your Honor. These documents need no affidavit for the following reason, these two professors who sent me these certificates are directors of University Clinics. The universities in Germany are not private institutions, but public institutions and institutes of public law. The directors on such institutes are public servants. The documents, which are signed by such officers within their authority, are legal documents, public legal documents, and such documents need, according to German law, no certification or signatures of their writers.
*******, therefore, assure Your Honors that it is the same in America. I came ********ine that in the United States a judge who signes a sentence or some legal official who submits a copy of such a document; that he should go to the Notary Public in order to have his signature certified, otherwise there would by no public legal documents.
I, therefore, present the point of view that the rule of the Tribunal, about this certification of Documents and affidavits, can not be carried out, if it is a matter of public documents of a public servant or of a civil servant, which he writes within the authority of his office.
I may therefore point out that the Tribunal, if I am not mistaken, in other cases has also asserted themselves on the same point of view and until this point, for instance, I have not seen the Prosecution have any doubts to make use of sentences and other official documents, although the signature on these documents was not publically certified. This is not necessary as the difference is between the public servant and the private individual and the difference between the public legal document and a simple private document.
I would also like to point out, Your Honors, I do not think that a high official can understand or see my point if I would return the Document, which he in his capacity as a public legal servant, in his capacity as a director of his institute, has sent to me. He would not understand if I would ask him to go to a Notary Public and to have the signature certified; he would not understand it, Your Honors, if the Prosecution would not recognize publically the statement because it has not been stamped.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, in view of comment of counsel, I must object to the admission into evidence of these two documents. These documents appear to be testimony of fact concerning the defendant Blome, testimony as to personal knowledge on behalf of affiants. They are no semblance of a legal instrument as prescribed by this Tribunal and have no preamble executed in lieu of a note, and there isn't any evidence that they are executed in their official capacity.
Furthermore, they are not testifying as to facts of state interest. They are testifying as to facts concerning the personality of Blome, and I add in passing that if I were on trial and Roosevelt or Truman executed an affidavit in my behalf, I would be ready to assume that they must also have their signatures sworn to. Therefore I object to the admission of these documents into evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: In their present form these documents are entirely inadmissible in evidence. The prosecution's objection is sustained. Of course, the documents may be completed and offered again in their proper form, but in their present form they are entirely inadmissible.
DR. SAUTER: Your Honor, I do not think I shall do this because I believe that these gentlemen who are well-known all over Europe would not understand if I would ask them to do this. I shall, therefore, ask these two gentlemen to come to Nuernberg as witnesses. I am afraid that these two gentlemen in question will not understand this either, but I shall draw the consequence from this. In the future I shall object to all documents of the prosecution if they are not certified by a notary public because what the defense counsel have to do can also be asked of the prosecution authorities, and the right of the prosecution authority is also the right of the defense counsel and, therefore, if I have to have these documents certified, the same applies to the prosecu**on authorities.
THE PRESIDENT: These documents would certainly be refused by the Court if offered by the prosecution if I heard any objection by the defendant. If counsel desires to request the attendance of these wit nesses, the Tribunal will approve the request.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Witness, you have heard that I am not in the position to submit these documents here. Do you know these documents?
A. Yes. Yes, I do.
Q. What do you know about the writer of these two documents? One is Professor Dr. Von Bergmann and the other is Professor Dr. Martius. Please be short if I may ask you.
A. Professor Bergmann was until the end of the war director of the Second Medical Clinic Charite in Berlin, and thereafter was director of the Second Medical Clinic in Munich with the specific authorization of the American occupation authorities. He is the recognized internist in Germany with an international reputation to be compared with only a few people in the whole world.
Professor Martius in Goettingen is director of the Gynacology clinic, of the women's clinic. I believe he took on that position in 1933. He had nothing to do with the Party but despite the law relating to public officials and despite efforts made against him by Party officials he could not be deposed despite the fact that he has some Jewish blood. He also is a person of international reputation as a teacher, university professor, and is internationally known as a gynacologist.
****I will not deal with details of these two statements. I am interested in the following --
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I object to any further comment by counsel on these two documents. They have been ruled out here in this case and further comment is unnecessary.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel made no objectionable comment about the documents. Counsel may proceed.
