When you answer that question, please be brief, and take into consideration what you said before on those various points.
A. In the field of food, as far as I can recall, apart from securing heavy workers' rations, I took the following measures for the inmates. By an agreement with the enterprises I secured considerable and current supplies of special food, of yeast for hospitals and sick beds. I believe in 1943 and 1944, by using large detachments, including particularly Jehovah's Witnesses, I had vegetables, mushrooms, and berries gathered, which resulted in very large quantities of vegetables reaching the inmates. In certain emergencies, and all I recall at this point is a very grave situation in Nordhausen, I arranged for a considerable amount of food stuff belonging to the Waffen SS, that is to say, I transferred it from the army sector to the inmate sector, therefore greatly violating official rules which I was not supposed to do. I am fully aware at that time in Nordhausen several trains and convoys of trucks reached Nordhausen.
In the field of clothing, which situation was very acute, by agreement with private enterprises I endeavored as far as was possible for private enterprises to give their inmates protective clothing and warm clothes. We, ourselves, from 1944 onward, when deliveries of clothes and material for inmates' clothes became very difficult from the point of view of the textile industry, we switched over our own workshop in Ravensbrueck, and from various surplus clothes we wove clothing ourselves. I don't think the camp commandants understood this, but I arranged for a sort of competition so as to obtain warm clothing from substitute material.
My idea was to line coats with paper, such as it was introduced with the army later on. Other efforts as far as I recall, other changes I may have arranged were for instance, I got rid of the roll call. Punitive detachments were dissolved. Repeatedly I issued orders concerning treatment of inmates, that they must not be beaten, that they should be treated decently. I issued an order that when they returned to the camp they must not be given any more work. I made efforts to supervise camp commandants very closely, and as far as I can recall I started four to six proceedings against commandants who had violated the official rules.
Those things, by and large, are the things I can recall at this moment as far as the measures are concerned I took in these fields.
Q. I now come to a few questions which deal with the medical experiments. Case One, before Military Tribunal 1, has shown, and the documents submitted here show, that Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler, when he ordered a number of experiments, played a very important part. I should like to ask you, how did it come about that Himmler should become so active in this complex, and what were the reasons for him to do so?
THE WITNESS: Excuse me, Dr. Seidl. May I just go back for one moment to the food rations of inmates, and would you ask the President whether I could tell the Court how certain measures of mine took effect by my quoting from certain books of inmates? Therefore, you can see what effect these measures of mine had on inmates. I do think it is important to quote them, because I myself could not see how these measures would work.
These are quotations from Kogon's book and another book called "Two Thousand Days in Dachau."
DR. SEIDL: If the Tribunal please, the defendant, following up the last few questions dealing with concentration camps, and which were aimed at the measures he himself took in order to improve conditions in camps, has just suggested to me, prior to the last question put to him, he be allowed to give the Court a few quotations from books which are in his possession and which were written by former inmates of concentration camps, including Dr. Kogon, who was a witness here. There are only a very few quotations. The defendant himself gives the reason for this type of evidence by saying he himself was in no position, from Berlin, to study the effect of his measures on the inmates, and therefore all he can do is refer himself to the things said by the inmates themselves, testifying to the effect these measures took. I should like to add that these are a few quotations the reading of which will take up only a very few minutes.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
MR. ROBBINS: May it please the Tribunal, I have no objection to Dr. Seidl introducing parts of Dr. Kogon's book, and perhaps quotations from other books, but it seems to me that it would expedite the trial if Dr. Seidl presented them in the regular manner so that the translators would have copies, court interpreters...and a rule providing for copies twenty-four hours in advance, complied with. I don't want to stick to the technical rules, but I think that it would expedite the trial if they were presented in the ordinary course.
DR. SEIDL: I did not avail myself of these quotations so far, and I did not submit it in writing, or submit the quotations as an exhibit because that would have given more work for the translation section, paper is wasted; but if the defendant himself reads these few sentences they can be translated at once and the whole matter will not take more than two or three minutes.
I think that would be quicker and more practical.
THE PRESIDENT: If they are not too long...if they are not too lengthy, you may follow that method.
MR. ROBBINS: I would like to get a concession from Dr. Seidl. I attempted to introduce several pages from a booklet which was written by concentration camp inmates, and he objected on the grounds that an affidavit was not made by the inmates. Now, I should think that if he is permitted to read these quotations, then we should be permitted to put in our quotations.
