Auler. He was the director of the Cancer Clinic at the University of Berlin in the Charitee. I knew him from the time when I worked at the Charitee. I was to ask Prof. Auler about his opinion on this drug, whether there was any prospect of success. Prof. Auler said to me that he himself had no experience with it but he knew that in the early history of the treatment of cancer doctors had tried and recommended this drug. He himself would conduct experiments at his clinic with it on patients who had been given up and who were suffering from cancers on the surface, which were easily accessible. If I am correctly informed, however this was never done because soon thereafter the Berlin clinics, including the clinic of Prof. Auler, evacuated their patients away from Berlin.
Q. Was this the end of this discussion?
A. No. Grawitz talked about other medical discoveries. He mentioned a number of examples where medical advances were due to nonmedical people and were later accepted by doctors. He also pointed out frequently about white pills --- accident played a role in research. He mentioned the discovery of insulin by two young American doctors after the World War. It had been known for twenty years what would cure diabetes, what the cause was; but all attempts to obtain an extract had failed, although many well-known scientists had tried to obtain it? and now these two young Americans who had come back from war had the good fortune to discover an effective substance because they happened to combine the proper ingredients.
I believe they took the glands from animals and put alcohol and some acid on it; and that happened to be the secret. This prevented the digestive juices from destroying the insulin. Grawitz discussed that at some length. He was a metabolism expert. Then he said that one should not reject everything that is suggested by laymen just simply because it comes from laymen but one should test it with the necessary critical attitude.
Q. At this discussion Sievers was also present. Did you know Sievers?
A. Yes, Sievers was there; but I know him only slightly; and aside from this discussion I believe I saw him only once. Then there were the few times I talked to him on the telephone when he called up our office.
Q. What did the entry mean which Sievers made in his diary, 3546PS, Exhibit for the prosecution 34, page 34, page 142 of the 8th of September 1944: "Ploetner remains at our disposal." Apparently that was a telephone discussion.
A. I cannot say what that means exactly; but I do remember that Sievers called me to the telephone a few times.
He called up from his office--I believe it was in Southern Germany--and wanted to talk to Grawitz. In these cases Grawitz was himself talking on the telephone at the time. Grawitz used to carry on very long telephone conversations. Sievers had been waiting for some time on the telephone and was afraid that his conversation would be interrupted. Then he had me called to the phone and asked whether I couldn't go in to Grawitz's office and ask him what Sievers happened to want to know. This must have been one such case.
Q. On the 23rd of October 1944, on Page 281, the entry, "By telephone with Poppendick transfer of biological experiments with Ploetner. First of all, as submission Prof. Friese for discussion." What does that mean?"
A That was no doubt a similar case he also called up and wanted to talk to Grawitz and then talked to me. He was afraid the telephone connection was to be broken. He used me to ask Grawitz. Today I cannot say, of course, what it was about.
Q Do you know what biological experiments were those of Professor Friese?
A No, I cannot say that either. It is possible it was pectin research.
Q Was this Professor Friese only on pectin experiments, did he not have anything to do with the N-question?
A Professor Friese, was a chemist, I believe, from the Brunswick Technical College. He was in contact with Grawitz. I did not know him well. I saw him perhaps once. I believe he was to pass an opinion on this N-substance.
Q Did you know Professor Friese?
AAs I said, I saw him perhaps once briefly in the office of the Reich Physician.
Q Did you otherwise have anything to do with this matter, or did you receive any further knowledge about it?
A No, I have nothing to do with the technical matters. I just happened to be called upon briefly in such matters.
Q Therefore, you did not have to deal with this matter particularly?
A No.
DR. BOEHM: As evidence as to the entries in the Diary of Sievers I submit as Document Exhibit HPO 6, which is affidavit of defendant Sievers, which is on page 12 of the Document Book Helmut Poppendick, and I offer this document as Poppendick Exhibit No. 5. Because of knowledge of the High Tribunal I shall not read it in order to speed up matters.
Q You are charged with special responsibility in sulphanilamide experiments; before this conference of consulting physicians in the year 1943 did you have anything to do with sulphanilamide experiments, or did you know in anyway of such experiments from the manner of which Gebhardt said they went to Grawitz?
A No, I learned nothing of that.
Q Did you know before that a lecture on such experiments had been intended on this conference?
A No, I learned that only at the meeting itself, as all the people present did.
Q And what impression did you have of this lecture or this paper?
