For some reason this fact was not noted down probably because this was, I think, my last interrogation, and there was not sufficient time to do that.
Q The second organization chart which you submitted is dated the 1st of September, 1943. Professor Karl Brandt 's position was established by the decree of the 5th of September, 1943, which is mentioned by you and noted down on the first box. On the second chart you can see the direct relationship between Professor Karl Brandt and Grawitz as Reich Physician-SS. Did the decree of 5 September 1943, change anything in Professor Brandt's relationship to Grawitz?
A The decree shows that Professor Brandt would centrally deal with the tasks of the entire Medical and Hygenies Services and direct them. This affected the SS to the extent that our medical quartermaster had difficulties in getting medical equipment directly from industry. We also were tied to whatever the plenipotentiary directed as far as the supply was concerned. It is possible, however, that this was only an accidental effect because the order was directed to industry, in the first place, from which we, in turn, received our supplies. If the industry then gave us only a limited amount of medical equipment, that was a very important matter for us.
Q. Do you mean to say that neither after the decree of the 28th of July, 1942, nor after the decree of the 5th of September, 1943, there was any relationship of command between Prof. Karl Brandt as the superior and Dr. Grawitz as a subordinate? Rather, that with the decree of the 5th of September, 1943, Prof. Brandt had received a task which became necessary because of the emergency situation, according to which he had to steer, according to directives? On the basis of German military phraseology, this does not mean that he had to give any orders?
A. That is correct. If any line was drawn there, it would have to be a broken line - subordination in technical matters.
Q. Doesn't this lack of material restrict to the essentially medical affairs?
A. I don't know whether Prof. Brandt would have been justified in giving such directives to Grawitz directly. It was an indirect relationship which came as a result of this task he was given.
Q. When it says in that decree that Prof. Brandt has the task of steering according to directives, it means that on the basis of directives of Hitler he would have to take certain measures, for each particular case, that is he had no individual powers to act on his own initiative; is that right?
A. Yes, that is absolutely correct.
DR. NELTE: Thank you. I have no further questions.
EXAMINATION BY THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE SEBRING):
Q. Prof. Mrugowsky, in answers to questions propounded to you by Dr. Nelte, you have made some comment concerning what is meant in the decrees of 28 July 1842, 5 September 1943, and 25 August 1944, being Prosecution Documents No080,-081, and -082.
Did you have any part in framing any of these decrees?
A. No, not in the least.
Q. Then from where do you derive your knowledge of the effect of these decrees, other than from the context of the decrees themselves?
A. I remember that I had repeated conversations at that time with our medical quartermaster concerning various questions. There was a very close relationship between us; and we discussed various questions of an official nature. For that reason, I know that he traced the cause of difficulties in getting the necessary medical equipment at that time, to this organizational change by virtue of the Fuehrer order. That is what I meant when, it was an indirect effect.
Q. But you never did discuss the meaning of these decrees with Hitler, Keitel, Lammers, or Bormann?
A. No, I never spoke to any of these at any time.
JUDGE SEBRING: Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other questions to be propounded to this witness by any of the defense counsel?
DR. HEINZ FRITZ: Dr. Fritz, counsel for the defendant Rose.
EXAMINATION BY DR. HEINZ FRITZ:
Q. Professor, did Dr. Ding-Schuler ever tell you that he had relations of any kind to Prof.
Rose or whether he was in any correspondence with him?
A. No, he didn't do that. After the objection raised by Prof. Rose on the occasion of the meeting of the consulting physicians in the year of 1943, he used very strong terms in speaking about Prof. Rose.
Q. Couldn't you tell me anything more about that?
A. He was very excited after Prof. Rose made his objection, something that he didn't expect. He repeatedly mentioned this incident for the next few days. I remember one thing in particular. He said "You probable are convinced yourself by now that I will no longer admit Prof. Rose into a concentration camp." I was never quite clear as to how he came to say that because every visitor to a concentration camp had to receive permission from a higher agency and not from Mr. Ding. Today, however, I think that his arm in this field was longer than I realized at that time.
