According to his experience also, he said, the experiments involved no danger whatsoever, and he goes on to say that he was ready at any time to subject himself to any such experiments under the leadership of Dr. Ruff. He goes on to describe the extraordinary care which Drs. Rascher and Romberg showed towards all experimental subjects.
As a further document I am going to submit an affidavit of General of the SS Karl Wolff. This is to be found in Supplement III, taken in London on 21 November 1946 and sworn to and certified in the proper way in Nuernberg on 27 March 1947.
The record of this affidavit was submitted to you as a document mainly because the witness, without himself having participated in the Dachau experiments in any way, can testify completely objectively about the quality of the experimental subjects. I am not going to read the affidavit in detail. He first explains the research spleen of Reichsfuehrer-SS Himmler and then he goes on to say that the initiator of these experiments at Dachau was Dr. Rascher - the mental originator of these experiments. And then he speaks about the quality of the experimental subjects. That is on page 3 of the original, first paragraph.
I quote:
"In order to clarify and to stop such accidents in the future a number of junior members of the Luftwaffe had volunteered with their own person for experiments. Now, he said, sometime ago Dr. Rascher had had the idea to use volunteering inmates of concentration camps instead of the valuable members of the Luftwaffe which could be assigned to better tasks. Of course, favors would have to be granted to these inmates as a compensation, after about a dozen experiments, for instance, release from custody and front assignment. He, Himmler, he said, had gladly accepted this suggestion of Dr. Rascher and had granted permission to carry it out. He continued that he was very much interested in these experiments and therefore that he thought it very important that I witness the experiment we were going to see, in order to be able to talk about it to the Fuehrer at a suitable occasion.
And that is what I did. The Fuehrer was very glad about it. As far as I remember, the short report I gave him also resulted later on in the release and front assignment of these inmates.
"Therefore, Himmler was altogether responsible for making possible the execution of the experiments in the concentration camps, while Dr. Rascher was the executive head."
I think that I can skip the next paragraph; then the witness says:
"Right after the arrival of Himmler in the concentration camp Dachau Dr. Rascher started with his experiments. About ten prisoners were standing in front of their barrack. They looked quite detached and one after the other they climbed willingly into the low pressure chamber which was built into an automobile. Each experiment took only a few minutes, in accordance with the height that was imitated and with the normal falling speed of the human body.
"After they had left the low pressure chamber, it took the prisoners only about two minutes until, lying on a blanket on the floor of the barracks, they had recovered from the short endurance test. After that, in the knowledge of what they had just achieved, they became actually confiding. None of them were political prisoners; they were all rightly and lawfully declared to be unworthy for military service because of a strong criminal record (thieves and such).
"They emphatically assured Himmler in my presence that in this manner, after a request to get a chance to prove their value at the front had been rejected, they at least made a voluntary, modest contribution for Germany with their own person, and that thereby they wanted to prove their good will which really existed. Thereupon Himmler promised them to use his influence with the Fuehrer to obtain their release and the front assignment they wanted. It results, for instance, from the letter of Dr. Rascher to Dr. Brandt of 20.7.42 that Himmler, in fulfillment of his promise, decided on 14.7.42 really, that the prisoner Sobota and two other co-prisoners were to be released from the concentration camp and transferred to the trial unit (Bewaehrungstruppe) 'Dirlewanger'."Had these guinea piges been involuntary, then Himmler, in view of the inhuman treatments which in that case would really have taken place, could never have afforded to take the risk of these people going over to the enemy during a combat assignment of this 'Dirlewanger' unit.
"As far as I recollect, I have gained no knowledge from Himmler or from any other sources of the fact that later on low pressure experiments, for instance, were carried out on inmates on a non-voluntary basis."
The further statements of the witness show the same trend and I do not intend to go into them in detail.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, what number of exhibit do you assign to this document?
DR. SAUTER: I beg your pardon.
THE PRESIDENT: What Exhibit number did you assign this document?
DR. SAUTER: The testimony of Wolf has Exhibit #20.
I then have a number of documents which have not yet returned from the Translating Branch and I shall submit them at a later date. Among those is the extract of the penal record about our witness Vieweg. If you remember, this is the witness who didn't know whether, excepting one sentence, he had previously suffered any other sentences. In the meantime, I have received his criminal record and I found confirmed what I had assumed from the start; namely that the witness already before had suffered seven sentences, including one of five years' penitentiary. This is one of these people who are now going around the country claiming to be political prisoners, and who offered himself here in this trial as witnesses. I shall submit this criminal record to the Tribunal.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, as I understand it now, Dr. Sauter has one more book that book is Book #4. That is the one we haven't received.