A I knew Professor Gebhardt as one of the leading scientists in the field of surgery. I had the impression that this was a purely scientific investigation to clear up an essential war problem. I learned of details only then. That is insofar as I learned of them at all here.
Q But Gebhardt has expressed that these were experiments to be carried out on persons who were sentenced to death.
A Yes, he said so.
Q What is your answer to this question to carry out experiments on people sentenced to death?
A I cannot pass judgment on the right to carry out such experiments. I must leave that to the leading scientists and the state authorities, but I can imagine that in times of emergency, such as war times, if problems cannot be solved in any other way, such experiments may be justified. The state, of course, had to create the legal basis for it.
Q Did you know the defendant Fritz Fischer well who held this lecture at this conference of the Military Academy?
A No, I had just seen him.
Q Did you know the defendant Fischer at the Reichsarzt?
A No.
Q Did Fischer talk to you about these experiments either before or after? 5572
A No.
Q Did Professor Gebhardt talk to you about sulphanilamide experiments at any time?
A No, Professor Gebhardt did not talk to me either.
Q And also not later, after the conference of consulting physicians in 1944?
A No. My connection with Professor Gebhardt was only a very superficial one. He hardly knew me. He did not speak to me. I was not an equal.
Q Did Grawitz carry out experiments at Ravensbruck at which you accompanied him?
A I knew nothing about any such visits of Grawitz to Ravensbruck. At least I did not accompany him.
Q During the time of the ending of these experiments of sulphanilamide did you bear then the title of Chief of Personal Office?
A No, I received the title of that in March of 1943.
Q Your only knowledge of sulphanilamide experiments, therefore, if I may summarize, comes from the lecture of Fischer at the meeting in 1943, which you attended, as many other people did?
A Yes.
Q According to the indictment you are charged with responsibility for sea water experiments; did you know the correspondence between Grawitz and Himmler of June or July 1944, in which experiments are mentioned carried out on gypsies and other inmates, there where they also made use of sea water?
A No, I learned of those letters only here.
Q Did you know anything about a correspondence between the authorities, where it is charged by the indictment about making drinkable all sea water?
A No.
Q Did you have anything to do with the planning or carrying out of such experiments at all?
A No, I did not.
Q In a letter from Sievers to Grawitz, No. 182, Exhibit 137, English Document Book 5, page 23, the adjutant of Grawitz is mentioned with whom the co-defendant Biegelbeck is supposed to have got in touch; did the adjutant tell you anything about this matter at all?
A No, the adjutant did not talk to me about it.
Q Did you know one of the parties in these experiments of the Luftwaffe who are made responsible by the Prosecution for participation in these experiments?
A No, I knew none of them.
Q I may therefore in conclusion ask you, you have no knowledge whatever of such experiments as have been mentioned here, which were carried out on inmates at Dachau in order to make sea water drinkable?
A No.
Q You are also charged as particularly responsible in Jaundice experiments; did you know of any connection between the Reichsarzt with other people in order to carry out experiments on inmates for research in the epidemic jaundice?
A No, I knew nothing of such negotiations.
Q Did you know Dr. Dohmen who was mentioned in connection with such experiments?
A No, I did not know him.
Q Did you know anything about the transfer of cultures of hepatitis germs?
A No, I never heard anything about it.
Q Did you know anything about experiments made on inmates for the research on the epidemic jaundice?
A No, I never heard anything about experiments on prisoners.
Q Did you know anything of this, that eight men who were sentenced to death, criminals, that these criminals were to infected artificially?
A No, I knew nothing about that.
Q Did Grawitz ever talk to you about these questions?
A No.
Q You know no facts therefore from which you can conclude that such criminal experiments for research of epidemic jaundice were made?
A No.
Q You are furthermore charged as particularly responsible in the element of sterilization; did you know any of the persons who were mentioned by the prosecution in connection with sterilization experiments?
A No, I knew none of them.
Q Did you know Gerlang?
A No.
Q Did you know Dr. Maddaus?
A I had read the name "Maddaus" in the Medical Journal.
Q Did you know Dr. Koch?
A No, I did not know Dr. Koch.
Q Who was Schopper, in Document NO-054, Exhibit 144, English Document Book 56, page 6, in the name Schopper was mentioned?
A Schopper was a young SS doctor who was with the Reichsarzt for a few weeks. That was about 1942. He had fallen ill at the Front. If I remember correctly Wille knew him. After he had been released from the Hospital at Berlin he was not to go back to the Front directly. He was to be assigned to an office first where he could recuperate. In this way Dr. Schopper came to the Office of the Reichsarzt briefly, where he likewise had nothing to do.