Q. It can be seen from your answer that you were present during the meeting of consulting physicians in 1943?
A. Yes.
Q. When Dr. Ding-Schuler was giving his well-known lecture. Can you confirm that Dr. Ding in his answer to Prof. Rose's objection stated that the experimental subjects were criminals condemned to death?
A. According to my memory this is how the situation was. After Prof. Rose's objections, Dr. Ding stood up and stated, firstly, that there was no reason for any excitement since the experiments were carried out on criminals who had been condemned to death and who had been furnished by Himmler for this particular purpose; secondly, that the entire affair was over and done with anyway.
Then as far as I remember, Prof. Schreiber got up and confirmed what Ding had said, namely, that the experiments had ended, and that the legal questions had been decided by the highest police chief. Obviously he was only repeating what Ding had said. He couldn't have spoken of his own knowledge. He furthermore forbade that this conversation should be recorded in the record.
Q. Did Dr. Ding ever tell you or did you find out in any other way that the Bucarest vaccine tested in Buchenwald was furnished by Prof. Rose?
A. No, I didn't know anything about that.
Q. During your activity as the chief hygienist with the Reichsarzt-SS Dr. Grawitz, did you ever see reports by Dr. Rose? Did you ever see any files which were directed to Prof. Rose?
A. No, I never saw anything like that. I never heard the name of Prof. Rose mentioned by Grawitz.
Q. Now, another subject very briefly. If I understood you correctly, you stated during your direct examination that you had seen an intermediate report by Prof. Schilling concerning his malaria work at Dachau.
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. To whom was this report directed and from whom did you receive it?
A. That was a handwritten report written on a very abnormal size of paper, half size. It was written by hand, in Schilling's own handwriting; and it was addressed to Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler. It said in its introduction:
"Dear Reichsfuehrer: I should like to give you the first intermediate report on my experiments." Then a few pages followed where he spoke of his experiments and his results. There were about eight or ten such pages in that letter. It was written in large letters. I received this letter through Grawitz. He made the remark that he received that letter from Himmler. Himmler wanted his attitude about it. He asked me to voice my opinion about the contents of that letter.
Q. What did you do with that report, Professor?
Q. What did you do with that report, Professor?
A. I read it. This was the first time I had heard about Schilling's experiments, and I know some of Professor Schilling's work from literature which concerned a similar subject, and I found out that the old problem was once more raised in this case, and that there was no positive result to be found in that report. I expressed that opinion; and I added, since one was obviously concerned with artificial infection on human beings, that Grawitz would stop any experiments of that nature.
Q. In that case you sent this report back to Grawitz?
A. Yes.
Q. I observe from your statement that this handwritten report by Dr. Schilling was not mimeographed by Reichsarzt-SS, but typewritten?
A. No, no, I received the original.
Q. Thank you, I have no further questions.
BY DR. DUERR (Counsel for the defendant Poppendick):
Q. Professor, could Poppendick give you any orders or directives on the basis of his position on Grawitz's staff, or could he, on his own initiative, deal with you?
A. No, Poppendick couldn't give me any orders. He was a departmental chief, just as I was; we were both coordinated within the organization and he had no independent right to issue any orders to me.
Q. Who did Dr. Grawitz use for his correspondence before 1943?
A. He had a secretary, Miss Sommerfeld. She was sitting in his anteroom, and she was really Grawitz's right hand.
Q. Was there any change after the 1st of September 1943, -perhaps to the effect that Poppendick supervised the office activity?
A. On could hardly say that. There was only a change of secretaries because one secretary fell ill. I didn't observe that Poppendick exercised any influence on the secretary's activity. I am sure that is wrong.
Q. Whenever you reported to official conferences to Grawitz, did you deal with Grawitz personally, or were any other persons present?
A. No; generally, I was alone with Grawitz, and I know that this was Grawitz's habit in the case of other conferences. Only when any professional questions of any particular kind were discussed the competent man was asked to attend: for instance, concerning any field of vaccines or medical equipment where the man dealing with that question was always asked to attend.
