A. Yes, after this conference we went to Berlin.
Q. Certain preparations had to be made for the beginning of the experiments, who was entrusted with this prepatory work?
A. Preparations were divided. Dr. Ruff was to deal with the transport of the mobile pressure chamber. Then Rascher was to make all necessary preparations in Dachau, selecting the experimental subjects and examining them, and I was to gather the scientific material, as far as it was not yet available, and to work out an experimental program, the basis of which already existed?
Q. Before you returned to Berlin, the decision had already been made that such experiments were to be carried through, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. Had you, as the representative of your Institute at Adlershof, already previously collaborated with a representative of the Weltz Institute?
A. No, not all frequently, only at one time in January, 1941, when dealing with a mobile low pressure chamber, the witness Lutz has testified about that here, and on that occasion we collaborated with a representative of the Weltz Institute. This was done when the mobile pressure chamber was committed in the campaign of France in order to carry out special experiments on the fighter squadrons. Not only Weltz' institute participated there, but there was a collaboration of many agencies.
Q. Who did participate?
A. There was one physician of the German Experimental Institute for Glider Flying, who was a civilian, who participated; one came from Rechlin, who was an Oberarzt of the Luftwaffe, and then there was Dr. Lutz from the Munich Institute, who was also, I think, an Oberarzt of the Luftwaffe, and finally two or three physicians, medical officers of Air Fleet No. 3.
Q. Who was in charge of the chamber at that time?
A. This chamber was supervised by the medical inspectorate and when it was in France it was under the charge of Air Fleet No. 3. They were caring for fuel, travel orders, etc.
Within our detail of physicians, Dr. Doering was entrusted with leadership. He had come from the E Agency at Rechling.
Q. Did you know the individual physicians of that team at that time?
A. I knew Dr. Doering personally very well. I only passably knew the physician who came from the Research Institute for Glider Flying and I didn't at all know Dr. Lutz. I only knew he had come from the Institute Weltz and I didn't know any of the others.
Q. Was the situation approximately the same when using the chamber at Dachau?
A. To what extent it was the same officially I cannot judge. However, I do think it was rather similar. The chamber had been furnished by the medical inspectorate and I went there as a representative of the Ruff Institute while Rascher went there as a member of the Weltz Institute. We all went there for the purpose of collaboration in order to carry out experiments for the purpose of rescue from high altitudes.
Q. Let us revert to the Dachau experiments. How long did you stay in Berlin, after having returned from Dachau to Berlin?
A. I stayed there for a number of weeks, at least during the time it took for the chamber to leave Berlin and go to Munich, that was in the beginning of February.
Q. And after that you returned to Munich, did you?
A. Yes, after the chamber had left Berlin I went after it by rail, one or two days later, in order to carry out the necessary technical preparations of the chamber at Dachau with Rascher.
Q. Did you arrive in Dachau before the chamber or did the chamber arrive before you?
A. The chamber was already there. As soon as I arrived at Munich I telephoned the Weltz Institute to find out whether the number had arrived, and I then learned it was already at Dachau.
I then telephoned Rascher and went out there together with him.
Q When did the experiments in Dachau start?
A I remember that they actually started on the 22nd or 23rd of February, because I can still recall, as the witness Neff testified here, that a birthday table, so to speak, had been prepared for him. Subsequently, a number of difficulties arose concerning Rascher's being detailed there. The experiments after a day or two were interrupted and Rascher went to Schongau, whereas I returned to Berlin.
Q Before the experiments started, did you have a clearly defined program which was to cover the extent of the experiments?
A Yes, I have already said that the initiation for this experimental series which was to extend over a number of years originated with the commitment of the mobile pressure chambers in France. There we discussed the question of parachute descent from high altitude with tho fighter pilots employed there; and we had determined that the pilots were not sure about this because they were neither practical nor theoretical experienced on land in these questions. These experiences gained as a result of the conversations we held with the fighter pilots constituted the initiation to start these experiments.
In the year of 1941 I performed experiments with parachute descents from high altitudes at the DVL, which extended to 12 kilometers. This was the first important practical question because people were already flying at that height. At that time, however, the flying altitude was already being increased. Motors had been built which could increase the altitude of planes up to 16000 meters. Junker, Arado, Henschel and many other airplane manufacturers, were already building pressure cabins; and the ME-163, which I have already mentioned, and which was the first airplane with an independent rocket propulsion, was already being tested.
