That had not been planned in the beginning. This test was to cover only the vaccine produced by the Robert Koch Institute, produced by Gildemeister, and now the Behring Works asked that their vaccine was also to be tested and I believe that the documents also show that Gildemeister did not want this at first. Apparently he was afraid of some difficulty. Actually, however, I had already established contact with the Behring Works because I needed vaccine. Therefore, it was not necessary for any further contact between Demnitz and myself.
Q Then it is perfectly clear that in this meeting in the Reich Ministry of the Interior the intention was expressed to test the effectiveness of vaccines by experimentation, wasn't it, from your knowledge of the documents?
A There is not only your document about this matter, but two other documents, and these three documents show the state of affairs quite clearly. Almost every word that was spoken is reproduced there. It was purely an industrial discussion, and Gildemeister merely mentioned that his vaccine - or that I was to see to it that his vaccine was used on a large scale. The correspondence later with the Behring Works also shows what the intention was. That persons, Germans who were to be used in the East as officials and who had to be vaccinated should be vaccinated with this vaccine. That is a test on human beings. If you mean this kind of experiments on human beings, you are right. But it would not be true if you apply that to Ding's experiments. There is no connection.
Q Did you ever attend a meeting on 29 December 1941 concerning this typhus problem?
A No.
Q You state that no such meeting took piece, as stated in page 1 of Ding's diary; is that correct?
A That is my conviction.
Q You further stated that if you did have a meeting you would never have taken Ding along; is that correct?
A I cannot remember taking Ding to any meeting at which I was present. If I was there I did not need any assistance; I always went to meetings alone.
Q Did you ever attend a meeting at any time on the typhus problem in December on another date than the 29th?
A On the typhus problem; of course there was a great deal of discussion at that time in various places.
Q You never attended a meeting as outlined by Ding on another date?
A No, at this meeting of Conti, Handloser and I or Ding. No, I apparently was never in such a meeting as I was never at any meeting with Conti and Handloser.
Q Did you attend a meeting on December 29th or thereabouts concerning the typhus problem at which Schreiber and Gildemeister were present?
A I do not believe so, as I have just settled in the last few days with certainty in my mind on December 27th I left Berlin; during these days I could not have been at any meeting as that was when I was on my travel to Russia.
Q You changed your mind since last November, didn't you Doctor? I wish to call to your attention that Mr. McHaney and I interrogated you on November 1, 1946 and we had previously interrogated you on 25th of October and the majority of the time was consumed in discussing this meeting.
In the course of this interrogation on November 1, 1946, Mr. McHaney asked you whether or not the stated by Ding in his Diary concerning this conference was accurate and you said, "I remember that meeting and it occurred to me that there was present Schreiber, Gildemeister, Ding and myself. It is possible that Rose and Reiter were present too, but Handloser and Conti I don't remember as being present. I think that the meeting took place in a room of Schreiber's in the Army Medical Inspectorate, not in the room of Handloser."
Are you telling the truth now, or were you telling the truth then, Doctor?
A It is true that I made that statement, that was based on my knowledge of the situation at the time. You will remember that you did not show me the diary, you merely read this entry to me; an excerpt and in my direct examination I have stated, and I have just repeated it, that at that time there were several discussions about typhus. It was the most important medical problem in Germany at the time and of course I repeatedly met the same people at these meetings. There are not many people in Germany who have a certain degree of knowledge about typhus and it is also true, as far as I remember, that Rose was present at one of these discussions. I also attended a meeting with Gildemeister at that time, but certainly never on the 29th of December and in the second place never with the people mentioned in the Ding entry. That is wrong for sure.
Q Now, in view of this interrogation and the answer which you gave, which I assumed was truthful at that time, must I assume that since you have seen the documents and realize how complicated the documents are, your memory is becoming convenient and you say you did not attend the meeting; either you did or you did not attend the meeting.
You stated that you did and there was Schreiber, Gildemeister, Ding and yourself and your memory is only refreshed by the entry in Ding's diary and you immediately recalled such a meeting; did you ever meet with Schreiber, Gildemeister and Ding and discuss this problem?
A It is true that I discussed typhus with these people, yes.
Q What did you talk about?
A Gildemeister and Schreiber you said; didn't you or Ding?
Q Gildemeister and Schreiber.
