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)
THE PRESIDENT: Does the witness read the French language?
WITNESS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Is the affidavit which was just handed to the witness in the French language or in the German language?
WITNESS: German. Excuse me, French. French.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may call the attention of the witness to the portion of the affidavit concerning which he interrogated her.
DR. FRITZ: Miss Eyer, under Paragraph 9, it is stated - and this is also in the French text which I have also seen - "Professor Rose, Inspector of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe". It is mentioned that he came to Strasbourg twice.
WITNESS: Rose to Strasbourg twice? What it says here is a mistake. I didn't notice it when I read it through. I have already told you that somebody else typed it and I didn't read it good enough and that escaped me.
Q Therefore it is wrong as it stands now.
A Yes, it is wrong.
Q Another small mistake, Miss Eyer. In the same paragraph 9 it is stated and you have also repeated that earlier today that Professor Rose had gone to Strasbourg for the first time in 1942?
A Yes.
Q The fact is and has also been testified here by the witness Schmidt that Professor Rose came to Strasbourg for the first time in 1943, to visit Professor Haagen.
A That is possible.
Q I do not have any further questions.
DOCTOR MARX (Defense Counsel for defendant Schroeder): Pardon me, Mr. President, I request that I can ask the witness some further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: You may interrogate the witness.
DR. MARX: Miss Eyer, can you still recall the contents of the letter which were addressed to the Central Air Physician, Berlin, personally, with a copy for the Medical Chief of the Luftwaffe?
That is, a letter to the Central Air Fleet Physician, Berlin, with a copy for the Medical Chief of the Luftwaffe. Can you still recall such letters?
A I remember that I wrote them but I do not remember the contents.
Q You cannot recall the contents any more? In your affidavit you spoke of "virulent vaccines". What do you mean by that?
A I just remembered the phrase from a letter which I wrote once.
Q Well, in my opinion, in your affidavit you have talked about virulent vaccines.
A Yes, that was in a letter that fifty prisoners were infected with virulent vaccine.
Q Do you know what virulent vaccine is?
A I assume that the disease was injected into the prisoners through the vaccine but I do not know exactly. I have never studied medicine.
Q Yes. There are two kinds of vaccines - one virulent, one nonvirulent. Therefore, in my opinion, it is a living bacteria. Correct?
A Because it was virulent I assumed that it was to give the prisoners the disease. If it had not been virulent it would have been less dangerous probably.
Q That is a matter which we shall leave to the experts. You spoke of jaundice experiments. However, you stated that you did not know if the Kron prinzen Allee had jaundice.
A I don't know. I only saw a few letters that mentioned it.
Q Are you mixing up jaundice and yellow fever here?
A No, that was yellow fever.
Q You know what we mean by yellow fever?
A Yellow fever is a tropical disease. Jaundice......
Q There are two kinds of jaundice. One is hepatitis -- connected with paralysis of the liver.
A Hepatitis epidemic.
Q Well, there are still others. Once you stated that the experiments with yellow fever were concluded in the year 1943?
Correction sheet for Court No. 1 15 January 1947, page 1776 The question reading:
Q. That is a matter which we shall leave to the experts. You spoke of jaundice experiments. However, you stated that you did not know if the Kron prinzen Allee had jaundice.
SHOULD READ:
Q. That is a matter which we shall leave to the experts. You spoke of jaundice experiments. However, you stated that you did not know if the patients at Wittenau Kron prinzen Allee had had jaundice.
A In 1942.
Q Already in 1942?
A I believe so. They were not completed, they were stopped.
Q As far as I know this was connected with the termination of the Africa campaign.
A Yes. If it was 1943 that was 1943.
Q That was 1943 then. Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: Any further cross examination of this witness?
Is there any redirect examination by the Prosecution?
REDIRECT EXAMINATION
MR. HARDY: Miss Eyer, in regard to these reports sent to the high command of the Wehrmacht, could it have been that the reports were sent to the Chief of the Medical Service of the OKW?
WITNESS: I didn't understand the question.