Q Schopper applied to the Personal Staff of Himmler obviously after he received knowledge of Document NO-036, Prosecution Exhibit 143, Document Book 6, page 5, after he received knowledge of this document; how could this happen considering that Grawitz kept secret such delicate matters, and dealt with it himself?
A This matter about sterilization by drugs which I saw here in the trial for the first time, is an open matter and nothing can be seen from it except that there is perhaps a new method of sterilization of people who legally had to be sterilized. How Schopper got this letter I do not know, perhaps he saw it when the adjutant had it and took an interest in it. He must have had a personal friend in the Personal Staff to whom he turned. That is something quite unusual, and was actually forbidden.
Q From the first letter from Himmler to Pohl, NO. 036, which is Prosecution Exhibit No. 143, it becomes evident that Pohl supposedly was to get in touch with the Reichsarzt in order to carry out experiments; from the evidence material here it seems to become evident that Pohl had no connection with Grawitz, but that the matter was only discussed with him by his leading assistant, Dr. Lolling; did you know this man Lolling?
A I knew him slightly. I often saw him at Grawitz' office when he was leaving after he had talked to Grawitz.
Q Did Lolling speak to you about this or any experiments in concentration camps?
A No, I had no connection with Lolling.
Q Did you know about experiments in concentration camps about sterilization with X-ray?
A No, I knew nothing about that.
Q Did you know Dr. Schumann?
A No, I did not know him.
Q Is Professor Klauberg known to you?
A Yes, I knew Professor Klauberg. In 1941, approximately. Himmler in the case of a number of SS wives and fiances had ordered treatment by Professor Klauberg. They were cases when these women were sterile, according to the opinion of the doctors. In these cases the doctors expressed misgivings, which were recorded in the opinion of the Sippenamt doctor, but all cases where there were misgivings had to be turned over to Himmler for his personal decision; and then in about six or eight cases Himmler wrote on the records, "Treatment by Professor Klauberg, Koenigshuette." These women were then sent to Professor Klauberg for treatment, but this stopped pretty soon. After 1941 I heard no more about these cases.
Q What kind of a method was this which was used by Professor Klauberg?
A It was a kind of hormone injections. It was a special system which he had developed.
Q In a letter of Dr. Grawitz to Himmler about treatment of female sterility there were a number of other doctors mentioned, Professor von Wolf, Professor Ehrhard, Professor Schulze, and so forth; do you know anything about that?
A Yes, Grawitz had officially informed the Race and Settlement office that in the future in the treatment of sterile wives of SS members these doctors who were named were to be called upon, and there was a specialist for women's diseases for each district of Germany named.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, defense counsel just made reference to a letter from Grawitz to Himmler regarding sterilization. I would like to be in formed to what he is referring to.
I have no knowledge of any such letter.
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel inform the counsel for the Prosecution and the Tribunal to what he refers?
(no response)
The Tribunal suggests that counsel inform the Tribunal and counsel for the Prosecution as to the Document to which he refers?
DR. BOEHM: Your Honor, I cannot determine that at this point, but in the course of my examination I shall present and make known the letter.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
MR. HARDY: The prosecution should like to know if this letter is available, has it been a Prosecution exhibit and to what it refers. I have no idea as to what is referred.
DR. BOEHM: I shall explain that.
THE PRESIDENT: Will counsel proceed to enlighten the Tribunal and counsel?
DR. BOEHM: Yes.
Q What else do you know of Professor Klauberg?
A I know nothing else about Professor Klauberg.
Q Did you know about any other sterilization experiments which were supposed to have been carried out in concentration camps, and which were of a criminal nature?
A No, I know nothing about them. If I had heard anything about sterilization I would have had to assume it was sterilization according to the valid laws.
Q This, after all is a matter which deals to a certain extent with matters concerning population; was it not that Grawitz consulted you in these population and racial matters?
A No, I was not an advisor of Grawitz in this sense. In the first place Grawitz did not accept any advice, also not in this field. He had his own particular ideas. Moreover these were matters of the so-called negative population policy, things which were foreign to me, to my whole training which I had obtained from Professor Lenz. In the Race and Settlement office I was concerned only with the positive matters. Sometimes I tried to present Professor Lenz's views to Grawitz, but I soon gave that up because he said that Professor Lenz was an academic man and refused to accept his ideas. We never talked about those things.
