Now, while I have been saying this, I remembered one case, a political senior camp inmate I name Wolff, a former German national captain, according to the opinion of the illegal camp administration based on a number of indications had begun to work with the SS against the illegal camp administration. With the aid of Dr. Hoven this senior camp inmate I was sent to a camp at the Beltic sea.
I believe I can recall that Dr. Hoven even sent a latter to the camp physician there to inform this camp physician about Wolff's quality in the Buchenwald camp. After a few months we learned through transports prisoners that Wolff had died there.
Q. Can you state whether any non-German nationals were included in these invalid transports?
A. The sick transports without distinction included all nationalities. At the end, in the Buchenwald camp we had representatives of no less than thirty nations.
Q. Now, going back for a moment to Hoven's relationship to the so-called Reds, do you state that Hoven worked with the Reds because he had been corrupted by them; that is, given clothing, food and gifts of various kind?
A. It is very difficult to determine the motives of a human being afterwards and during an action. I can only judge from facts which I know and from statements which were made. I can only conclude that both motives, the political motive and the motive of corruption, were active in the case of Dr. Hoven. If Dr. Hoven expressed any desire, and he expressed many desires, then these wishes were always filled.
Q. Did he ask for any gifts for his girlfriend perhaps?
A. That too happened. Artists were given orders, assignments, to work for Dr. Hoven. Sometimes they were people whom Dr. Hoven had saved from death transports who tried to foresee all the wishes that Dr. Hoven had. In other words, he himself expressed such wishes constantly and all possible advantages were given him by such people whom he had saved.
Q. Do you know whether Dr. Hoven personally killed any of these so-called traitors to the Reds?
A. I cannot testify precisely in which cases Dr. Hoven directly, personally, killed such spies. I heard repeatedly from the political prisoners working in the prisoners hospital who were my friends, that Dr. Hoven himself killed people.
Q. Did you hear in what manner this was done?
A. In most cases by injections of chemicals which were either poison or were given in quantities big enough to induce death; for example, evipanatrium phenol, but it also happened that air was injected into the heart so that air embolisms occurred.
Q. Can you give the Tribunal any accurate estimate of the number of people killed by Hoven in Buchenwald?
A. That is not easy to say. I must make a distinction. It happened that a whole ward was disposed of in order to make room, or in the course of a TB program, whole rows of prisoners were killed. I do not say that this happened during Dr. Hoven's period or was his responsibility in every case, but during his period too, such killings occurred repeatedly. A medical assistant named Wilhelm, a Hauptscharfuehrer, could have carried them out too, or the SS camp leader Gust, a violent anti-Semite, took from the remaining Jews who were still in Buchenwald, took five or six whom he had noticed on some occasion or other because they were working as bricklayers. He sent them to the prisoners hospital and had them killed there. I know that such things happened repeatedly, also, during the period when Dr. Hoven was camp physician. As for spies, that is, real or suspected traitors, during Dr. Hoven's period I would estimate that up to a hundred persons were killed.
Q. Do you know of any cases of killings in which Hoven was implicated which were unconnected with the struggle between the Reds and the Greens?
A. At the moment I can remember a single case which, however, was not quite independent of the internal conditions in the camp. It concerned Polish citizens. In 1943 a few Poles in the camp were suspected of having prepared some action against the SS. The Poles who were considered the leaders of this plot were taken to Block 46, were isolated there. I and a few of my comrades, since I had already be working for Dr. Ding a few weeks, tried to help these comrades. Two of them who were Polish doctors, I knew very well. We tried to save them. It was a matter of hours and then two doctors, Dr. Hoven and Dr. Ding, were not there but were expected back at the camp. No one could get to them except me. When the two doctors came to the Pathology Section, I approached them. I believe Dr. Hoven saw me personally for the first time in the camp. Dr. Ding had already know me for a few weeks and I spoke to Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Ding and Hauptsturmfuehrer Dr. Hoven and asked them not to kill these men. Both of them asked me why I made this suggestion. I said, "These men are Polish patriots and there is no reason to kill them." I was told, "They are Polish Nationalists, Polish Chauvinists." I said, "I know the two doctors." One of them was Dr. Chiepielowski whom I have already mentioned. I said, "I know the two doctors. They are good Polish patriots." The answer was that "it doesn't make any difference." I said, "Sturmbannfuehrer and Hauptsturmfuehrer, that is exactly the limit which is important." They laughed. They said, "We will see what can be done."