THE PRESIDENT: What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I think that is a fair offer, Dr. Seidl, don't you?
DR. SEIDL: Yes.
MR. ROBBINS: You remember the document, don't you? (To Dr. Seidl) The concentration camp Buchenwald?
DR. SEIDL: I do not think it was I who objected to that. As I remember it, it was one of my colleagues.
If the defendant should now read a few passages from these books--in contrast to what the Prosecution tried to do at the time--this Court No. II, Case No. 4.does not mean documentary evidence.
We do not submit these passages as evidence to the Court. All we wish to do is to use it as a means to facilitate--to emphasize the things which I said before by resorting to statements made by concentration camp inmates.
Of course, if one can say that the inmates felt it--the effect of these measures on themselves--it would help the testimony. I do not wish to submit these books as evidence. The defendant only wishes to use them as illustrations.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, go ahead. And when you have finished--or sometime later--Mr. Robbins can put in a few quotations of his own.
DR. SEIDL: Yes, your Honor. Witness, you can now read the quotations to the Court which you have earmarked.
WITNESS: Kogon, in his book "The SS-State" says on page 223, and I quote:
"A considerable part of the described atrocities since about 1941 were done away with in the original camps. Apart from the official beating as a punishment, flogging ceased, more or less. New arrivals would be sent in a somewhat more bearable manner. Bathing, disinfection, and the chambers functioned normally, although they remained stations of humiliation; but they were lacking those special atrocities and shameless acts which, for such a long time, had been characteristic of them."
"In the blocks the Block Eldest had its deputy, and he would come from one of all sorts of nationalities. The block leaders now dealt with very few things. The old detachment leaders were removed, or else they were comparatively tame. The last two circumstances particularly took away quite a few of the special terrors from the main camps which they had been used to before."
"In the interest of objectivity it must be said that these changes be emphasized". End of this quotation.
MR. ROBBINS: Excuse me. I would like to know whether the Court No. II, Case No. 4.witness has read this as refreshing his own recollection of the events described there, or just what the purpose is.
THE PRESIDENT: His counsel states that he is to use it for the purpose of illustration and that it is not of any probative value.
WITNESS: From the diary of Inmate 16,921, "Two Thousand Days in Dachau"--the author is K.A. Gross--I would like to quote the following from page 61. May I say first of all, the author was in Sachsenhausen since 1939, and there he came across the terms "Amt A" and "Amt D." At that time "Office A" was part of the Main Office Budget and Building; and administration of economy, respectively, whereas "D" was the same designation which he would find on the orders to commit people to protective custody, because in 1939 there was no office group "D". I shall now quote from page 61:
"The two currents from offices A and D decided on the character of these innumerable camps and the fate of the individual inmates. These waters did not run parallel to each other but they would flow into one another and, depending on where you were driven to, you were either lucky or unlucky. You were lucky if you could swim in the river of a good detachment."
"Inmates had to be treated sparingly. Human power is precious, and food must be taken care of, and so forth." End of quotation.
And from the same book, page 227, the author makes these comments on the decree concerning treatment of inmates which is contained in the document books. "I copied this order because it is a typical order from Department "A". The sentries must not even touch an inmate--let alone beat him. He must be nice to the inmates."
I think I will confine myself to those few quotations.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, I am now coming back to my earlier question which is concerned with the reasons which made Himmler take so active a part in the medical experiments, and which became clear from the evidence of Court No. II, Case No. 4.the Doctors' Trial before Military Tribunal Number One, and which becomes also clear from the document submitted by the Prosecution in this trial.
A I never discussed the medical experiments with Himmler inasmuch as he never gave me his basic attitude on this question. His interest probably was that of a more or less educated layman; possibly he had some conversations with doctor friends of his. It was very easy to interest him in these things. I know of no other reasons.
Q Did you, yourself, have anything to do with the medical experiments and did you have any scientific--or any other interest in these experiments?
A No. As far as experiments on human beings were concerned I had no interest because I am not a doctor.
Q The Prosecution have submitted Exhibit 183 which is an affidavit signed by yourself; and another affidavit, Exhibit 184, also from your pen. This is in Document Book 7, pages 1 and 6; or pages 1 and 4 in the English document book. These are documents NO-605 and NO-407.
I would like to ask you, do you still maintain the things which you said in these affidavits?
A Yes.
