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.
It was shown clearly that experiments were being carried cut on living human beings. May I assume from this that you are trying to state that this is the report which was sent to the OKW in 1944? This is not clearly stated.
A. I cannot remember the report to the OKW exactly; I do not know what they showed.
MR. NELTE: Thank you very much.
BY DR. PRIBILA (for the defendant Rostock):
Q Before I begin interrogating you I would like to state a fact to you. You realize that at the beginning of this interrogation you have given a solemn oath?
A Yes.
Q Furthermore, you must surely realize that you are standing before a very high Tribunal here where very large crimes are concerned and in this case it is a matter of life and death of the defendant?
A Yes, I know that.
Q Therefore, you will understand that your testimony as a witness is extremely important?
A Yes.
Q That you realize your own responsibility?
A Yes.
Q You surely realize, also, that the correspondence which is not here before the Tribunal, the testimony about such correspondence is extremely important?
A Yes.
Q Now, at the time in this affidavit you stated, with regard to my client Dr. Rostock, that Haagen had visited him regularly in Berlin, Now you have corrected that today "to the best of your knowledge",
A Yes.
Q You have stated to the Tribunal that your assumption at that time was wrong and that the person which you saw at the time was Mr, Seis.
A Yes.
Q However, then you have answered your question of the Prosecution when he asked you if Haagen also visited Rostock, "I assume that".
A Yes. I don't know exactly.
Q That is just it. I would like you to answer with yes or no.
A I don't know exactly.
Q Will you please wait until I ask the question, Do you know from your own personal observation if Haagen visited Rostock in Berlin?
A From my personal knowledge I do not know that.
Q Thank you. That is what I understood previously. Now, if you realize of what importance I consider your testimony and, after having corrected that this was mistaken identity, I would like to ask you if in this correspondence which was sent to the Reich Research Council if, in your opinion, you might also be mistaken in that information?
A I do not believe so. The letters were signed with Rostock, but as far as I remember they were signed Rostock.
Q Now you say, "I can't state". Is that correct?
AAs far as I remember.
Q You remember the name?
A Yes.
Q You also remember the contents?
A No, I do not remember the contents.
Q Is it possible that this correspondence may have dealt with the following subject? That is, it was correspondence from the year 1944, rather the end of the year, about fears of an influenza epidemic which was being expected for the winter 1944-1945? Do you recall that perhaps?
AAn epidemic was mentioned but whether that was in the correspondence I do not know.
Q But you did have such an epidemic? However, you cannot tell this high Tribunal with certainty and under oath that Professor Haagen reported to Rostock about these terrible experiments?
A Not to Rostock. Reports to Rostock with name ------
Q Therefore, it was a completely different sort of correspondence?
A I don't understand.
Q Therefore, there is a possibility it was some other correspondence?
A Yes.
Q Than that which was sent to Rostock?
A I don't quite understand.
Q I am just asking you that certain letters to Rostock, if you can remember that, and we discussed the possibility they were concerned with the terrible experiments.
A That may be, but we often received letters from Professor Rostock.
Q However, you cannot state that they were letters about these experiments on human beings?
A No, I cannot say that.
Q Thank you. That is what I understood. I do not have any further questions.
BY DR. MARX (for the defendants Schroeder and Dr, Becker-Freyseng):
Q Miss Eyer, what positions did Professor Haagen occupy and what activity did he exercise?
A Oberarztfuehrer in the Luftwaffe and at the same time consultant hygienist until 1944. From 1944 on he was directly under the Air Fleet Physicians Center.
Q But now you state - what month of the year 1944 did these changes occur?
A I do not remember.
Q You do not recall exactly any more?
A No, I do not know.
Q You stated in your affidavit "I knew of the whole correspondence of the Institute as well as the secret correspondence". Therefore, you make a difference between secret correspondence and the remainder of the correspondence?
A Secret correspondence I mean the research work, and general correspondence had no reference to it.
Q Yes. However, there was correspondence which was classified as top secret. To what agency was this correspondence sent?
A To the Chief and Inspector of the Medical Service, and to the Air Fleet Center, and the Reich Research Council.
Q I must ask you to think over very precisely in this case what you have just stated. You stated this secret correspondence had been sent to the Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe.
Was it not sent exclusively to the Reich Research Council and offices of the SS?
A No. I know nothing about the SS.
Q I mean that for scientific research --
A It was the Reich Research Council, the Air Fleet Center, and the Chief and Inspector of the Luftwaffe. These things were generally treated secret. At least, marked secret when the reports were sent in.
Q Any difference between top secret and secret?
AA letter from the Reich Research Council was marked specifically that research work was to be dealt with as top secret.
Q Yes, I see. Did you hear about these experiments unexpectedly -at the time the typhus epidemic at Natzweiler came?
A Yes. That was in 1944.
Q Was some action taken then by the Luftwaffe Inspector?
A The Luftwaffe Medical Inspectorate wanted to know if the epidemic had any respect to Haagen's work there. Haagen wrote back it had nothing to do with it, that the epidemic had broken out itself.
Q Wasn't it brought in from outside?
A No, I don't remember.
Q Miss Eyer, you further stated that every three months reports about experiments were sent to the Inspector and Chief of the Medical System of the Luftwaffe and the Reich Research Council. Is that correct?
A Yes. That may have been later. I don't know exactly -- after every three months.