The interview lasted perhaps five minutes. The two doctors left the Pathology Section and went to the prisoner's hospital. The Polish were taken there from Block 46 for a last interrogation in the presence of three prisoners of the prisoner's hospital. Dr. Chiepielowski who spoke German better -- he had taken lessons from me before -- was able to answer more or less and was spared. The others were killed by injections. Who actually killed the other three persons, whether it was Dr. Ding or Dr. Hoven, I did not see myself. It was said in the camp that each of the two doctors had killed one of the prisoners, one or two, but I cannot say myself.
Q. And, of course, it is true, is it not, that Hoven was connected with the deaths which took place in Block 46, which, of course, was not connected with the struggle between the Reds and the Greens in the camp?
A. Yes and no. Insofar as Dr. Hoven was Dr. Ding's deputy and is said to have carried out actions in Block 46 within the series of experiments, no. Insofar as certain political or other prisoners were more or less smuggled to Block 46 through camp intrigues to be killed there and if such actions then were carried out by Dr. Hoven, yes. I know of one case of the latter type. There were two prisoners named May and Friedemann. Standartenfuehrer Koch from Buchenwald had Syphilis. He would not let himself be treated by the SS doctors, but prisoners from the prisoners' hospital treated him. They were not doctors themselves and acquired their medical knowledge only in the prisoners' hospital. One of them was an iron worker before. They treated him so that he was satisfied. Later through the investigations of Dr. Morgan this was about to become known. The two men who were very prominent members of the illegal camp administration were sent to the outside command at Gosslar and had them shot while trying to escape there. Of course, they did not try to escape. Two people, this May and Friedemann, whom I mentioned, were witnesses of this happening; they were sent to Buchenwald. When Standartenfuehrer Koch learned about it, they were sent to Block 46. They were incorporated in an experiment. They survived the typhus. They were released as healthy. They came directly to the prisoners' hospital from Block 46 and were killed there on the next day; that is, they were removed as witnesses.
Q Now, Witness, I think my original question to which you have given a response was not very good. It was compound. Your answer was, "Yes and no." I take it that you mean to say that the activities of Block 46 were at times connected with the struggle between the Reds and the Greens? Is that right?
A Yes.
Q You do not mean to say that Hoven was not the assistant to Ding in the operation of Block 46? He was, in fact, his assistant, was he not?
A His deputy.
Q And Hoven supervised the operations of Block 46 during the times when Ding was absent?
A Yes, if he felt his duly. Hoven was often at Block 46.
Q Now for a last question: you mentioned the TB, the tuberculosis action, a few minutes ago. I wonder if you could explain to the Tribunal what was that action and when it took place.
A Repeatedly, I believe, from 1941 on, TB patients were killed by injections. I know that I myself who was considered an acute TB case for sometime, although I was not sick at all, was repeatedly warned in the prisoners' hospital to watch out; that I should not be included in such an extermination action, and, therefore, during the period in question I stayed away from the TB Station. The TB Station was at the same time an asylum for those political prisoners who wanted to hide, only they had to be careful, on the other hand, against being included in such an extermination action. They could hide there because the SS had an enormous fear of contagion, and none of them entered the TB Station, sometimes not even the SS doctors.
Q Were these tuberculosis patients killed right at the camp or were they included in an invalid transport and shipped elsewhere for extermination?
A In the camp itself.
Q Were non-German nationals included among those inmated killed?
A There was no distinction.
MR. McHANEY: I have no further questions at this time, your Honor.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. NELTE:
DR. NELTE: (For the defendant Handloser). Permit me to begin the cross examination, Mr. President.
Q. Witness, if I understood you correctly, yesterday you said that in April 1943 you were in the office of Block 50 under Doctor Ding?
A. In the so-called business office, in the business room.
Q. From your own knowledge -- your own knowledge dates from April 1943 then, to what is this knowledge supposed to refer? The knowledge of the events which you have stated here?
A. Well, as far as Block 46 is concerned, my knowledge originates about April 1943. It is from the information of my friends in the camp.
