A So far I hadn't known about that since I am not informed about internal working of the concentration camps. I myself had never belonged to any staff of a concentration camp, or any other staff of that nature, and I, therefore, didn't know anything about these matters; but on the basis of the documents which I have seen here now and it became apparent to me that in the case of Buchenwald the furnishing of the inmates was done by two agencies at different times. During the first period of time it was done by the local camp administration and, at a later date, after the year 1943, it was done centrally by the Reich Criminal Police Office, which is the State Agency which is exclusively competent for criminal prisoners.
Q And what, in your opinion, is Dr. Ding's responsibility?
A He is responsible for the proper execution of experiments with which he had been entrusted.
Q I shall speak about your own responsibility a little later. I should not like to turn to the high altitude experiments. You know that you are indicted because of high altitude experiments, too. Did you know Dr. Rascher?
A No.
Q Did you know that high altitude experiments were carried out in the concentration camp of Dachau?
A No.
Q Did you hear a report about high altitude experiments in Dachau on the occasion of a meeting of Consulting Physicians?
A No.
Q Before your arrest did you on any occasion hear or were informed about high altitude experiments?
A No.
Q Did you know the defendants Ruff and Romberg?
A No.
Q Did your official activity have any connection with the questions which were to be clarified by the use of high altitude experiments?
A No, not in the least.
Q And, now I turn to the cold experiments. Did you hear about the cold experiments which were conducted by Dr. Rascher at Dachau?
A Not before the beginning of this trial.
Q The Prosecution, when submitting the report about the cold conference in Nurnberg, which is Document NO-401, Prosecution Exhibit 93 to be found on page 312 of the English record and page 355 of the German transcript, has stated that the Waffe-SS was represented as No. 33 of the list of the participants in this meeting whereby the name of Obersturmbannfuehrer Motthum of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen--SS was mentioned. The Prosecution pointed out that the Hygiene Institute was subordinate to you and Dr. Genzken. Did you send Dr. Motthum to that meeting?
A Yes.
Q For what reasons did you send Dr. Motthum to that meeting?
A Motthum, who will testify here in detail at a later date, was an experienced front line physician. He participated in the first severe Russian winter. A second Russian winter was pending and the question came up whether the wounded at the East front could be protected against freezing in any better manner than during the last winter. As far as I remember the SS was also invited to participate as a branch of the Wehrmacht, but somebody was to be sent there who himself knew the problems that the Russian winter brought with it. Only such a person could have learned something positive for the troops, and it is for that reason that Dr. Motthum went there.
Q You yourself did not participate in that cold conference in Nurnberg in the year 1942?
A No.
Q What did Dr. Motthum report to you about that cold conference?
A I remember that situation very exactly. He returned and reported to me very briefly that on the two days of that meeting a number of problems had been discussed but that nothing, however, was mentioned which could directly be exploited in practice for the benefit of the Waffen-SS. That sufficed and in that manner his purpose had been fulfilled.
Q Did your official activity have anything to do with the question of cold?
A No.
Q According to the document submitted by the Prosecution, that is, the affidavit of Romberg, Prosecution Exhibit No. 40, the high altitude experiments started in the beginning of May 1942 and lasted until the end of May 1942. The cold experiments, according to the affidavit of Rudolf Brandt, Prosecution Exhibit No. 80 laster from August 1942 until April 1943. Were you in Dachau during that time?
A I don't believe so. However, in the spring of 1943 I participated in a conference in Dachau which dealt with nourishment question. As I remember that occurred in May, that is, after the experiments. It is possible, however, that was in April. I do not know that anymore.
Q Were you in the concentration camp on that occasion?
A No.
Q Mr. President, in that connection I am submitting the Document Mrugowski No. 2. It is an affidavit made by Oswald Pohl which can be found on page 35 of the document book. I offer it as Mrugowski Exhibit No. 10. I should only like to quote the second paragraph which can be found on page 35. "Mrugowsky in spring 1943 took part in a conference on food questions, which took place in a building of the Medicinal Herb Gardens at Dachau. All participants in this conference were billeted in hotels in Munich. They were taken to the conference by buses and automobiles and were taken back to the hotels in a group. Mrugowsky, too, with all other participants was taken back to Munich in the same way. Consequently he had no opportunity to set foot in the concentration camp at Dachau. Furthermore, such a visit was not planned."
During your stay in Dachau did you speak to any of Dr. Rascher's coworkers?
A No.
