"I ordered the porter of the Kaiserhof to send off the registered letter, because already at 14:30 we started with our work in Bethel (a car-ride of 20 minutes.) Each group consists of two gentlemen and two ladies working with them."
The next line must contain a faulty translation. I think it should read, "I examined, together with Miss Fischer, altogether 22 female patients.... " "I examined together with Miss Fischer altogether 22 female patients including personal examination from 15:00 till 19:00 h. This is a very quota, which most of the others did not attain....."
It is signed "Your faithful Fritz," Fritz being Dr. Fritz Mennecke, and his letters to his wife. I just want to call your Honors attention to Mennecke's relation to Professor Heyde and Herr Brack, which is the defendant Viktor Brack, when they inspected houses which were alloted to this doctors' commission which was handling patients at the Bethel asylum. I recall one of the documents which has already gone into evidence mentioned this asylum. If I remember correctly it was probably an asylum under the supervision of some religious organization, which I think ultimately succeeded in keeping out these doctors' commissions which were there to select the victims for the extermination.
The next letter carries the date line "Weimer, 25 Nov. 1941, Hotel Elephant." Weimar is right close to the Dachau concentration camp, and you have seen Weimer in the documents before. The letter reads as follows:
"At 7 o'clock tomorrow morning we will be awakened, at about 8 o'clock we will have our coffee and then we will drive out in Schmalenbach', car, but he himself will soon depart to Dresden again. On Thursday and Friday a meeting will be held in Pirna within the frame of the action, in which problems of the future will be discussed and in which Schmalenbach will take part as the medical adjutant of Herrn Brack (Jennerwein). J-e-n-n-e-r-w-e-i-n" And if I may say so parenthetically the prosecution suggests the name "Jennerwein" is another name used by the defendant Viktor Brack in the operations of the euthanasia program.
The letter continues:
"No experts will be present...... The first working day at Buchenwald is over. At 8:30 h this morning we were out there. At first I introduced myself to the authoritative leaders. The deputy of the camp commander is SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Florstaedt, camp physician is SS-Obersturmfuehrer Dr. Hofen."
The prosecution contends that Dr. Hofen is the defendant Hoven, and I would like to recall at this time the questions put to the Witness Roemhild, who testified under direct examination that Hoven was the camp physician sometime during the year 1941, and he was pressed to a considerable degree on cross-examination with the question, "wasn't it possible that Hoven wasn't the camp physician until 1942? This letter of Dr. Memmecke, dated 25 November 1941, says Dr. Hoven was the authoritative leader, and that he was the camp physician. The letter continues:
"At first another 40 reports of a first portion of aryans had to be completed by filling them out, on which the two other colleagues worked already yesterday. Out of these 40 I worked up about 13. After this whole portion had been worked up, Schmalenberg left, in order to go to Dresden and not to return until our work here is done. Following this, the 'examination' of the patients was carried out, i.e. a presentation of the individuals and a comparison with the entries taken from the files. We did not finish this work until noon, because the other two colleagues worked only theoretically yesterday, so that I had to 're-examine' these, whom Schmalenbach ( and I myself this morning) had prepared and Mueller his persons. At 12 o'clock we stopped for lunch....."
Continuing on the next page:
"Afterwards we continued our examination until about 16 o'clock. I myself examined 105 patients, Nueller 78 patients, so that finally a total of 183 reports were ready as a first portion. As second portion a total of 1200 Jews followed, all of whom do not need to be 'examined', but where it is sufficient, to take the reasons for their arrest from the files (often very columinous!) and to transfer it to the reports. Therefore it is merely a theoretical work, which will certainly keep us busy until next Monday inclusive, perhaps even longer. From this second portion (Jews) we completed to lay; I myself 17, Mueller 15. At 1700 hours sharply we 'we throw away the trowel' and went for supper.
"Exactly as the day I described above, the following days will pass -with exactly the same program and with the same work. after the Jews, another 300 Aryans followed as a third portion, who again will have to be 'examined'. Therefore we are busy here until the end of next week. Then on Saturday, the 6 December, we shall go home .....
"Mueller goes home from Saturday noon until Monday noon, Koonigslutter near Braunschweig."