The air pressure is artificially maintained in pressure cabins by compression apparatus; in other words, there is always a stronger pressure in the pressure cabin than in the atmosphere which surrounds it. For planes employed at the front a pressure corresponding to eight kilometers had been provided. There was the problem of how the crew could overcome an explosive decompression caused by a leak in the pressure cabin; and this was a question which had already been dealt with by a number of institutes, who concerned themselves with explosive decompression questions. We also had carried out explosive decompression experiments up to seventeen kilometers in height.
It may perhaps be a proof a to how the entire problem was pending at that time that we had built in explosive decompression chambers into the mobile low pressure chambers, because we had in ended to lecture the troops about explosive decompression questions. The problem which had been entirely left aside, however, was the question of how the air crew could be saved in the case of an accident occurring in high altitudes, after the crew had survived the explosive decompression: How and with what means can I bring the crew back to earth? - A number of questions had come up: Is it sufficient to use a parachute with oxygen apparatus? Up to what altitudes would it be sufficient? Would the pilots have to drop for some time with a parachute not unfolded? Through what altitudes would they have to fall? Do they wake up by themselves from altitude sickness or not? Are they alert enough afterwards to pull the lever? In what altitude will they awaken?
Then in addition the question came up of what effect cold would have; and in the case of particularly high altitudes the question was added: Can one in such altitudes just by using one's own body leave, the plane or does high altitude sickness appear so quickly that certain apparatus would have to be provided which would get the crew out of the plane without their having to act on their own initiative? Then the question came up of how soon after the explosive decompression the altitude sickness arises; how much time is at one's disposal in order to start rescue measures? These were about the most important questions which moved us and which had to be clarified during these experiments.
Q. Was it your intention to carry out further experiments in Dachau if the opportunity was available?
A No. By putting these questions the program had been clearly defined. On the other hand, the program was large enough and a sufficient number of questions had to be clarified. I made the necessary preparations, We knew that from a technical point of view ten seconds would be at our disposal for leaving the airplane.
DR. VORWERK: Mr. President, I have just learned that a figure had not been mentioned which the witness has stated. He said that at that time motors had been built by a number of manufacturers which were in a position to rise up to 16,000 meters in height. This figure apparently had not been mentioned.
Q Witness, what was Rascher's position in Dachau?
A The position in itself had been clarified by the basical condition raised by Himmler that Rascher had received authorization and at the same time, owing to the condition, that Rascher would have to participate in the experiments, that any execution of the experiments without him was impossible.
Q What leads you to assume that? What leads you to assume that it would have been impossible to carry out these experiments without the participation of Rascher?
A That can be seen from a letter written by Brandt to Sievers, written the 21st of March 1942, Document 1581-a (PS), Exhibit 48 in Document Book II.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the Tribunal will now be in recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats. The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. VORWERK:
Q. Dr. Romberg, before we go on where we stopped, I should like to ask you to speak about the necessity of these experiments and to explain what the significance of this machine was that could fly at an altitude of 16 kilometers.
A. I said that motors for air planes were being built at this time which could reach an altitude of 16 kilometers. That is, their maximum achievement was 16 kilometers. The actual ceiling would be two or three kilometers higher than that.
Q. Do you mean to say that this machine would, in practice, be able to reach an altitude of 18 or 19 kilometers.
A. Yes, that would be the highest altitude which it could reach at all. At 16 kilometers it could fly with its entire motor power.
Q. What do you mean by full pressure altitude?
A. That is a very technical expression connected with the compressors. At that altitude, the motors work just as a motor not built especially for high altitude works on the ground, artificial pressure is created which corresponds to sea level pressure. Above this altitude the efficiency of the machine sinks rapidly.
Q. I believe that this explains that point sufficiently.
Now, we'll go back to the point of Rascher's position in the experiment. You were just beginning to speak of this question before the recess.
A. I said that, without Rascher, it would never have been intended to carry out the experiments and it never would have been possible. That arose from Himmler's original assignment. Practical proof of this is the fact that the experiments were stopped immediately when there were difficulties with Rascher's assignment. This is proved by the letter from Mrs. Rascher to the Reichsfuehrer SS, the 24th of February 1942, Document NO-263, Exhibit 47.