A I talked to Gildemeister and Schreiber about the problem of increasing vaccine production. Gildemeister's point of view was that the army procedure, the Weigl vaccine was very slow and cumbersome and could not be increased to the extent necessary and I shared his opinion and I still do. On the other hand, Schreiber shared Eyer's opinion that the main thing was to develop one procedure well and on a large scale and when one is in the middle of production not to stop everything and change everything for a new procedure; that was Gildemeister's opinion.
Q. You did not discuss the testing of these vaccines?
A. As far as Ding's experiments were concerned, we did not say a single word.
Q. You did not discuss the testing of vaccines at all at this meeting with Schreiber and Gildemeister?
A. Yes, the necessity of gathering experience with the various vaccines was discussed of course. May I remind you of the Document of Handloser concerning Geheimrat Otto who was the best typhus expert in Europe, who had dealt with typhus all his life. In 1943 he said all the vaccines from chicken eggs are not well known enough in their effect and there was of course much greater danger in 1941 when we wore at the beginning of this period.
Q. Now, by the same correspondence it says that this institute was set in January of 1942 following these meetings at the Ministry of the Interior and one meeting with Schreiber and Gildemeister. How did it happen that Grawitz and Himmler set up such an institute if they did not attend such a meeting; who told them about this problem of typhus?
A. I informed Grawitz several times about the problem of typhus. Himmler was certainly informed through Conti, who was SS Grup enfuehrer and both of them belonged to the Reich Ministry of the Interior. May I point out again that among hygienist and bacteriologists was the typhus problem. If there was any medical problem in Germany at that time, it was the problem of typhus and the Government offices wore greatly concerned with it then. It was their duty and in order to make that clear I have a document in my document book an excerpt from the Reichs epidemic law, which orders increased measures against typhus, not in 1941 but since 1900. The great int rest of our Government and the Wehrmacht office can be explained in this way.
Q. Well, how does it happen that did not result until during the course of all these various meetings that you had in December of 1941 and these typhus discussions, if it was not agreed upon to experi ment on human brings; to test the value of these on human beings, they set up Buchenwald; why did the Waffen SS resort to the Buchenwald concentration camp if it was not determined before hand that they would experiment on human beings; why did they not go to the Military Academy and get volunteers; why did they not go to your institute and get volunteers if they wanted a compatibility test?
A. I understand the difficulty of understanding those reasons, they are really very complicated, but I may remind you that in the interrogations we discussed this point at grant length. You asked me which block was ordered first, Block 46, and I told you and it is still my opinion today that the vaccine production, which was later block 50, was ordered first. That was the idea which interested us in the Waffen SS and then there came a second development from a different source, that is from Grawitz and Himmler and the consequence of this second aspect was the creation of block 46; that is later block 46. This second development by-passed the first development because Ding became ill and was not able to work for more than six months and therefore the vaccine production could not begin.
Q. I won't argue the point any further, Doctor. I might say, as you stated, it was your intention to set up block 50 first and to set it up in the Buchenwald concentration camp; I ask you had that been the procedure why would you report to the Buchenwald concentration camp to set up a station for vaccine when it could have been done in any of your other institutes; was it because you people thought it necessary to experiment and you thought you had those guinea pigs; that is the only logical sequence, Doctor?
A. No, I beg your pardon, but that conclusion is not logical. In order to test a vaccine in concentration camps on human beings I do not need to put the production in the concentration camp, too many vaccines from other sources were tested too. The reason was quite a different one, which I have already explained to you very carefully. At the beginning of the war there were two bacteriologists in the Waffen.
SS. At the beginning of the campaign in the east the duties in the field of hygiene and epidemic control suddenly arose enormously. The assistants in Hygienic Institutes in Germany, who had been drafted into the Waffen SS, was a very small number; they were mostly very young and had only seen training in bacteriology. If we wanted to take over such a definite task as vaccine production, that is if we wanted to compete with industry, we had to have experienced men.
Where could we get these men? I knew that among the prisoners in various concentration camps there were foreign bacteriologists and quite well-known people. Dr. Horn, for example, mentioned the Czech professor, Thomaschek. He is a professor at the Czech University, a very well-known man in Europe. There were various other people under arrest.