DR. NELTE (Defense Counsel for defendant Handloser): I object to this question. The witness has replied to my question clearly that she could not recall to what office of the OKW these reports were submitted and I have asked the witness what signature was placed on the questions of the OKW and she stated that she was unable to recall and finally she answered to my question that she could not recall the reports to the OKW any more. After that, this question by the Prosecutor can only be of a leading kind.
THE PRESIDENT: Objection sustained.
BY MR. HARDY:
Q. Miss Eyer, when you said in your affidavit that Dr. Rose was inspector of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, did you mean to say that Professor Rose was from the office of the Inspector of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe and that he was not the Inspector?
A. Yes, he belonged to the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, but he was not inspector; at least, I don't believe so.
Q. Now, in these typhus experiments conducted by Dr. Hagen in Natzweiler, did Dr. Haagen infect the concentration camp inmates with typhus?
A. Yes, with virulent vaccines.
Q. New, when you say virulent vaccine, do you mean virulent virus?
A. With virulent virus. That is what I meant, yes.
MR. HARDY: I have no further question, Your Honor.
DR. PRITZ (Counsel for defendant Rose): Mr. President, I still have one additional question to put to the witness which has arisen from the examination by Mr. Hardy.
THE PRESIDENT? Counsel may proceed.
RE-CROSS EXAMINATION BY DR. FRITZ:
Q. Miss Eyer, to the last question of the Prosecutor you replied that the prisoners had been infected with virus. To a further question you stated that you meant with virulent virus, not virulent vaccine. I am now asking you whether you can tell we the difference, for example, between virulent virus and virulent vaccine.
A. No, I assumed that the 50 prisoners in question had to be given that disease so that the typhus experiments could be conducted on them. I have already said that I do not understand about these things.
Q. Thank you, that answers the question sufficiently.
THE PRESIDENT: There being no further questions, the witness may be excused.
(The witness was excused.)
MR. McHANEY: I would now like to offer Document NO 891, on page 52 of the English Document Book, as Prosecution Exhibit 414. This is a memorandum or directive from the Reich Minister of the Interior, Berlin, 6 September 1944. It is addressed to: (a) The Reich Governor, (b) The administration of the provincial association, (c) the County Presidents, (d) the Police President in Berlin, (e) The Lord Mayer of the Reich Capital Berlin. It is concerning "Mentally insane Eastern workers and Poles -- Circular decrees of ft he Reich Minister of the Interior of -- " and then fellows some sort of number and letter reference.
"1. Due to the considerable number of Eastern workers and Poles brought into the German Reich for labor employment, the a assignment of mental cases among them to German asylums is constantly increasing. The purpose of such assignments must be in any case the possibly speediest recovery to working ability. Thus, to those mentally insane people toe all the means of modern therapy must be applied.
But due to lack of space in German institutions, it can net be justified that patients who are not considered a s curable to be able to work again in a reasonably short time may remain permanently or for a long time in German institutions. In order to avoid that the following is ordered:
"2. In the following list I established for each district in the Reich a collective list for incurable mentally insane Eastern workers and Poles. They should be assigned to those institutions immediately if possible. In case this is impossible due to urgency or to transportation difficulties, the institution in question should deliver their Eastern, Polish patients to the collecting, institution in their respective district within at the most one month. It is not necessary to carry out the removal if the patient is considered as being able to leave the institution within six weeks at the latest.
"3. It is the task of the collecting institution to decide whether the restoration of working ability might be considered within a reasonable period of time.
"4. The charge of costs from the date of registration in the collecting institution is to be taken over by the Head cf the Central Financial clearing Office of the Sanitarium in Min*/Oberdenau, P.O. Box 324, which has to be informed immediately of such Assignments. The fixed rate for patients of the general class will be pair to the institutions. The Eastern workers and Poles already assembled in collecting institutions are to be reported on a list immediately to the Central Financial Clearing Office. The charge of costs for those patients as transferred as from 1 October 1944 to the Central Account Office.
"5. After four weeks of the registration in the collecting institution, at the latest, a short report on the prognosis of the case and on the question of working ability has to be sent to the head of the Central Financial Clearing Office. It is the task of that office to direct the transportation of patients from the collecting institutions to nearby special asylums in their home district.