In this letter, Mrs. Rascher writes that there were difficulties of command and that the experiments were stopped; that Rascher has gone back to Schongau. That was the time when I went back to Berlin and later, when the experiments were actually carried out, Rascher had expressly forbidden me to perform experiments in Dachau without his permission or his presence, so that I never did perform any experiments without Rascher. I always waited until he was there. On the days when he was in Schnogau, no experiments were performed. Generally, I did not even go to the experimental station -perhaps to write - but certainly never to carry out experiments. This rule, although, of course, it often delayed the work, seemed justified to me because Rascher had the permission from Himmler to perform these experiments and was responsible to him for the experimental subjects. Also, I myself was under the authority of the camp at Dachau which seriously restricted my independence. For example, my freedom of movement or talking to prisoners, similar things. Rascher himself, on the other hand, on the basis of his powers which he had received from Himmler and on the basis of a special pass, had a very free position. The camp of Dachau was under Himmler's authority. That is shown, for example, by the letter from Himmler to Milch, Document 1617 PS of November, 1942, Exhibit 77. In this letter, Himmler spoke of Holzloehner's conduct and adds that the camp Dachau is under his orders, and Holzloehner would have to submit. Under these conditions, Rascher had taken the low pressure chamber from Munich and set it up.
Q Who took care of the maintenance during the experiments, that is who worked on the chamber, maintained it?
A There was not a great deal of maintainance work necessary for examply loading the batteries or supplying the oxygen, that was taken care of by Rascher and it was probably paid for by the camp
Q Was Rascher responsible to you for that?
A No, Rascher was not responsible to me at all. He was responsible to the medical inspectorate because the chamber belonged to them.
Q Did you have an opportunity to give Rascher any orders or prohibition or instructions?
A No, that can no doubt be seen from what I have already said. I could not give him any orders. I certainly could not forbid him to do anything only for the progress of these experiments for rescue from high altitude I had a certain advisory right as is customary for two scientists who are working together on the same task, and when one of the two has greater knowledge pertinent to the specific task.
Q You said the experiments began on February 22 or February 23, was that the time when you saw the experimental subjects for the first time?
A Yes. On that day I went out to Dachau for the first time together with Rascher, and met the experimental subjects for the first time.
Q About how many were there?
A There were 10 or 12.
Q Could it have been five?
A Five? No, there were certainly more than that.
Q Could it have been 15?
A Yes that is possible.
Q Did you talk to the experimental subjects on that day before the experiments began?
A I believe on that day we talked, primarily. Whether any experiments were done at all on that first day, whether any real experiments were done before the thing was stopped for the first time I don't remember. At any rate I talked to the experimental subjects and got to know them a little on the first day.
Q What did you talk about with the experimental subjects?
A It was quite new surroundings for me, of course. The were all professional criminals who ware in custody.
Q How do you know that?
A They told me that gradually in the course of conversation. They didn't have complete confidence on the first day and told me all about their previous convictions. But after one inquired carefully one discovered sometime that they had been condemned for certain crimes, repeatedly convicted, and finally had been condemned to Sicherheitsverwhrung (protective custody).
Q For what reason did you talk to the experimental subjects on this day?
A It is quite natural when one begins to work with such a group then certain personal contact is necessary. We had to get to know each other. I talked to them their profession, if I may say so, and of course I was told then something about the experiments, what it was all about, what they themselves had to do to cooperate. So the cooperation would be possible as with ********** the experimental subjects that I was used to.
Q Was the reason for this investigation to prepare the subjects of their activity or to check whether these people were actually volunteers?
A No, it was more to get to know the subjects personally. The situation was this, in the talk with the camp commandant on the basis of the agreement with Rascher, and his authorization from Himmler, a very definite agreement had been reached that these people were to be selected from the volunteers; a clear agreement had been reached on the conditions, about which there could be no doubts basically. When I met the subjects for the first time personally and talked to them about the principle of the experiments and their duties, and so forth, of course I also inquried why they had volunteered, not because of any distrust of the camp authorities, but just for that reason.
A I didn't only believe that, but they were. They told me so themselves.
Q How do you know that so definitely for each case?
A In the course of time, not on the first day but in the course of time I talked to all of them frequently in some detail, and gradually they told me about their previous convictions, and what other prisons and penitentiaries they had been in, before they came to the camp and they also told me the reasons why they had volunteered.
Q Do you mean to say that all the experimental subjects who were used for the high altitude experiments were volunteers?
A Yes.
Q Now before these subjects entered the chamber did prepare them for what they had to do, and told them the significance of the whole thing?
A Yes, of course. First I explained the whole question to them in broad outline, so that they would know what it was about and what the purpose of the experiment was. In detail I told them specifically what they had to do in the experiments. There was the writing test, they had to write numbers from 1,000 backwards, then the cardinal point was that after the altitude sickness during the experiments as soon as they came to they had to pull the ripcord. We had a handle in the chamber connected to a bell. This was to represent pulling the rip cord of the parachute, and this had to be explained to them carefully, otherwise they wouldn't have understood it and wouldn't have reacted right.