At that time through Lolling I inquired of all the concentration camp doctors, and about ten to fifteen bacteriologists were reported. I said to myself, "If we do not have enough bacteriologists now, then there is the possibility that those bacteriologists who have a great deal of experience can participate in this work." I had another thought in the back of my head, too. In the first part of the war the prisoners who had previously studied medicine were not allowed to work as doctors. They were employed in the stone quarries and so forth. That is a terrible physical and mental effort for a man who is not used to such work.
I tried in this way to give them an opportunity to work in their own speciality again, not only as doctors but in their own specialized fields. That coincided with my own desire to have vaccine produced, although we did not have enough of our own SS doctors for this purpose and there was no opportunity to train people thoroughly enough.
Q That's enough on that line. Now, in your Document Book Number 1, Page 104, which is Mrugowsky Exhibit 19, the last paragraph states: "On request of Ministerialrat Dr. Bieber, it is also stipulated that in a large-scale experiment, agreed upon by the Robert Koch Institute and the Hygienist of the SS, Dr. Mrugowsky, both Weigl's vaccine and the vaccine of the Behring Works shall be included." What is this large-scale experiment?
A That refers again to the testing of the vaccine which is mentioned in the Bieber document which you submitted as a prosecution exhibit in connection with the discussion between Domnitz and myself. That's the same thing. It is called large-scale experiment apparently because it is a question of hundreds and thousands of vaccinations. One of my documents -- I believe it comes from Dr. Demnitz -- shows that as early as September, I believe it was, 1941, we informed the Behring Works of our need in respect to the Germans to be settled in the Eastern areas, whom I estimated at the time at 20,000.
That was really a large-scale experiment; and I think that that is what this word refers to; not experiment but test.
Q Well, summing up this discussion of the conferences, you do suggest that you had meetings or a meeting with Schreiber and Gildemeister. Now, was that meeting in the office of Schreiber in the Army Medical Inspectorate?
A Yes, that is correct. It must have been earlier. I remember that there was no snow at the time; and that would not have been the case in December. It must have been in the late fall.
Q You exclude the possibility that Dr. Ding was there; is that right?
AAt this discussion which is mentioned?
Q Yes.
A Yes, he certainly was not there.
Q However, you do admit to this Tribunal that in answer to a question in an interrogation on November 1st, 1946, by Mr. McHaney, regarding the statement by Ding on Page 1 of his diary, as to whether or not it was accurate, you answered, "I remember that meeting; and it occurred to me that there were present Schreiber, Gildemeister, Ding, and myself. It is possible that Rose and Reiter were present, too; but Handloser and Conti I don't remember as being present. I think that the meeting took place in a room of Schreiber's in the Army Medical Inspectorate." You admit that you said that in an answer to a question that Mr. McHaney propounded to you on November 1st, 1946, do you not?
A It is true that I said that; but I point out that it had been five years since the meeting and that my memory was not necessarily quite accurate and that it is much better to base one's opinion on the documents which speak quite clearly.
Q Now, you have stated here that you never issued orders to Dr. Ding regarding experimentation. I wish to call your attention to Document Number NO-257, which Prosecution Exhibit Number 283, on Page 10 of Document Book Number 12, wherein Dr. Ding states as follows: This is an affidavit of Dr. Ding. "At the end of 1942 I took part in a conference of the Military Doctors' Academy in Berlin. The topic of discussion was the fatality of gas burn serum on wounded. Now, Kilim and Mrugowsky gave reports of soldiers who had seen gas edema serum in high quantities up to 1500 c. c. an hour afterwards out of complete recuperation."
DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, I object to the use of this affidavit by Dr. Ding. I objected to it when it was submitted. Dr. Ding is dead. It is, therefore, no longer possible to call on him for cross examination. Written testimony of dead persons may not be used in the trial for this reason. I object to tho use of this testimony.
MR. HARDY: I won't comment, your Honor. The document has been admitted into evidence; and I feel that I can use it in cross examination.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection is overruled. The document may be used for purposes of cross examination of the witness.
Q I'll repeat. In substance this affidavit states that in 1942 a conference was held in tho Military Medical Academy in Berlin. Those present were Schreiber, Mrugowsky, Ding and apparently Kilian. Now, you have submitted an affidavit of Kilian here in which Kilian states that such a meeting took place. Do you remember attending that meeting?
A Yes.
Q The topic of discussion was gas burn serum, was it not?
A Yes, that is right.
Q Now, Dr. Ding states in his affidavit: "Mrugowsky suspected that the phenol content brought about the fatal results of the consolidation of the separate injections." Was that true?