"6. As Poles are to be considered only those who were brought into the Reich for labor employment. This decree does not apply to local Polish population.
"7. The leaders of the Gau, etc., mental institutions are to be informed by their superior officials and the leaders of welfare and private institutions by their competent higher administrative authorities. The required copies are enclosed herewith."
And there follows a list of collecting institutions, which we need, not mention here particularly, except Number 9: "For Kurhessen, Nassay and land Hessen: Mental Institution Hadamar."
"By order: Wiesbaden, 11 September 1944, Landeshaus."
A copy is noted as having been received by the County Mental Institution, Eichberg, "with the request to acknowledge and take further steps."
This document indicates that those Eastern workers who had been forcibly brought into Germany, who no longer wore able to work and who were considered as a burden on the mental institutions in Germany were to be brought together in a collecting institution and, unless they could be discharged in a matter of six weeks, they were to be exterminated and brought under the scope of the euthanasia program. I now would like to offer Document NO 1116 on Page 55 of the Document Book as Prosecution Exhibit 415.
This is a judgment, or rather, an extract from the review and recommendations of the Deputy Theater Judge Advocate in the case of the United States vs. Klein, Wahlmann, et al, held at Wiesbaden, Germany, from 3 October 1945 through 15 October 1945.
I do not think that it is needful for me to read these extracts into the record. I'll state briefly that this is a review of a judgment handed down by a duly appointed military commission of the United States Army in the case of a number of Germans who were tried for participation in the execution of persons of Polish and Russian nationality at Hadamar Institution, which, as we know, was one of the extermination institutions in the euthanasia program. The facts here involve the execution of in excess of 400 Russians and Poles between the dates 1 July 1944 and 1 April 1945 at Hadamar Germany.
Suffice it to say that three of the seven individuals tried were sentenced to be hanged by the neck until dead, that one was confined to hard labor for life and one for 35 years, one for 30 years, and one for 25.
The Court found that it had jurisdiction to try these individuals for the murder of persons of nationality other then that of the trying Tribunal. In other words, the fact that the persons executed were not of American nationality did not preclude the Court from taking jurisdiction.
THE PRESIDENT: Wasn't that matter settled by the Judges of the International Military Tribunal, Mr. HcHaney?
MR. McHANEY: Sir?
THE PRESIDENT: Wasn't that matter more or less settled by the Internati nal Tribunal?
MR. McHANEY: Yes, I think so. Yes, Mr. Hochwald will now proceed to introduce -
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 0930 hours, 16 January 1947).
Official transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nuernberg, Germany, on 16 January 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable Judges of Military Tribunal 1.
Military Tribunal 1 is now in session.
God save the United States of America, and this Honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you will ascertain if the defendants are all present in the courtroom.
THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honor, all the defendants are present in the court.
THE PRESIDENT. The Secretary General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in the courtroom.
This morning Tribunal 1 convenes at 9:40 o'clock, a delay which was due to mechanical difficulties in the recording appliances of the court. They having been promptly repaired by the efficient agents in charge of them, the court now convenes at 9:40 o'clock. The prosecution may proceed.
DR. HOCHWALD: May it please the Tribunal, the last document which was presented by Mr. McHaney last night was NO 1116 which was Prosecution Exhibit 415. I also offered into evidence a set of documents which were prosecution exhibits in the case against the defendants Wahlmann and so on; excerpts which were read into the record by Mr. McHaney. The first document is NO 748 which will be on page 66 of document book, Your Honor, which will be Prosecution Exhibit 416. It is a statement of Alfens Klein. I do not want to read this document into the record. The next document I offer is also an exhibit from the Hadamar case, prosecution exhibit from the case, NO 730, on page 69 of the document book and will be Prosecution Exhibit 417. I quote:
"Before me, Capt. Luke P. Rogers, being authorized to administer oaths, personally appeared Philipp Blum, who, being duly sworn through the interpreter, made and subscribed the following statement.
"My name is Philipp Blug, I live in Frickhofen, Germany; I am a cousin of Alfons Klein.