It is not impossible. There were many, many doctors in the institute whose names I do not know, or don't know today.
Q: When did you meet Dr. Klauberg for the first time?
A: The bacteriologist, Dr. Klauberg, I met at a micro-biologic conference, and I heard him deliver a lecture there, but I cannot remember ever having had a private conversation with him. You are referring to this bacteriologist, aren't you?
Q: I am referring to Dr. Klauberg, another SS physician.
A: I do not know any SS doctor, Klauberg.
Q: And you are sure you never had any affiliations with Schumann and Klauberg?
A: So far as I can remember I never had anything to do with those two, nor can I remember any correspondence with them. I think I can say with absolute certainty that I had no connections with them at all.
Q: Doctor, for the moment I wish to propound a hypothetical question to you. If you have a drug which will be effective on males and not on females, would its use for sterilization be sound -- for purposes of sterilization be sound?
A: I didn't understand the question. Could you please repeat it?
Q: Well now, if you have a drug which is effective and will effect the sterility of a male but not a female, would it be sound scientifically and medically to use that drug in actual practice, or would there be danger that the males to whom the drug was administered might, in some instances, not become sterilized?
A: The effect of caladium was net the same in all animals. We found great differences in the effectiveness. The resistance of an animal to such a substance is very great; that is to say, the differences in resistance are very great. It could be, and it actually did happen, that some of the animals were sterilized and some of the animals were not sterilized at all, or if some were sterilized, only much later.
Now whether or not this was healthy for the animals, I should like to have that explained mere closely. What do you mean by healthy? Are you talking about a general poisoning? I must say that I have the impression that were animals died when being fed caladium in their food than animals died that weren't being fed caladium. It is possible that this effect on the glands with internal secretion also has a toxic influence on other organs or was your question intended differently?
Q: No, that answer is sufficient, Doctor. Doctor, did you have any misgivings after having been approached by Oswald Pohl regarding the production and experimentation with caladium sequinum?
A: Yes, because we thought we saw some purpose behind these maneuvers which we couldn't recognize for certain, but which we suspected the nature of. For that reason we had misgivings and for that reason we carried out experiments in 1939-40 in a way that from the scientific point of view is not acceptable. They were simply carried on in a pseudo exact way.
Q: Well then, what was the reason for your misgivings, if you thought that caladium sequinum would not be effective if applied to human beings?
A: Because that's an open question and you never can tell what will come of such investigations. We didn't even want to broach this question from the scientific point of view, entirely aside from the question what ultimate goals the SS might be having in this, namely the possible sterilization of human beings.
Q: Well then, you can't agree with the position taken by Dr. Pokorny after having read your publication, that it would be impossible to sterilize a human being by use of caladium sequinum?
A: At the time when uve wrote the paper, and I think even today also, because I do not know that any further investigations have been carried out of this question, you can say that it was impossible. What it will be in the future that, as I have already repeatedly said, no one can know, because it is an open question.
Q: You have never had any reports from the SS concerning the results of work with caladium sequinum on human beings or never have heard of any?
A: No, that cannot be. We made no caladium available for such purposes and that being the case, the SS would have had to find caladium elsewhere. We never delivered any or did we ever have any reason to believe that anywhere in this world caladium was being used on human beings, even in one single instance.
Q: However, it could well have been done without your knowledge?
A: That is quite possible.
MR. HARDY: I have no further questions, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, I would like to ask you if there is any botanical relationship between this drug, caladium, and the drug botanical product used in South America by the Indians known as curare?
THE WITNESS: No, so far as I know there is no connection between the two, because curare is used as a prison and it paralyzes the animal. It is toxic to the nervous system, but in a case of caladium we never had the impression that it was of such toxicity to the nerves as curare is.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. Any further questions to the witness? There being none the witness is excused from the stand.
DR. HOFFMAN: I have no further questions, your Honor.
(Witness excused).
DR. HOFFMANN: Mr. President, perhaps between now and the noon recess I could put in the rest of my documents so that after the pause I can call my witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, counsel.
