I went to see Rascher immediately and asked him what was going on and asked him who this subject was and told him Neff knew the man who was a tailor and know something was wrong. Rascher questioned the SS man who had brought the tailor and it was actually discovered that the tailor was neither condemned to death nor had he volunteered for any experiment.
Q Now, didn't you become suspicious?
A Well, Rascher went away to clear up the matter with the SS man, whether ho was supposed to bring this man up, etc. He discovered the SS man had taken the matter in his own hands and, first of all, he sent the tailor back to his work shop. When the SS man threatened the tailor again Rascher said he had reported the incident, and soon after that the Camp Commandant came and Rascher told him about the whole incident indignantly. He demanded the SS man be punished, and I can recall that afterwards ho talked to me about this SS man and said that those wore perhaps not the worst ones but such a man could not be allowed to stay in the concentration camp service. He did consult the Camp Commandant and did probably dispense with the charges against him and finally got this man sent to the Eastern front in a penal company. That ho reported to the Camp Commandant and this immediately happened convinced me that things in the concentration camp were correct:
Such excesses of individuals which could happen were immediately settled and punished. After this incident Rascher made me give my word of honor that I would not say anything about the whole matter. I was obligated to secrecy about the experiments and what I saw in the concentration camp but for this thing he felt certain personal responsibility and such an incident might start rumors and put the concentration camp in a bad light. Since this matter was settled immediately quite officially by Rascher I gave him this promise. Later on we went to East Prussia when we met Professor Wuest on the train. He told Professor Wuest of this incident with all details. He expressed his indignation and he spoke to Wuest for a long time whether immediate transfer to the front would be enough punishment and Professor Wuest assured him that he had acted correctly.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the Tribunal will not be in process until 1:30.
AFTERNOON SESSION (The Tribunal reconvened at 1330 hours, 1 May 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
HANS ROMBERG - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. VORWERK (Counsel for tho Defendant Romberg):
A. Mr. Romberg, before the noon recess you were describing to tho Tribunal tho incident with the tailor. Do you know whether something actually happened in that case to tho effect that the SS man who had brought tho tailor along was hold to account?
A. Yes, at any rate ho was removed from tho camp. Rascher told me that ho was transferred, and Neff also stated here that he was removed.
A. Neff went on to toll about a second incident where as a result of your intervention an experimental subject was not admitted to tho experiment. Do you remember that second incident?
A. No, I do not remember that.
A. That was Neff's position during these experiments and what was his attitude towards them?
A. Neff did not play any essential part for mo during these experiments and he did not come at all into the foreground. He was tho block oldest of our experimental subjects who were living at the block and as a former nurse of that station he was to assist us whenever necessary. Ho had certain qualifications in his capacity as a male nurse that Neff apparently played a certain double roll during these experiments only became clear to mo here. At that time I hod tho absolute impression that Neff was feeling as a prisoner and had the same attitude towards Rascher's experiments as I. This is tho only way one can explain that I spoke to Neff about my attitude towards Rascher's experiments and that I told him that I would endeavor to got tho chamber away from there through tho help of Milch.
If I had considered Neff as a Kapo, as a man who was against the inmates, I would never have spoken to Neff about Rascher and bis experiments in a rejecting and critical manner. I cannot imagine the fact that Neff know about Rascher's experiments that had a fateful result, or that ho had any knowledge of them. I can only explain that if ho had known about them Rascher would have told him to keep everything secret. Naturally, be must have kept strictly to that directive since any betrayal of Rascher world have had tho most serious consequences for Neff.
In addition, Neff had boon promised release the same way as all other experimental subjects and was actually released on March 1944. Any such promise, of course, had a fateful importance for Neff and that way perhaps explains his peculiar behavior. In spite of that, there can be no doubt that Neff with his innermost fooling was on the side of tho inmates. This is confirmed by the fact that after the war he went back to Dachau and once more went into the ranks of the inmates, and also that he handed to the American Troops all incriminating material about tho SS there and told about the invalid action. Furthermore, this shows that ho found bis place within the ranks of the victims of Fascism. Many of his exaggerated and incorrect testimonies can be explained by the testimonies which may incriminate himself too.