A Yes.
Q Now, Ding goes on to say, "In the presence of the other gentlemen Mrugowsky, commanded me to take part in the euthanasia with phenol in a concentration camp and to describe the result in detail, since neither I nor Mrugowsky ever saw a case of death through phenol." If I understand it correctly, you deny that you ever commanded Ding to do such a thing; is that correct?
A It is very fortunate for me that Ding made this statement in the form in which he did. The other person present at this meeting, Prof. Kilian, says quite clearly in Ms document that in his presence no such assignments were mentioned. That refutes the statement of Ding. I have no necessity to do so either. We learn about phenol deaths in the pharmacology at the University; and we fail in the examination if we don't know about it.
Q Well, in this regard, how would you determine the tolerance of a serum containing phenol, unless you experimented with phenol or unless you experimented with the serum? Isn't there a problem there which should have been given consideration by the members of this meeting?
A Yes, that is true. There were two things to be considered; first, the symptoms of poisoning themselves were very well-known and did not require any investigation. It is known that death from phenol and damages to health can occur, such as appeared here after the use of gangrene serum; and it was a question of figuring out how much phenol is contained in 400 c. c. of gas gangrene serum. For example, that is 2 c. c. of concentrated carbolic acid; and the human body cannot stand that without harm being done. In the second place the possibility was discussed of testing this thing once more by experiments. Prof. Kilian speaks about this in his document. In the conference he reported that, I believe, four or five of his associates, assistants at Ms clinic in Breslau, had injected into their arteries a solution of phenol and table salt, and then all suffered certain symptoms of phenol poisoning. The situation was cleared up by this. There was no need for further experimentation.
This experiment had taken place before the meeting. Kilian reported about it. I said to Ding: "Orientate yourself about phenol poison as such it may become important in course of the war in cases of large doses of serum being given." I told him where literature was to be found at Jena. I said that because I was responsible for Ding's training as a hygienist and a bacteriologist, I am responsible to the state for training my assistants. At the end of their specialized training, I had to give a certificate that they had been properly trained.
For that reason I took advantage of all the opportunities which arose by accident to demonstrate to my assistants rather complicated questions in our field. For that reason I went to this meeting with Ding. I wanted to induce him to think about this question of gangrene, and it is better to do this on the basis of experience rather than on the written orders.
Q One last question, Doctor. As a result of this meeting, Ding then returned to Buchenwald and killed people with phenol injections. You deny that you commanded him to do that, and do you state that Ding did that on his own initiative? Is that your defense to Ding's statement?
A I certainly do deny that, yes. I had nothing whatever to do with it.
MR. HARDY: I believe this is a good breaking point, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess until 1:30 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 2 April 1947).
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
JOACHIM MRUGOWSKY - Resumed CROSS-EXAMINATION - Continued BY MR. HARDY:
Q Prior to the afternoon recess, doctor, we were discussing the phenol problem. Now in this connection did you at any time propose experiments to be conducted at Buchenwald concerning the tolerance of serum or sera containing phenol? That is, did you propose that in 1942 or 1943 or any time?
A No, no such suggestions were made and they were not necessary because in Germany every serum contains phenol. In the German serum industry there is no serum produced without phenol. I am speaking of the sera for therapeutic purposes, not vaccines.
Q Then at no time did you ever propose that experiments be conducted to determine the tolerance of sera containing phenol, is that what you say?
A No, I never suggested that.
Q Are you sure, doctor?
A Yes.
MR. HARDY: At this time, Your Honor, I offer Document NO-1198, as Prosecution Exhibit No. 466, for identification. This is a letter dated Berlin, 24 August 1944, Subject: Service of experiments, it has reference file indexes, addressed to the Chief Hygienist on the staff of the Reich Physician SS and Police, Berlin - Zehlendorf.
"Dear Mrugowsky:
"I am able to inform you that the Reichsfuehrer--SS has approved today the series of experiments proposed by you:
1. specific therapy with typhus 2. tolerance cf sera containing phenol.
"I agree that both series of experiments in the department for typhus and virus research of the Hygienic Institute cf the Waffen-SS in Weimar-Buchenwald should be carried out, and request that I be informed of the course of the findings, perhaps through intermediary reports."