Q. That is what I wanted to find out. Your own knowledge or your information, I should like to distinguish -
A. (Interposing) Just a moment! May I add something to this? The knowledge of those incidents which took place outside of Block 46, of course, always occurred directly in the camp.
Q. I am interested in my question -- of the knowledge of events in Block 46.
THE PRESIDENT: It appears there is some difficulty in the defendants hearing the translations. The cross examination will be suspended for a moment to give them an opportunity to remedy the situation. The Tribunal will be in recess until the difficulty is remedied.
(A recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
Q. Witness, in the diary of the Section 4 Typhus and Virus Research which you know of, and on the 2nd of January 1942, there is an entry, "Investigation of Typhus Vaccines, Concentration Camp Buchenwald Selected". Was this determination still in effect at the period when you were in Buchenwald?
A. As far as experiments were carried out at Buchenwald, that is correct. If, in excess of this, from the Hygienic Institute of the Waffen SS at Berlin and from the medical office of the Waffen SS or from other organizations of the SS, experiments were carried out, this came to my knowledge.
Q. I should like to know about typhus vaccine research, and as far as that goes it was the same during your period as in the beginning of 1942?
A. Yes.
Q. Is it true; is it correct if I say that the Section 4 Typhus and Virus Research in Buchenwald received from the firms and other places, institutes, vaccine which was still being developed, that is, still required investigation?
A. The description "Department for Typhus and Virus Research" was an internal SS description. The agencies which wanted to have their vaccines tested, no matter if they were being developed or if they had already been perfected, never turned to the Department of Typhus and Virus Research at Buchenwald. The directive for the execution of experiments always came from the Hygienic Institute of the Waffen SS at Berlin, in particular from Oberfuehrer Mrugowsky.
Q But it is probably correct that where a typhus vaccine was completely developed and had been used for years with success, there was no need to use Buchenwald either directly or through Berlin?
A Such vaccines were only used for control purposes and were only furnished for that purpose, for example the vaccines of Cracow.
Q That is what I wanted to find out. As far as the Weigel typhus vaccine from the Typhus and Virus Research Institute of the OKH in Cracow is concerned, this was a vaccine which was not sent to be tested but which Dr. Ding ordered from Cracow.
A Either Dr. Ding ordered it from Cracow directly or Dr. Ding did through the Hygenic Institute of the Waffen SS at Berlin.
Q Now is there is a connection between the section in Buchenwald and the OKH Institute in Cracow, that is true of Dr. Eyer as far as typhus vaccine is concerned, may I not assume that this connection was instigated by Buchenwald or Berlin. In other words, that the interest was only on the side of Buchenwald, the Hygienic Institute of the Waffen SS?
A I have never known of any fact which might prove the contrary.
Q Now this morning you testified that to test the effect in preventive vaccination, lice were ordered from Cracow, and you expressed the assumption or you said positively, I don't remember exactly - that this is a shipment from Eyer's institute, is that correct?
A It was a shipment of the OKH from the Institute at Cracow. Experimental series in Buchenwald did not only take place in order to test the effectiveness of typhus vaccine, but also to test the effectiveness of infectious material. I have already pointed out on several instances that this infectious material came from the Robert Koch Institute at Berlin and also from other places, and that this infectious material hardly had any effect on the experimental subjects. In the case of lice infecting experiments in Block 46, an attempt was made to find out if through direct infection by infected lice from Cracow an infection could be caused at Buchenwald. Infectious material from the Robert Koch Institute at Berlin had proven itself ineffective because the cultures apparently had lost their virulence.
Q Did you yourself experience this?
A No.
Q Then how do you know that this was a shipment of infected lice from Cracow?
A I know that from two different sources. The first source consisted of my political friends in the prisoner's hospital who were there at the time the experiments were carried out and who on their own part had the closest contact with the Capo Arthur Dietsch. The second source was the discussions with Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Ding during the time when I was with him. As I have already previously mentioned he had a number of so-called scientific works which he was preparing and which repeatedly dealt with the effect of the infection. The question of the modus of the infection has been very thoroughly discussed in the presence of specialists from Block 50. Then although the experiment with infected lice was discussed, I was told by Dr. Ding that these lice had been sent from Cracow. As far as the first source is concerned I have also discovered that the lice were burned immediately after the conclusion of the first experiment. That was in two cases because there were two shipments.