Q. What are the testimonies that you consider to be exaggerations, or that you consider to be false testimonies, and to what extent do you believe that these testimonies were incorrect? 6809
A. I can only explain that in a few individual cases. For instance, Neff is always speaking of ten women who were used during these experiments. In the documents, however, only four are being mentioned.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, whenever the defendant or defense counsel are referring to statements of the witness Neff, would they kindly refer to the page number of the record?
BY DR. VORWERK:
Q We're here concerned for example with experiments on Russian officers - experiments on two officers, if you remember, Jr. Romberg. These are testimonies which can be found on page 675 and 676 of the German transcript. What is it you can say about these experiments and Heff's explanation that he is giving in connection with that experiment?
A I'm not an expert in cold questions, but I think that the description of this experiment is largely exaggerated. I think it is impossible that it could have been carried out in that manner. I have looked through the cold questions as they become apparent, for instance, the Document 428, Exhibit 91, on page 4 of that report, and I also looked at the Document No. 401, Exhibit 93, which is the report on the cold conference held at Nurnberg, on page 43 of the report. According to these descriptions of the other cold experiments, the regor begins to appear after a very short time, after approximately ten to twenty minutes, and makes any movement or speech on the part of the experimental subject impossible. After, at the latest one hour, unconsciousness appears. Neff, on the other hand, states here that these two Russian officers, even after a period of three hours, were speaking to one another and were in possession of their full consciousness and then he said that they even shook hands. I can not imagine that this period of time could have elapsed. The same becomes apparent from the American work on cold questions where it is stated that, in case of sea rescue, the rigor occurs after a very short time, approximately ten minutes, and this regor would make any entry into the rubber rescue boat impossible.
Q Neff, on page 694 of the German transcript, goes on to say that Rascher was producing cyancali tablets which were to be swallowed by the inmates.
Some of the people had died under severe pain. At the end he says "Among our comrades we said, by way of figure of speech, and I quote, they are producing a drug which would kill us very quickly as soon as something happens."
A Well, he is contradicting himself here by saying that the inmates lost their life under severe pain. Then he goes on to say they found a drug by which they can die without pain. But, it is well known that potassium cyanide kills without any pain.
Q I have just been informed, Mr. President, that, through error, the release of Neff was stated as being in the year of 1945 instead of the year 1942. It should be 1942.
Regarding the voluntary aspect of the experimental subjects, Neff, on page 656 and 657 of the German transcript, as well as on Page 711 and 712 of the German transcript, states as follows, and I quote:
"A volunteering for these experiments was made possible when the person concerned turned to Rascher on his own initiative. That was not difficult because Rascher was around the camp a lot. Naturally, every prisoner who is hungry and is working on a difficult detail, knowing that at the experimental station he would receive better nourishment, will try to get there. In addition, the Reichsfuehrer SS promised the inmates that they would be released."
What can you say about this testimony of Neff's?
A The first testimony, where he says that of two hundred experimental subjects only ten were voluntary, and this latter testimony that you mention can not be brought into conformity, and, therefore, contradict one another. In addition, I think that the number of two hundred experimental subjects is largely exaggerated.
Q Let us now revert to the experimental subjects. What badges did the experimental subjects wear who wore at disposal for the experiments for rescue from high altitudes?
A They had badges as they were worn by professional criminals.
Q Were they green only, or were other badges among them?
A No, all these badges were green. All, with the exception of Neff, who was wearing ared badge, but he was not a real experimental subject.
Q Did Neff participate in any experiments as an experimental subject?
A Yes, he did, and. he offered himself to them.
Q Do you remember the badges which were worn by the experimental subjects who were used for Rascher's experiments? What kind of badges were they? Were they criminals? Were they political prisoners? What can you say about that?
AAs far as I saw the experimental subjects, and you must keep in mind that I only saw a small part of them, they wore green badges and were thereby designated as criminals. There were, however, a few red. ones among them who had been sentenced because of high treason or such similar offenses.
Q The witness Neff, who testified here, was also heard in the Milch trial which was running simultaneously to this one. Do you know that?