By order of Grawitz Signature is "NICCLAI"
Q Now this states that the Reichsfuehrer-SS has approved a series cf experiments proposed by you and the experiments may be carried out in Buchenwald. You stated that you never proposed experiments to determine the tolerance of sera containing phenol. Now do you maintain, doctor, that you never initiated any experimentation to determine the tolerance of sera containing phenol?
A Yes. The connection here is something quite different. I shall discuss point 2 first. I have already said that in Germany there were no sera without phenol. In connection with this phenol question in German serum, I informed Grawitz about the discussion which is being discussed here, at which Kilian and Schreiber were present, and I told him that the industry should try to produce sera without phenol, as the French serum industry had been doing for same time. I knew that suggestions to that effect had been sent to the industry, but that the German serum industry had refused, during the war, to effect any such basic change in its production because it was not in a position to obtain the necessary special apparatus, filters, etc. I therefore told Grawitz that in serum therapy for ordinary diseases -- I was thinking primarily of diptheria, in which large quantities of serum were used at the time in the therapy against diptheria once it had broken cut, because the highly concentrated serum was no longer available in necessary quantities -- I told him that in such diseases one should watch to see whether damage migrht result from phenol.
and I told him that it would be desirable to know whether serum without phenol would definitely prevent such a shock and etc. I also remember that this point two had connection with the fact we had negotiated with Behring Works for the production of serum frequently in small quantities in order to use them, and to compare them with other serum. If I remember correctly this involved diphtheria serum, that is the serum which is used mostly in Germany. The comparison was to be made of symptoms following the administration of the usual diphtheria serum containing phenol in the children preventing from diphtheria, and which was to be seen whether the symptoms would appear and the symptoms following the administration of the serum freed from phenol were to be noted. This was what Grawitz mean there, and he called that a series of experiments. I might point out that this expressed series of experiments in this case cannot refer to artificial infection, because with diphtheria it is not possible to have a human being artificially infected with diphtheria serum.
Q. Doctor, after receiving this confirmation of your proposals to perform experiments as outlined in this letter, you must have issued orders in that regard. Now to whom did you issue those orders?
A. No, I did not issue any orders. In my opinion this concerns activities of some civilian hospitals; for among the troops, and in concentration camps we did not have any diphtheria patients.
Q. Just a moment, Doctor. But it is said in this letter Grawitz agrees that these experiments can be carried out in Department of Typhus Virus Research of the Hygienic Institute of the Waffen-SS in Weimar-Buchenwald. Did you or did you not carry out these experiments in Weimar-Buchenwald?
A. No.
Q. Never issued any orders to carry out such experiments to Ding, for instance?
A. I have already explained what this series of experiments mean. It is possible that I suggested for example that he was to vaccinate one child with one kind of serum and another child with another serum.
That is possible; I don't remember about that. But to try out serum containing phenol on human beings, that I did not order.
Q. Then as a result of this letter of Grawitz to you approving your proposals, you took no action, is that right?
A. No. I may point out that this has no connection with the Ding affidavit, which also refer to serum containing phenol.
Q. I am not asking you that question. Did you or did you not as a result of this confirmation of your proposals order that experiments be carried cut as outlined in this letter? I am not interested in other phases of experimentation at Buchenwald. Did you or did you not carry out or have carried out experiments as outlined in this letter?
A. I do not know anything about experiments which were carried out.
Q. You told us on direct examination that you had specific therapy with typhus carried out at Buchenwald, didn't you?
A. Yes. I was referring to point two, serum containing phenol, and as to No. 1 specific therapy with typhus, I explained that in my direct examination. Do you want me to repeat it.
Q. No, you don't need to explain it again, You did as a result of this confirmation and proposal pass down orders in compliance with this letter to Buchenwald?
A. No. It was not an order, but a suggestion. As I have said in my direct examination it was not a series of experiments in the sense of artificial infection that would have been senseless, because we had enough people suffering from typhus with whom this therapy could be carried out. It is unfortunately so that in the German language we use a word "experiment" not only in artificial infection but also for tests of such a nature, and that we call them experiments, too.
Q Then you only passed it along as a suggestion and not as an order, is that what you wish to state?
A Just a suggestion to certain internists, that, in the case of typhus, against it we had no treatment, they should test this new treatment, which in a clinically similar instance paratyphus "A" had very good results; for that reason I was of the opinion would have justified in trying it and of the same way in typhus. This suggestion, I believe, went to three different persons, who were internists in the SS hospitals, and I believe they were in Berlin, Prague, and some other hospitals, and it is quite possible that I also made such a suggestion to Ding, because I know that I discussed this matter with my assistants, but not with the purpose of starting a series of experiments with artificial infection.