Q What you say is also in Ding's diary, only from your testimony this morning one might have come to the conclusion that you had experienced that yourself, that you had your own knowledge. The diary says: Before the entry about the testing of the effect by means of the lice, that from the Typhus Research Institute Von Behring at Lomberg, lice and typhus vaccine was sent, and following that testing of exact infection with typhus infected lice would be undertaken. Since Cracow and Lemberg are more or less identical and since there were these institutes in both cities, I want to learn whether there might not be a mistake, which was that these lice could have come from Lemberg. Can you with certainty maintain what you have said or do you think it is possible as it seems to be indicated in the diary that it came from the Behring Works?
A I know from a certain lecturer, Dr. Hass, who was corresponding with Dr. Ding later on, I believe in the year 1943, was ordered to report to the Institute at Lemberg, and according to my knowledge, Sturmbannfuhrer Dr. Ding only from that period of time on had some more intensive correspondence with Lemberg.
I have never heard anything about it, that the infected lice had come from Lemberg, and to the contrary I have only heard that they had been obtained from Cracow.
MR. McHANEY: If it please the Tribunal, I would like to ask that in the future when a portion of the diary is being put to the witness in an effort to undertake to shake his memory, that the excerpt from the diary be read aloud and not paraphrased in the language of the attorney. Also it would be helpful to the Prosecution if we are given the date of the entry so that we can also follow the cross examination.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection by counsel of the Prosecution is well taken. Whenever the diary is quoted from hereafter counsel will please read the entry in the diary and give particular reference to the dates, and counsel should refer in reading from the diary to the page of the record in which the matter is contained. It would facilitate counsel following it.
We suggest that when reference is made to the diary that the witness be furnished with a copy of the German document so that he can refresh his recollection from the diary.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, shall I repeat everything or should that be a rule for the future?
THE PRESIDENT: I think you can proceed from where you left off without repetition.
BY DR. NELTE:
Q Then I only want to establish that this testimony which you gave regarding the obtaining of the lice was not based on your own knowledge but on information from a third person.
A Yes sir.
DR. NELTE: I have no further questions to put to this witness.
BY DR. FRITZ:
Q Witness, you described to us this morning what you knew about the protest of Professor Rose at the third Military Medical Meeting.
You also described to us that Dr. Ding was very much excited for days about this and called Dr. Rose such names that you do not want to report them here. You also said that you still cannot understand the contradiction to be seen in the protest of Professor Rose, the latter assignment which ostensibly came from him. Now, I should like to ask you a question, only one question, but before you answer this question I must let you know about a statement of Professor Rose without the knowledge of which you will not be in a position to answer the question properly. First the question. It is as follows:
Do you consider it possible in view of Dr. Ding's anger that he would follow a recommendation of Professor Rose to use the Copenhagen vaccine for human experiments in the Buchenwald Concentration Camp; that he changed this for a recommendation to use humans for experiments in Buchenwald?
Before you answer I shall inform you of the following statement of Professor Rose, which I shall have to prove later; In the fall of 1943 Professor Rose had negotiations in Copenhagen to begin vaccine production there. On this occasion he learned of the new vaccine which was highly recommended to him by Posen. He passed on this recommendation and effected the use of the vaccine but since it was a completely different type of vaccine than had been heretofore used, the actual vaccine exports opposed it, but Professor Rose did not participate in this altercation. Then when the source suggested the testing of this vaccine in human experiments, the name of Rose, however, remained connected with the vaccine because he recommended it. Now I shall repeat my question: In view of Dr. Ding's anger, do you consider it possible that he changed his recommendation of Professor Rose to use the Copenhagen vaccine against typhus to a recommendation to use this vaccine for human experiments in the concentration camp Buchenwald?
A From the statements of Sturmbannfuehrer Dr. Ding, such a problem has not become apparent at all. As far as the character or Dr. Ding-Schuler is concerned, I would consider it quite possible that he might have done something of this kind. The circumstances, however, were such that such a request to test the Ibsen vaccine at Buchenwald was not even taken to him personally. He received a directive from Berlin to carry out such a series of experiments.