A Yes.
q The witness says here, on page 973 to 974 of this record, and I quote:
"It was my impression that Dr. Romberg was not in complete accordance with the experiments Dr. Rascher was performing, and intended to get the chambers away from the camp as quickly as possible. Rascher, on the other hand, was attempting the contrary. He wanted to keep the chambers as long as possible in the concentration camp. To what extent Dr. Romberg succeeded in getting the chambers away earlier, or rather, to what extent Rascher succeeded in keeping them there for a longer period of time, I don't know."
Did you speak to Neff at that time to the effect that it was your wish to remove the chambers from the camp as quickly as possible?
A Well, he is saying that. I discussed this matter with him at that time for the reason I stated before; namely, that I considered Neff as Rascher's opponent. Rascher, of course, wasn't allowed to learn about that, and it is for this reason that Neff knows that I endeavored to get the chamber away.
Q Well, how were these experiments finally stopped?
A. The basis for this stoppage was the agreement reached between Hippko, Ruff and myself. We intended to pretend there was an urgent reason for the chamber being removed, and thereby stop the experiments. It w s difficult, however, to execute that plan. Neither towards Himmler nor towards Rascher could we cite tho reason as to the fatalities caused by Rascher. Tho only thing we could say was that those chambers were used for air accidents. This, of course, wasn't a very strong reason. Rascher when I returned from Berlin and made tho first indications that tho chambers was to be used and when I told him that we would have to finish tho experiments very quickly, Rascher didn't react to that at all, but told me that he would intervene with Himmler and Milch and got the permission for a longer usage of tho chamber, something which ho in effect achieved. However, when Milch's order to that effect came the chamber had already boon removed. Tho basic prerequisite for getting the chamber -way was to bring the experiments for rescue from high altitude to a quick conclusion and in addition to finish the film which w-s to be taken about these experiments, as a result of Himmler' order. Only by fulfilling these two demands which were made by Himmler was he in a position to influence Rascher to agree to tho temporary removal of that chamber. I explained to him that there would be little sense in getting a permission for the chamber to be retained for a further period of two or three weeks and told him that I was sure that one needed the chamber at the front very quickly. I suggested to him tint it would be a muck better way to get this chamber at a later date to Dachau through other moans for a longer period of time. I told him that ho could then carry out the work which he was ordered to do by Himmler.
I said that he also could participate once more in tho experiments for tho purpose of saving people from high, altitudes. Only by using this tactic was it possible that Rascher didn't oppose the removal of the chamber and that ho didn't succeed to get an order to the contrary from Himmler or Milch. It can hardly be conceived that ho would have succeeded in getting such an order through. He actually did that, and one can see it by looking at tho letter from Milch to Wolff, this is Document N0261, Exhibit 63, in Document Book II dated 4 June 1942. In conclusion I should like to state once more that at no time would it have boon possible for anyone, not oven Milch or Hippko to remove tho chamber against Himmler or Rascher's will from tho concentration camp.
Q. When was tho chamber removed from tho camp?
A. That was on tho 19th or 20th of May. At any rate before tho order Hippke's or Milch's dated the 20th of Hay, Document 343PS, Exhibit 62, could have achieved any effect. That was on tho 19th or 20th of May, and not at the beginning or end of June as Neff said here or in August as the Prosecutor says.
Q. How is it that you know exactly that the chamber left tho camp on tho 19th or 20th of May?
A. Fortunately I have in my possession a few firm dates about this experimental series which do give mo some hints. At first it w s tho birth of my child, date 19th of March at which time I wont to Berlin. Since tho birth was originally expected on tho 9th of March I know I was then in Berlin. As I said before I returned to Berlin on tho 19th or 20th of March and then I also know that I went to Berlin for Easter, and that I stayed there a few days after Easter. I know that I was in Berlin on the 1st and 2nd of May, and I also know that I stayed in Berlin for sometime because then the barometer was repaired.
I also know that Whitsun occurred on the 24th of May and I know that in tho week before Witsun I had already loft. That was on a Tuesday or Wednesday. I spent a few days at tho DVL, and I know that oven after Witsun I didn't return to Dachau. For that reason I know exactly that tho chamber was removed on the 19th or 20th in tho week before Whitsun.
