Q. Thank you. Did you know, witness, that Rascher sent his own father to the concentration camp?
A. No, I did not know that.
Q. Witness, I shall come now to Exhibit No. 128, which was shown to you this morning by the Prosecution. This is a report of Rascher concerning his conversation with you.
According to this report, you are to have said: "You must be clear that the medical officer corps of the Luftwaffe will no longer cooperate with you, and that you will have scientific enmities from certain gentlemen", and I shall skip a few words, "That is, will have a fight in the scientific connection, and you will not have to expect such a fight."
A. These terms were not used by me.
Q. Are you of the opinion that they contain a threat and that it does not quite coincide with the fact that you said that you were rather nice?
A. At that time I did not make any threats and I wasn't nice to him either I was just factual.
Q. Witness, according to the statement made by Rascher, you are to have said that you and Romberg carried out, or were ordering, experiments over 21,000 meters of 21 kilometers. Is such a statement correct compared with your letter of the 6th of March, just six days prior to that, where you state: "For the time being, this work however, can no longer be carried out because, for a continuance of the work, we need a low pressure chamber, which not only produces stratospheric altitudes, but also stratospheric temperatures."?
A. They do not quite coincide. I explicitly said that this work of Dr. Romberg and Ruff would start right away, not of Rascher, who had nothing to do with that any longer.
Q. I still don't understand that witness. You say that experiments were carried out over 21,000 meters and would be carried out very soon, and six days prior to that, you write: "These experiments cannot be carried out before they cannot be executed because we do not have the chambers."
A. I'm not speaking of over 21,000 meters. Rascher was the one who said that. We did not want to carry out experiments over 21,000 motors. We were only talking about freezing experiments in connection with the altitude experiments below 21,000 meters. In other words, the whole thing is wrong.
Q. Witness, Rascher speaks of being in a position to be promoted very fast with you, rued the SS there would be difficulties for the promotion. Did 868a you ever discuss such questions with him, or did you ever have an oralreport or a talk with him?
A. I see here that there is a distortion here, that, I regard as desire to reach as high a rank in the SS - or rating as possible.
Q. I have a last question to you, witness. This morning, the prosecution asked you when was the first time you spoke about these experiments with your superior in 41. As the question was not answered, due to some difficulty, I shall ask you again, explicitly. This letter to the defendant -- was this said to the defendant or to the supervisor, Ruedel?
A. It was made to my supervisor. This remark was made to my direct superior, who at that time was General Ruedel, so that I do not doubt that the report went to Ruedel, and not directly to Milch, who at that time was no longer my immediate superior.
Q. Do you know if the report then went down to Milch?
A. That I do not know personally, because it was absolutely a matter concerning Ruedel.
DR. BERGOLD: I have no further questions to this witness.
BY JUDGE MUSMANNO:
Q. Witness, in a letter which you wrote to Himmler, you stated that the freezing experiments led to results of practical use. Can you tell the Tribunal very briefly now, just what were those practical uses that you mentioned?
A. The following things were the practical results: We knew now that people who had been saved from the water alive could only be revived by the use of hot water of 40 degrees - they could only be treated this way - and we thus succeeded in saving their lives, whereas, in a greater percentage of cases, in spite of all the attempts that were made to save their lives, we did not succeed in doing so. That was absolutely new for us. Apart from that, we understood, through the experiments, that the use of medicine, drugs, did not help at all.
As a matter of fact, they didn't help at all. We finally found out that the speed with which the doctor must help after the saving must be a great one because, afterwards, the rescued ones die within half an hour after the rescue. Finally, there was something else that was practical, or practically important; that such people who had been rescued unconsciously, and who were stiff in their muscular systems, were still to be saved; that, on the contrary, people, the muscular systems of whom was lax, were dead, and that a rescue was absolutely unnecessary and useless. In other words, while a man was still stiff in his muscles, then everything should be tried in order to revive him. Finally, we found out that the protective suits had a very very great practical importance; that furthermore demonstrated what ought to be changed on those suits, suits, namely, that the pilot in the protective suit had to float vertically and not horizontally, so that his neck wouldn't be exposed to the cold water, because, should the neck be exposed to the cold water, there was a great danger of death. All this was absolutely new for us, and, therefore, of greatest practical use, and immediately after the conference, we made use of it. I personally saw to it that in the fiord of Oslu the hot water was used, in a motor torpedo boat, through the fact that the radiator water, which was about 40 degrees, could be used on the rescued persons.