THE PRESIDENT: That is my understanding.
MR. HARDY: and then now, in Document Book #2, he has an affidavit under "Ruff Publications", or is it supplement #1? Does he intend to introduce that? I haven't given it an exhibit number yet.
DR. SAUTER: I have already done that during the course of the examination of the defendant Ruff. I think this is Exhibit #8 if I'm not mistaken. Yes, I think it is #8.
MR. HARDY: No. 8 is another one. That is the affidavit of Schroeder. This one here has not been introduced yet.
JUDGE SEBRING: Counsel for the prosecution is referring to ..........
MR HARDY (Interrupting): Document 19.
JUDGE SEBRING: Document #5, I think, counsel.
MR HARDY: I have missed it then. Thank you Your Honor.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, this brings me to the end of the submission of my documents, and I further make the application which I have already made in the past that we carry out here a practical experiment, using a low pressure chamber, in order to convince ourselves here how such an experiment, using a low pressure chamber, in order to convince ourselves here how such an experiment is being carried through and what its effects are. In Heidlberg, not too far from here, there is such a low pressure chamber. The defendant Dr. Ruff and other defendants have already worked in this low pressure chamber. This mobile low pressure chamber, located in Heidelberg, can be brought to Nurnberg without any difficulty. Some such experiment can be carried out in a courtyard of the Palace of Justice and it will considerably make the Tribunal's tasks easier if it con convince itself about such an experiment. Ye have a number of experts who can be in charge of that experiment. There is an American medical center at Heidelberg where a number of experts are located. The defendants Ruff and Romberg, are available for this experiment and are ready to subject themselves to it. I have received a number of telegraphic offers from a dozen former collaborators of Dr. Ruff that they would be glad to make themselves available here as experimental subjects. Among them is this witness Mrs. Guaita who, earlier in her capacity as film director, had participated in these experiments.
I should like to consider this my application for having such an experiment performed here and then, Gentlemen of the Tribunal, you will convince yourselves that, in case these experiments are planned and executed in a scientific manner, they are harmless and non-dangerous and not painful to an extent that any one of us persons here in the court room could subject ourselves to any such experiments.
JUDGE SEBRING: Counsel, is the experiment you propose the one you say that Jr. Ruff performed? That one or one of Br. Rascher performed? Which one you propose to show here?
DR. SAUTER: Dr. Ruff's experiments, the experiments that Dr. Fuff has performed. The experiments of Rascher do not concern us,
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, it is my understanding that the Tribunal has ruled on this once.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has ruled on this point, denying the application made for the defendant Ruff, and the Tribunal is of the same view. The application is denied.
The Tribunal will now recess Until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(A recess was taken until 0930 hours, 1 May 1947).
OFFICE OF US CHIEF OF COUNSEL
EVIDENCE DIVISION LIBRARY BRANCH
THIS ITEM IS DUE ONE WEEK FROM:
IF NEEDED LONGER PLEASE INFORM THE LIBRARY.
Official Transcript of the the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany on 1 May 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I.
Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save tho United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you ascertain if tho defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please your Honor, all defendants are present in the court with the exception of the Defendant Oberheuser, absent due to illness.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note the presence of all the defendants in court save the Defendant Oberheuser. Tho prison physician having filed a certificate that the Defendant Oberheuser is unable to attend court today, she will be excused pursuant to that certificate, it appearing that her absence will in no way prejudice her case.
Counsel may proceed.
DR. VORWERK: (Counsel for tho Defendant Romberg): Mr. President, I think I am correct in assuming that the high tribunal has Romberg's document book available to them.
THE PRESIDENT: We have not yet received it.
(Document book handed to the Tribunal.)
DR. VORWERK: The Defense of tho Defendant Romberg will now call the Defendant Romberg into the witness stand, and in the course of his examination will submit the individual affidavits.
With the approval of the Tribunal, I ask that the Defendant Romberg be called into the witness stand.
THE PRESIDENT: At the request of his counsel, the Defendant Romberg will take the witness stand.
DR. HANSROMBERG, a defendant, took the stand and testified as follows BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q. The Defendant will raise his right hand and be sworn.
I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE SEBRING: You may be seated.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY.
DR. VORWERK:
Q. Your name is Hans Wolfgang Romberg, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. When and where were you born?
A. I was born on the 15th. of May, 1911, in Berlin.
Q. Would you please be good enough to describe your career to the Tribunal.
A. I wont to a humanist High School Gymnasium in Berlin and while going to school my main fields of interest were medicine and technique. I decided to choose the medical profession, and from 1929 to 1935 I studied at the Universities of Berlin and Innsbruck, In tho spring of 1935 I took my state examination at Berlin and then proceeded to work as an interne at the hospital in Friedrechshain, Berlin. I was there at the Internal and Surgical Department. Since it was my intention to become a surgeon, I went to Professor Buechner as an assistant to the Patho logical Institute in order to gain a basic education in the field of surgery there.