DR. HOFFMANN: As Exhibit No. 24 I put in Document No. 24 from Document Book II. This is an extract from the minutes of the Interational Military Tribunal in Nuernberg on 9 August 1946. This is the examination of Sievers by Elwyn Jones on 9 August 1946.
HR. HARDY: Your Honor, this is an extract of the proceedings of the International. Military Tribunal which doesn't necessarily need to bear a document number. However, it is not certified in the manner prescribed by the Tribunal and should be certified by the Secretary General. I won't object but suggest it be certified in the proper form.
DR. HOFFMANN: I personally certified this extract. However, I can also have it done through the Secretary General should that be necessary.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, as a matter of expediency I withdraw my objection but want to do that with the reservation that any extracts from the record should be certified by the Secretary General.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel is correct. It may be waived in this instance. The document will be admitted as Pokorny Exhibit 24.
DR. HOFFMANN: I should like to read this document very briefly. Mr. Elwyn Jones, the prosecuting attorney, asked the question of the witness Sievers: "Do you know that in connection with this matter" - that is, relative to Dr. Pokorny's letter which is an issue here "hothouses were erected where these plants were cultivated?
"Answer: No, I do not know this. In connection with this, I recollect only the following: that this publication was sent to Dr. Madaus for comments, without mentioning the remarkable suggestion of Dr. Pokorny for comments of Dr. von Wuenzelburg who is an expert on tropical plants and who stated at once that such a plant could not be cultivated here and was not available."
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, I do not notice that this exhibit is con tained in your document book.
I was mistaken - it does show the record of the page of the International Tribunal proceedings.
DR. HOFFMANN: The next document I put in evidence is Document 25. This will be Exhibit No. 25 and is on page 62. This is an affidavit of the affiant before Military Tribunal II, namely Oswald Pohl, who on seeing Document NO-041, Exhibit No. 156, made additions to his statement of 14 July 1946, Document NO-065, to the following effect: "My letter of 7 September 1942, NO-041, shows that I had employed SS Sturmbannfuehrer Lolling in connection with caladium. Now, I never heard any more from Lolling concerning experiments with caladium. Had experiments with caladium in fact been made, Lolling would have reported to me about them. As this was not the case, no experiments could have been made."
Now comes Prosecution Document 26, Exhibit No. 26, page 63. This is an affidavit by Dr. W. Gottschald, Ph.D. - correction - the affidavit is signed by Dr. Thren, director of the Biological Firm of Dr. Madaus and Co., whom I first intended to call as a witness and from whom I now put in this affidavit. This affidavit of 2 January 1947 states the following:
"Since 16 August 1936 I have been working as a biologist at the Biological Institute of the firm Dr. Madaus and Co. after Dr. Koch evacuated Radebeul in February 1945 with a large part of the equipment of the institute, I directed the institute.
"I know that before I took over animal experiments with caladium secuinum were performed at the institute. However, this was done only on a small scale as the cultivation of this plant, a typical hothouse plant, is very difficult. I am not aware that caladium was supplied for sterilization experiments on human beings. not any "I know that not any / members of the SS came to inspect the institute.
In my presence, however, nothing was discussed with them concerning caladium experiments."
And it says at the end: "I would add that I was never a member of the NSDAP or of any of its affiliated organizations."
The next document that I want to put in is Pokorny Document No. 19.
This will be Exhibit 27, Document Book II, page 54. This is an affidavit by professor Hellmut Weese, director of the Pharmacological Institute in Duesseldorf, and who makes statements regarding effects produced by caladium.
Then I shall put in Document 20, Exhibit 28, page 56. This is an affidavit by August Wilhelm Forst from Munich, professor of pharmacology, and this also discusses the effects of caladium. From this affidavit of Weese I should like to read only the last paragraph:
"Apart from these restrictions, however, the whole train of thought seems to me to be without pertinent significance, since large scale transplantation of a tropical plant to Europe would hardly have been possible during the war.