Q. Now, before the experiments began, did you have an electrocardiogram of each separate subject?
A. Yes and later again.
Q. Please explain that.
A. First Rascher had examined the people to see if they were suitably fitted for the experiments, so there would be no heart defects or anything like that. Then for an exact control, before the beginning of the experiments we took an electro-cardiogram of all the subjects and in almost all the experiments the electro-cardiograms were registered and at the end, when the experiments were finished, we took another electrocardiogram of all the subjects in order to have material for, perhaps if there were no visible damage, their might still be some effects which could be determined only by such tests.
Q. Now, how long did these experiments of rescue from high altitude last approximately?
A. Well, they really began on about the 10th or 11th of March and they lasted until the 19th or 20th of May.
Q. Following that, you prepared the report which has been submitted by the prosecution?
A. Yes.
Q. In this report you have a sentence saying that during the experiments for rescue from high altitude there had been no deaths and that there had been no damage to health, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct that that sentence is in the report, and it is also true that there was no death or other damage.
Q. But here in the testimony of the witness Neff you heard that there were deaths?
A. Yes.
Q. What do you have to say about that?
A. In addition to our joint experiments for rescue from high altitude, Rascher had experiments of his own which he carried out. He did not tell me the exact problem; he merely said that he was carrying out these experiments for Himmler and that they were to do with the explosive decompression sickness and electro-cardiogram.
He had apparently carried out secret experiments for some time on this problem, but then in my presence he continued it with special subjects. In the course of these experiments at the end of April the first death occurred when I was present. He told me in the course of our conversations that he wanted to qualify as a lecturer on the basis of these experiments which were ordered by Himmler. He wanted to get Dr. Fahrenkamp into it but this was not done. Dr. Fahrenkamp did not work on this matter because the experiments were broken off.
Before the death, I had no reason to object to the experiments in any way since Rascher was using other subjects and had an assignment from Himmler for them separately. I had the assignment to carry out the experiments for rescue from high altitude and I, together with Rascher, carried it out.
Q. How many deaths were there when you were present?
A. There were three.
Q. But Neff spoke of five deaths at which you were present.
A. There could only have been three.
Q. Why could there only have been three?
A. Because I remember. There were deaths after all and they made a definite impression on me, I know it.
Q. Why did death in the low pressure chamber make such an impression on you?
A. In the innumerable low pressure chamber experiments not only made by us, but everywhere in Germany in other institutes, we never had any deaths at all and the point of view at that time was that any question of aviation medicine, which was necessary, could be solved without deaths.
Q. Now, how did it happen that you were present at these deaths, as you say these experiments did not belong to your series of experiments?
A. At the beginning of April or the middle of April Rascher told me for the first time that he was performing experiments with slow ascension and he had attempted to work with Kottenhoff but the work had been interrupted when the latter was sent away. I said that had nothing to do with our experiments and was quite unimportant and uninteresting from our point of view. He admitted that he said it was a specific question which especially interested him personally and which he had to work on. These experiments, which according to records here lasted eight to ten hours, I did not see. He probably always performed them on the days I was not there because these eight to ten hours would have interfered considerably with our experiments. He expanded these experiments and performed time reserve experiments at certain altitudes to test the adaptation which he had been testing before in the slow ascension experiments. This was an experiment where the subject remains at the same altitude in contrast to the falling or sinking experiments where the pressure is constantly increased, that is, when the altitude is decreased. As his intermediate reports show, he extended these to high altitude. The time reserve was studied either with or without oxygen. The suggestion for this in part came obviously from other work, such as Dr. Klisches.
I sometimes observed these experiments. He carried out these experiments correctly; he watched the subjects so that there was in itself no objection to these experiments. The only thing was that they interfered with our experiments from the point of view of time, but Rascher's unpunctuality was a much greater annoyance in this respect. According to the documents, as well as the witness Neff, Rascher apparently had deaths in these experiments. The first deaths were apparently unexpected. In these unexpected deaths the electro-cardiogram and the autopsy findings, together with his reports, apparently gave Himmler the idea that these experiments should be carried on further, to work with Fahrenkamp in addition, to extend them as far as possible scientifically. The fact that Himmler was covering them apparently induced him in my presence to carry out experiments which were dangerous, and in which deaths occurred.
The fact that I had been present several times at previous experiments brought about my presence at that fatal experiment, too.
Q. Was it not unusual to you that during an experimental series, which you and Rascher were to carry out together, Himmler suddenly gave Rascher orders for special experiments?