While working with Buechner my interest in aviation medical questions was awakened, since in Buechner's Institute there were animal experiments performed concerning themselves with those questions. Already at that time I volunteered as experimental subject for high altitude experiments performed by other physicians because I was interested in that field. In the year of 1937 I participated in an air medical congress at the RLM in Berlin, to which I gained access by the mediation of Buechner, and became acquainted with the entire field of work of aviation medicine. As a result of this congress, I decided to be active in that sphere because this represented a very fortunate synthesis of my medical and technical interests.
On the 1st of January 1938 I was employed by the Air Medical Department of the DVL of which Dr. Ruff was the head. I was employed as a scientific co-worker and my special assignment was the theoretical and practical evaluation of air accidents. In addition, I simultaneously worked on air medical research questions.
Q. What, in detail, w. s your work concerning air medical research questions?
A. In addition to my accident work I had research assignments of various types which at first wore on the field of acceleration research. In the course of those experiments I worked in many airplane tests with dive bombers and carried out centrifugal experiments. After the DVL, in the year of 1939, received their own low pressure chamber, we started the work in the field of high-altitude research. I currently carried on low pressure chamber experiments, concerning flying ability and in addition there were a number of research assignments in tho field of high-altitude.
Tho initiation for those experiments originated partly from aerial accident work and from the experience which I gained as a result of investigation of air accidents which had not as yet been explained. Those were air accidents on the basis of altitude sickness, and it was they that interested mo mostly. I soon began to see the fight against highaltitude sickness and death as my special assignment. Tho first phase of my activity in the combat of accidonts was concluded in the spring of 1940 with the report which was already mentioned by Dr. Ruff regarding high-altitude sickness and high-altitude death. I specialized in tho field of high altitude research, and carried out many low pressure experiments concerning flying ability in that connection.
Q What was your task within the framework of high altitude research?
A There was a number of activities going on in order to improve high altitude firmness with pharmacological means regarding the effect of continued exposure to respiration oxygen, concerning carbon dioxide content, the effectiveness of pervitin, investigations of parachute descending from high altitudes, explosive decompression experiments in the question of high altitude flying in the pressure chamber, airplanes, and many similar matters.
Q Were there any series of experiments in your institutions carried out by you at that time, and who at that time was in charge of your experiments and whom did you use as experimental subjects?
A We had a series of experiments in all these research assignments. We ourselves were the experimental subjects. Sometimes we had experimental subjects coming from our collaborators in our own institutes, and sometimes from other branches of the DVL. Usually I myself was in charge of these experiments, except in cases when I myself was the experimental subject.
Q Who, for the first time suggested to you that low pressure chamber experiments could be carried out at Dachau?
A In December 1941, after Weltz' visit to Ruff, Ruff called me into his room and told me about his conversation with Weltz. He asked me whether I was prepared to work under these conditions and participate in experiments for the purpose of rescue from high altitudes.
Q You are saying under these conditions, what conditions were you speaking of?
A These were the conditions which Dr. Weltz mentioned to Dr. Ruff on the occasion of his visit. The experiments were to be performed on sentenced criminals who volunteered for these experiments.
Q Was the concept "criminal" discussed at that time already, and what was to be understood by it?
A One meant criminals who had been sentenced by proper courts.
Q Who determined the subject which was to be investigated at Dachau?
A The subject had already been determined as a result of our preceding work, and as a result of the planned experiments which were to be continued. Since this subject, namely the rescue of persons from high altitude was particularly acute, at that time Ruff asked me whether I was prepared to participate in these experiments, working on these questions.
Q In that case am I correct in assuming that already before the Dachau experiments had been carried out in a similar way, and that other experiments were to be continued after the Dachau experiments?
A Yes.
Q That the Dachau experiments merely constituted an excerpt from a large scale experimental plan?
A Yes, that is true.
Q What were your reasons to accept Dachau?
A One can only explain that decision considering the situation as it prevailed at that time. It was the winter of 1941-1942 and the collapse of the Eastern front was already pending because of the unexpected severity of that winter. The emergency situation of the soldiers at the front became very clear also at home for the first time. At that time woolen things were collected for the Front and one could imagine what actually was happening at the Front if one had to resort to such means. The pilots of the medical planes told us what actually was happening. We were also told about conditions by pilots of the DVL who had been committed at the Eastern Front for the purpose of this emergency situation. In addition a new opponent had arisen, the United States of America, and we especially in aviation research were clearer about the importance of that new opponent than many others, we know what was being built in the United States and what the potentialities were. In America Boeing B-17 planes were flying with exhaust turbines at high altitudes, the Thunderbolt planes were being used, and we were able to see that the air war would have to embark on an entirely new form, especially regarding high altitudes and numerical employment.