Q I am now asking you - did three months reports of importance at similar intervals, which were addressed to the Luftwaffe - did they not deal with experiments of consulting physicians where they discussed observations in great experiments and make suggestions for potential changes. Just a moment for your clarification. After all Professor Haagen was consulting hygienist of the Air Fleet Research, is that right?
A That is right.
Q Now, was it that these reports composed themselves of his activities as consultant hygienist?
A The reports were sent in after the time Professor Haagen undertook the inspection - after 1944 - the reports were sent in every time. They were also kept secret.
Q There was also work by Professor Haagen with Fr. Crodal and this work referred to a new typhus vaccine. You know anything about that?
A I typed the reports but I don't know what was in them because I am no expert. Never studied medicine.
Q Wasn't there works which were submitted to have approved for publication? Did you understand my question?
A Yes.
Q There was some scientific work which had to be submitted in order to have it examined so that it could be permitted to be published?
A That is right.
Q Were there also reports frequently which Professor Haagen had composed together with Fr. Crodal, were they reports which were supposed to be published which had been previously submitted for examination?
A Yes. Such reports were sent in.
Q It is correct that Professor Haagen reported about the status of his research examinations which had been given to him by the Reich Research Council every four months?
A Yes, that is right.
Q Were these examinations classified as top secret?
A The reports which were sent in, no.
Q What sort of reports do you mean in typhus research which were sent to the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe. Some one could assume that the experiments on human beings were being carried out. You stated in your affidavit that reports about typhus experiments which were sent to the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe and which clearly showed they dealt with experiments on human beings. What do you mean by that?
A There wore about fifty prisoners who were infected with virulent vaccine.
Q Are you trying to claim now that this statement was contained in a report to the Medical Chief of the Luftwaffe.
A I do not remember that exactly.
Q Perhaps it may be that you have made a mistake in two different facts. When the Luftwaffe Medical Inspectorate asked what had caused the typhus epidemic in Natzweiler to which Professor Haagen replied that this had nothing to do with the experiments and that this epidemic had been brought into Natzweiler from the outside.
Q No. A report was made on the typhus research but since I do not understand enough about the report I can't talk about it - I can't explain it to you but it did indicate that experiments were conducted on human beings.
Q Well, you mean that this was really contained in the report or is this only one of your conclusions?
A It is a conclusion of mine. I say that I do not understand enough about.......
Q Therefore, I can say that it is only a conclusion by you. However, that you can't state that this was explicitly contained in the letter or report?
A No, I cannot swear to it.
DR. MARX: I do not have any further questions.
DR. SAUTER (Defense Counsel for defendant Blome): Mr. President, I have only a few brief questions.
Witness, you have previously told us about the research assignments which the Reich Research Council had given to Professor Haagen and of the reports which Professor Haagen on his part submitted to the Reich Research Council. Have you seen these assignments which the Reich Research Council gave to Professor Haagen?
A Yes, there was letter which was marked "top secret" in which the research assignments were given numbers and they were given the Priority D.
Q Have you only seen one written assignment of this kind or several? I'm talking about assignments of the Reich Research Council.
A One. All four research jobs were contained in this one letter. Each was given a number.
Q Then, if I understood you correctly, there were four research assignments at the same time?
A Yes, in the one letter, yes. They were given Priority D. All four were given different numbers.
Q Were any other assignments, besides these four of which you have just spoken, given by the Reich Research Council or did any other ones come to your knowledge?
A No, I don't believe so.
Q Therefore, there were only four?
A Yes.
Q Do you know who assigned this assignment of the Reich Research Council? I am asking this quite specifically - if the name of Blome ever appeared on the letter of the Reich Research Council? Blome - I am spelling to you - B L O M E?
A I do not know.
Q You cannot recall at all?
A No.
Q In the reports which Professor Haagen then submitted to the Reich Research Council was there no name on the address -- to whose attention?
A They went to Dr. Breuer usually.
Q They were usually sent to Dr. Breuer?
A Yes.
Q Can you recall if at any time any of these reports were directed to Professor Blome?
A No, I do not.
Q Did you at all, until today, hear the name of Professor Blome in connection with these research assignments?
A I do not remember the name but it may very well be. Sometimes I have a poor memory.
Q And from the correspondence which passed through your hands you cannot recall anything either with regard to Blome?
A No.
Q I thank you.
I do not have any further questions.
DR. FRITZ (Defense counsel for defendant Rose): Miss Eyer, I have only two questions to ask you.
When you were interrogated by my colleague, Dr. Servatius, amongst other things you have testified that also some correspondence took place between Professor Haagen and Professor Rose.
A Yes, that is right.
Q Was this correspondence frequent or infrequent?
A It was not very frequent.
Q Thank you.
A Perhaps five or six letters altogether.
Q Then I have one additional question. In the affidavit which has already been mentioned several times you have stated there that - under paragraph 9 - that Professor Rose was the Inspector of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe?
A That's not right. I did not say that.
Q However, it is stated in the German translation.
A That is a mistake. I didn't say that.
Q Then you want to correct yourself?
A Inspector?
Q Yes, I can read it to you.
A No, I never said that.
Q Thank you. I do not have any additional questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The affidavit will be handed to the witness to allow her to read it. The affidavit concerning which the witness was interrogated should be handed to her so she may examine it.
MR. HARDY: The affidavit is in the French language. I have a copy here and I will hand it to the witness.
(Affidavit was handed to witness)