Q The Prosecution, during the session of 13 of December 1946 as Prosecution Exhibit 124, submitted a file notation of your co-defendant Sievers which concerned the conference of 21 October 1942. Among others it says "The collaboration was discussed not only in the field of combatting insects but also in the field of the work of Rascher and regarding the use of Gasteiner water in case of freezing."
Do you remember that conference with Sievers and what did he tell you about Rascher's research work?
A The conference was only very brief. I can remember it very well. There was no mention made about Rascher's research field.
Q Mr. President, in this connection I should like to submit an affidavit made by the co-defendant Sievers which is Document Mrugowski No. 3 and can be found on page 37 of the Document Book. I offer it as Exhibit Mrugowski No. 11. I should like to omit the first paragraph and I read: "The defense counsel of the co-defendant Mrugowsky has asked me about the remark I made on 16 December 1942, Document No. 647, Exhibit No. 124,
MR. HARDY: May it please, your Honors, in due course the defendant Wolfram Sievers will take the witness stand. It seems to he that defense counsel for Mrugowski can put this question to Wolfram Sievers at that time and can dispense with the admission into evidence of this document. I object to the admission into evidence of this document affidavit of Wolfram Sievers
DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, may I say in this connection -
THE PRESIDENT: Objection by Prosecution is over-ruled.
DR. FLEMMING: "The defense counsel of the co-defendant Mrugowsky has asked me about the remark I made on 16 December 1942, Document No. 647 Exhibit No. 124, concerning the discussion of 21 October 1942 between Mrugowski and myself about Rascher's activity. I can state the following about it "When, by order of Himmler, an entomological department was establish at the Military Scientific Research Institute of the Waffen-SS and Police, under direction of Dr. May, Mrugowsky, as Chief of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen-SS, which also dealt with entomological research, asked me what task of the new department was to be, I informed him of Himmler's establish ment order, and told him that the Institute would be exclusively concerned with the development of methods of fighting animal pests, especially in the insect sphere by breeding diseases peculiar to insects, but not diseases relayed to human beings by insects so that there was no question of overlapping with the Hygiene Institute.
An immediate discussion with Dr. May regarding details would be expedient. This I arranged, and it took place in Mrugowsky' quarters at the Institute of Hygiene on 20 November 1942.
On that occasion, we discussed briefly the other departments in the Military Scientific Research Institute, and who was in charge of them. I pointed out to Mrugowsky that the Institute for Military Scientific Research combined those departments in whose research Himmler took a personal interest. He had founded the Institute because he did not want any other authority to engage in the work of these departments.
"Himmler, in his order concerning the execution of experiments, (Prose cution Exhibit No. 79), had also commissioned Rascher with experiments on curing partial freezing and added: 'for example with Gasteiner Water Compresses).' According to No. 5 of Himmler's letter, the procurement of equipment needed for the experiments should be discussed with the offices of the Reich Physician SS, the Main Economic and Administrative Main Office and the Ahnenerbe.
"I was to get a continuous supply of Gasteiner water fresh spring for Rascher's experiments. Since I had no idea about the organization of the office of the Reich Physician SS and Police, I asked Mrugowsky in this connection if an office of the Reich Physician SS could help me with the supply of the Gasteiner Water.
"We did not discuss any other questions about Rascher's experiments. I would also not have been in a position to give any information about them. But in the course of this discussion I pointed out to Mrugowsky, that collaboration between the Institute for Hygiene and the institute for Military Scientific Research of the Waffen SS required in every case personal permission from Himmler, who had reserved these decisions for himself.
"I have only just found out that, in my note of 16 December 1942 the words "that is" were left out between the words "Rascher's sphere of research and the words "with regard to the use." It should read: "We discussed collaboration not only in the sphere of past control but also in Rascher's sphere of research, that is with regard to the use of Gasteiner Water in cases of freezing."
Because we walked about collaboration in Rascher's sphere of research only with reference to the supply of Gasteiner Water, in fact, not about collaboration with Mrugowsky's Hygiene Institute, but about which office of the Reich Physician SS could help with the supply of the Gasteiner Water."
And then follows the signature and the certification.
I come now to the malaria experiments. You are also charged with having carried out malaria experiments. Did you know Professor Schilling?
A No.
Q Then you never spoke with him?
A No.
Q Did you know that he carried out malaria experiments in Dachau?