DR. SAUTER: I did not understand this.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal rules that counsel for defendant Blome had made no objectionable comment about these documents and that counsel might proceed.
BY DR. SAUTER:
Q. Dr. Blome, in the session of 20 February the defendant Professor Dr. Rostock gave evidence here and stated that Conti continually tried to make political parties a part of the medical science and the German Medical Association. On the 20th of February Dr. Rostock stated further that Conti had a Plan to close down the German medical institutes, universities, to eliminate the literature, medical literature, and so on.
Perhaps you could tell me, not in detail, whether it is right, whether it is correct that you, in the interest of medical education and in medical standards, fought against these regulations on the part of Dr. Conti although you were his subordinate. I would ask you, Dr. Blome, not to deal with your relationship to Dr. Conti in detail. This will come up later. Please only talk about this particular point.
A. It is true that Dr. Conti interpreted his office almost exclusively as a political one and that he used his training as a physician only as a reasonable excuse for his holding that office. It is true that there was a plan in 1943 to close the German universities in order to send all the students either to the front or to the labor forces. However, it was not Conti alone who pursued such plans. I believe that Goebbels also played a role in these plans at that time. At any rate, those who participated in this, the circle of them was not specifically limited. Furthermore, in the year 1934, allegedly to save paper, a large number of newspapers and periodicals were limited, including scientific periodicals.
At that time there were negotiations in the Reichepressekammer or in the Reichsschrifttumskammer, the Reich Press Department, and I took part in one such conference. There were present various gentlemen and representatives of various organizations and they spoke systematically about the scientific periodicals. At that time I protested very energetically against the limits that they were attempting to put on scientific periodicals and did bring it about that the limitations were of a minimum. I further know that against the measures to close the universi ties Professors Brandt and Rostock also protested energetically.
Thereupon, I had a considerable difference of opinion with Professor Conti, end the consecuence was that I was thereafter excluded from attending such conferences.
Q. Dr. Blome, I believe that you gave a wrong date. This paper shortage was in '43.
A. My error. I meant to say in '43, not '34.
Q. Dr. Blome, you remember that the prosecution and the expert, Dr. Leibbrandt, also charged you with permitting so-called "nature science" laymen to practice. This, for instance, is the case of Dr. Kersten, when we have mentioned twice. Perhaps you could give us a report. How many of these laymen were allowed to practice in Germany and why in individual cases were they allowed to practice?
A. The creation of the so-called Office for Nature Healing was a necessary compromise I had to strike with Hess in order to be able the pass the law that forbade lay healers to practice. I could enter into this compromise without misgivings because in the last analysis, the regulations that determined whether or not a person could become a physician in nature healing depended upon the approval of the Reich Physicians' Chamber.
In the course of time, only one such physician was approved and that was Kersten, the Finnish Medizinalrat, medical counselor. I knew that Kersten had a large international practice. He treated leading personalges from all over the world, people from politics, the arts, scientists and he also treated members of the Swedish and English Royal houses. For part of the year, he practiced in Sweden for which he received official approval from the German government. Thus, one cannot assert, as Professor Leiebrandt of course assumed one could, that new such doctors for nature healing were being indiscriminately approved.
As a matter of fact, there was only no such doctor.
Q. Dr. Blome, I would like to add to these general questions one more before I deal with the other points. The Prosecution as well as Professor Leibbrand have shown how German-Jewish doctors were excluded from practicing; how they were forced to wear a David Star, to have a Jewish First name, to have only Jewish patients, and how they were not allowed to practice at all and such like. I would not like details in this matter again because Dr. Kesmehl already dealt with this question yesterday. I would like to hear from you, though, as the defendant, whether you participated, in these measures against your Jewish colleagues?
Secondly, who ordered these measures? Was it the Medical Chamber or what organization was it? What can you tell us about this matter?
A. First of all, I did not participate in this. Secondly, it was a matter of carrying out general legal provisions because not only the Jewish physicians were the Star of David, but every Jew wore it. It was not as if the Jewish physician was compelled to carry on certain civities, but every phy physician was compelled as long Jewish physicians could practice, to be limited in certain fields.