"Because of the unspecific effect of the caladium extract, its virulently poisonous quality, the doubt as to whether it can be planted and used in our moderate zone, I consider it extremely improbable that even a doctor of only average education will attempt with conviction the experiment of sterilizing human beings with caladium extract on the basis of the work of Madaus and Koch. Convincing papers for the problem referred to other than the work of Madaus and Koch are not know to me."
THE PRESIDENT: This completes, counsel, the introduction of your documents, I think.
DR. HOFFMANN: Yes, it does. Permit me to call the witness after the noon recess.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess until 1:30 o'clock this afternoon.
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1335 hours, 26 June 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, I am informed that the examination of the witness, Jung, will not take much more than an hour. At the end thereof I think Dr. Servatius will be prepared to complete the afternoon by introducing supplemental document books of the defendant Karl Brandt. The Prosecution requests to call, out of order, that is, before the completion of the supplemental documentary evidence of the defense, 2 witnesses tomorrow. One is Josef Laubinger and the other is Karl Hoellenreiter, both gypsies, who were subjected to the sea-water experiments at Dachau. I would like to be sure that Dr. Steinbauer is informed - he is in the city - and will be available tomorrow when these 2 witnesses appear, if it meets with the approval of the Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: See that Dr. Steinbauer is informed of the fact that these witnesses will be called tomorrow morning.
MR. HARDY: Very well.
DR. HOFFMANN (Counsel for the defendant Pokorny): I should like to call the witness, Jung, at this time.
THE PRESIDENT: The Marshal will summon the witness, Friedrich Jung.
FRIEDRICH JUNG, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows:
JUDGE SEBRING: Please hold up your right hand and be sworn: I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth and will withhold and add nothing.
(The witness repeated the oath.)
JUDGE SEBRING: You may be seated.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. HOFFMANN:
Q Witness, please tell the Tribunal when and where you were born?
A On the 21st of April 1915, in Friedrichshafen.
Q Please describe your scientific training.
A I studied medicine at Tuebingen, Koenigsberg and Berlin. Since 1938 I have been an assistant at the Pharmacological Institute in Berlin, under Professor Huebner. In 1943, I was at the Pharmacological Institute of Tuebingen as a scientific assistant and since the beginning of 1946, I have been head of the Pharmacological Institute of the University of Wuerzburg and hold the Chair of Pharmacology there.
Q Witness, are you an expert on pharmacological questions?
A Yes, I believe so.
Q Witness, what do you think of homeopathy or bio-chemistry?
A Homeopathy or bio-chemistry is a very interesting system of healing which, at the time of its origin was a reaction to the one-sided attitude of classical medicine. It is noteworthy and no doubt justified and has many good aspects; but I consider it psychologically remarkable that for 137 years this system has remained essentially unchanged as a doctrine although in the past century the development of modern scientific medicine has come to a certain degree of perfection. I consider this all the more remarkable inasmuch as the advocates of homeopathy at the time, insofar as they are doctors, have the advantage of the high medical training of our universities and medical academies and should realize the unsoundness of the tenets of homeopathy. The latter has been testified to by internists and pharmacologists on many occasions. Schissler's bio-chemistry, which is not to be confused with physiological chemistry, is closely connected with homeopathy and is derived from it.
Q Witness, is it true that in instruction at the universities a similar antagonistic attitude toward biot-chemistry or homeopathy is expressed?
A Yes. I, myself, am in the habit of going into these things in detail in my courses. During my own studies at the University of Tuebingen and Berlin, I heard nothing else. I know no German member of my profession, responsible for teaching students pharmacy and related subjects, who is an advocate of homeopathy.
Q Witness, do you believe the firm Madaus is in favor of this homeopathic tendency in medicine?
A Yes. I have known the Madaus firm for many years as a leading firm in this connection. I have always had the impression that it publishes propaganda among laymen and doctors very extensively. As an example of the nature of this propaganda, one could mention Madaus year books of all the past years.
Q Witness, what we are interested in here is that the firm published a paper by Madaus and Koch, on the question of the use of caladium. You know this paper and if you have an opinion on it, I ask you from what point of view do you believe the Madaus firm came to carry out experiments with caladium seguinum?