As a result of this, the problem could not appear objective as far as he was concerned. He only told me triumphantly that the fact that Professor Rose had advocated that this vaccine be tested on human beings in the Buchenwald Concentration Camp meant that Rose had given in. In my opinion, thereofe, the difference is in answering the question. According to my knowledge, Ding-Schuler, subjectively might have been able to do something of this kind; objectively, in my opinion he was not in the position to do so.
Q The order to test that vaccine in human experiments did not came from Professor Rose at all?
A Dr. Ding-Schuler brought the order from one of his numerous visits to Berlin. How it originated, escaped my knowledge. This is another reason for the fact that I, myself, could not cope with the striking influence.
Q The last question, Witness, this morning you said that the order came directly from Mrugowsky?
A To Dr. Ding-Schuler. Ding-Schuler told me that he had been given the order by Mrugowsky.
Q You personally cannot say objectively Professor Rose asked Professor Mrugowsky to start this series of experiments?
A Beside the statement of Dr. Ding-Schuler, no.
DR. FRITZ: Thank you.
I have no further questions.
DR. FLEMING: Attorney Flemming for the Defendant Mrugowsky.
Q Witness, you said that in Peril, 1943, you came to Dr. Ding as clerk?
A That is correct. 1224
Q You also said that at the end of 1942 or the beginning of 1943? Dr. Ding made a suggestion to produce typhus vaccine. Is that correct?
A Yes.
Q I must point out to you that Dr. Ding, as early as the end of 1941? was at the Robert Koch Institute. He was ordered there in order to study Gildemeister's method for the production of typhus vaccine. Do you know about that?
A Yes.
Q But, if at the end of 1942? or at the beginning of 1943? he was ordered to Gildemeister for this purpose, then the decision to produce typhus vaccine must have been made long before the end of 1942 or the beginning of 1943.
A I see a difference in the assignment of Dr. Ding-Schuler to start a typhus vaccine, and in a decision to test typhus vaccine and to produce it practically in the concentration camp at Buchenwald. Dr. Ding-Schuler had not only been ordered to report to Gildemeister at Berlin, but on two occasions, he was also sent to the Pasteur Institute at Paris. That was once in the year 1941. The second time was also before the establishment of Block 50 at Buchenwald.
Q You, yourself, came to Dr. Ding only in April? 1943?
A Yes.
Q How do you know about events before that time?
A I know that from statements of Dr. Ding-Schuler himself? and also from diary notes which he personally made for himself. May I point out that Dr. Ding-Schuler, during the last half year before our liberation, requested that I write a history of his person for his family.
In order to do this he gave me all documents which he had at his disposal and from these documents I was supposed to write that. From these documents, I was able to see all of the difference things that had occurred before my time.
"Then these documents did not show that the order to report to the Robert Koch Institute and the Pasteur Institute in Paris had not been issued to learn the effect of typhus vaccine, but to study the production of typhus vaccine.
A It was shown by the documents.
Q Why did Dr. Ding explain to you at the end of 1942 and 1943, long before the time when according to your assumption, the decision to produce vaccine was made, the express purpose of studying the production of typhus vaccine?
A I believe that there is different concept between the defense counsel and myself as to the word "production". There is a little different conception. By production I mean the direct immediate production; not the preparation for the production. Therefore, when I stated the decision for the production, I meant and I still mean the decision to establish this department, with a sub-department for the production of vaccine. I did not refer to the preparatory study of Dr. Ding so he theoretically would become acquainted with the question of producing the vaccine.
Q You just said that Dr. Ding, when you were to write his life history, gave you his diary. The Prosecution, yesterday, shaved you a diary. Is this the diary which you just mentioned, or was that another one.
A There is a striking difference between the two diaries. The diary which was presented to me yesterday is the one which Dr. Ding-Schuler started. That is the diary of Block 46 which was executed under his super vision. The diary to which I am now referring consisted of yearly calendars in which Dr. Ding almost daily made various sorts of entries for a period of years. These entries consisted of private and official matters.
Q When did you see the official diary of the Section for Typhus and Virus Research in Buchenwald for the first time?
A The diary which was presented to me yesterday, is the Diary of Block 46. I had seen that for the first time after I had moved to Block 50. And that, under no circumstances, is before the 15th of August, 1943.