Q. Dr. Ruff, who was here yesterday or the day before as a witness, has made statements to tho effect that a detailing to a branch of the DVL at Dachau was not possible; what is your attitude to that question; will you explain that as briefly as possible?
A. Dr. Ruff has said that in essence. When tho experiments start Rascher was still detailed to the institute of Woltz, which was a military agency of tho Medical Inspectorate. Later Rascher suggests, or we know from the letter of Mrs. Rascher, Document NO 264, Exhibit 60, that to detail him to tho Branch at Dachau of the DVL. Wolff writes the same thing in his letter to Hippke. This can be explained since Rascher nor any other SS agency were clear about the organization of the DVL. We after all were no military organization , and Rascher neither during the experiments nor later when ho was in Berlin for the purpose of working out the report was detailed to the DVL. Therefore, it was impossible for him to be detailed to any branch which after all was non-existent. If in effect any such details had boon made objection would have been raised in tho Personnel Department and we would have found out about it. At any rate I didn't personally hear or see of any such details. I really didn't know when ho left tho Weltz Institute. I only know that the ack-ack Artillery School at Schongau had boon stated in his orders because ho often wont to this place by car and on that occasion ho told mo that ho would have to be officially detailed there since otherwise his car would have to be stopped.
For tho purpose of his Dachau journios ho had received special permission by tho Reichsfuehrer SS. Tho expression DVL "branch" therefore is wrong and any military transfer there is impossible.
Q. Has it often happened that air force officers had boon detailed to Adlershof to the DVL there?
A. Yes, we had Luftwaffe officers working with us. They were detailed to us by tho Medical Inspectorate who knew the situation and who didn't detail them to us directly, but to tho air school at Adlershof, or to some air force institution there for the purpose of actually working with us.
Q. Therefore, you are of tho opinion that any detailing of air force physicians was impossible to your institute because your institute wasn't a military one, do I understand you correctly?
A. Yes.
Q. When did you arrive in Berlin after tho conclusion of tho experiment?
A. I already said on the 20th of May. I am sure that on that date I was again in Berlin. A few weeks elapsed, perhaps two or three weeks until Rascher arrived in Berlin in order to work out tho mutual report about the experiments. He had not been detailed to us, oven for that period of time. He merely received guest travel orders which authorized him to enter tho terrain of tho DVL.
Q. How was this chamber sent -- by rail or by car to Adlershof?
A. As Ruff said yesterday, it came back by rail because we did not have enough diesel oil for that purpose.
Q. How was the research report compiled, the report on the research of saving people from high attitude?
A. Rascher, as I said, came to Berlin in the beginning of June and together we started writing the report on the basis of my book and that is the report which is available here. Rascher insisted on pointing out the necessity for a continuation and extension of the experiments. I had no objection to that because I personally intended to continue these experiments too. In particular, to find out what the effects of cold were in the case of a parachute descent. Of course, our opinion as to the experiments differed. Rascher intended to continue the experiments in Dachau on inmates, but I intended to carry them on at my institute, DVL, but I did not speak about that.
When at the end of the report I added the sentence that no cases of death had occurred in these experiments, Rascher had no objection at all. This is a clear proof that Rascher considered the experiments, which he performed by order of Himmler, as his personal work and property. These experiments had nothing to do with the experiments conducted for the purpose of rescuing people from high altitude. When taking into consideration Rascher's personality, there can be no doubt that Rascher would have had no inhibitions to introducing a report about death cases in a top secret document if such cases had occurred in the latter report. Regarding the cold experiments, which Rascher wrote together with Holzloehner and Fink, there were many reports about cases of death.
In addition, I would never have been irresponsible enough to introduce a research report, which was to be the rescue basis for our future flights and experiments and which was to influence the air-force, in which I concealed such a decisive point as this would have had the most serious consequences for the future. It is really not necessary to speak about it; it is just out of the question.
Ruff never would have countersigned any such report. At that time there was really no reason to keep quiet about any cases of death, because no one really would have held me to account for causing any cases of death.