Q Let's go on doctor. On direct examination you said you knew nothing about high altitude experiments, is that right?
A That is right, yes.
Q In addition you knew nothing about Rascher's Research work at all?
A No, I knew nothing about Rascher's Research work.
Q Now Document No. NO-647, which is Prosecution Exhibit No. 124, which is found on the last page of Document Book 3, there is a note by Sievers which states as follows: "Subject: Cooperation of Hygienic Institute of the Waffen-SS. In reference to my letter 9/2/42, regarding vermin -(reads letter.) Now do you state that Sievers erroneously included your name in this notation in connection with the research of the gastein water?
A Yes, in this discussion I remember this discussion with Sievers in my Institute very well. It was fortunate circumstances
Q Net's not go into other discussions. Did you or did you not discuss the research field of Rascher's with regard to use of the gastein water in cases of freezing, as stated in this document?
AAccording to what Sievers has told me here, he asked me who within the SS hospitals, and medical inspectorate of the SS, of the medical office was competent for such experiments, and he also said that this water was actually used later against freezing in the SS hospitals in Vienna. Of this specific point about the gastein water I don't remember. It could only be a particularly brief question, but we certainly did not discuss Rascher's work of either high altitude experiments, or cold experiments. On those Professor Schadler who is mentioned here, has been here since yesterday, and he will testify as to what we discussed at this meeting, and he will confirm what I have said that we did not discuss Rascher's research work.
Q Now you have said on direct examination your representative or a member of your staff of the Institute attended the Nuernberg meeting on freezing, and he reported to you about the meeting, is that right?
A Yes.
Q. As a matter of fact you stated in direct examination that you visited Dachau itself or that you were unable to get into the inner camp, is that right?
A. I said that in the spring of 1943 I was in Dachau at a food meeting. I was not in the concentration camp and I did not talk to any of these people. I also said that this meeting probably took place after Rascher had finished the high altitude and cold experiments. As far as I remember it was in May, and his experiment only lasted until April, but I was not quite sure whether the meeting might not have been at the end of April, but in any case, and this is confirmed by the affidavit of Pohl, it is certain that I had no opportunity to talk to anyone who worked at this experimental station of Rascher's and had no opportunity to enter the concentration camp, since we were taken oat from munich all of us together, and after the meeting we were all taken back together.
Q. You also stated in direct examination that you received knowledge from Grawitz of schilling's experiments with malaria, but that you had no opportunity to interfere since you were still in the Ss-Fuehrungshauptamt, is that right?
A. Yes, that is right.
Q. Now, you are aware, of course, that schilling's worm continued until the end of the war, aren't you?
A. Yes, that is true. I heard of it here.
Q. Then after you became Chief Hygienist, that is chief of Office 3 in Grawitz office you didn't interfere with Schilling's work either, did you?
A. I did not know at that time that Schilling's work was still going on.
I can testify quite definitely under oath that outside of this intermediary report, which I believe was in 1942, I never had anything more to do with the whole matter, and was quite astonished when I learned suddenly after the collapse that Schilling had continued the malaria experiment in Dachau until 1945. This is my explanation for that. According to the records of the trial at Dachau Schilling approached Himmler by mediation of Conti, and Grawitz told me at the time that he himself had no influence on these matters because they had been ordered by Himmler personally. Grawitz had not been included in the matter, and I believe that is also shown by the record of the trial at Dachau. I was of the opinion that these matters had gone directly from Schilling to Grawitz. That was my opinion until the beginning of this trial here. In any case I never had anything more to do with it. I never read anything about it. I was never told anything about it, and I never did anything. I never took any steps in the matter. I was convinced that it had long been finished.
Q. Well now, regarding the sulfonilamide experiments, on direct examination you didn't deny that the cultures came from the hygine institute to the Waffen SS, did you?.
A. No, that is not right. I only said that it was possible. There is a difference, isn't there? I myself know nothing about it. I was not in Berlin at that time.
Q. Fischer says that the cultures came from the hygine institute to the Waffen SS, doesn't he?
A. Yes.
Q. You were chief of that institute, weren't you?
A. Yes.