Q. Very well. Do you know Walter Neff?
A. No. I don't know Walter Neff. I only heard that he was one of those released from Dachau, who participated in the experiments and I know that he's here in jail, because, in the corridor I noticed his name.
Q. You do not know that he has testified that the subjects of these experiments were not volunteers?
A. Would you repeat the question, please? No; I didn't know that. I never heard about that.
DR. BERGOLD: I am through with the witness. I have no further questions, Your honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The I Marshal may remove the witness.
(The witness was removed.)
870 a
DR. BERGOLD: I would appreciate it if we could call the witness RICHTER: since document Book 2 is not ready yet.
THE PRESIDENT: Here, is the Marshal.
DR. BERGOLD: May I call in Witness Richter? May it Please this Tribunal, I am calling this witness a little earlier than I expected, for the following reasons: When the Tribunal granted me permission to call this witness there was no time during the session yesterday so I could finish my own personal affairs, therefore, I was not in the courthouse.
I just heard that this witness, who is 71 years of age, due to a long-chain of bad happenings, for which nobody is responsible, is badly billeted, in an absolutely cold room and his food situation is not very clear. I therefore want to enable this poor old man to be in a position to return to his home at once. After a consultation with Mr. Denny, Mr. Denny has agreed, and I now ask the Tribunal for permission to grant me my wish now.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Denny, do you object to Dr. Bergold calling this witness at this time?
MR. DENNY: No, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. The Marshal will please produce the witness Richter.
THE MARSHAL: "Richter"?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
(At this juncture the Marshal left the room and returned with a male person, who took his seat in the witness chair, the marshal adjusting the witness' ear-phones to the witness' head)
THE PRESIDENT: Will the witness stand, please?
(the witness stands)
The PRESIDENT: Raise your right hand.
(The witness raises his right hand)
THE PRESIDENT: Repeat after me: "I swear by God" -
(The witness repeats the words in German)
THE PRESIDENT: --the Almighty and Omniscient," -
(The witness repeats)
871 a
THE PRESIDENT: -- "that I will speak the pure truth"-
(the witness repeats)
THE PRESIDENT: --"and will withhold" (the witness repeats)
THE PRESIDENT: --"and add nothing."
(the witness repeats)
THE PRESIDENT: You may sit down. Proceed.
KARL EITEL RICHTER, the witness, thereupon testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q Witness, if I ask you now, I want you for technical purposes, to make a certain pause between my questions and your answer, a few seconds, so that the translator can finish the translation of your question, before they interpret your answer?
A Yes.
Q Witness, tell the Tribunal your first name and your middle name, if any, and your last name?
A Karl Eitel Richter.
Q When were you born?
A On the 3rd of February 1876.
Q That was your position,--the last position you held with the government in Germany?
A I was Director of the Ministry; with the Aviation Ministry, as the Personal Reporter of tho Defendant Milch, Field Marshal Milch.
Q Can you recognize the defendant Milch in this room?
A (The witness nods his head in the direction of Dr. Bergold)
DR. BERGOLD: I wish tho record to show that the witness recognizes the defendant.
THE PRESIDENT: The record will so show.
(pause)
THE PRESIDENT: The witness will please repeat what his position was with the German Government.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. Will you tell the Tribunal what was your last position?
A. Director in the Air Ministry and Personal Reporter of Field Marshal Milch.
Q. How long have you known the defendant Milch?
A. Since 1919, approximately.
Q. How long have you had to do with the official business of the defendant, in what capacity did you have official dealings with him?
A. At that time, as far an I can remember, I was made Hauptman-
Q. Answer the question again?
A. I was Ministerial Personal Adviser at the Reich Office for Air navigation and Motoring.
A. How long have you been personal adviser of the defendant Milch?
A. It was either 1937 or 1938.
Q. What was Milch's position at that time?
A. I can't tell you that exactly, what rank the defendant had at that time; maybe he was a General, or maybe he was a Major General; I don't know.
Q. I did not ask you about the rank; I asked you about his "position"?
A. Secretary of State for Luftwaffe, the Luftwehr.
Q. Do you know the former Director of Aviation, Hippke?
A. Yes, I know him all right.
Q. Was Hippke under the defendant Milch?
A. For a certain time, yes.
Q. Please state the date, from when to when?
A. I am afraid I can't do that, because I do not know.
Q. Is it right to say that he was no longer under Milch, is that correct, when the Luftwehr was placed under General Raoder?