Q What did the diary look like the first time you saw it? Were loose leaves fastened together in the folders? What did it look like?
A It had exactly the same form as today.
Q Could one see whether this diary was kept constantly or whether it was written all at once?
A I know the history of this diary from the statements of Dr. DingSchuler himself, and also from the statements of Capo Arthur Dietsch; as well as the physician's clerk in Block 46, a certain Gadczinski. I also know on the basis of the documents which were started from the very beginning of the establishment of that block and on the basis of the personal notes which Dr. Schuler made in his private diary. He dictated as far a I can recall the first half of 1942. He dictated the diary of Block 46 until the period of time and all at the same time. From the time on, the diary was filled regularly from experiment to experiment.
Q You say that Dr. Ding dictated the beginning of the diary about the middle of 1942?
A In the first half of that year
Q In the first half of 1942. Thank you.
Then I must point out the following contradiction:
The Diary bears the heading "Diary of the division for research of spotted fever and virus at the Institute of Hygiene of the Waffen-SS."
Do you have that place in the diary?
A. Yes,
Q Would you please look at the entry of 9 January 1943? There you will read "By order of the surgeon general of the Waffen-SS, SS-Gruppenfuehrer and Major General (Generalleutnant) of the Wafen-SS, Dr. Genzken, the hitherto existing spotted fever research station at the concentration camp Buchenwald becomes the Department for Spotted Fever and Virus Research." Is that correct.
A That is correct.
Q This shows up to that date the section had the title we just read. The title of the diary bears this name which is given more than a year later. You came to Buchenwald only in April, 1943?
A No. That is when I came to Dr. Ding.
Q To Dr. Ding, yes. And in August, 1943, according to what you said, you saw the diary for the first time. Your information is that if was written in the first half of 1942. You have that information from a third party?
A The last part of your three or four questions - is right.
Q It is correct that you did get the information from the third party, and the other point was right too?
A I must make some more explicit statements on that point. The title, "Department for Typhus and Virus Research" was, as far as I know suggested by Dr. Ding himself. It was not perhaps suggested to him by SS-Gruppenfuehrer Genzken. He had not been ordered to adopt that name. The relationship of Genzken and Ding was not like that. The initiative in things of that kind came from Ding.
Long before the concrete establishment of this department, Ding occupied himself with a plan of an institute which was not only to be an experimental station which was later on the clinical department, but he wanted a large independent basis in order to reach great importance under the auspices of the Hygienic Institute of the Waffen-SS. I do not know, but I consider it possible in this connection that the plan for a department for virus and typhus research was not only composed one-half year before the actual establishment of the department by Ding, but already one year previously, and it may even be longer.
There is another circumstance which entitles me to that concept. Dr. Ding knew the Crakow Institute of the OKH. If Dr. Ding perhaps toward the first half of 1942 dictated that diary, then at that time, he may already been thinking of that title. However, I am even seeing the possibility that Dr. Ding at a later period of time after the establishment of the department, but before my activity with them, had the first page of the diary written.
Such a practice would have been possible. The activities of Block 46 were not destined for external purposes or for Berlin, but only for Block 46 itself. After all, it does not bear any other official description.
The diary if it had been destined for Berlin or any other SS authorities, it would have had to bear the title which all reports to Berlin had to bear. I therefore consider it possible that Dr. Ding, as I have already emphasized, may have had the first page re-written with a new title.
Q Witness, you were just speaking of the customary designation which all reports in these matters to Berlin had, but you did not say what designation you meant. Will you please tell us that?
A We submitted many kinds of reports to Berlin and when they dealt with excerpts of a diary of an official nature for the Berlin Central Agencies, then on the upper left side, we have to put the notice, "Secret Diary, Number So and So" and we must also include the file mark of the kind of document and a description of the person who was dictating, and the person who was writing.
Q Did matters concerning typhus experiments in Buchenwald bear a secret or top secret stamp?
A It was always classified as "secret".
Q Witness, you were just saying when you sent excerpts from a diary of an official nature to Berlin, this designation was put on the letter or other excerpts. Up to now we have mentioned two diaries. One is the private diary of Dr. Ding which was on a number of calendars -
A Not a number of calendars, but in yearly calendars.