Q. Where was Poppendick active, as far as you know; what was his main activity?
A. His main activity was not in the staff of Grawitz, but as meeting physician at the Race and Settlement Main Office. This is a completely different agency which even locally was separated from Grawitz's staff.
Q. How far apart were these two offices from one another, approximately?
A. I would say the classical situation there was very different, very hard to get from one point to another; I think it took about threequarters of an hour by train; one had to make frequent changes.
Q. Well, let me pass on to another chapter. Did Poppendick participate in the planning or leadership of typhus experiments in any way?
A. I never heard anything about that. It is highly improbable.
Q. Did you discuss typhus experiments with him at any time?
A. No, at no time.
Q. Do you know whether Ding was sending reports to Poppendick?
A. No.
Q. Do you remember the lecture given by Ding on the occasion of the meeting of the consulting physicians in the year 1943; was Poppendick present during that lecture?
A. No, he was not there.
Q. Were the participants limited to such an extent that you would have seen Poppendick had he been there?
A. There were about twenty-five to thirty gentlemen there, and one could overlook them very easily. Most of them I knew personally.
Q. I am going to hand over to you Ding's work about Rutenol and Acidin, with regard to typhus, which can be found on page 20 of the German Document No. 12. It is Document No. 582. I should like to point out a few passages in that paper. On page 12 you find some mention about therapy experiments. If you look at the second page you will find a footnote which was struck out but is still legible, where it says, "There can be no statements in greater detail about this epidemic." This is Obersturm-Fuehrer Doctor Fleckau, on the staff for typhus. Then there is a paragraph which starts on the same page, where it says that in the month April to May 1943 the expression, the epidemics, started to be mentioned; and furthermore I should like to point out to you that there is a sentence where it says in consequence of strict measures of quarantine in the case of a number of diseases the day of infection could be found out.
As an expert I want to ask you the following question: Whenever a physician who has experiences in typhus questions -- must he come to the conclusion that he was here concerned with artificial infections? What is your opinion about that?
A. This is not my opinion. I should like to say the following in that connection. During the course of the trial the possibility was repeatedly mentioned that the incubation period, namely, the period of the appearance of the infection until the symptoms, had to be established as exactly as possible. It was also mentioned here frequently that transports of inmates were carried out, then they were sent from one camp to another. Furthermore, it was pointed out that in the Eastern Ministry a number of Germans were sent into a typhus area to work there, who were vaccinated. These people were free of lice, and in most cases the discovery of a louse on their body was an event which they remembered.
If, at a later time they fell ill with typhus we could say with a high degree of probability that particular louse that had been found was the carrier of typhus. It is quite possible that inmates having no lice were included in a transport where there were people with lice. This transport usually took one day. The prisoners entered a camp and were generally immediately deloused. After some time a few inmates fell ill with typhus. One could say with certainty that the infection must have taken place during that transport on that particular day because there can be no typhus unless there are lice. Therefore, it is quite possible that such exact statement about the incubation period can be made in certain cases. That was possible because in many concentration camps there was a very close checkup on lice, as it was described by Dr. Horn yesterday.
This was a planned action, a planned control of lice, which were ordered, that was done, on the basis of my suggestion. This method was not initiated by the inmates but only carried out by them. I therefore had made a large number of such observations which always concerned epidemics, or cases of illnesses where the incubation period could always be put down exactly according to time.
Q. So there are no passages in this paper which could lead an unprejudiced export to conclude that any artificial injection had taken place?
A. No, I could not say that. I couldn't say that any such passages are there. Naturally, when one reads about an incubation period lasting about five or six days, one is surprised; one will ask oneself, "How is it possible to make such exact statements?" Every experienced physician knows that there is such a basic possibility.
Q. In the case of the paper we just discussed, are we concerned with the report of an experiment as it was maintained by the prosecution?