Q The Prosecution have submitted as Exhibit 185 Rudolf Brandt's affidavit of 24 October 1946, Document NO-444, page 9; or 7 in the document book. In that affidavit of Rudolf Brandt's, it is stated that you had selected the experimental subjects. Is that correct?
A No, that is not correct. Brandt contradicts himself here. He says: "Selections of persons to be experimented on were taken by the chief of the WVHA," and a little lower down he says, "The selection of various experimental subjects was made in the camp itself."
I neither ordered experimental subjects to be detailed, nor did I carry it out. If I had done that I would have had to go to the concentration camp concerned from Berlin, would have had to select the persons there; and I do not think that was part of my duties as chief of the WVHA.
Q. I shall now come to Document L-7. The prosecution submitted that as Exhibit 186, and it is an extract from a decree of Office Group D of the WVHA of 4 December, 1942. It is signed by Obersturmfuehrer Maurer. It is in Document Book VII, page 12 of the English Book. That concerns the selection of inmates and their transfer to the camp physician for experimental purposes, and I should like to ask you, did you have any knowledge of that decree of Office Group D?
A. This is a work done by D-II under Kammler and I knew nothing about it. Otherwise, I would most certainly have protested against using inmates who were capable of doing work or even were skilled workers.
Q. Then I come to Document NO-436, which is Exhibit 187, and it is a letter written by you on the 21st of May, 1943 to the SS oberfuehrer Deuschl, page 11 of the English Document Book, Volume VII. In that letter you talk of 8 to 10 Experimental Series. I would like to ask you what experimental series are we concerned with here and by whose orders were they carried out?
A. The figure 8 to 10, as it becomes clear from the passage, was my estimation. I did not know at the time how many there were where and to what purpose medical experiments would be carried out. Dr. Deuschl was a friend of Himmler's and Himmler himself decided that Deuschl might be used possibly to control these experiments. This is how this letter came about, I did not know Deuschl myself and the figures and character of the experiment were not at all clear to me.
Q. Then there is Document No-919, which is Exhibit 188, and it is an order from Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler of 15 May 1944. It concerns the carrying out of medical experiments.
It is in Document Book VII, page 13 of the English Book, and I would like to ask you, do you know how this order of Himmler came about and did you, in any way participate in this?
A. I had been informed by a report from Lolling that Professor Schilling as late as 1943 was carrying out his malaria experiments in Dachau. I had heard about this shortly after he had started on this. I had been at the time on a construction inspection at Dachau and I had come across this enterprise of Schilling and he showed me his cultures mosquitoes there. That is how I knew that he had been staying there for considerable time and I was somewhat surprised that as late as the end of 1943 he should still be working, but, as a layman, I could not form an impression that as far as the combatting of malaria is concerned, which in the tropical countries is always done with quinine, so much research work should be made there, and, as Lolling told me, he needed so many inmates, I protested against this by a letter to Himmler. The result, as I found out afterwards, unfortunately was not that the Schilling experiments were called off, but merely that the Reichs Physician-SS was used and employed there to supervise these experiments. The other statement that all medical experiments, without exception, should need Himmler's personal approval was completely superfluous in this context, because even before then they always had to have Himmler's approval. That is the history behind that letter.
Q. I shall now go to high altitude experiments, and I would like to hear from you what you knew about these experiments. When did you hear of them for the first time?
A. I believe it was in 1942, on the occasion of a report to Himmler, which took place in Munich. Himmler asked me whether on the following day I would still be in Munich and where I was staying.
I told him I had something to do still in Munich and I was living in Dachau. Thereupon, he told me, would I come and meet him right outside Dachau the next morning. When he turned up he said he is to look at Rascher's experiments and "you had better come with me." That is how I heard for the first time the reason why he had asked me to go to Dacnau. We soon entered Rascher's station, and Rascher showed us one of his high altitude experiments in this sort of chamber. An inmate was put in and he was exposed to low pressure. Rascher looked at it through a piece of glass. As soon as the inmate had fainted or become unconscious, so to speak, he was taken out and Rascher put questions to him. Now that I have seen all the reports, it is my impression that at that time the experiment which Rascher showed to Himmler was intentionally not prepared as radical and extreme as the other experiments, because the inmate was able to stand up and walk relatively quickly, and, as a layman, it was my impression, if you fly at high altitudes, you feel peculiar. That was my impression. He gave clear answers very soon and then he was dismissed and my impression was as though these experiments were comparatively harmless. From my knowledge today I can see, of course, that they were not. Himmler then talked to Rascher for about ten minutes on the side and I had to wait with his adjutant and than we went away. That was all I saw of these medical experiments with my own eyes.