Q The second is the diary which was shown to you yesterday, and which you have before you now. You just told us that this diary you have before you is not an official diary. Would you please tell the court what other diaries there were besides these two in Block 50 and Block 46? Who kept these diaries?
A I have never said that this diary we are discussing here was not an official diary.
Q Let me interrupt you. You just told us that you consider it possible that the first page of this diary was rewritten and that is quite possible. That would have been permissible because it was not an official diary.
That can be seen because as an official diary it would have the notation "secret" and other indications-
A There is a little misunderstanding here which can be clarified very easily. Let us first of all agree to the description of "Official". Dr. Ding was the department chief and the chief of Block 46. If he gave the order to keep a diary, and if be even dictated this diary himself, and this diary was an official diary as far as Block 46 was concerned -it had no connection with superior agencies-- it was a internal official diary. It was not a private diary of Dr. Ding-Schuler. Whenever we had some correspondence with Berlin and the description, and secret diary number so and so, was placed at the upper left corner of the letter, then the reference referred, at all times, to the so-called postal diary.
The mail, which arrived and which left, was segregated according to number; that was with a short summary of its contents like in any other plant. It was provided with a summary of its contents and this number of the postal diary or the secret diary was placed in the left upper corner and the word secret diary number showing. Now, if a diary of Block 46, which is under discussion here, had served as a document for Berlin in such a way that there might have been an official reference to it, then every time that some reference was made to it, I would have had to enter into the secret postal diary that this document would have gone into the diary in the form of a secret diary number.
Q The diary itself, even if it was only an internally official diary, was a record of the agency and it would have to have the notation "secret"?
A In Block 46 there was nothing that was not secret. If the diary at any period of time, or for any purpose, had been sent outside of Block 46 or Block 50, then naturally it would have had the classification of secret.
Q In Block 50, witness, the typhus vaccine was produced; is that right?
A Yes that is correct.
Q The correspondence about the production of the typhus vaccine is not entirely, at least to a large extent as the correspondence shows, was not secret; is that right?
AAs far as fully technical organizational things were concerned, that is right. For example, the ordering of writing paper or other things from firms, in these cases the secret stamp was not applied. When reports about the amounts of vaccines or the production of vaccines or similar items were concerned, this correspondence was always classified as secret.
Q As a matter of course, in every section there are things which bear the stamp secret, but, witness, you just said that in Block 46 everything had been secret and in Block 50 not everything was secret. You told us yesterday that you from time to time got the diary from Block 46 in order to make entries from it for reports; is that right?
A Yes, that is correct.
Q The diary then came out of Block 46 from time to time, which had only secret matters and went to Block 50 which also had other records.
A Yes,
Q Did not the diary alone, in view of the fact that from time to time it went to Block 50, would it not have to have the notation secret?
A It would not have had to have top secret, because it was only Dr. Ding-Schuler who could bring it personally from block 46 to Block 50 and he was very, very careful. He only gave it to me for one hour or perhaps one and one half hours and then demanded it back again.
Q I believe that we can leave this point. You said before that the diary in Block 46 was kept by the clerk Gadczinski?
A Gadczinski.
Q Would you please spell the name?
A G-A -D-C-Z-I-N-S-K-I.
Q Can you give me Gadczinski's present address?
A I have asked for the present resident of Gadvzinski, who survived the camp and I have discovered that he has returned to Poland. His address can be obtained through the Polish Red Cross with U.N.R.R.A. in Karlsruhe, Roggenbachstrasse 5. He is corresponding with the Poles there.
Q The U.N.R.R.R.A. in Karlsruhe?
A Roggenbachstrasse with two g's.
Q The number?
A Five.
Q Thank you. Witness, yesterday in your examination you said that you made reports about the experiments in Block 46, which generally went to Mrugowsky. Please tell the Tribunal where the reports went that did not go to Mrugowsky?
A In one case, or in two cases, part of direct correspondence in which foremost reports took place between Dr. Ding and agencies, which were not identical with the office of Dr. Mrugowsky. On one occasion with the Zere Bacteriological Surgical Laboratory of the I. G. Farber works and in I can recall, the first report about the activities of Sturmbannfuehrer Varnet was not sent to Mrugowsky, but it was submitted directly to Oberfuehrer Poppendick.