Q. The witness, Neff, has testified here that you yourself had served as an experimental subject during these experiments. Up to what altitude did you ascend?
A. I participated in a number of experiments. At one time I was the accompanying physician in the experiments and went up to 12,000 to 13,000 meters and then I participated in a number of self experiments, which have been discussed here. In addition there was explosive decompression experiments of a pursuit descent at 19 kilometers without a supply of oxygen.
Q. In July of 1942a report was made to Himmler, together with Rascher; how did this report come about and what happened there?
A. In July -I have forgotten the exact date -- Rascher suddenly appeared in Berlin. He telephoned me at the D.V.L. and asked me to meet him. I left Adlershof and met him in Berlin. He told me that both of us had been ordered to go to the Fuehrer's headquarters to report and we both went to the Reichsfuehrer SS office in Berlin. There they already had our train tickets ready for us. Then we heard the film about the experiments, went to my department and I telephoned Ruff. I told him about the matter. Then, I had to change, pack, and we loft the same evening. We had a special train with sleepers on the train. Rascher met Professor Wuest, who also was going to the Headquarters on this journey and ho told him once more about the notorious reports about the taylor.
Q. When did you arrive at the Headquarters?
A. The next morning; we went by car to Himmler's special train, which had not yet arrived, but which was due to arrive that evening. He arrived late that night and he heartily greeted Rascher. On this occasion, Rascher introduced me to Himmler. We went to a conference room and Himmler asked us to report to him about the high altitude experiments.
We did that by reading to him the conclusions we had arrived at, as they can be found in the report here. Himmler was rather satisfied and said we should report to the Reich Marshal too.
He said that he had been with Goering for one week and they had reached a good understanding. He then pointed to the gold flying badge with diamonds which he had just been given by Goering. I had noticed that badge before and had silently thought that this highest civilian decoration, which Himmler was wearing and which up to that time was only used in the case of being committed during very dangerous test flights, was possibly the reward given to Himmler for having forgone his original wish to getting his own airforce with the SS, which was his wish-dream and that Rascher also mentioned that to me. After the high altitude experiments, Himmler started to speak about the cold experiments and gave the orders to prepare them.
Q. Did Himmler say anything further about the cold experiments?
A. Yes, he mainly emphasized that these experiments were of great importance for the army, navy and airforce. He went on to develop a number of tests about those experiments and their execution. For instance, he gave the order to Rascher that he should go to the rescue stations for people who were shipwrecked at the North Sea and find out how the community population wore reviving their shipwrecked people. He went on to say that the population had found out very good and well proven means to revive people, like with herbs, tea, coffee or things like that and at any rate one must take the experiences gained by the population into consideration. He said he could well imagine that a fishwoman could well take her half frozen husband into her bed and revive him in that manner and everyone said that animal warmth had a different effect than artificial warmth. He went on to say that Rascher should have experiments to that effect and he would have to take into consideration the popular means used by the population. 6821
Q. What was your attitude toward these statements made by Himmler?
A. Prompted by a sober and materialistic attitude, I did not think very much of these mystic methods and therefore raised an objection against that sort of experiment. I said that the main consideration was how to rewarm people, whether to rewarm them quickly or slowly and if you experiment around too long you will lose lives. There was a painful silence and after that I noticed that this was not the place for any contradiction.
Q. Was Professor Wuest present during that conversation?
A. Yes, he had come along with Himmler and he was present there.
Q. Did anyone object to your objection?
A. No, certainly not with words, but the silence which occurred meant much more than "words could have meant. Later Rascher gave me a severe reprimand and he asked me if I was entirely mad. He thought I was made to contradict the "Reichs Heini" as he expressed himself in that manner.
Q. Did Wuest's remarks to Sievers refer to that situation about which Sievers has testified here?
A. Yes, it can only be in reference to that situation.
Q. Sievers says upon pages 58 to 69 of the German transcript, and I quote: "Wuest once told me about a conference which took place at the field headquarters of Himmler in the presence of Romberg and Rascher. In that connection he said the young man had come to his attention, although he had forgotten his name. Romberg not only opposed Himmler, but beyond that made long statements, This caused an embarrassing silence among the people present." Is that the incident?