This letter tells us what these examinations consisted of; certainly a very complete and thorough medical examination at best. The writer of this letter even put the word "examination" in quotation marks, which he said consisted of a presentation of the individuals and a comparison with the entries taken from the files. If there were no other crimes involved in this Euthanasia program I should think that the conduct of such examinations on the part of the doctors who were selection the people to be exterminated per se, is enough to take this nothing short of murder. It is ridiculous to suppose that these doctors connected any sort of mental examination on the patients that were being selected and I again reiterate that the documents show conclusively that the basis of the selection was unability to perform work. Here we see a reference made to the Jews who were sent from Buchenwald in the summer of 1942 as Reemhild testified, and Mennecke himself looked over these 1200 Jews who the Defendant Hoven had already collected together for him and they, it should be noted, were not even given the cursory type of examination extended to Aryans.
As far as examining the Jews went, the letter states that it is sufficient to take the reasons for their arrest from the files, so it is quite clear that no communication whatsoever was conducted. I move on to the third excerpt which is from Fuerstenberg on Main, 12 January 1942, Hotel Wegert, Monday.
"I hope to learn from Professor Nitsche, what exactly our next 'tour' will be. If he really does not know it, I hope to be able to catch Herrn Brack in the Tiergartenstraase in order to ask him with regard to my discussion with Dr. Hefelmann concerning Karl, your scruples are right but I will report it in a way that I will have no disadvantage from Karl's misfortune...
"Now I will say goodbye to Dr. Schidlausky -- then I will take a motorcar and ride to the hotel. At 10 o'clock Berlin rang me up; Fraulein Schwab told me that the meeting was postponed, but that they are waiting for me in Berlin tomorrow. All was changed again completely, but she did not know details and said I would hear it tomorrow. And maybe the matter again? It is awful with the 'charade Berlin'..."
We can see from this Letter that Dr. Mennecke had made a tour, as he describes it, to the Ravensbruck Concentration Camp because as the Tribunal has heard already, Dr. Schidlausky was the camp doctor at Ravensbruck. And from whom did Mennecke receive his instructions about going to concentration camps? Was it from Heinrich Himmler? Not at all. It was for Professor Nitsche and Herrn Brack, two of the more important people in the operation of the Euthanasia program.
The next letter is dated Berlin, 14 January 1942, Hotel Esplanade.
"My beloved mother! That was a typical war-winter railway journey from Fuerstenberg to this place."
Then fellows a rather long description about his trouble with transportation in wartime Germany which I will eliminate and drop to the latter part of this first paragraph on page 47, where he states:
"I met Professor Nitsche in the Bellevuestrasse who told me that I was expected, especially Dr. Hefelmann requested to have a talk with we. The meeting was postponed indeed, but we would have a meeting in a small circle. Professor Schneider would come too. Nitsche was in a hurry and so I want on to Tiergartenstrasse. I delivered the reports to Herrn Moumann, but kept the three nice covers and the wrapping paper. Then I called the office, spoke to Frau Meyer and asked when I could come to Dr. Hefelmann. He expected me at 14.30 hours. I did not speak with anybody else yet. At Herrn Moumann I saw the copy of the letter which announces me at Gross Rosen for the 15th to 20th January. Professor Nitsche too said -- in passing so to speak -- that new tasks are waiting for me, but when I asked if I could not go home first, he said: Of course, you can arrange it as you like. Now I will wait for the things to come.
"At 21.40 hours Cafe Excelsior. After having written a letter of three pages to Karl and also a copy (enclosed) I am able to continue to inform you, Mummy: Now we will still go to Gr. Rosen. I am allowed to decide it myself and therefore I decide it in this manner. Listen: At 14.30 hour's I entered the Reich Chancellery and the discussion with Dr. Hefelmann during which certain problems had to be reviewed, started immediately. Everything is fine. As the proposed big meeting was not held, we are going to meet tomorrow in Heinze, Dr. Straub and 'your husband'. At 11.30 hours I will go again to the Reich Chancellery. The following problem will be discussed: Promoting the psychiatry of the youth. In this branch Schneider and Hinze have to be regarded as the leading experts of the Riech. I am co-adviser as a man of the practice (with Straub). Straub is country councillor and coordinator of the institution of the province Holstein in Miel and Oberstabsarzt of the Wehrmacht and is the bearer of the party badge in gold. He wants to resign in Kiel and to direct again an institution in southwestern Germany. Eichberg? Oh, no , there will be no other man than your husband. But it is planned to establish a new regional institution for Herr Straub in our vicinity, which will be mainly devoted to the psychiatry of youth.