Q You are further charged with further responsibility in typhus experiments; do you know that Buchenwald inmates were infected with typhus baccilus quite intentionally?
A No, that was unknown to me.
Q Did you know that Ding was active in Buchenwald?
A Yes, I knew that. I knew that there was a Hygiene Institute in Buchenwald at which Ding was working.
Q What do you know of Ding's activity in Buchenwald?
A I do not know any of the details of this work, but I learned once that he was producing typhus serum, or a vaccine against typhus, according to a new process, which quantitatively had greater results.
Q Did you know Ding?
A Yes, I met him frequently in Berlin at the office, and a few times I talked to him briefly.
Q What did you talk about?
A I don't remember, unimportant things. Ding was a cheerful person, and we exchanged greetings and discussed unimportant matters briefly.
I saw him only when he was leaving Grawitz. I met him in the hall.
Q How often was he with Grawitz?
A I can't say exactly. I myself saw him there three or four times.
Q Did Ding not talk to you about his typhus experiments?
A No, never.
Q. You signed a report about typhus by Di************** Number No-582, is Exhibit 286, with your own************** Does the signature of this letter mean?
A. You said "a report." this was not a report. It was not a report on experiments. Otherwise it would have had a return address, a date; it would have had the address of the addressee and at the end there would have been a signature, and besides that, it would, no doubt, have been marked "secret". This was not the case. It was quite obviously the manuscript of a scientific publication. Such manuscripts had to have two stamps, one from the superior medical agency that there were no objections to the publication, and, secondly, there had to be a censorship stamp from a propaganda agency.
Q. How did this publication reach you?
A. I cannot say. Certainly it did not reach me directly. Probably Ding sent it to Mrugowsky. In any case, Mrugowsky had seen it beforehand since he was the specialist in this field and since the work had originated from his institute. Then Mrugowsky made a notation that there were no scientific objections to publication and sent it on to Grawitz, and Grawitz read it and then, no doubt, Grawitz gave it to me saying that the paper could be published and I should put the stamp on it. Then the stamp of the counterintelligence office in the SS Operational Main Office was put on it and then the paper was sent back to Mrugowsky who passed it on to Ding.
Q. Those publications which are mentioned here, did you read these?
A. I read it here, and I determined that I had definitely not read it before. I am sure I read only the summary, as one usually reads scientific articles in which is not particularly interested.
I am not a specialist. I have no experience in the field of typhus. I was not interested in the details and was not able to evaluate them correctly.
Q. Did you have the permanent order or assignment to stamp all scientific publications?
A. No, not in general, but it happened that Grawitz gave papers to me to stamp.
Q. Were you a member of a special committee for typhus and virus research which was under the leadership of Ding?
A. No, I do not know of any such committee. I was not a member of any such committee, and in view of my complete lack of qualifications, I cannot see why I should have been put on any such committee if it had existed.
Q. In this connection, coming back to the evidence for the Defendant Handloser, especially to the affidavit of the Defendant Poppendick, HA-27, Handloser Exhibit No. 12, which is on page 17 of the Document Book. Helmut Poppendick, I do not intend to read anything from that. The witness, Balachowsky, in his affidavit 448 maintains -this is Exhibit for the Prosecution 291, English Document Book 12, page 60 -- that you were Obergruppenfuehrer. Is that correct?
A. No, I never reached the rank of a general. The mentioning of my name in this context must be a mistake. Balachowsky got his information from Kogon and he must have confused the name.
Q. Did you hear the lecture by Ding about typhus at the conference of consulting Army physicians in the year 1943? This is the same lecture, surely, to which Dr. Rose took objection.
A. No, I did not hear Ding, and I was not present at any lectures of the hygiene section at these meetings.
Q. The witness, Kogon, said when asked by the Defense that no reports about typhus experiments were submitted to Poppendick. This is in the English records, page 1266, German records, 1288. No furthermore says at the examination by the Prosecution, page 1288, English book, German book, 1307, that he had sent reports to Grawitz, and Poppendick received a copy of this report. There is a disagreement apparently between these two statements. What have you to say to this?
A. I can only declare that I had nothing to do with typhus experiments or reports on them When asked by Dr. Doerr, Kogon answered that no report was sent to me. His second contradictory statement which he made about half an hour later I can explain by the question asked by the Prosecution. Kogon was asked whether reports were sent to Grawitz. Kogon answered "yes", and probably the Prosecution showed him the records, and he knew that I belonged to Grawitz's staff, so that in answer to the next question -- and Poppendick received a copy -- he also answered "yes". I cannot understand why within a short time he could make two directly contradictory statements. In answer to the first clear question as to whether I received reports on typhus, he said "no".