(no response)
Q. Is that correct?
A. To the best of my knowledge that is correct.
Q. Was the witness Hippke often received by the Defendant General Milch?
A. No.
Q. And why not?
A. Because the Field Marshal did not like to see Hippke. He did not like him.
873 a
Q. Did you ever say, "No, thanks", when Hippke wanted to report?
A. Yes.
Q. For what reason?
A. Yes, I believe he did not like Hippke. Because he talked too much.
Q. Did the defendant tell you about it, that the SS was carrying out experiments together with the Luftwaffe physician Rascher in Dachau, and that the whole thing was supervised by Ruff?
A. No.
Q. Is it a fact that most of the official visitors of the defendant went through your office?
A. Yes, quite a few of them but not all of them.
Q. It was the procedure, however, was it not, that they first had to go through the Medical Inspection Office and had to go through you?
A. Unfortunately, these proceedings were not conducted openly but secretly; that is why they couldn't have gone through some other channel.
Q. The witness Hippke testified here that on the 20th of May, 1942, he wanted to see Milch for a report, or to make a report, and that he was not received however, but he left a report slip; do you know about this happening, or did those things happen very often, generally speaking?
A. Yes, it happened often. During my office, certain people left record slips for the Defendant.
DR. BERGOLD: This letter of the 20th of May, 1942, reads as follows "Dear Wolffy: In reference to your telegram of the 12th, May, our Medical Inspector reports to me that the altitude experiments carried out by the SS and Luftwaffe at Dachau have been finished. Any continuation of the experiments seems essentially unreasonable. However, the carrying out of experiments of another kind, in regard to perils at high seas, would be important. These have been prepared in immediate agreement with the proper office. Oberstabsarzt Seltz will be charged with the execution and Stabarzt Rascher will be made available with further order in addition to his duties within the Medical Corps of the Luftwaffe.
A change of these measures does not appear necessary, and an enlargement of the task is not considered pressing, at this time. The low pressure chambers would not be needed for those low temperature experiments. It is 874 a urgently needed at another place and therefore can no longer remain in Dachau.
I convey the special thanks iron the supreme commander of the Luftwaffe to the SS for their extensive cooperation.
I remain with test wishes for you in good comradeship and with Heil Hitler Always yours "E. Milch To SS Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff Berlin SW 11"
Q. Was the defendant Milch on such good relationship that he could talk to him and call him "dear Wolfy" or how do you explain that the Obergruppenfuehrer was not also calling him at that time by the first name and not Field Marshal? This can be clearly seen from the letter of the 27th of February 1942, to which I shall refer later.
A. The way these people addressed each other as not in most cases the result of close intimacy.
Q. How does it come that Field Marshal Milch is writing to Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff with such great intimacy?
A. As concerns the personal relationship between Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff and Field Marshall Milch, I never noticed such a relationship.
Q. Do you know that Wolf was generally addressed as "Wolffie"?
A. Yes, I heard that.
Q. In the letter of 20 May, 1942, which I submitted to you; could that letter have been dictated by the defendant Milch, or was it dictated by somebody else?
A. All these letters were written by somebody else and submitted to the Field Marshal and the Field Marshal just put his signature on them in those cases.
Q. And all those cases where the letters were submitted to the defendant did he review the letter closely or did he just sign them?
A. I don't believe that a close reviewing was possible; the Field Marshal signed after the personnel who had written the letter said a few words to him in other words, explain the contents of the letter.
Q. How many letters do you think that Milch had to sign within a day?
A. I can remember that there were quite a few letters. I found out that the Field Marshal signed eight hundred letters within three days.
Q. Witness, was the field of work of the defendant a small one or a large one?
A. It was just about in-between; in any case rather larger than smaller.
Q. Did he have, for the various experiments, did he have much time to examine those things?
A. No.
Q. Witness, on the 25th of August, 1942, in connection with these experiments, a letter from Hitler came in where he asked to accept a report of Dr. Rascher and Dr. Ruff and to call these gentlemen and receive these gentlemen for a film-lecture. Is that fact known to you?