Q. Now Document 1971b-PS, page 96 of the English Document book, and page 30 of the German. This is a letter from Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler to Dr. Rascher of 13 April 1942; a copy of that letter was sent to Brigadefuehrer Gluecks.
I would like to ask you, did Gluecks tell you anything about the contents of this letter?
A. No, I cannot remember that Gluecks talked to me about this. I am sure I would remember if he had, because Dr. Fahrenkamp is known to me and surely he would have made remarks to me about this, and therefore, I do not believe that Dr. Fahrenkamp was taken into these experiments at all, but this letter once again shows how Himmler did not have any plans in all these things. Once he writes Glueck and then he would write to me and I saw from one document he brought Schnitzler, his Adjutant in Munich and the camp commandant together. As far as the persons participating in all these things is concerned there is no straight line. He could write to this person or to that person as he felt, because that letter he just as easily could have written to me. Why should he write to Gluecks? Just as I said, Himmler did one thing one day and another the next.
Q. The next document submitted by the prosecution concern the Institute of Ahnenerbe. These are Exhibits 201 to 204. I would like to ask you, Witness, what were the tasks of that Institute and what were its relationships to the WVHA?
A. The Ahnenerbe was a scientific enterprise and stood under the leadership of Professor Wuest in Munich. Its tasks were mainly research into German prehistoric times. This Ahnenerbe also wanted to do its bit in the war effort and the only way it could find was to open an Institute for Military Science, a task which had nothing to do with the Institute's original task, but it would appear to have been the ambition of its leaders to obtain a few decorations. This Institute for Military Research suffered from the same lack of funds as did the Ahnenerbe; to finance the Ahnenerbe was a difficult proposition in itself.
It was done mainly by begging for funds from all sorts of agencies which becomes clear from Exhibit 201, "Whereas I or Gruppenfuehrer Berger have to beg from the Reich Treasury for money" and this was also the case with the Institute of Military Research, bat as that Institute had tasks in the interest of the armed forces and in particular on behalf of the Waffen-SS, Himmler concurred that the financing of this Institute must be done from funds of the Waffen-SS and this also happened. In the remark in Exhibit 204, it says, "From which part of the budget expenditure for that Institute that should be accounted as both the Ahnenerbe and the Institute for Military Research were under Himmler's personal staff," which is the reason why this communication, on the auditing of the money needed, is addressed to the Personal Staff-SS Himmler.
Q. I shall now come to the freezing experiments; and I should like to ask you, what did you know about these experiments, and when did you hear of them for the first time? In this connection I should like you to refer to Paragraph 12 of Rudolf Brandt's affidavit which is Prosecution Exhibit 205, and also Paragraph 17 of that affidavit. This is Document NO-242; and it is on Page 38 of the English text, 42 of the German. Will you also refer, please, to Exhibit 208 when you answer my question, which is Document NO-1619-PS?
A. I heard something about the freezing experiments because they needed women from the Ravensbruck concentration camp. In Paragraph 12 it says: "Himmler wrote to SS Obergruppenfuehrer Oswald Pohl, Chief of the WVHA, regarding his (that is, Himmler's) visit to Dachau in November 1942, during which he had observed the freezing experiments. He (that is to say, Himmler) observed the freezing experiments. He informed Pohl that he (that is, Himmler) had ordered that suitable women be set aside for the purpose of warming up the experimental subjects."
First of all, I think I should clarify this point because if you read this paragraph, one might assume that I in November 1942 had been to Dachau; that I had given certain orders. Apart from the high altitude experiments, to which I was taken without my knowledge or intention, I saw no other experiments, now am I informed on the manner in which they were carried out because at that time I did not see the reports which are now contained in all these document books. They were not submitted to me; they were not part of my work. About these women -- oh! -- Paragraph 17 of the same affidavit, apparently deals with freezing experiments in Auschwitz and Lublin; and it is alleged that I received a copy of the letter in order to order the carrying out of these experiments at Lublin and Auschwitz.
It is possible that I received such a letter; but judging from later documents, experiments of this kind were not carried out in Lublin nor Auschwitz because Rascher carried them out himself in Dachau.