AAt the beginning, no; but one day I received from Grawitz a handwritten note of Schilling's regarding his work. It could be seen from this note that he was engaged in experiments to achieve immunity from malaria. That was one of Schilling's old research problems on which he had written several papers. It turned out that general immunity from malaria could not be achieved, but only immunity against one particular form of that infection. Such partial immunization, of course, does not play any role at all in nature because in every region infected with malaria there is not just one brand of malaria but a great number. Consequently, when I gave my opinion on this report of Schilling's, I stated that so far there had been no success and could not be expected because, in my opinion, the whole matter had been incorrectly handled, and I added that I would ask the Reichsarzt SS to take care of such experiments.
Q Did you have anything else done?
A I could have nothing else done because, as far as I know, these experiments of Schilling's were discussed immediately by him with Conti and Himmler, and Grawitz took a part in them only later. At that time I did not belong to Grawitz' staff, but to Dr. Genzken's staff in the Main Office, so that I had no opportunity to interfere. I could simply tell him my opinion and point out that I was of a different opinion in this matter, and that I did.
Q Did you yourself over concern yourself with malaria?
A Within the sphere of epidemic control I did concern myself rather extensively with malaria since in Southern Russia and in parts of the Reich and in Upper Italy we had many cases of malaria. I also delivered a lecture on the subject of Malaria in Southern Russia.
Q Now, as Document No. 37 I submit an excerpt from the report on the second meeting of consulting physicians from 30 November to 3 December 1942 in Berlin. It is to be found on page 40 of the document book, and I submit it as Mrugowsky Exhibit No. 12. I bring it to the notice of the Tribunal and can dispense with reading it into the record.
We come now to the sulfonamide experiments with which you are also charged. Did you ever concern yourself with sulfonamide or its use?
A No.
Q Did you know the defendants Oberheuser and Fischer?
A No.
Q Did you know Rosenthal or Schiedlowsky who are said to have participated in these experiments?
A Rosenthal I did not know and, at that time, I didn't know Schiedlowsky either.
Q You knew Professor Gebhardt?
A Yes, but only by sight.
Q When did you make Schiedlowsky's acquaintance?
AAt the beginning of 1945 in Buchenwald.
Q Dr. Gebhardt stated on the witness stand that he did not discuss his sulfonamide experiments in Ravensbrueck with you. Is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Did you know anything about the fact that these experiments were being carried out?
A No.
Q The Hygienic Institute of the Waffen SS, of which you were in charge, is said to have delivered the gas gangrene bacilli which were used in these sulfonamide experiments in Ravensbrueck. What do you know about that?
A That is possible because the Institute was to fill the interests of other SS units. The delivery of cultures for scientific purposes was one of the normal and customary functions of a bacteriological laboratory. We had such exchanges with many bacteriological institutes. The deliveries of bacilli were not so important a matter that they were anything out of the ordinary.
That fell within the competence of the departmental chiefs.
Q At a later time I shall submit to this a statement from the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin, which I have not yet received, but it shows deliveries of cultures without telling the chief of the institute.
After your return from the trip you made at that time, were you told nothing about these bacterial cultures?
A No.
Q In an affidavit of the co-defendant Fischer of the 19th of November 1945, Document No. NO-228, Prosecution Exhibit 206, it is said that, on the basis of correspondence with you and a conference with your assistants, it was decided upon to change the type of bacteria cultures. What do you know about this correspondence which, according to Fischer's testimony on the stand, took place roughly between the 7th and 10th of August, 1942?
A. Regarding this correspondence between my institute or me on the one hand and Professor Gebhardt on the other hand, I know nothing. In June and July I was on an official trip in the East and returned from this trip at the end of August. Consequently, at the time that this correspondence took place I was not present in Berlin, and I could not have written these letters. If this letter was written at all, which I have not been able to clarify as yet, the copy had certainly already been filed away before I returned at the end of August, so that I did not see it. I found out nothing about it.
Q. In an affidavit on the part of the co-defendant, Fischer, Fischer states further that the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS had arranged various combinations of gas gangrene bacilli for the experiment. Do you know anything about that?
A. No.
Q. Mr. President, at this point I should like to read Mrugowsky Document No. 38 to be found on page 48 of the document book and which I shall put in evidence as Mrugowsky Exhibit No. 13, paragraph 9 on page 52. This is an excerpt from an affidavit by Susanne Dumont, Mrugowsky's former secretary. The first paragraph is the usual introduction. No. 9 sets forth:
"I still remember that Mrugowsky went on a lengthy official trip to the East in 1942 and again in 1943 together with the Chief of the Department for Climatology and Kultur-Geography, Dr. Kurt Scharlau, and was absent during June, Jnly and August. In 1942 Mrugowsky did not return until August, after the date fixed for the end of the trip had already elapsed. I still remember that at the time Mrugowsky was rather sharply reprimanded by his superior, Dr. Genzken. Mrugowsky was very annoyed and told me about it.