The work in this newly established or recognized institution will be thoroughly furthered especially by the scientific cooperation and counsel of Schneider and Meinze. According to present plans, Idstehn is taken into consideration. I have to work with my special department for children which should be still further expanded in close cooperation with Schneider, Meinze and. Straub, and the 'elimination' of this new 'psychiatry hospital of youth' will be completed by me. There we have already the project of the future which I have always expected from the special department for children. In addition to very agreeable flattering remarks concerning the perfect organization of my special department for children (he said that this department and that of Hinze are the best ones) Dr. Hefelmann expressed his appreciation for my work and said that this was not only his own opinion but also that of Herrn Brack. Today, as a preparation for the meeting tomorrow we mutually considered how to reorganize the hospital in Idstein. Characteristically not Bernetat but I am called to aid in settling these problems. This is important. It also finds an explanation in the way Dr. Hefelmann spoke about Berne and what he thought of my opinion. I advised against Idstein as first thing today and proposed Scheuern instead. For this proposal various facts seemed deisive. If I have two institutes for idiotic children in the vicinity I would prefer to give the up to new badly managed institute of Scheuern into better hands, instead of interfering with Idstein which in Herrn Mueller has a constant reliable manager."
Now I skip down to the last paragraph on page 48.
" At about 17 o'clock I left Dr. H., who, at the end asked me to buy wine for him; I will of course do it. He gave me his home address. After this I went to Tiergartenstrasse, in order to talk with Dr. Nitsche. Dr. H. had already informed me about the complete new changes! which Fraulein Schwab had indicated on the telephone. Since the day before yesterday a large delegation of our action headed by Herrn Brack is on the battlefields of the East to aid in the saving of our wounded soldiers in ice and snow. They include physicians, clerks, Hadamar and Sonnenstein, nurses and male nurses, a while detachment of 20 to 30 persons.
This is a top secret. Only these persons who cannot be spared in the carrying out of the most important tasks of our action, were not included. Professor Hitsche told me about that too and regretted especially that the male and female assistant nurses of our institution Eichberg were taken away so quickly. This is the reason that the great meeting of the 15 January was postponed until the 6 February because until then the relief action in the Last will be finished. The best and sincerest greetings to my beloved , golden mummy, signed: your faithful Fritz."
Letter No. 4 is dated Heidelberg, 15 June 42:
"Just now I finished the thing for Berlin in order to send it registered tonight the photocopy for the Tiergartenstrasse as well as the answer to Herrn Jennerwein," which we suggest is the defendant Brack. "In the latter I wrote to inform me in time about Dr. Hofelmann's visit so that I personally could be present at the conference on the Eichberg. I enclose the copy; please file it into the Berlin letter case. I keep the original. I want to show it to Professor Schneider with whom I discussed it this morning and who was very interested in this "recommencement." He himself has nothing to do with the National Committee. Besides that I started to work right away this morning at 8.30 I was already working. I finished a voluminous exploration until 11 o'clock and dictated it immediately. Then I talked with Professor Schneider about very interesting things of our future cooperation, etc., until 12.15 hours."
I will omit the last paragraph of that letter. I might comment upon the word "recommencement" in this letter of 15 June 42. It appears that there may well have been an interruption in carrying out the Euthanasia Program in the latter part of 1941. This was certainly not a complete cessation because the documents that we have indicate that the exterminations were carried out right on through, but it does appear that as a result of the tremendous indignation which was stirred up among the German people as a result of this Program that considerable pressure was brought to bear to have it stopped, and hence we find this word "recommencement" in the letter of 15 June 42, which may indicate a recommencement of the Euthanasia action at this or that place.