Therefore, no order of any sort could ever have been carried out; and Exhibit 208, addressed to SS-Brigadefuehrer Gluecks, concerns the setting aside of four women from Ravensbruck.
EXAMINATION BY THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE MUSMANNO):
Q. Before you proceed to the next exhibit, I think we should like to know what you have to say about the paragraph which you read and which you did not in any way explain, namely, whether you did or did not furnish the women that Himmler had requested you to furnish in connection with the freezing experiments. That is Paragraph 12. You read the paragraph and then merely passed it on. What was the use of reading it if you weren't going to tell us something about it?
A. I do not remember any more how the setting aside of these women and their transfer from Ravensbruck to Dachau was done. All I can say is that I myself was not in Ravensbruck nor did I select the women. I see from Exhibit 208 that this was later on dealt with by Gluecks and that Gluecks ordered the setting aside of these women.
Q. Well, but you were practically instructed by Himmler to set aside the women. Now, you didn't merely ignore a request of Himmler's, did you?
A. That is Brandt's allegation in his affidavit, that I had been given an order; but I can no longer recall that I ever received such an order; and it is rather unlikely because otherwise Gluecks would not have been ordered to do this.
Q. Well, if that is your explanation, very well.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. SEIDL:
Q. If I understand you correctly, Witness, you wanted to say that Exhibit 208 shows that it is a letter from Meine to Gluecks of 8 October 1942 when this matter was taken care of by Himmler's staff. Who was Obersturmfuehrer Meine? Where did he work?
A. Obersturmfuehrer Meine was a collaborator of Rudolf Brandt, of Himmler's secretary, and the same Brandt who says in Paragraph 12 that I had been given the order to set aside the women.
In Exhibit 208 his own, -- Brandt's -- collaborator Meine orders Gluecks to take care of this matter. Surely one order must have been sufficient. If I had been given an order, Gluecks needn't have received an order afterwards.
EXAMINATION BY THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE MUSMANNO):
Q. Wasn't Gluecks one of your men?
A. Gluecks was the Inspector of Concentration Camps and Chief of Amtsgruppe "D".
Q. Therefore, under your control?
A. Yes, indeed.
BY THE TRIBUNAL (JUDGE PHILLIPS):
Q. I understood you to say before you read this document that you remembered something about the freezing experiments because you recalled something about a request for women. From where did you get that information?
A. I knew at the time or I heard, which becomes clear from documents which reached me, that four women had been sat aside because in another document Rascher complains to Himmler that these women had not been suitable.
Q. I am not asking you about the documents. I am asking you what you testified to before you read the document. When your counsel asked you what you knew about the freezing experiments, you said, "I remember something about it because of four women being asked for in these experiments," or words to that effect. Now, from where did you get that information, regardless of the documents?
A. I received that information from Himmler's letters.
Q. All right.
DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. SEIDL:
Q. Following up the Court's question, I should like you to comment on Document 1583-PS, which is Prosecution Exhibit 211. It is on Page 102 of the English Book and on page 96 of the German.
When you answered his Honor's question, did you think of that letter of Himmler's?
A. No, not of that letter. That letter is concerned with something entirely different and it has no connection with the medical experiments at all. The text of this letter says in Paragraph 2, "Rascher suggested to Reichsfuehrer SS to distribute the warming bags in both pockets of the overcoat and put another bag between the trousers and the body, and when it is very cold ---"
Q. Excuse me, Witness, you are talking about the wrong document. I asked you in connection with Document 1583-PS, on Page 96 of the German Document.
A. That document is missing in my book.
Q. This is the document which the prosecution has submitted as Exhibit 211. It is on Page 102 of the English text. I should like to ask you, when you answered the Judge's question, did you think of that letter?
A. Yes, that is correct. I had that letter in mind. That letter is addressed to me personally; and it discusses the setting aside of four women from Ravensbruck, in the interests of these freezing experiments. That is how I learned that freezing experiments were carried out in Dachau.
Q. Do you know, Witness, whether in Dachau following up this letter, that is to say, after 15 November 1942, freezing experiments were carried out?
A. I do not know how long these freezing experiments took and so forth. I do not know. I never saw anything of it.
Q. I shall now come to Document NO-428, which is Prosecution Exhibit 209 in Document Book No VII, on page 51 of the German and page 50 of the English. This is the final report on freezing experiments on human beings, signed by Holzloehner, Finke, and Rascher. I should like to ask you, are the contents of this report know to you? When did you see this report for the first time?