"I remember the incident very well because, contrary to his usual custom, Mrugowsky did not celebrate his birthday (15 August) in the Institute, and I could not congratulate him on the actual day. As far as I can remember, he did not return until several days later." 5046 I submit this as proof that Mrugowsky was not in Berlin at that time.
Professor Gebhardt has testified on the stand that Grawitz caused the bacterial cultures to be sent from the Hygiene Institute. What were the usual channels for such transmissions and in the Hygiene Institute who was responsible for them?
A The shipment of cultures of living bacteria was in the hands of the Chief of the Bacteriological Department. In the middle of 1942 the person who was in charge of this department frequently changed because to a greater and greater extent we were fixing up field laboratories for the army and men had to be taken from my institute to fill those positions. Consequently I do not know who, in June or July, was chief of that department.
Q Mr. President, in document book MRUGOWSKI, Mrugowsky Document No. 4 is an extract from the Reich Law Gazette 1917. I do not want to read this at this time because the passage is not herein contained. In other words I shall do so later but not at the moment.
Was Professor Gebhardt one of the scientists to whom such gas gangrene cultures would be sent without further ado if he requested them?
A In this Reich Law Gazette which you just mentioned there is printed a law regarding the shipment of bacterial cultures which was valid in Germany since 1917. Here it says that chiefs of clinics and hospitals were permitted to receive such cultures. It is a matter of course that Professor Gebhardt, as chief of a hospital clinic of 1,000 beds, was among those permitted to receive then. Consequently there was no need for police permission, which a lay person would have had to have, nor did we have to inquire to what use these cultures were to be put.
It is the custom in German clinics that scientific work is carried on animals, and frequently, of course, bacteria and germs of other sorts are used. When the chief of so large a clinic asks for cultures, no bacteriologist would consider it necessary to inquire more precisely in to the use to which these cultures were to be put. That would certainly have been construed as a scientific indiscretion.
Q You know that the witness Sofia Maczka testified that Veronika Kraska died of tetanus. This is on 1436 of the English record and 1447 of the German record of 10 January 1947. Were tetanus cultures bred by the Hygienic institute?
A We had a considerable collection of cultures in our institute including tetanus cultures which we acquired from another institute. They were in powder form in little glass test tubes and were never opened. We did not engage in the breeding of such tetanus bacilli. We used the Meuser method of investigating tetanus and not the method involving bacteriological cultures if the question ever arose.
Q Gebhardt and Fischer on May 1943 at the 3rd Conference of the consulting physicians reported on their experiments Did you hear this report?
A No, I did not hear these reports.
Q Why not? Weren't you at the conference?
A I was present but at the same time there was a meeting of the hygienic sector which I attended. Dr. Gebhardt's report took place in the large meeting room of the surgical department, and since we were discussing problems ourselves, I believe about typhus I attended it rather than Professor Gebhardt's lecture.
Q I come now to the sea-water experiments, of which you are also accused. Did you take any part in these sea-water experiments?
A No, no part at all.
Q When did you first hear of these experiments?
A On the day of the arraignment.
Q You know that the Prosecution, in the cross-examination of Professor Karl Brandt, mentioned the committee for drinking water utensils. What was the task of this committee?
A This committee was part of the Reich Ministry for Armaments and War Production. The purpose of it originally was to make uniform the drinking water utensils for sterilizing water for the troops. Many power firms produced their own equipment and it was no longer possible to keep using these many types of drinking water equipment nor to use them. Consequently, unification was to be undertaken and for this reason this drinking water committee was formed. However, I did not concern myself with this problem in general, but turned to a special problem.
Q You concerned yourself with a special problem. What was that special problem?
A This was the problem of purifying water which had been poisoned during an imaginary combat and this making it potable for the population of cities without endangering their health. Particular attention was given to the question of mustard gas poisoning, and the question was debated in what form this mustard gas, which had been put into drinking water, could be made harmless. At that time, from the Reich Department for Water, Land, and Air Hygiene, there was a test in this matter which was to be carried out on German water systems. The committee I mentioned concerned itself with this problem.
Q You were a member of this committee?
A Yes.
Q Did it meet often?
AAs far as I know, it met twice.