A. Yes, I am sure it must have been that.
Q Did Himmler say anything else during that conference?
AAfter this embarrassing silence was over, Himmler spoke about the demands that that total war effort made on us and he said that it wasn't asking too much to use concentration cam inmates for these experiments, who were not helping at the front. This is the way these people could rehabilitate themselves, people condemned to death could thereby be pardoned, and they could be given an opportunity to fight at the front. He further said that whoever didn't understand that could not have understood that in this war it was a matter of life or death for Germany. Then he went on to speak about the losses in the East and particularly the losses of the SS and how his heart was bleeding every time he heard that another thousand of his wonderful boys had died.
Q What impression did these statements make on you?
A Well these were words that actually made sense considering this serious situation at that time. However, I was firmly decided never again to cooperate with Rascher.
Q And what happened afterwards, was the film shown?
A On, yes, afterwards we went into a room and there the film about the experiments was shown. Himmler was very satisfied with the film and the experiments and he thought that those experiments were f extreme importance for the Luftwaffe and that they would save the lives f many a pilot. Afterwards we saw it in the news reel and in the Russian military film.
Q that was your impression about the entire conference y u had with Himmler?
A Well, at that time I did have a very strong impression about this conference. These serious conditions, I heard about the losses in the East and about the total war effort were in such strong contradiction to what I had read in the press, that I would perhaps even have participated in the cold experiments as they were performed by Rascher and the carelessness he had shown toward human life.
For that reason, when Himmler asked me to participate in the cold experiments I tried to get away from that duty and I succeeded in doing so.
Q Therefore, although you were selected for these experiments you refused to take part, is that right?
A Yes.
Q When did Rascher first plan to carry out the cold experiments, so far as you know?
A During the high altitude experiments in Dachau he collected literature on the subject, and no doubt had it planned, and whether it was Himmler or Rascher I don't know. He also showed me the work by Smith and Fay about the treatment of cancer with cold and he asked me to work on these planned experiments with him, but I always carefully tried to get out of it. When he was in Berlin working on the report of the DVL he got to know my work and I was able completely to convince him I was not the right man for these experiments and that it was too far away from my field of interest and my field of work and Rascher stopped trying to persuade me to work on the cold experiments. I was, therefore, unpleasantly surprised when Himmler suddenly personally gave me the assignment to carry out the experiments with Rascher. When he gave me the assignment I tried to get out of it by saying I was already overworked at the DVL. He immediately offered me assistance to get free from the DVL and I gave up objecting. I thought it would be possible to get free by myself and I decided to disappear inconspicuously just as in the high altitude experiments and I succeeded in doing so.
The next time I saw Rascher at the aviation ministry when the film was shown, I, of course, did not bring up the subject of the cold experiments, and he himself did not mention it either. I was all the more astonished then when Rascher in October appeared in Nurnberg with Holzloehner and they had already completed the experiments.
Q. Did you ever ask Rascher whether the experimental subjects were pardoned or released, the people who had participated in the high altitude experiments?
A. Once when we visited Himmler, Himmler said that the people would be released and when I met Rascher in Nurnberg at the cold meeting, I asked him and he said that they had been released.
Q. You v.ere just speaking of a film shown in the Reich Aviation Ministry, and you no doubt wrote a brief report on it. That is document book No. 2 of the Prosecution, NO 224, Exhibit 76; when was this film shown?
A. I know the date only from this report which I wrote and which is in the document book. I know from that it was on the 11th of September. I was on a trip at that time. I was on leave and the invitation or the order to attend this showing of the film was sent after me. I went to the Reich Aviation Ministry on that date and I met Rascher there. The rest of the meeting is described better in this file note than I can reproduce it from memory. After the unsuccessful attempt to show it, Milch had failed to turn up and Rascher refused to toll me about these experiments without the presence of Milch. This had annoyed the doctors who were interested. Rascher immediately tele phoned Mr. Sievers and told him about the failure of the showing very indignantly, because his vanity was hurt.