A. No.
Q. Do you know if on the 25th of August, the defendant Milch was in Berlin?
A. No, I don't know that.
Q. Witness, the witness Hippke testified here that this letter, with the enclosures, was sent to him. Is that the normal channel of things that such questions concerning such medical questions were sent on without any further trouble; or if the defendant was asked before their conveyance if they should be sent or not?
A The normal channel was that either the gentleman came in to sign the letters themselves or they were conveyed through normal office channels.
Q Witness, do you know that on the 11th of September, 1942, in the Reich Ministry for Aviation, during a conference, a film was shown concerning the Dachau experiments?
A No, I don't know that.
Q Witness, a letter came in written by the Obergruppenfuehrer Wolf on the 27th of November, 1942; this letter was answered by the witness Hippke on the 6 of March, 1943; whereupon Hippke says that the State Secretary Milch has given me your letter of 27 November regarding the release, etc., how did this happen between the 27th of November, 1942 and the 6th of March, 1943, the lapse of time; did it occur upon the orders of the defendant Milch?
A No. I am sure that he submitted the letter to some other office.
Q There was no order of the defendant Milch to leave such a letter around?
A No.
Q Witness, I shall now proceed to another question which has nothing to do with this medical case. May it please the Tribunal, this witness is here only once; I have to ask a few other questions. Witness, you have known the defendant for a very long time.
A Yes.
Q Is the defendant a man of bad character, or was he a rather humane man?
A. I have fifty years of civil service, and I had many superiors, all military superiors, that is; and I want to say and I can say that he was correct and fair.
Q Witness, how can you explain that in the records there are quite a few strong words 877 of the defendant where he continually speaks of the fact that people who do not do their work or duty ought to be shot, hanged, beaten or punished in some other way.
A. Well, that was the way of the defendant; to use boasting remarks once in a while; although the defendant, I am sure, thought in some other way, in very honest ways that is.
Q. Can you tell this Tribunal of a characteristic hanging, where the defendant sentenced somebody to death, and what actually happened to the persons sentenced later on?
A. The Field Marshal had a very small jurisdiction only in the house small cases; and sometimes he sentenced somebody -- for instance if somebody, when there were secret papers and somebody left the drawers open, which were found open -- in those cases he had them pay a fine of fifty or eighty marks which were later collected. Later on though, he was sorry about sentencing the men to pay fifty or eighty marks and he made up for it by ordering that there be sent to the wife of that man or to the family during any of the holidays; some money, which amount was higher than the fine paid.
Q. Isn't it correct that in such cases he first threatened to have the guilty one hanged, etc.?
A. Well, yes, the defendant always said those things.
Q. Were these threats made very often?
A. Very often, and I still remember -
Q. Were you yourself threatened in the same manner -- to be hanged? Were you over hanged?
A. Yes, and I am still alive too.
Q. Was it known that those words which the defendant used were never meant?
A. Yes, that was known in the Luftwaffe undoubtedly.
Q. Did these outbursts of rage increase after the accidents he had?
A. Yes, after the accident in Stalingrad they did increase undoubtedly; after that time he was very nervous and he sort of burst into rages; but latter 878A on he was very sorry about it.
I am a layman myself, but personally I believe that this is in connection with the accidents.
Q. When was that accident, witness?
A. That was during the siege of Stalingrad.
Q. In other words, around the end of 1942 or early in 1943?
A. Yes, January 1943, perhaps.
Q. Witness, I shall now submit to you from the document book 2 C of the Prosecution, page 174; the Exhibit No. I have not here, I believe this is Document No. KW 247. It is an undated authorization of Goering, and I would like to have him read it before I ask questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Where is it found in the English Document Book?
DR. BERGOLD: Page 99.
Q. (Continued) Did you read the power of attorney?
A. Yes.
Q. Witness, did such an authorization ever exist?
A. I don't know if such an authorization existed; I have never seen one.
Q. Would it be possible that such an authorization would have been issued in 1944 by Goering to the defendant Milch?
A. I don't believe that is possible; I don't believe that this is possible.
Q. Isn't it correct that in July 1944, the defendant had already or almost broken with Goering?
A. That was the case most of the time, or always.
Q. Now tell us, witness, the relationship between Milch and Goering.
A. It was always a bad relationship, which almost lead to his elimination.
Q. When did that elimination take place?
A. Well, there was a constant elimination so to say; namely, that the Field Marshal had point by point removed all Milch's powers and the powers were taken over by Goering.