Q Did the conferences of this committee have anything to do with making sea water potable?
A Not the slightest.
Q In your official activities did you have anything else to do with seawater, or with making it potable?
A No, nothing.
Q Were there any connections between the Committee and the sea-water experiments?
A I knew of none.
Q Mr. President, I submit now Mrugowsky Document No. 5, which is on page 45 of the document book, as Mrugowsky Exhibit 14. This is an affidavit by Dr. Werner Hasse in Berlin-Friedenau.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, did you give the last exhibit to which you referred - I think it was Mrugowsky Document Number 4 - the number 14? Did you offer that? Did you offer Number 14?
DR. FLEMMING: Not yet, no.
THE PRESIDENT: Should not this exhibit you are now offering then be Number 14?
DR. FLEMMING: Yes, the one I am now submitting should be Number 14. Let me repeat. Mrugowsky 37 is Number 12; 38, the third from the bottom in the table of contents, is Number 13; and Mrugowsky 5 now becomes Mrugowsky 14.
THE PRESIDENT: And I understood you to give this exhibit number as 15. Possible I misunderstood you.
DR. FLEMMING: No, 14. I may omit reading the first two paragraphs of Document Mrugowsky No. 5 of this affidavit and begin With the words "Prof. Dr. Mrugowsky" on page 45, third paragraph:
"Professor Dr. Dr. Joachim Mrugowsky, the director of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS in Berlin, and I, together with other gentlemen, were members of the Commission for Drinking Water Equipment.
"This commission is supposed to have been founded by order of Professor Dr. Karl Brandt in the Reich Ministry Speer.
"The commission met only twice in all. The only problem which was discussed was the protection of the central water system of the large cities in case of gas warfare and the provision of portable drinking water installations. The commission never dealt with the question of making sea water potable or any other questions concerning sea water."
Q. You know the Document Number NO-154, Prosecution Exhibit Number 446, in which poisoned water is tested after it has been made harmless. Can you say something about that?
A. So far as I remember, this is a report of the president of the above-mentioned Reich Department for Water, Land, and Air Hygiene in Berlin on the question of rendering drinking water non-toxic, and it was not known to me that any testing of this was carried out in concentration camps.
I am not mentioned in this document nor did I have anything to do with that matter.
Q. Was it here in the trial that you saw that document for the first time, or had you known of it before?
A. I saw it for the first tine here.
Q. Professor Brandt testified on the stand that you had delivered a lecture at the meeting of the Commission for Drinking Water Installations Could you say something about that?
A. I spoke once there, but that was not really a lecture. The originator of this process wanted to introduce his process as a monoply and I stated my point of view about this and said that it was dangerous in times of air warfare to rely on only one process; on the contrary, several procedures for the same purpose should be developed, to one of which, of course, one could give precedence, but one should not rely on just one. That's all I said.
Q. Now I come to the experiments with epidemic jaundice with which you are also charged. Did you participate in any way in experiments in epidemic jaundice?
A. No.
Q. When did you first hear of these experiments?
A. When the indictment was presented to me.
Q. Did you know Dr. Dohmen?
A. No.
Q. Did you know Professor Haagen in Strassbourg?
A. I knew him slightly.
Q. Did you yourself collect any data on hepatitis, that is, epidemic jaundice?
A. The persons affected with hepatitis were, next to typhus and malaria, the greatest concern to German physicians during this war. Dr. Gutzeit has already said that the number of persons who fell ill of this disease rose into the millions. It is a matter of course that I as a doctor should have had to concern myself with this problem because every clinic with a hospital for epidemic cases received hundreds of such cases.
In other words, I concerned myself clinically with the treatment of this disease, and I calculated on the basis of statistical data that there were few cases but sufficient that fell to me. There were roughly a thousand but I did not concern myself with the germ that causes this disease, nor was there any equipment in my institute for breeding that virus. You need special technical equipment for that which we did not have.
Q. Did you concern yourself with how the sickness arises?
A. No.
Q. Professor Gutzeit in his interrogation as a witness on the 10th of February 1947 said that he had seen you occasionally at conferences and so knew you. Did you ever talk about jaundice experiments when you met him there?
A. No, not a word.
DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, I now submit Document Mrugowsky 6.
MR. HARDY: May it please Your Honor, this Document Number 6 of Professor Gutzeit's on page 47 in Mrugowsky's document book is dated 23 January 1947, and since that time Gutzeit has appeared here as a witness and was examined by defense counsel. I think it will only be cluttering the record to admit this into evidence. Therefore, I object to the admission of this document.