A From the final statement of this paper itself one can see that it was carried out in a series of experiments performed by the Madaus firm, to study the influence on the hormone structure by plant material. This question is no doubt extremely interesting and scientifically rewarding but it is an obvious assumption that the aim of the work was rather to find a basis for the use of caladium in homeopathic practice in interruptions of potency, sterility, frigidity, etc. That the Madaus firm had certain propagandistic purposes in publishing this paper can be seen from the publication of the results of the work in a popular magazine, a procedure which is not customary.
Q Witness, what possibilities are there, in principle, for sterilization?
Q Witness, what possibilities are there in principle for sterilization?
A From the papers which have been given to me I have observed that a clear distinction is not made between sterilization and castration, and I should like to clarify that here first. Sterilization, generally, means disturbance of the capacity for reproduction. Sterilization includes castration. That is, nor merely disturbing the reproductive capacity, but removing the reproductive glands from the organism which has deep-seated consequences for the whole human being. There are false disturbances of the psychic and of the working ability. I believe that the problem under discussion here is not the problem of castration, but the problem of the simple disturbance of the reproductive capacity while retaining the other aspects of the personality of the human being. I shall not go into the various procedures which are used in medicine. When a human being, especially a woman, is to be sterilized, temporarily, because what is at issue here is permanent disability of the reproductive capacity, is interruption of the output of the reproductive glands. That can be done by putting an obstruction at any point, that is by performing a surgical operation. The second possibility is that the human being, as a whole, remains normal, the only thing that is lost is the reproductive capacity. The second most radical possibility is the removal of the reproductive glands which involves castration, and various other serious symptoms, reduction of working capacity, serious psychological changes. A procedure which in practice would be out of the question. Another possibility is radiotion of the reproductive glands with X-ray or radium rays, and thus damaging then severely. There are certain very definite disturbances, depending on the degree of irradiation. This is in all equivalent to castration. X-ray sterilization or X-ray castration does not guarantee 100 percent, success, unless one is using very large doses. This X-ray sterilization is based on the fact that X-rays effect particularly young, rapidly growing tissue, such as reproductive glands are, but there is no specific procedure for sterilization because X-rays will effect also other quickly growing tissue.
I am thinking of the blood building system of the body. If one were to radiate the whole body with the dose necessary for irradiating the reproductive glands, the person would probably die of a severe blood disease. Another possibility is poison, which also effects specifically quickly growing tissue. As an example I would like to mention Benzol. When these poisons are introduced into the human body, there is no way of controlling the effect. If, for example, Benzol is administered to a human being the reproductive glands are damaged it is true, but before this can take effect, the blood building organs which react similarly, are damaged even more severely, and the human being dies. We have the picture of chronical Benzol poisoning very frequently as an industrial disease. In most such cases we have no complaint about sterilizing effect. Another way of affecting the reproductive glands is to interrupt the sexual life of the organism. One can perform an operation in the central nervous system at a certain spot. That is, of course, not acceptible for practical sterilization. One can do the same by removing the pitituary gland, the hypophysis. It is important for the activity of the reproductive glands. That is also a very difficult operation and very frequently brings about the death of the experimental animal, but one can also administer the hormones produced by this gland to the human gland in larger quantities and thus the regularting mechanism is disturbed. We distinguish two hormones, Prolan A and Prolan B.
MR. HARDY: May it please, Your Honor, I just can't understand the purpose of this testimony. Is this witness an expert on the subject of sterilization or is he testifying as to facts concerning Pokorny's implications in the experiments, or is he testifying as to the reliability of the Madaus Company, or to the effect of caladium segunium?
If he is testifying to the effect of caladium segunium, I don't think the other discussion is necessary.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal shares the doubt expressed by the Prosecuting attorney, so far the point of this witness's testimony is not easily discernible. Just what is the purpose of it, counsel? If the witness is going to read a long document it might be better if it were presented in the form of an affidavit and put into the document book.