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, it is respectfully requested Defense Counsel state the page number on which these contradictory statements of Kogon's appear in the record.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel's request is reasonable. Will Counsel for the Defendant furnish Counsel with the page numbers where these statements may be found?
DR. BOEHM: I did that already, and it was here a matter of record on page 1266 and the German record on 1288, and in the reexamination by the Prosecution it was the English record, 1288, and the German one was 1307.
At this opportunity I should like to come to the letter and to mention it here, a letter which I have already mentioned in connection with Klauberg. It is in German Document Book 6, Document NO-214, page 48. This is a letter from Grawitz to Himmler which refers to Klauberg.
BY DR. BOEHM:
Q. In connection with what has been said, I would like to ask you: Did you have any connection at all with typhus research or other diseases which made it possible for you to recognize that criminal experiments in these fields had been made?
A. No.
Q. You are, furthermore, charged by the Prosecution with responsibility in experiments with poisons. Did you ever visit the concentration camp Buchenwald in which experiments with poisons were supposedly made, according to the statements of the witness, Kogon, in December, 1943, until October 1944?
A. I never entered the concentration camp Buchenwald.
Q. Did you not in any way receive knowledge either orally or by writing of these experiments with poisons?
A. No, I received no knowledge of them.
Q. Furthermore, it was stated by the Prosecution that a special experiment was made by the Reich Criminal Police Office in September, 1944, in which five persons were supposed to have taken part. These were experiments with aconitin. Did you know anything about this letter of Mrugowsky to the Criminal Technical Institute, or did you know anything about any other letters? This letter was document number 201, Prosecution Exhibit 290.
A. I know nothing about this letter of Mrugowsky's, and I did not see any other correspondence about it.
Q. About all this matter you only received knowledge after your arrival in Nurnberg, did you not?
A. Yes.
Q. Also, you are charged with responsibility in experiments with incendiary bombs. Did you know anything about any experiments in Buchenwald on human beings in which incendiary bombs were used?
A. No, I did not.
Q. The witness, Kogon, in this connection spoke of an experimental ward 5. Was there a special office in the office of the Reichsarzt in which such experiments were planned and approved?
A. I know of no such office. I do not know what kind of work this office would have had to do. Approximately Thirty-five letters which refer to Grawitz, Grawitz no doubt answered or passed on personally.
Q. In your opinion, witness, what was this experimental station 5 in Leipzig which supposedly had the authority for experimentation in concentration camps which was mentioned by Kogon?
A. This is quite obviously confusion with the so-called research section V, Professor von Kennel. That is the initial of his name. This was located in Leipzig.
Q. What do you know about von Kennel and his activity?
A. Professor von Kennel was the rector of the skin clinic of the University of Leipzig. Besides that he was one of the best-known specialists for the development of now medicines in the so-called sulfonamide series.
Q. What did von Kennel have to do with this experimental station 5?
A. For years at his clinic he had a special research laboratory, to so-called research section V, and in those chemical laboratories he carried on research on sulfonamides in addition to his work as clinic.
Q. Was he in any connection with the SS?
A. As far as I know, he received financial support from the Waffen-SS during the last years of the War. As far as organization is concerned, however, his work were not incorporated in the SS.
Q. Do you know whether this research department had any connection with concentration camps?
A. If I remember correctly, he received animals from the hygiene institute at Buchenwald. These animals were very difficult to obtain during the War; probably Professor von Kennel corresponded with Ding or the hygiene institute on this matter, and Kogon probably saw this correspondence and saw the letterhead "Research Section V", but he didn't know what it was, and he read it as "Research Section" Roman numeral V, and then he thought that was an experimental station roman Number V of which he talked so much here.
Q. Can you find an explanation why Kogon connects you with this office?
A. As far as I recall, I once sent a letter to Ding on behalf of Grawitz, and I passed on von Kennel's request for experimental animals. On the basis of such harmless letters, Kogon probably confused these things. He thought that I was the man in charge of all such experiments.
DR. BOEHM: Document HPO-13 in Document Book Helmut Poppendick, page 35, contains the corresponding excerpt from this book. I offer this document as Poppendick Exhibit No. 6. Kogon writes in his book "The SS State" you had signed as responsible for this department in which the experiments were carried out.