"7 April 1943, Wednesday." There is a short excerpt reading:
"The letter of Herrn Blandenburg, the answer on my "report" sent to him about a fortnight ago (not yet the answer of my second letter concerning "certificate") is as follows: Werner Blankenburg, Berlin, l April 1943. Dear Mr. Mennecke.
"I was very glad to have received some words from you. I am especially glad that you are well and that you enjoy your work. Everything goes as usual here. We are waiting for the things to come. The Military post office number of Herrn Brack is 46.000, of Dr. Hefelmann (unfortunately left out, error)". Signed: "Blankenburg."
Blankenburg, the Tribunal will recall, was an assistant to the Defendant, Viktor Brack, and after Brack left to go into the army or at least left Berlin, Blankenburg took over many of his activities in Berlin. That was in the year 1942, as I recall. The letter continues on Page 50:
"Yes, sweetheart, that shows that my connections to Berlin are alive and kept up; that is very important. The military post office number of Dr. Hefelmann was apparently still to be put in, but unfortunately it was left out. Perhaps I will be able to learn it from Herrn Brack to whom I shall write soon."
The next excerpt I shall not read at this time. We come now to Document NO-1007 on Page 51 of the document book, and this will be Prosecution Exhibit 413. This is a letter again from the WVHA, Division D which was in control of concentration Camps. Stamp: Top Secret. To the Camp Commanders of the Concentration Camps." and then there the list of camps: "Dachau, Sachsenhausen, Buchenwald, Mauthausen, Flossenburg, Neuengamme, Auschwitz, Gorss-Rosen, Natzweiler, Stutthof, Ravensbruck, Ri." -
I don't know, -- "Lublin and Bergen-Belsen." Ri. and Herz. I don't recall at the moment.
"The Reichsfuehrer-SS and Chief of the German Police upon demonstration has decreed that in the future only insane prisoners can be selected for the action 14 F 13 by the medical commissions appointed for this purpose.
"All other prisoners unfit for work (persons suffering from tuberculosis, bedridden invalids, etc.,) are absolutely to be excluded from this action. Bed-ridden prisoners are to be given suitable work which can also be done in bed.
"The order cf the Reichsfuehrer-SS must be strictly observed in the future.
"The requests for gasoline for this purpose will, therefore, be discontinued." Signed: "Glucks."
This document indicates that prior to this date of 27 April 1943 that the Euthanasia Program encompassed the execution not only of insane persons, but persons suffering from tuberculosis, bed-ridden individuals, etc because this document states that in the future only insane persons can be selected, and all other prisoners, even though they be unfit for manual work, are to be put to work with something they can do in bed. This again indicates the Euthanasia Program cannot be justified on any ground of Eugenics or medical considerations.
Defense Counsel for the Defendant, Karl Brandt, points cut that I did not read the excerpt from the letter written by Dr. Mennecke -- it is on Page 50, August 14, 1944 -- in which the name of Professor Brandt is mentioned. It is not evident on the face of the letter what the meaning of it is; consequently, I have not read it into the record. It is, of course, part of the Exhibit and is in the record, but I have made no point of it because there is nothing on the face of the document which indicates that it had anything necessarily to do with the matter under consideration.
I think at this point, if the Tribunal please, we will ask that the witness, Olga Eyer, be brought to the stand to testify. She, of course, will not testify concerning Euthanasia. The Tribunal will recall that the affidavit taken from Olga Eyer was admitted several weeks ago in connection with the activities of Dr. Hagen of Strassbourg upon the condition that we make an effort to bring Miss Eyer here, so I think that it might do just as well to put her on new, and then she well be able to return to Strasbourg probably tomorrow.
THE PRESIDENT: Prior to the securing of the witness, the Tribunal will recess.
(Recess)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session. MR HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, this witness is a French national. However, she is fully conversant with the German language and will testify in German.
OLGA EYER, a witness, took tho stand and testified as follow BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q The witness will rise, hold up her right hand, and he sworn. Repeat after me:
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.)
THE PRESIDENT: Be seated, please.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q Your name is Olga Eyer, is it not?
A Yes.
Q Your last name is spelled E-y-e-r-?