DR. HOFFMANN: Mr. President, I believe that this expert witness had already finished his general statements. I consider his last statements of value, which refer to specific and non-specific sterilization.
THE PRESIDENT: Concerning what phase of the issues before the court is the witness to testify to?
DR. HOFFMANN: The witness is to testify that specific sterilization is impossible for caladium.
THE PRESIDENT: Then instruct the witness to proceed to give testimony on that subject.
Q Witness, you have heard, please speak of the possibility of sterilization on the organism as a whole, and not on the reproductive glands specifically.
A I shall be briefer. I thought it was necessary to go into some detail, because in my opinion the sterilizing effect of caladium can not be understood, and the basis of the procedure can not be understood, unless one is informed as to how human beings and animals can be sterilized at all. If one does not understand sterilization in general one can fall into the error of feeling this is a relative specific work.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, just a moment.
Counsel, why would this testimony not be more effective if prepared in the form of an affidavit and put into a document book. I can assure you it adds nothing to testimony such as this to have it repeated in open court.
It is even more useful to the Tribunal if it is in the form of an affidavit in the document book, unless the prosecution attorney cares to cross examine the witness.
MR. HARDY: I have no desire to cross-examine this witness, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, it seems to me clear that the testimony of this witness would be even more valuable to the Tribunal in the form of an affidavit, that would be submitted as one of your documents.
DR. HOFFMANN: Mr. President, I shall gladly comply with the wish of the Tribunal and shall submit an affidavit from this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: I would ask you, counsel, if this witness can testify directly to any of the activities of the defendant Pokorny in regard to this matter or anything that he did in the matter of caladium or endeavoring to procure caladium to be used as an experimental drug, or is this witness testifying merely to scientific facts as he sees them?
DR. HOFFMANN: He had no direct connection with the defendant Pokorny. He can testify only to the scientific value of the matter, especially what an average doctor would think of this working after studying the results of the animal experiments.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for Prosecution stated he did not care to cross-examine the witness. I am sure the testimony of this witness would be equally of value to the Tribunal in the form of an affidavit and save considerable time. The Tribunal accepts your offer to withdraw the witness and put his statement in the form of an affidavit. It must be numbered and submitted in the form of an exhibit when offered. The witness Jung is excused from the witness stand.
DR. HOFFMANN: Witness, you are excused.
THE PRESIDENT: I would ask the Secretary if Defendant Pokorny's counsel has provided these witness sheets if they are available for the witnesses called this morning and this afternoon for Pokorny, the witnesses Trux, Koch and Jung.
MR. HARDY: The Secretary reports he has no such documents furnished.
THE PRESIDENT: They should be prepared and furnished to the Tribunal.
Does counsel for Defendant Pokorny have anything further to offer?
DR. HOFFMANN: No, I am finished with my case then.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I believe Dr. Servatius is prepared to submit the rest of his documentary evidence in the case of Karl Brandt. If he does not anticipate he will fill out the rest of the day, I suppose Dr. Nelte will be ready to put in supplemental affidavits or documents for Handloser.
THE PRESIDENT: Is Dr. Nelte, counsel for Handloser, prepared to submit any further documents?
The Tribunal has not only on the bench the subsequent document book, the last document book, prepared by Dr. Servatius, I think they are all in our offices.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, we have a rather unusual circumstance here. I searched my files and find from Dr. Servatius about five or six supplements. Now he has lined up in order the documents out of these supplements which he will introduce. I think he has prepared one for the Tribunal and one for the Prosecution in addition to the supplement he put out in the book, he has them now and in the order in which he will present them. I wonder if we could recess for about ten minutes, and line up the supplementary books and then the copies for the judges can be lined up at the same time.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the Tribunal will be in recess.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is agin in session.