A. No, I never received any report on medical experiments because my office was not a medical office; and therefore, there was no reason to submit scientific reports on medical experiments to me.
Q. I shall now come to Document -
THE PRESIDENT: Save it till after lunch, Dr. Seidl. We shall now recess.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, 20 May 1947)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats. The Tribunal is again in session.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, I now come to document NO-538, which was submitted as Exhibit No. 216. It is an excerpt out of Sievers diary in Document Book 7, on page 111 of the German text, and on page 116 of English text. It is stated on 28 January 1943 where we have the following entry, and I quote: "In Dachau discussions with SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl. A: Transfer of building site for the Entymological Institute." Now I will ask you, witness, did the Entymological Institute have anything to do with medical experiments?
A No, the Entymological Institute was a research place in order to combat vermin.
Q And in this diary on 26 March 1943, the following entry was made: "Established contact with SS-Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl because of the production of serum." Now I would like to ask you what was involved in this matter?
A Sievers at that time requested me to assist the Military Research Institute in establishing a production place for a serum, which at the time, I think, was called "Polygal", and which had already been developed. He came to me because of the German Drug GMBH of being under my supervision, and where this serum might have been produced. He did not like the idea, and thus so far as I am informed he later on established his own production place.
Q I now come to Document 1580-PS, which was submitted as Exhibit 215, and is a letter from Himmler to Rascher. It is dated 26 February 1943, and a copy of this letter was apparently sent to you. It is in the Document Book V on page 116 of the German, and it is on page 121 in the English version. It is a letter on re-warming experiments at Auschwitz and Lublin, and I now ask you, witness, were such Court No. II, Case No. 4.experiments carried out at Auschwitz and Lublin?
A No, Rascher himself has stated in another document that the execution would still have been possible at Dachau.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: What, if anything, did you do when you received this letter from Himmler?
A So far as I can remember, I did not take any further action in this matter.
Q You just ignored an order from Himmler?
A Well, because the experiments had already been carried out at Dachau, the cold experiments, because Rascher himself stated that, I believe, in December...
Q I just want to know what you did, if anything, in regard to this letter, not what Rascher did, but what did you do when you received this order from Himmler. What did you do, if anything?
A It is possible that I made inquiries of Rascher if he wanted to carry out this experiment. I only received this letter in February, 1943, and it is possible that afterwards I inquired from him if he intended to carry out the experiments at Auschwitz, or at Lublin.
Q I don't care what is possible. I want to know what you did, if anything. If you remember saying anything, tell us, and if you don't remember doing anything, tell us that. That is what I want to know?
A I can not remember exactly.
JUDGE PHILLIPS: All right.
Court No. II, Case No. 4.
BY DR. SEIDL:
Q Witness, I now ask you to turn your attention to the next document which was submitted by the Prosecution. It is Document NO 292. It is a letter of Rascher, and it is addressed to Rudolf Brandt. It is stated in the second paragraph and I quote:
"The question of a saving of people frozen in the open air has in the meantime been cleared up. Thank goodness that there was once again a period of heavy frost weather at Dachau." Unquote.
You have previously spoken of the document which shows that the experiments themselves could still be carried out at Dachau and that for this reason further experiments at Auschwitz and Lublin did not become necessary. Did you in this case consider the letter from Rascher to Brandt?
A Yes, of course, I was thinking of this letter.
Q I now come to the so-called malaria experiments. In its presentation of evidence regarding the malaria experiments, the Prosecution has presented Exhibit 253. That is an excerpt of the trial held before the Military Tribunal at Dachau. It is Document NO 856, Document Book 8, Page 1 in both the English and German books. I now ask you if you knew anything about the malaria experiments of Professor Schilling, how did you obtain knowledge of them, and if you ever ordered that prisoners were to be furnished for these purposes.
A I knew of the malaria experiments of Dr. Schilling. When I inspected a certain building, without knowing that Schilling was working there, I accidentally was in his department and I made his personal acquaintance on that occasion. He then showed me around his institution. At the time I was unable to recognize just in what form these experiments were carried out, and therefore I am not informed as to the manner in which these experiments were performed. Then I heard nothing further about the experiments until the fall of 1943, when it was pointed out to me by Lolling that Schilling was still carrying out certain experiments and that he was again and again putting in requests for Court No. II, Case No. 4.prisoners.