A Yes, that's right.
Q You were born on January 17, 1909?
A. 1907.
Q Where were you born, Witness?
A In Strasbourg, France.
Q And you are a French citizen?
A Yes.
Q What is your present address?
A In Strassbourg.
Q Miss Eyer, will you kindly tell the Tribunal what education you have had?
A I attended the college in Hildercheim in Strassburg until I was 16.
Q In what year did you complete your education?
A In 1923. 1755
Q Will you tell us what you did in the way of employment from 1923 until the present date?
A For about five years I was in my parents' business; and after that I had various positions as secretary.
Q. When did you enter the employ of Prof. Dr. Eugen Haagen as a secretary of the Hygiene Institute of Strassbourg?
A On the 1st of November 1941.
Q Did you remain in that position until Prof. Haagen left Strassbourg?
A Yes.
Q In your position as a secretary to Dr. Haagen, did you handle all correspondence, including correspondence of a secret nature?
A Yes, but I did not know that Prof. Haagen may have had other secret correspondence in addition.
Q Therefore, Witness, you are in a position to tell us about some of the details of medical experiments performed on human beings, are you not?
A Yes.
Q Will you tell the Tribunal what you know about experiments on yellow fever?
A The yellow fever experiments were carried out until 1942. They were stopped in 1942.
Q Do you know where Prof. Haagen carried out these yellow fever experiments?
AAs far as I knew I saw a few letters from an insane asylum in Berlin, Wittenau; and they gave some names of patients.
Q Where?
A Since I do not know enough about it--I only looked at the names--I don't know exactly what it was about. I only know that it was about jaundice.
Q Now, Witness, you stated in your affidavit that you thought that these experiments were in Berlin, Reichenau.
You meant Wittenae; is that correct?
AAfterwards I remembered that it was Berlin, Wittenau.
Q Now, Witness, you tell the Tribunal in your own words what you know about the typhus experiments conducted by Dr. Haagen.
A The medical inspectorate of the Luftwaffe gave Prof. Haagen assignments, research assignments, about yellow fever, typhus, hepatitis, and influenza.
Q Now, did you handle any correspondence or see any correspondence in connection with these experiments which might Infer that experiments were conducted upon concentration camp inmates?
A. Yes. There were two letters, Prof. Haagen dictated them to me. In the first letter ****** Haagen, through Prof. Hirt, asked the SS Main Office for two hundred*******ers in order to conduct typhus experiments with these prisoners. In ********** letter Prof. Haagen complained that the patients arrived in such******condition that they could not be used and that a part of them had already die on the way; and he asked for two hundred more prisoners in good health, similar to Wehrmacht soldiers.
Q. Witness, do you know where these experiments were conducted?
A. The experiments were conducted in Natsweiler, Stutthof.
Q. As a result of these experiments, did Prof. Haagen prepare reports to be sent to the medical chief of the medical services of the Luftwaffe?
A. Every quarter year a report was sent about the work to the medical inspectorate of the Luftwaffe.
Q. I understand you to say then, Witness, that reports were sent to the medical service of the Luftwaffe every three months. Is that correct?
A. Yes, and other reports. From 1944 on the reports were sent to Air Fleet Center, Berlin-Bahlem, Koenigstrasse 59, two copies, with the request to forward one report to the Luftwaffe Medical Inspectorate.
Q. The, Witness, you say that these experiments with typhus on human beings took place from 1944 on?
A. Yes.
Q. Was it obvious from these reports sent every three months that a live typhus virus was being used on the prisoners at Natzweiler?
A. The reports indicated that fifty prisoners were infected with virulent typhus.
Q. Do you know from your own knowledge whether or not any of the prisoners subjected to these typhus experiments died as a result thereof?
A. I can't say.
Q. However, you do not exclude the possibility that prisoners died as a result of these experiments, do you?
A. I assume that it is a dangerous disease.
Q. Now, witness, in regard to these reports, were reports of these typhus experiments sent to the Reichforschungsrat?
A. Yes. The Reichforschungsrat issued research reports on yellow fever, hepatitis and influenza, and the reports were sent in every three months.