We could only make a stand if we did everything to develop our fighters. Here we were particularly concerned with the ME 163 from which we expected considerable success. The increase of flying speed was of extreme importance, also for civilian aviation, and in this situation development, of course, became particularly acute, and our experiments were necessary for the purpose of this development. When Dr. Ruff approached me with that question I didn't consider it very long as to whether I was strong enough or whether I would rather stay in Berlin where I had my family and a comfortable place to work. When I was released to do aviation research work I never thought that this would mean a comfortable position, but I participated in a great number of experiments which were neither pleasant nor non-dangerous.
Q Didn't you have any moral or medical ethical misgivings in carrying out these experiments?
A I had no great moral misgivings. Naturally, I thought about the entire matter thoroughly, but the result of these deliberations was the following: experiments on human beings was an everyday affair with us. In the course of my activity I am sure I carried out about a thousand self experiments, and just as many experiments on other people who belonged to the circle of our Institute. All these people volunteered as experimental subjects, but that was done within the framework of the research of our Institute. I participate in experiments for Ruff and my own work, and I am sure that if any stranger would have asked me to do that I am sure I would not have consented. Within the framework of the activity of the Institute all the co-workers were glad to participate, though we gained no advantages whatsoever from that work. If I was now approached with the question whether I was going to use sentenced criminals who volunteered for the purpose of experiments which were to serve the rescue of pilots, and knowing that if they survived these experiments these criminals would receive a pardon I think it is quite understandable that although having to overcome certain personal inhibitions I had no principle moral misgivings.
In addition I knew of experiments being performed on inmates in the various countries, and the books of Paul de Kruif, which I possessed, gave me this knowledge.
Although Professor De Kruif, as I have learned here from Professor Alexander, supposedly is not in an unobjectionable position in America and sometimes allegedly does not quite tell the truth in his publications, it is not so decisive what he reports about the individual experiments performed by Grassi or other people. It is much more important to consider the way in which he is reporting these experiments; that he is glorifying these courageous research workers as heroes; that his books were a great success in America and in many other countries; that the German editions were printed in Zurich, the land of the Red Cross; that I never heard or read of an opinion which rejected the books or the experiments which are described therein.
As I know now, I was only aware of an infinitely small part of human experiments carried on abroad. There was yet another condition which strengthened me in my decision. At that time concentration camp inmates who volunteered were committed for the clearing of dud bombs and, as far as I know, were pardoned after having cleared some twenty such dud bombs. I think that compared to that the low pressure chamber experiments seemed to me to be much more harmless and incurred much less danger.
In addition, of course, I put the question whether I personally in the same position would have placed myself at the disposal for such experiments and I, of course, answered that question in the affirmative, for that in effect was what I did.
Q. Did it not repel you at that time working in a concentration camp?
A. It will always be difficult to make it clear to people that hardly one person knew in Germany anything about the concentration camps. According to name, I knew of Dachau and, being a resident of Berlin, I knew of Oranienburg. I never saw a camp personally up to that time. I had heard that professional criminals and political inmates were incarcerated in concentration camps. I had heard nothing of prisoners of war or foreigners who were in concentration camps. In the same way I had never heard anything of the Jewish extermination program or the mass deportation of Jews into concentration camps, which allegedly already started in the year of 1938.
When in the year of 1940 or 1941 the Jews were deported from Berlin, we were told that they were sent to Theresienstadt and from there went to the various cities of the general government in Poland.
Q. When did you take the first steps in order to carry through the experiments?
A. The first step was my journey to Munich to Weltz's institute, where Ruff accompanied me. That was in January of 1942.
Q. A conference with Weltz was the purpose of the journey, was it not?
A. Yes.
Q. Did that conference take place in January of 1942?
A. Yes, we went there for the purpose of this experiment.
Q. Well, who was present at that time?
A. Professor Weltz, Dr. Rascher, Dr. Ruff, and I.
Q. Had you known Dr. Rascher before that conference.
A. No.
Q. Had you known before the conference took place that Dr. Rascher would be present?
A. No, I am sure that I did not know the name.
Q. Were you introduced to Rascher?
A. Yes, he was introduced to me as an Oberarzt of the Luftwaffe.
Q. Was a fifth man present during that conference or at least present part of the time?
A. Yes, I remember that at the beginning Dr. Lutz was present. I think he was already there before the beginning of the conference.