A. Yes, of course. I did not have any specific experience in this direction, but on principle it is nothing unusual if two people are working together on a certain job one or both of them receive additional assignment from his chief and carries out other work. In addition, Rascher was also carrying out work in Schongau at the same time, which was on behalf of Luftgau 7. I, myself, had work of my own in the DVL, which my associates were carrying on and which I inquired about when I happened to be in Berlin. That Himmler, as Reichsfuehrer SS and chief of the German Police and as Rascher's boss insofar as he was an SS member, had the right to give orders to his subordinates and to give them assignments and order them to carry out experiments on experimental subjects in a concentration camp no one could dispute.
Rascher's cancer work, which Neff mentioned here, in which he was gathering blood from cancer patients to test them, that was also going on at the same time. Later during the cold experiments that was something similar. If Himmler gave the order to re-warm by animal heat and Rascher conducted these experiments within the framework of the cold experiments, after Holzloehner had left, that was also possible in this case because no special equipment was needed for these cold experiments.
A In our experiments the execution of the experiments depended upon the presence of the low pressure chamber, and for this reason he carried out these experiments simultaneously, and in general behind my back.
Q Did Rascher otherwise in your experiments which you had carried out jointly with him show the tendency to give the experiments a wider scientific basis?
A Yes, that was definitely his tendency to expand the matter as much as possible and to burden our joint experiments with specific questions which were of no practical importance. He wanted to carry out examinations of the spinal fluid, for instance, but I succeeded in stopping all of these efforts. I always urged that the experiments be carried out as quickly as possible in the way necessary for the Luftwaffe, that is in the way necessary for rescuing fliers. That explains the fact that on page 2 of our joint report there is something said that Ruff mentioned yesterday, that the detailed clarification of scientific questions had to be dispensed with for the time being, because I always insisted that these had nothing to do with the subject; but it would have been possible in Dachau, that is proved by the chemical and clinical tests during the cold experiments.
Q Now, in your opinion, what is the distinction between your presence at the experiments for rescue from high altitude and your presence during Rascher's experiments where you happened to be present?
A In the experiments of rescue from high altitude it was not just my presence. I performed the experiments myself. That is, I myself called the experimental subject, or sometimes Rascher called them. Of course, then I explained to the people what they had to do, what they had to write, what they had to pay especial attention to, and then when they registered the electrocardiogram that in order not to interfere with this they had to be still, couldn't move; and then when the experiment had started I directed the experiment myself, I watched the altitude of the mercury indicator, and the calculated speed of ascension and descension, which I checked with the stop watch.
Of course, at the same time I observed the subject. In other words, tho persons in the experiments. In Rascher's experiments which were at a certain altitude, that is, there was ascension to a certain altitude, and then they stayed at that altitude I sometimes watched if I happened to be there, if I happened to be at the low pressure chamber, but otherwise he performed these experiments alone just as he did when I was not present. He even laid great stress on performing them alone. It is clear to me now that he did not want me to observe any special results, that is, apparently why he performed the other experiments in the evening or otherwise when I was away.
Q After the first death was there an autopsy?
A Yes, there was an autopsy.
Q Did you participate in it?
A No, I did not participate. I was present and I watched the autopsy.
Q Why did you watch tho autopsy if it was not your experiment?
A Today, of course, that looks different than it did at the time. It was a matter of course for me then. Rascher was a colleague of mine. He had a fatal accident in his experiments. He asked me to watch the autopsy, and, of course, I went. And I also had quite a natural scientific interest in the cause of death, and in the findings, and I admit it frankly, although I am aware of the danger that someone will say I was interested in the death of the person too, but it happens in every hospital, all doctors watch the autopsies.
If, for example, in the surgical ward, a patient died after an operation, then the chief physician, or if he didn't have time, then the senior physician, and the other doctors who had nothing to do specifically with the patient, watched the autopsy, and generally even x-ray doctors came over who didn't know the patient at all; and besides if I had not been present, that would be considered today an incomprehensible lack of interest in the death, if I had not accepted Rascher's invitation. If such a death happened in a centrifugal experiment in our institute, if such an accident had happened which was not in my field of work, I certainly would have gone to watch the autopsy. One must learn from the findings, that is one's duty as a doctor. One has to look at such things so that one can draw one's conclusions and be able to avoid later accidents.
Q Did you see any further autopsies of Rascher?
A No.
Q Why not?
AAfter this death there was a basic change in my attitude toward Rascher in the plan to break off the experiments, so that in the case of later deaths I was not present because of this attitude; and I do not believe he invited me to the autopsy and under the conditions in Dachau I could not go there on my own initiative.
Q Did you ask Rascher how this death came about, did you warn him before the death?