DR. SERVATIUS: For Karl Brandt:
Mr. President, I have the documents in a new order for the convenience of the Court. I shall hand you this copy. They are no new documents in there. They are simply in a different order.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, this supplemental document book Dr. Servatius has just passed up to your Honors contains on the front page an index which starts out with Karl Brandt Exhibit No. 82, and runs down through Exhibit 30. If he puts them in evidence this index will start out with his first exhibit being No. 30. Now it would be most convenient for the Prosecution and I am sure for the Tribunal if at a later date Dr. Servatius could supply us with an index of the first 29 exhibits, then we could take all the documents which he is not offering and delete them from the document book and then we would have them in chronological order, 1 through 29, and then follow along in the manner in which he is going to offer them and it would be much simpler for the Prosecution, and then we would know just what documents he intends to introduce.
THE PRESIDENT: That suggestion will be followed, of course. Each member of the Tribunal should have a complete document book, but meanwhile we can proceed with the submission of these documents as we now stand with one document book in which the exhibit numbers will be noted.
DR. SERVATIUS: Mr. President, the document which I intend to offer fall into two categories, one affidavits about definite counts of the indictment. The rest is extracts from literature as evidence as to the lack of reliability of the experiments on euthanasia.
First, I shall offer the affidavits on the actual charges, document Karl Brandt 821, I offer as Exhibit 30. This is an affidavit by an Assistant Judge Geist, who was in contact with Karl Brandt through the office of planning and economy through 1943. He testified about the activity of this office, especially the relationship of the office of planning and economy to the office for science and research.
He says that the greatest influence was with business economy, not with planning and research. He says Professor Brandt never brought any political point of view into the work, and that the planning office did not have any political character, members of the office did not belong to the party.
Now comes document 47 as Exhibit 31, it is an affidavit of the Arms Adjutant of the Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler, who speaks of Brandt's connection with the Hitler office and his activities.
The next document from the supplemental volume II is document KB 91, an affidavit by Heinrich Hoerlein, pharmaceutical technical department of the I G Farben Industry. He speaks of Brand't office and he confirms what Luebke said about planning and research. He also says that he believes Brandt was against the interruption of industry and prevented great damage at the end of the war.
The next document, KB-102, is an affidavit of Dr. Luebke, who also worked in the Office of Planning and Research, of November '43, also an office reply on research. He confirms that this office had more influence than the one for science and research and speaks about Professor Brandt's actual activity. He also says that the office never had any political character. On the contrary, industry frequently asked this office for protection.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, for the sake of the record assign an exhibit number to each one of these. The last one that you just referred to is Exhibit 33.
DR. SERVATIUS: 33.
THE PRESIDENT: Announce the exhibit number with each document for the sake of the record.
DR. SERVATIUS: Now I offer KB-112, which will be Exhibit 34. This is a chart of Karl Brandt's office. The Court asked the defendant Karl Brandt to prepare such a chart. This chart shows the working connections. Brandt's subordination was limited to the offices for science and research and planning and economy. I don't intend to go into this chart in detail. That would take too much time and in my opinion it is not of any special significance.
THE PRESIDENT: Do I understand, counsel that this is Karl Brandt Document 112?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes, 112, Exhibit 34.
THE PRESIDENT: The number of the document is missing from the copy in this book. That's why I inquire.
DR. SERVATIUS: KB-112, affidavit of Professor Karl Brandt about this chart.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, the next document in your book does not correspond with the index which you handed the Tribunal. On this index you have Karl Brandt Document 120, and that is not contained in the book. The next document in the book is Number KB-88.
DR. SERVATIUS: One document is missing, KB-120, Number 188. It has not been translated yet.
That will be the one following KB-112, after the chart.
MR. HARDY: Might I inquire whether Number 188 is the document which has been offered by the prosecution or is that a new document?
DR. SERVATIUS: I obtained this document from the Defense Information Center. It has not yet been offered by the prosecution. I intend to offer it now. We have not yet got the English translation. I offer KB-120 as Exhibit 35. It is not very long.
THE PRESIDENT: That is the document which is missing from this book, counsel.
DR. SERVATIUS: Is the affidavit KB-102 by Luebke missing?
THE PRESIDENT: KB-120, Number 188.
DR. SERVATIUS: That is the document that I want to offer now. That is missing. It has not been translated yet.