Q. What in detail was discussed during that conference?
A. I think that Dr. Ruff already told about that conference in essence. The question of the experimental subjects was discussed once more. Dr. Rascher had a letter from Himmler which give him authority to carry out the experiments, which he produced.
It was decided to carry out the experiments for the purpose of rescuing from high altitude, using the low pressure chamber at Dachau. At the end of the conference we arranged to meet again the next day at the Reichsfuehrer's office at Munich, where a number of formal questions had yet to be settled.
Q. Wasn't it discussed that one would have to establish contact with the commander of the camp at Dachau?
A. I don't know whether Rascher had already suggested that at that time. The first step was the conference at the Reichsfuehrer's office at Munich and I think that there the decision was made to establish a conference with the commander at Dachau.
Q. During that conference did Rascher wear the uniform of an SS officer or a Luftwaffe doctor?
A. No, he had the uniform of an Oberarzt, a lieutenant of the Luftwaffe.
Q. Was he introduced to you as an officer of the Luftwaffe or an officer of the SS?
A. No, he was introduced to me as an officer of the Luftwaffe.
Q. Where did the conference take place, at the Reichsfuehrer SS?
A. On the next day, during that conference, we made the acquaintance of Schnitzler, the Munich adjutant of Himmler, who was also informed about the experiments. It was then decided to go out to Dachau by car in order to discuss the necessary matters with the commander there.
Q. Was it arranged that Rascher was to carry out the experiments?
A. Yes, that was arranged.
Q. Were you convinced that Rascher was sufficiently qualified to carry out these experiments?
A. Yes, naturally.
Q. Did you confer with him, or why were you of that opinion?
A. During that conference at Weltz's office we naturally discussed many questions. There was a lot of professional talk and Rascher made a very skillful impression. He told about his work at Schongau, where he was working at an ack-ack school, where he had prepared a distance guage for the purpose of ack-ack work.
In addition, he seemed to have a good general medical education. I think he had worked in Munich for three or four years doing surgical work and he generally made a skillful impression.
Q. When did you actually go to Dachau?
A. We went there the next day, starting from the Reichsfuehrer's office.
Q. What was discussed with the camp commander at Dachau?
A. Schnitzler, the Munich adjutant, went out with us and there were the four of us and the camp commander was also present during that conference. During that conference all the basical questions of the practical execution were settled. First, the bringing of the pressure chamber to Dachau, its installation in the camp, further the selection of the experimental subjects. The camp commander had already been informed about it by Schnitzler.
Q. Would you please once more repeat what had been arranged with the camp commander concerning that point?
A. Basically the fact that the experimental subjects were to be sentenced criminals who volunteered for that purpose had been determined and was merely confirmed during that conference. We made certain demands regarding the caliber of the experimental subjects. They had to be of a certain age, ranging from twenty-five to thirty-five years; they had to be in good physical condition, had to receive additional rations in order that a good comparison could be drawn to the personnel of the Luftwaffe regarding nourishment and physical condition. In addition, it was determined they were not to work during the time of the experiments. The camp commander then said that Rascher was to select the suitable people.
Q. Did the camp commander state on that occasion that in any way he had tried to bring about a voluntary reporting of the inmates for that purpose?
A. Yes, he had no doubt whatsoever, that under these conditions a large number of persons would report, once he made the facts know to them. Rascher was then to select the suitable people from that crowd.
Q. I am sure that the manner in which the camp commander was to select the people was not discussed in detail, if I understand you correctly? I mean whether they were to be gathered by way of a roll call or in any other way?
A. I don't know how it was done, whether posters were put up or whether they were gathered by way of roll call. At any rate that was not discussed at the time.
Q. Was it then already determined that Rascher alone would deal with the camp commander in the matter of the experimental subjects or were you also authorized to interfere in these matters, was it then already determined whether Rascher alone was to select the experimental subjects or were you to have a vote too?
A. That, of course, was left to Rascher, because he had the corresponding authorization from Himmler.
Q. Did Rascher produce that authorization during a conference, during the preceding conference?
A. Yes, I already said it happened during the time we spoke with Weltz. He showed us Himmler's letter.
Q. Do you still remember the contents of that letter?
A. Yes, it said in the letter that the basic authorization for the execution of the high altitude experiments was maintained and that such experiments could be carried out in the concentration camp Dachau. It further said that criminals who had volunteered were to be used and that pardon would be granted to these men after the conclusion of the experimental series.
Q. Did you travel back to Berlin with Dr. Ruff after these conferences?