A No, it is a scientific paper; it is a manuscript. It bears the letterhead of my institute because Grawitz wanted all young physicians to publish their work under the protection of scientific institutes. In many cases papers were published under the heading of my institute, which however I received from different people and this is one of the papers. My only participate was that I went through them and found out whether the paper was fit for publication. On that occasion an error was discovered. You read one paper where you mentioned Obersturmfuehrer Vetter which was then a struck out. This line had to be struck out, because this man did not die of typhus but is still alive today. It was an error on Ding's part, such papers had to be submitted to the competent medical chief for approval before publication.
Q This paper was not sent to Poppendick directly?
A No, I am sure that was not the case. I sent this paper to Grawitz eventually us the competent chief; that was after the reorganization of the medical service and this was certainly not sent to Poppendick. Grawitz must have agreed to that; whether Poppendick agreed or not was of little interest; the main leadership was Grawitz.
Q Thank you; I have no further questions.
BY DR. MERKEL, (Counsel for the Defendant Gerzken.):
Q A few very general questions. If I understood you correctly, during your direct examination you stated that Grawitz, because of an organizational difficulty, had only a professional right to give directives and no order to issue commands; your testimony limited itself to his official duties as to the SS formation, which was subordinated to him?
A Yes, one can only then speak of a professional right for him to issue directives.
Q What was Grawitz' military tasks concerning his close tasks, his close staff and the institute which was immediately subordinated to him?
A He naturally was the disciplinary superior of his staff and of the institute, which was subordinated to him because he was a member of the Waffen SS; he was the military superior.
Q Now two brief questions with reference to the sulfonalamide experiments; on the basis of Grawitz' line of issuing directives in the professional field could he issue any orders for any strains to be issued to your institute without the approval of Dr. Genzken?
A The right to issue directives in professional matters enabled him to issue professional commands of every kind to every member of the medical service of the SS; one could mention a number of special cases.
Q Did you inform Dr. Genzken about the delivery or the strange delivery to Ravensbrueck?
A No, that was not possible because I did not know about it.
Q Another subject; among other things you were saying that one of your collaborators by the name of Dr. Moton participated in the meeting with reference to the cold question in Nurnberg; was Dr. Genzken informed by you about the results of that meeting?
A. I am quite sure that I did not inform Dr. Genzken about that; I don't know if Dr. Moton informed him, but it is not possible from what I know. Dr. Moton told me that Luftwaffe questions were discussed during that conference, which were of little interest to us and would have brought no practical results.
Q. Now, a few questions regarding the typhus experiments at Buchenwald; who was Dr. Ding's superior at Block No. 46?
A. Dr. Grawitz.
Q. To whom was he subordinate as chief of the place of production in block 50?
A. In this place he was subordinate to me.
Q. Was there any difference in regard to time in his position of subordination?
A. The production place started on the 7th of August, 1943, which was sometime before the reorganization of the medical service and Dr. Genzken was really not concerned.
Q. After the end of August the Hygienic Institute was no longer subordinated to him?
A. Yes, that is right.
Q. Did the scientific reports of Dr. Ding go directly to Dr. Genzken?
A. I am sure that these reports were never submitted to Professor Genzken by me or by my order; that is only insofar as they went to me they were immediately put into another envelope in my office and it was written when the word "Genzken" was written.
Q. So that every participation of Dr. Genzken is excluded?
A. In my opinion, yes.
Q. It was repeatedly mentioned that Dr. Ding was giving a lecture about typhus vaccines on the meeting of consulting meeting; is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. In April of 1943 you informed Dr. Genzken about the intended amount of vaccines to be produced by the SS; is that right?
A Yes, that was done in the spring of 1943.
Q Did this information have a special cause?
A Yes, there were three causes. At that time I was the Hygenic Expert attached to Dr. Genzken and I had to inform him about all important matters in my field as they applied to the army. Dr. Ding was to hold a lecture during that meeting of the consulting physicians because of Dr. Grawitz' wish. He had prepared this lecture and sent it to Dr. Grawitz for his approval and Grawitz sent this manuscript to me in order to look through it and it bore the same contents, which I mentioned, as that of May 5, 1942. As Dr. Ding was later writing in a more extensive form, I think this can be found in my Document No. 10. This was my cause for informing Dr. Genzken about Dr. Ding's intention. He, as medical chief of the Waffen SS, had to be informed about the fact that a member of the Waffen SS was going to hold a lecture in that circle.