Q. Did they also receive reports on typhus?
A. Yes.
Q. Were any reports over sent to the high command of the Wehrmacht?
A. From 1944 on, the high command of the Wehrmacht was very much interested in the experiments and also wanted to have reports on the research work that was going on.
Q. Could it be clearly understood from these reports that the human beings used were concentration camp inmates?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, Miss Eyer, did Professor Haagen go to Natzweiller often?
A. He went once a week to Natzweiller with his assistant, Miss Krunel.
Q. Witness, will you kindly tell the Tribunal what you know about the epidemic jaundice research, that is, hepatitis?
A. Hepatitis epidemica, the research work on hepatitis epidemica, was to be started in about June, 1944, and prisoners were also requested for this, but I don't know whether it over get to the point that the prisoners were-that the prisoners were--that the work was actually done with prisoners. I don't know.
Q. Then you do know in your work with Dr. Haagen that preparations were being made to experiment with hepatitis on human beings?
A. The application had already been made, but I do not know whether the work had already been begun. I cannot say.
Q. Did you ever hear the name Dr. Doman?
A. Dr. Domen was to be in charge of the work on hepatitis epidemica. He came to Strassbourg for two or three days, but whether he was at Stutthof I do not know. He was to come back again, and after that the liberation of Strassbourg came. 1759
Q. Do you think it is possible that after Dr. Domen's visit of two or three days to Strassbourg that he night have gone from there to Natzweiller?
A. It is possible. I do not know exactly.
Q. Did you ever hear the name Professor Dr. Rostock?
A. Yes, I saw a few letters which came from tho Reich Research Council signed "Professor Rostock" but I do not know what function he had in the Reich Research Council.
Q. Then you do remember that Hagen corresponded with Rostock?
A. Yes, but I do not know exactly what it was about.
Q. Did Hagen ever visit Professor Rostock in Berlin?
A. I do not know. I assume so.
Q. Miss Eyer, did you state in your affidavit that Hagen visited Rostock in Berlin?
A. Yes.
Q. Then, Miss Eyer, why have you changed your testimony in regard to Hagen visiting Rostock at Berlin?
A. I confused tho name with Professor Seiss. I remembered that Afterwards.
Q. Then, Miss Eyer, you are sure that Hagen visited Dr. Seiss, and you are not certain whether or not Hagen visited Rostock; is that correct?
A. No, but I assure that he visited him, too, because he corresponded with him.
Q. Witness, do you know the name Professor Dr. Rose?
A. Yes.
Q. Was Dr. Rose over in Strassbourg?
A. Professor Rose was in Strassbourg twice.
Q. When did Dr. Rose visit Strassbourg?
A. For the first time in 1942 and then I believe at the beginning of '44.
Q. What did Dr. Rose do while he was at Strassbourg?
A. He visited Professor Hagen, and Professor Hagen showed him the institute, but what they talked about I do not know.
Q. At this time was Prof. Rose dressed in the uniform of the Luftwaffe?
A. Yes.
Q. No, witness, do you know the name of Dr. Schroeder?
A. Yes, Prof. Schroeder was at Strasbourg; he was there once.
Q. What did Dr. Schroeder do while he was at Strasbourg?
A. I am sorry, I did not understand.
Q. What did Dr. Schroeder do while he as at Strasbourg?
A. He visited Prof. Hagen; Prof. Hagen showed him the institute.
Q. When did Dr. Schroeder visit Strasbourg?
A. It was in 1944, as far as I can remember.
Q. Witness, was Dr. Schroeder dressed in the uniform of the Luftwaffe?
A. Yes, he wore the uniform of a general adjutant with thite lapels.
Q. Dad Dr. Hagen comment on the visit of Dr. Schroeder at all?
A. Prof. Hagen told me that this was his top boss.
Q. Now, witness, did you ever hear; pardon me; witness, did you or your associates ever protest to Dr. Hagen, or his assistant Dr. Graefe, against the experiments on human beings?
A. Yes, we complained to Dr. Graefe, and Dr. Graefe told us that the experiments were conducted on Poles, and he added that Poles were not human beings. He said Poles are not human beings.
MR HARDY: I have no further questions, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Does Defense Counsel desire to cross-examine this witness?