THE PRESIDENT: Does counsel desire to read the document into the record or simply submit it as an exhibit?
DR. FLEMMING: I simply wanted to put it in evidence. I asked Gutzeit when he was on the stand at that time whether what he had said here in this affidavit was true, so I simply bring the Bench's attention to the document.
THE PRESIDENT: The document will be admitted in evidence.
DR. FLEMMING: It will be Mrugowsky Exhibit Number 15.
Q. The co-defendant Rudolf Brandt said in his affidavit, Document 371, Exhibit Number 186, that Dr. Grawitz had direct negotiations with Himmler in order to get experimental subjects for Dr. Dohmen.
Did Dr. Grawitz talk about this to you?
A. No, no one spoke to me about the jaundice problem.
Q. Then I can state that you neither participated in jaundice experiments nor before your arrest did you know anything about them?
A. That is correct.
Q. I come now to the sterilization experiments. Before your imprisonment did you know anything of experimentation in sterilization?
A. No, I had heard nothing about it.
Q. You know Rudolf Brandt's affidavit, Document 440, Prosecution Exhibit Number 141, in Document Bock 6, in which it is said that Himmler after a conference about sterilization problems specifically ordered that the whole sterilization question should be treated with the utmost secrecy. Were you ever present at conferences on sterilization?
A. No, never.
Q. Did you know Professor Klauberg?
A. No.
Q. Professor Hohlfelder?
A. I saw him once in Grawit's anteroom but did not speak to him.
DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, from Susanne Dumont's affidavit, which is on page 48 and which formerly was Exhibit Number 13, I should like to read Numbers 18 and 19 on page 56:
"Number 18. I was also asked whether I had ever heard in the Institute or from Mrugowsky anything about:
(a) Luftwaffe high altitude experiments at Dachau carried out by Dr. Rascher, (b) Luftwaffe freezing experiments at Dachau carried out by Dr. Rascher, (c) Professor Schillings malaria experiments at Dachau, (d) Hepatitis experiments at Natzweiler and Sachsenhausen, (e) Typhus experiments at Natzweiler, (f) Sterilization experiments, (g) Luftwaffe experiments at Dachau on rendering sea water potable.
"I have definitely never heard anything about experiments of this kind. If such experiments had been discussed verbally or in writing in the Institute, then I an convinced I should have heard about them.
"Regarding the Luftwaffe experiments on rendering sea water notable, I should like to add that the question of water supply and drainage in concentration camps and their outlying posts was dealt with in the Institute, but it was purely a matter of water supplied from underground sources, never of sea water."
Q. So I can you state that you knew nothing about sea water experiments nor about sterilization experiments?
A. That is true.
Q. I cone now to the typhus experiments. Please describe to the Court what typhus really is.
A Typhus is a disease which is not normally an epidemic within the German Reich. In Europe there is a considerable source of this epidemic, with the center point in White Ruthenia in Russia, and this area in which the typhus epidemic is extends about the middle of Poland. There were only a few isolated cases of typhus in normal years before the war in Germany. The isolated cases of typhus in normal years before the war in Germany. The German doctors, in other words, had no knowledge of this epidemic, or this disease. It is known that this typhus always appears in large groups of people that are impoverished, and that the presence, therefore, of typhus is a specific wartime epidemic, and always appears when famines occur, or when the population is, as said, impoverished, and it was first known by the name of "Hunger Typhus."
Presenting those fields or areas in which the German troops were operating at the beginning of the Eastern campaign, typhus played a great row, and also it played a great row when Napoleon invaded Russia, because this campaign collapsed because of typhus and not because of cold weather. In order to do away with this epidemic since 1900, in other words, almost half a century, there has been in Germany sharp measures to combat it. For the whole field of contageous diseases we have divided Germany into two groups. The larger part we characterize as contageous diseases, whereas, a few diseases which usually do not occur in Germany but are brought from outside, and are consequently bringing fear are characterized as commonly danger us diseases, and are regulated by a special law, Of all these six epidemics, typhus is one.
DR. FLEMMING: In this matter I would like to submit Mrugowsky's Document No. 21, which is Document Book No. 1-A, not yet presented to the Court, on page 153. I do not know whether I should already new identify it, or to wait to give it a number when I put the document in evidence. I think it would be better if I did so now, for the sake of a better sequence.
THE PRESIDENT: Unless you find it necessary to read some portion of the document now, I should suggest you wait until the document is offered in evidence.