The second reason was that I wanted to inform him about the effectiveness of a number of vaccines, which was used for the troops.
Thirdly, I wanted to tell him when he could expect the first portions of vaccines for the SS and the amounts he could expect per month. I had to tell him that so he could gage his future for the vaccines accordingly. That were the three reasons why I reported to Dr. Genzken at the time.
Q. Did you discuss the question of the furnishing of prisoners in order to make observations about vaccinated and non-vaccinated people and their reactions?
A. The conference with Dr. Genzken was extremely brief. As far as I remember we were standing close to his desk. I told him that the various vaccines which I mentioned to him had a different effect; I told him that the effect varied as to the length of the temperature; and a reduction of fatalities and I told him that after having vaccined the entire SS we could count on some protective effect for all soldiers. On that occasion I showed him a few charts which Ding had handed over to me at that time, the same charts which Ding reproduced in his paper, and I used these charts in order to explain the effectiveness of the vaccines to him.
Q. The mortality figures and the temperature figures could be derived from these charts, couldn't they?
A. Yes. If I remember correctly, on the heading of these charts the information was given what the day of the infection was. This entire conference was very brief and it is quite possible that Dr. Genzken--who was only concerned with the most important points which he had to know-it is quite possible that he overlooked that. I had no cause to point it out to him in particular since I was not reporting to him about Ding's series of experiments but was only reporting to him about the protective value of various vaccines which he, as medical chief, had to know. These were two completely different points of view.
THE PRESIDENT: I suggest to the witness that questions be answered a little more briefly. The question that was propounded to the witness-the question before the last one--could have been answered simply by "yes" or "no" which would have completely answered it.
The Tribunal will now be in recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel will proceed.
BY DR. MERKEL:
Q Professor, in order to review your last answer very briefly, it was not so at that time the days of the infection and the number of dead were expressly discussed?
A No, they were not.
Q Then consequently the fact that artificial infection of human beings was carried out was not mentioned?
A No, certainly not.
Q And I believe you did state that Dr. Genzken was not to be informed of all details of the tests, or he was to be informed merely as to the contents of Ding's report?
A The contents of Ding's report, and the effectiveness of the vaccines themselves, in that connection, of course, the report was complete, and I don't believe the medical chief needed to know any more than that.
Q Under whose control was the Dr Ellenbeck Laboratory, which in the winter of 1943 was set up in the SS Hospital in Berlin?
A It was under the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS, therefore, it was under me.
DR. MERKEL: Thank you. I have no further questions.
DR. WEISGERBER: Dr. Weisgerber for the defendant Sievers.
BY DR. WEISGERBER:
Q Professor, in your direct examination you already testified that the doctor in charge of the health system in the concentration camp was Dr. Lolling?
A Yes.
Q Now on the basis of any conferences, or on the basis of any other knowledge, can you tell us anything about this; that on the basis of general orders in connection with the measures against epidemics pre tective vaccination was ordered for concentration Natzweiler camps in fact, because at certain times a typhus epidemic had prevailed in this concentration camp?
A There was a general order to all chief doctors in camps that when typhus appeared in a concentration camp, all inmates of the concentration camp had to be vaccinated. I myself had Lolling issue this order, and, therefore, I know from my own experience that this order was actually issued.
Q The necessary vaccine was not adequate, was not sufficiently available; do you know whether Dr. Lolling tried to do anything about this scarcity?
A It is true that for the many hundreds, thousands of people there was not always immediately at hand enough vaccine available. There was not typhus in every camp, there were only a few of them, but generally the largest ones, and frequently the institute had notice when a vaccination was to be carried out, and the vaccine was not available in large enough quantities. It is possible that Lolling made an active attempt to obtain vaccine from somewhere.
DR. WEISGERBER: Thank you. I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: No further questions by the defense counsel. The Prosecution may cross examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q Dr. Mrugowsky, in your position as Chief of Amt 16 in the SS Fuehrungs-Hauptamt, that is, prior to the reorganization in 1943, your immediately superior was Dr. Karl Genzken, is that correct?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Now after the reorganization in 1943, you were no longer subordinated to Dr. Genzken, but you became subordinate to Dr. Grawitz, is that right?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Now in your position as Chief of Amt 16, and Genzken, the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS was under your control was it not?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Dr. Ding was a member of the staff of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS, wasn't he?
A That is correct, for a certain part of Ding's activity.
Q How long was Ding connected with the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS?
A Until the collapse.
Q Now, I assume that you contend that the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS did not set up the experimental station at Buchenwald, is that right?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q Did Dr. Genzken set up an experimental station at Buchenwald.
A No, Dr. Grawitz.
Q Do you recall on October 25, 1946, during the course of an interrogation when I asked you whether or not Dr. Genzken had anything to do with the setting up of an institute at Buchenwald, that you replied that Dr. Genzken was instrumental in forming the Buchenwald Institute, do you recall that?
A I certainly did not say it in that form.
Q Who placed Dr. Ding in charge of the experimental station at Buchenwald?
A Grawitz.
Q Did I hear you say that Heinrich Himmler had something to do with the appointment of Ding as Chief of the experimental station at Buchenwald?
A Yes, that is true. Grawitz had applied to Himmler that Ding should be given this assignment.
Q Who told Grawitz about Ding?
A Ding was known to Grawitz. I know that during the first campaign in France Grawitz was with the Deathhead Division, and Ding was Adjutant of the divisional doctor at that time, and I also know that Grawitz sent Ding to Graz in charge of a construction group in the SS Medical Academy, which trained students.
In other words, Grawitz knew Ding.
A Do you deny you ever had given orders to Ding in his capacity as Chief of the experimental station at Buchenwald?
A I did not give him any order.
Q Do you deny that Ding ever reported to you his capacity as Chief of the experimental station at Buchenwald?
A Reports from Ding as to work going on, actually going through in the Institute.
Q Now I call your attention to a few reports which have been set forth here in your evidence. One was a document No. NO-571, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 285, which is found on page 14 of the Document Book No. 12, Your Honor, wherein Ding reports to you. Another one is Document No. NO-582, which as you call it, "A Publication of the Chief of Typhus Research acted on derivatives by Ding," this heading at the top of this report or publication. Then you may recall the following words: "From the Hygiene Hospital of Waffen-SS Berlin, Chief, SS Ober Fuhrer Mrugowsky." Now in your own affidavit which is document No. 423, Prosecution's Exhibit No. 282, found on page 7 of the Document Book No. 12, you said the following:
"I obtained full knowledge of the position and activities of Dr. Karl Genzken, and of the position and work of Dr. Edwin Ding, who was Chief of the Department for Spotted Fever and Virus Research at the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS at the Buchenwald Concentration Camp. Several times I received reports to which charts were attached from Dr. Ding indicating results of the experiments carried out there, and I reported on these matters to Dr. Genzken on occasion which shall be described later." And then you go into detail about the same report. Now on direct examination you stated that you never issued orders to Ding, or that Ding never got orders from you, and as a matter of fact, you go so far as to state you don't know where Ding got his orders from.
That all being the case, why in the world did Ding submit his reports to you?
A There was a very definite reason for that, arising from the special structure of Grawitz office. I did state during the direct examination that Grawitz did not have any working staff, that was before the reorganization, and several of my documents showed that for that reason he used members of other staffs, that he gave them special assignments, and I was one of these, and I have testified that in this capacity I had special title "Chief Hygienist," and I also said that this activity was very slight. Since Grawitz had no working staff of his own, and as he was not the Hygienist, and not the Bacteriologist, then he did not know necessarily what to do with Ding's various reports or orders, that Ding was to sent the reports through the Hygiene Institute. Since there was correspondence anyhow because of the production of typhus vaccine, that was the reason.