THE PRESIDENT: That is missing?
DR. SERVATIUS: It has not been translated yet. It is one page long and I should like to read it into the record.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, the document will be supplied for the document book later?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: It will be Exhibit 35.
DR. SERVATIUS: I shall only give the contents. This refers to the position of the Ahnenerbe office. It is a very characteristic document of the ambitions of this office to seize all research. First there is an order by Himmler which says the Reichsfuehrer-SS has entrusted the Ahnenerbe with the execution of all scientific research assignments. Then comes a notice about a telephone conversation of the 17th of August 1942 saying Hitler is to be asked to issue an order saying that all scientific research work in the SS is to be under the control of the Ahnenerbe, and it is added, "Such an order is of great importance and special urgency. He could not say any more." Finally, there is a letter to Himmler, speaking of the foundation of the Ahnenerbe, and I quote: "In a short time it must come to the point where we surpass the efforts of Reichsleiter Rosenberg and that it will become the research office for National Socialism.
This will be possible only if we all stand together and if everything connected with research, no matter what field, is in the Ahnenerbe and is directed from there." I believe this document is of great significance in judging the position of Himmler and the Ahnenerbe in research.
Now, there follow a number of documents on the experimentation on human beings. First, KB-88 which I offer as Exhibit 36. This is the affidavit, the first one, of Dr. von Kleng, who was an assistant of Dr. Ambros in the special committee of the Ministry for Armament and War Production. He speaks about "N" product which is a subject of the indictment and explains the significance of this material. He says that it is not a gas and was out of the question for such purposes but that later the problem was taken up anew by the SS and worked on themselves.
Now follows KB-89 which is Exhibit 37. This is another affidavit of Dr. von Kleng, speaking of the gas decree, the text of which is not known. He says that this decree entrusted Karl Brandt with anti-chemical warfare.
The next is KB-97 which is offered as Exhibit 38. It is the testimony of a Dr. Gutermut who speaks of the danger of liver punctures which was discussed here during the trial. He says it is very harmless and is performed in all modern clinics in the world.
The next document is KB-98 which I offer as Exhibit 39. It is an affidavit by the witness Dietzsch who was examined here. He stated at the time that Professor Brandt had been in Buchenwald at one time. He says here: "I declare that I made my statements solely on the basis of the information given by Dr. Ding; that is, that I myself never saw Professor Karl Brandt in Buchenwald."
There follows KB-99 which will be Exhibit 40. It is an affidavit by the co-defendant Professor Schroeder about the question of the ointment for burns. The defendant Brandt was accused of having passed on an ointment for experiments for phosphorous burns. This affidavit says that such an ointment was offered to the Luftwaffe, too, and it says here that Professor Brandt made an ointment available to him which was supposed to be suitable for use on phosphorous burns, and the doctor who reported this to Professor Schroeder said, no, Professor Schroeder said he told the doctor to get in touch with the firm to obtain amounts for tests in hospitals and first aid stations.
The Court will remember that was the statement of the defendant Brandt, that he had not passed this ointment on for research purposes but only for tests.
There follows Document 101, Exhibit 41, an affidavit by Dr. Ambros, who speaks about chemical warfare agents. He worked for I.G. Farben and had to work on chemical warfare agents and protective agents. He says that in 1944 he came into touch with Karl Brandt. On that occasion Professor Brandt said that he had to take an interest in chemical warfare agents and countermeasures. At the same time he showed a letter from Hitler and said that he was primarily concerned with obtaining materials for gas masks. He went to two factories with Brandt and Brandt wanted to get a general picture of chemical warfare agents. He says there was great uneasiness at the time about getting protection against chemical warfare as it was thought that the Allies would use poisonous gases. It was said that they had brought poisonous gas over with them when they landed at Tunis. It was also said that the Russians had new gas masks which fact pointed to the possibility of the use of a new poison gas. On the German side, there was definitely a serious shortage of chemical warfare protective equipment, the reason why Karl Brandt was given the special assignment to obtain gas masks.