CROSS EXAMINATION BY DEFENSE COUNSEL, DR. ROBERT SERVATIUS:
Q. Witness, you have told us that reports were sent to the Reich Research Council; how long were these reports?
A. How many pages do you mean?
Q. Yes.
A. One, two some times three pages.
Q. Were also short reports submitted which only contained a very few phrases?
A. No. A few letters were sent to Prof. Rose.
DR. SERVATIUS: I do not have any further questions.
BY DEFENSE COUNSEL, DR. OTTO NELTE:
Q. Witness, have you deposed an affidavit?
A. I don't understand
Q. You have made an affidavit?
A. Yes, I made a report.
Q. You have made a report?
A. Yes.
Q. With whom have you discussed this report prior to writing it?
A. Mr. -- I don't know the name any more; Mr. Tavarger I think.
Q. How often has he talked to you?
A. He was in Strasbourg once.
Q. I asked you how often he talked to you.
A. Twice, he talked to me twice.
Q. Did he make any suggestions to you in the course of the conversation; or, did he ask you any questions of a certain kind?
A. He wanted to know exactly about the various research assignments; I told him what I knew.
Q. Witness, I am asking you that for the reason because after all the witness has deposed in the form of a report and not in the form of questions and answers, and I want to ask you at this time if you have made the record which we have an hand here in the same form immediately by yourself, or if you have corrected it at a later period of time.
A. No, Mr. Tavarger took the thing down as I told it to him and then they were typed. Of course he asked me about Dr. Schroeder and whether I know of these people and what I know about them.
Q. And you talked with Mr. Tavarger twice -- on two different occasion?
A. Yes, this morning.
Q. You talked with him this morning?
A. Yes.
Q. I want to know if he has interrogated you twice at Strasbourg.
A. No, once at Strasbourg.
Q. And then this record is correct; have you seen it today?
A. I read it through.
Q. Just as it was presented to you here?
A. Yes.
Q. And is that the first record you had previously made?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, you have stated in this record that also reports about the experiments were sent to the OKW; is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. When?
A. In 1944.
Q. Did you also tell that to Mr. Tavarger?
A. I think so.
Q. I am asking you because in the affidavit, the period of time in 1944 is not set forth.
A. But it was in 1944.
Q. I only want to know if you also told Mr. Tavarger about that in Strasbourg and that this was the case beginning in 1944?
A. I don't remember if I told him that in Strasbourg; that was two years ago; I nay be mistaken.
Q. That was two years ago?
A. Over two years since I worked at the institute.
Q. I see. What you want to express is that you cannot recall the date exactly any more.
A. I can't remember dates exactly; I can give the year, but I can't give give any exact dates.
Q. Now, you have spoken of research orders, and on one occasion about research assignment of the Luftwaffe, and then by research by assignment of the Reich Research Council, and you have stated that reports were submitted to these agencies every three months.
A. Yes, three months.
Q. Then you have testified that the OKW was interested in the reports.
A. The OKW wanted to have reports on typhus.
Q. What do you mean by typhus reports; what do you mean by OKW?
A. The High Command of the Wehrmacht.
Q. Yes, I believe that with your knowledge of the organization, you should know.
A. My knowledge was not as exact as that. I only know that the high command of the Wehrmacht wanted to have reports; I learned that from a letter.
Q. You do not know for example, who signed it?
A. No, I don't recall.
Q. Or what agency in the OKW demanded these reports?
A. No, I don't know that either.
Q. Therefore, it is correct that up until the year 1944, well into the year, the OKW did net receive any reports?
A. Yes, as far as I recall.
Q. And secondly, it is correct that you are unable to state what agency of the OKW demanded these reports?
A. I cannot state that; I don't remember that.
Q. May I ask you further, If more details were given in these reports about the question of experiments on human beings. I want to draw your attention to the following fact: In paragraph 7 of your affidavit you say that once every seven months reports were sent to the Reich Research Council, Ministry of the Luftwaffe, as well as the agency at Berlin. Now, you added the following sentence: you added that I have also sent reports to the OKW, and now the following sentence from the reports about typhus which was directed to the Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe.