Now in the Reichsforschungsrat, or in what organization in the Wehrmacht and SS, who was the coordinator of these activities; who was the person or group of persons that studied these various activities so that they would not have a duplication of effort, in other words so that they would not have high altitude experiments going on in each concentration camp, and therefore it would be understood that 9 of the research task dealing, with high altitude experiment were necessary, who was the individual or group of individuals, who engaged in this coordination of this research, that we see here in this case?
A. Many experiments had been made in this direction, first of all it was the competent expert departmental leaders. For example for medicine, Prof. Dr. Sauerbruch. Then, when the conditions arose which as you have just described, the growing chaotic conditions, required a closer coordination, and the Military Research Association (Wehrforschungsgemeinschaft) was called into being, and Professor Osenberg was to coordinate. However, Professor Osenberg was a machine engineer and he had many arguments with Professor Sauerbruch. For that reason, in 1945 it was decided that Professor Brandt was to be in charge of all medical matters, however, this coordination in the hands of Dr. Brandt coincided with the military collapse, so it never become effective.
Q. Now, when you speak of Sauerbruch and Osenberg; that is within the Reichs Research Council?
A. Yes.
Q. Was it theoretically the idea that the Reichs Research Council was to be the coordinating agent in this field of medical research?
A. That was not the idea, because medicine was only one department among thirty in the Reichs Research Council. Only in 1944, when matters were concentrated and coordinated several departments were united and given preference, and the number of researches conducted by the others were limited. Medicine was one of the research assignments given preference, and since Osenberg could not carry out this coordination, Dr. Brandt was assigned to it.
Q. Well now, one last question along these lines of coordination and these experimental ideas, which were conceived; suppose you and I together had gone to Himmler with an idea, say to experiment with Lost, whom would Himmler have called into his office to advise him about the feasibility of Sievers and Hardy's research problem?
A. Since we are two lay-men, Himmler in this case would have called Grawitz, but if you or I brought him a proposal made by a professor, then that authority would have sufficed for him and he himself would have decided the matter.
Q Do you recall the affidavit of Oswald Pohl where he had a paragraph pertaining to your name, where Oswald Pohl stated, in the introductory paragraph, I don't have the document here now, it is Document No-065, where in it states that he thought Himmler had men like Brandt, Conti, Grawitz, etc., advising him in these matters, now do you think that Oswald Pohl was correct in his assumption, Do you recall that particular section?
A Yes, I remember that paragraph, but I don't believe - at least from my own experience - that I can confirm this. The close connection between Himmler and Grawitz was known to me, Himmler never thought very much, of Conti, and the relations between Himmler and Brandt were not known to me at all. Himmler never spoke if Brandt; but of course I do not know to what extent Himmler had conversations with these these men as, I was never present.
Q Now, Mr. Sievers, during the course of your direct examination you referred many times to the horrible conditions in concentration camps which you observed when you visited them; will you please describe in detail to the Tribunal just what you saw when you went into these concentration camps?
A The total impression was what really shock me. I could net visit or inspect the whole concentration camp, because when I arrived there I was taken right to the department I was visiting. I had to cross the large roll court, in one corner of which was Rascher's department, and there I saw how the prisoners had to line up who were to go to work. It was this that gave me the picture of which I spoke here, namely, that the men, like myself, with all sorts of signs, red and green, had to live here together with prisoners of all types, in one single community.
Q Now did you get the impression when you visited the camp you spoke of horrible conditions in the camps, did you get the impression as stated here and as stated many times before these Tribunals, that the concentration camps, were like boy-scouts recreational centers?
A I don't think you could say so, no. The set-up was such for instance the sick-bay was equipped with good medical equipment and clean, but this question of cleanliness was easy to achieve as it has often been said that when the concentration camps was visited everything was scrubbed and cleaned, and thus the dwelling accomodations made an exellent impression; but it is not just a clean house alone, that makes life tolerable. As I said, what struck me was everyone thrown together here.
Q Did you see, any of the inmates drinking champagne?
A No, I did not see that.
Q Well now, we have been told that all the inmates were very happy in these camps, they ran about gleefully, played harmonicas, etc.; did it impress you that way, Mr. Sievers?
A No, I did not have that impression.
Q Now, what I am getting at, Mr. Sievers, is do you think that any official visitor would have seen the same things in these camos that you saw?
A That depends when he went there. In general the concentration camps were empty during the day, because the inmates were taken outside to work, and this was also the case in Dachau. Only twice when the people were going out to work did I have the total impression of all these thousands of inmates, who had to line up, A visitor, say between nine and eleven o'clock in the morning, saw very few people, mostly they were orderlies and he saw empty barracks, so that the net impression was altogetner ascew. I hold it to be not cut of the question and in view of the whole system of propaganda, I believe it was certain that the visitors were taken to those camps purposely during those hours for that reason.
Q Now, how many times did you visit concentrations camps?
A IN all the years, I was in Dachau eight times, but not always in the concentration camps, because the ettomological institute was outside of the concentration camps. It was only twice that I saw all the inmates and I gained the impression about which I spoke. All the other times the camp was just about empty during the day, then you would gain the impression that there was so few people. For example, the people who could not work, because they were sick, they were walking around, and you would get the impression which really contradicted what it really was like.
Q Well now did you visit any other camps other than Dachau?
A I was twice in Natzweiler, which, however, was under construction. The buildings set up there were quite different from that at Dachau, and I did not see where the people worked. Working conditions in Natzweiler in the quarry were considered particularly terrible, but we were not allowed there. Then I once visited Oranienburg, but I did not get into the camp itself, only in the work shop, and other wise did not become acquainted with other concentration camps.
Q Well now in the course of all of your visits, how many of the visits that you had, are in the category of an official visit? For instance, you were with Himmler one time at Dachau. I assume that would have been an official visit. Now how were conditions that you saw?
A I was never in Dachau with Himmler.
Q Didn't you go with Himmler to Dachau in connection with the high altitude experiments?
A No, I wasn't present when Himmler took a look at those experiments.
Q Do you think conditions would have been different on an official visit than visits you made, or would your visit have been an official visit also?
A I never made an official visit to Dachau because I was always there for official conversations.
Q Well now did these conditions, the horrible conditions you have narrated here before this Tribunal, were they an open secret among the members of the medical service of tho Wehrmacht?
A We were not allowed to talk about what we saw in concentration camps. That was explicitly set down in tho paper that I had to sign. Moreover, I had no opportunity to talk with members of the medical inspectorate of the Wehrmacht because I did not know anybody in it.
Q Now, doctor, do you think you understand - I don't know whether the interpretation is difficult, but do you understand the expression, "open secret"? That is a familiar expression to you, isn't it?
A Yes, I know that expression.
Q Well then you don't think the conditions which you have narrated about the concentration camps would have been an open secret among the medical services of the SS, among the members of the medical service of the SS?
A That the conditions in the concentration camps were not ideal must in, my opinion, have been known within the SS, but the concepts of "ideal" and "sufficient" were not inform.
Q Well then you would think that a person with the rank of Obergruppenfuehrer would have no knowledge of the conditions in the concentration camps, that he just would not casually more or less hear about it from one of his friends or otherwise? Do you exclude the possibility that a max with the rank of Gruppenfuehrer or even a Standartenfuehrer would have no knowledge of the methods in which the concentration camps were being operated?
A For a certain category of these leaders that may be true, but I consider it out of tho question that an Obergruppenfuehrer, in whose official shpere there was a concentration camp, did not know what went on inside it.
Q Now, doctor, did you ever make any attempt during the course of these years to save some of this incriminating material so that when the war ended or when the resistance movement had accomplished their objective, if you had had that good fortune, did you make attempts to save the files of these criminal experiments, or did you make any attempt to retain this information so that you could aid in bringing home to the German people just what the basic activities of these Nazis were?
A I kept my documents on this in the Reich Research Council, and these documents along with the other documents were taken to Roslar, as I was later told. All of the material of the information office of the Reich Research Council was there, and my documents were taken there also.
Q Then in document NO-088, it is most difficult for me to understand why you being a resistance worker would have written such a letter as appears in document Book 9, which is Prosecution Exhibit 182. I think you are familiar with the letter. It is a letter addressed to SS Standartenfuehrer Dr. Rudolf Brandt, wherein you are eliciting three proposals for the dissolution and destruction of the Jewish sheleton collection at Strassbourg. Now herein you state:
"The skeleton collection as such is not conspicious. It could be declared as remnants of corpses, apparently left in the anotomical institute by the French, and ordered to be cremated. Decision on the following proposals is requested:
1) Collection can be preserved.
2) Collection is to be partly destroyed.
3) Entire collection is to be dissolved."
That is signed Sievers. Now here you haven't acted consistent with those beliefs that you had, and it would seem to me that you would want to save this material so that it could be received by the Allies, so that they would be fully aware of this horrible crime, killing these Jewish people to make a skeleton collection. Why did you act in this manner, doctor?
A In my direct examination I have already said that this proposal was not of my own. It was not simply the question of the skeleton collection alone, but of all measures, measures concerning Hirt's department as a whole in Strassbourg; and Hirt wrote to me, for this reason, and I telephoned to him, and he himself made this suggestion; which I, not knowing what the situation was at the University of Strassbourg in the matter of anotomy, and I could not have known this, could not have made; and I, orientated myself according to what Hirt said, and passed on tho teletype to Brandt; but after all what should I have done if Hirt asked me what was to be done, and what would have happened if I had said to Hirt:
"Leave everything where it is, so that the Allies will find it"? I would have been shot the next day.
Q Well now you state here in the letter that you would leave remnants of these corpses around tho Strassbourg laboratories which would indicate they were apparently left in the anatomical institute by the French, that is a fine how-do-you-do-, isn't it, trying to put this crime off on the French. Whose idea is that? It was Siever's signature.
A I have already told you that this was not my idea but Hirt's, and I can only explain this as follows: When the University of Strassbourg was taken over there were in the anatomical department, of course, corpses. In other words, I simply transmitted what Hirt told me. That was not my suggestion.
Q Well now, did you over express any satisfaction to the fact that all of this data had been destroyed or was that merely that you were transmitting an order for Hirt? Did you feel happy that this was destroyed or did you feel sad that it was destroyed, so that you could not bring it to the attention of the Allies or other members of the resistance movement when the inevitable end came. In other words, Dr. Seivers you were not pleased that this material had been destroyed, were you?
A I was not at all pleased about this because there were enough documents describing this whole matter available. Hirt's subsequent statement that the collection was destroyed was not true. I was not informed what went on here and the various questions that were asked of me I could not answer. I had to ask Hirt's advice.
Q Well now this teletype to Brandt was dated the 5th September 1944; and true, as you state, it was indicated they were not destroyed at that time, but were destroyed at a later time-around October, 1944, the skeleton collection was destroyed. Now, Mr. Seivers, you have been a little inconsistent. He have here a letter dated 20 January, 1945, which is document NO-975, which will be offered for identification as Prosecution Exhibit No. 479.-Do you have a copy?
A No, I don't.
Q. Now, this letter is dated 20 January 1945. It is addressed to "Dear Comrade Hirt":
"Your letter of 4 January dealing with Tuebingen being declared as a hospital town has been forwarded to me from Waischeafeld to this place. I have interceded for this plan, but I have desisted for the time being from submitting it to the Reichsfuehre-SS: first of all it will be necessary to come to an agreement with the Foreign Office and the Reich Ministry Speer.
"Your report on Strasbourg has duly come to hand. Many thanks for it. I shall be back in Waischenfeld at the end of the month, and if no further notice will have arrived there in the noontime, I shall see to it that all letters mailed to you recently shall be dispatched once again.
"Paris as well as London is taking quite active an interest in the Anatomic Institute of Strasbourg and regret that you have not been seized. In the meantime you will probably have received, or shall so in the very near future, an inquiry of the Foreign Office via the Ministry of Ecclesiastical Affairs and Education referring to this. We may be very glad that all data and papers on that work have been destroyed in time. The enemy could not offer any concrete statements so far. As I have already written to you, I should be very glad if you would make a short trip out of your way, to Waischenfeld, at the opportunity of one of your journeys to Wuerzburg.
"With best wishes end kind regards as usual.
Heil Hitler.
Yours (signed Sievers.)" That signature is a stamp.
This happens to be a file copy.
Well now, you have expressed glee here, have you not, that the data and papers at Strasbourg University have been destroyed?
A. Hirt told me this.
MR. HARDY: This is a good breaking point, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess.
(A recess was taken)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Court room will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
BY MR. HARDY:
Q. Mr. Sievers, as I understand it from your direct examination, you were directly opposed to the establishment of an institute for military scientific research in the framework of the Ahnenerbe Society?
A. Yes. May I say something very briefly with regard to the document which was submitted to me before the recess? With great ease you will be able to find many similar letters. I already stated that there was a very close connection between Hirt and Himmler. This letter proves that I did not destroy my own files; otherwise you would not have been able to find that letter.
Q. How going into the other subject, doctor. You state that you were definitely opposed to the establishment of an institute for military scientific research within the framework of the Ahnenerbe Society. Well, now, as a matter of fact, you were quite active, openly active, in the formation, the preparation, and the foundation, of this institute for military scientific research, weren't you?
A I explained in detail what I tried to prevent when I had that conversation with Himmler at Easter 1942. The possibilities of objection on my part were extremely limited. As it can be seen from the Statute of the Society, I only had a right to interfere in matters concerning budgets, or other organization matters. In this manner I was already able to prevent two different things. In the year 1939 already Himmler wanted to create a Cancer Research Institute under the charge of Professor Holtz, and wanted to affiliate it to the Ahnenerbe. At that time Professor Holtz wanted a yearly budget of 900 thousand marks. By indicating this assignment as alien in its nature to our Society, and in view of the large budget required, I was able to prevent this affiliation. Professor Holtz was later supported by Professor Blome in this, and I saw him again in the year 1943. My right of objection was extremely limited when Himmler at Easter 1942 stated that these matters were not to be furnished from the monies belonging to the Ahnenerbe, but from monies of the Waffen SS. When my objection had no avail, and at this occasion Himmler became very energetic, I could succeed in seeing to it that a separate institution was created, namely this institute for Military Science Research and affiliated to the Ahnenerbe; but this was merely a union with the Ahnenerbe as far as personnel was concerned as existed elsewhere. For instance, the personnel of the German Research Society was also used for the Reich Research Council. However, the two institutions continued to exist independently of one another. When Himmler finally issued that order, and after my objection was not successful, I did as directed all the preparatory work to set up this institute for military scientific research.
Q Then you did engage in activities which eventually resulted into the foundation of these institutes for military scientific research?
A I described in detail the developments causing this during my direct examination.
Q How, what did you do personally to further the establishment of the Station in the Natzweiler Concentration Camp for Military Scientific Research? Did you do anything, did you take any aggressive steps to carry out the Reichs-Fuehrer's order, as you put it, to establish this Military Scientific Research Station in the Natzweiler Concentration Camp?
A In this respect, in Professor Hurt's matter, Himmler had issued very clear directives. He ordered, and that can be seen from Document 095, that I discuss with Hirt the possibility of his being still more closely included in the work. That was done in the execution of Himmler's order.
Q And when you established this station, did you have ideas about perhaps establishing it, perhaps not at Natzwreilcr but at some other camp?
A Upon Himmler's request, Hirt in supplementation of his activities, was to carry out experiments in Dachau. He, however, rejected that because of the distance involved and because of his being indispensable at Strasbourg. Himmler thereupon ordered that this was to be carried out at Natzweiler.
Q Then consistent with your thought and your statement, did you make arrangements with, we will say Gluecks, Brigadefuehrer Gluecks, who was in charge of the concentration camps at that time? Did you make arrangements with Bluecks to get a station for Military Scientific Research in the Natzweiler Concentration Camp?
AAny such institute could only come about through the arrangement of the administration of the concentration camps, and it was for that reason I had to discuss this matter with Gluecks.
Q And you did discuss it with Gluecks, didn't you?
A Yes, I had to discuss this matter with Gluecks.
Q And what did you discuss with Gluecks?
A The creation of laboratories or work rooms at Natzweiler, and in particular experimental stations with animals, and arrangements for the breeding of animals, which were set up then.
Q You were aware of the fact that experiments were to be carried out on the inmates, weren't you? Or was it just animals?
A I had already pointed out repeatedly that the principal basis of Hirt's work was animal experiments, or could only have been animals experiments; and above that, however, Himmler wanted Hirt to carry out experiments on human beings. Hirt did both of these things at Natzweiler.
Q Now, did you, when you consulted with Gluecks, make it apparent that experiments were to be performed on inmates? Did you know at that time when you consulted with Gluecks in order to lay the groundwork for the formation of the station at Natzweiler, did you not know that experiments were to be performed on human beings who were incarcerated in the concentration camp Natzweiler?
A Himmler already ordered that at Easter of 1942.
Q Well, now, then you answer to my question I put to you a few moments ago, is that you were aware that experiments were to be carried out on inmates at Natzweiler Concentration Camp?
A Yes, I said that.
MR. HARDY: That is fine. Me turn to Document No. NO-978, which will be offered at this time, your Honor, as Prosecution Exhibit No. 480, for identification. Now, this is a letter dated 11 September 1942, on the letterhead of The Chief of the Office Ahnenerbe, addressed to SS Brigadefuehrer Bluecks, Subject: Military Scientific Research in connection with the concentration camp Natzweiler. Reference: Personal discussion of the 9th inst.
"Brigadefuehrer:
"Based on my report that, as proposed by the Reichsfuehrer-SS, there is a good possibility for carrying out our Military Scientific Research Work in the concentration camp Natzweiler, I hereby summarize what awaits your approval.
"1) Information to the commander's office, concentration camp Natzweiler: SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Prof. Dr. Hirt, Stabsarzt Dr, Wimmer and Dr. Kieselbach, are authorized to enter the concentration camp Natzweiler.
During their activity in the concentration camp Natzweiler they are to be provided with accommodations and board."
And now will you turn to paragraph 5 in the same document, wherein you state:
"The experiments which are to be performed on prisoners are to be carried out in four rooms of an already existing medical barracks. Only slight changes in the construction of the building are required: in particular the installation of a hood which can be produced with very little material. In accordance with attached plan of construction managements at Natzweiler, I request that necessary orders be issued to same to carry out the reconstruction."
Then you state:
"I would be very grateful to you, my dear Brigadefuehrer, if you would inform the Commander of the Natzweiler concentration camp, that you have approved the execution of the work at Natzweiler, just as it was discussed with me there and about which I reported to you in detail, and that you desire that we be given assistance in fulfilling the tasks with which we have been entrusted by the Reichsfuehrer-SS."
Q Then upon orders of the Reichsfuehrer-SS you handled almost exclusively the preparations for the foundation of the institute at the Natzweiler camp, didn't you?
AAs I already stated earlier, and as it is being confirmed in this letter, from paragraph two of this letter, it can be seen that the breeding of animals was arranged very exclusively -
Q Just a moment, Mr. Sievers.
A -- And that a certain man, Walbert, was placed at the disposal-
Q Just a moment, I asked you a question. I want you to answer that first, and then you may explain the document. Didn't you, nearly exclusively, make all the arrangements for the establishment of the Institute far Scientific Research in the Natzweiler concentration camp, and I will say in addition, on the orders of the Reichfuehrer-SS?
A Just as I answered you before, by order of the Reichsfuehrer-SS I arranged all the discussions in Natzweiler in order to enable Hirt to work there.
Q Now did you find out for Himmler that Natzweiler would be the best place to carry out these experiments successfully?
A I said before that Himmler had suggested Dachau instead of Natzweiler, and that becomes apparent from the letter, and that Hirt who was with me at Natzweiler, stated that he could very well work there.
Q Well, didn't you actually make a tour of concentration camps in order to find cut which one would be the most suitable for this purpose?
A No. I already told you that except Dachau, Natzweiler and Oranienburg I had visited no concentration camp, and that Himmler actually finally made that suggestion. It says in the first sentence: "as proposed by the Reichsfuehrer-SS."
Q Now let us turn to Document NO-935 which is offered as Prosecution Exhibit No. 481 for identification. This document bears your initials, doesn't it, Mr. Sievers?
A Yes.
Q Well, now, this document is dated 27 August, which is a short time prior to the time the document was submitted to you wherein you reported to Gluecks. This states as follows:
"To SS-Brigadefuehrer Gluecks, Oranienburg. Subject: Military scientific research in connection with the Natzweiler camp.
Brigadefuehrer:
"As a result of the official tour in connection with the creation of an Institute for Military Scientific Research ordered by the Reichsfuehrer-SS, I have unfortunately been unable to come and see you so far in order to report to you about the particulars of the researches and investigations, as SS-Obersturmbannfuehrcr Dr. Brandt proposed to you in his letter. Today, I again have to go to Strassburg to hold further discussions with SS-Hauptsturmfuehrer Professor Dr. Hirt and should like to take the opportunity of going to Natzweiler with him on Monday 31 August 42. May I, as this official tour had to be decided on suddenly, ask you to have the commander of the camp advised of my visits? Upon my return I will come and report to you.
Heil Hitler:
Sievers."
Now is Natzweiler the only camp to which you made an official visit for this purpose?
A Yes. It was for that reason that I went to Strassburg to see Professor Hirt. At that time I had not yet been to Natzweiler because, as it becomes apparent from this letter, I had had to ask Gluecks for permission to get into the camp. As I said in my direct examination, I couldn't get into the camp unless he approved my visit there. I made many official tours, but no official tours in order to find a suitable concentration camp.
Q Well, now, you were very much in favor of expressly choosing Natzweiler, weren't you? Weren't you in favor -
AAs becomes apparent from the previous submitted letter, Himmler had ordered that because Natzweiler was close to Strassburg.
Q I see. Well, now, didn't you consider that the working conditions in Natzweiler were extremely favorable for this purpose?
A Hirt established that because it was very close to Strassburg.
Q Well, let's see if Hirt established that. Let us have a look at Document NO-977 -
MR. HARDY: -- which will be offered for identification as Prosecution Exhibit No. 482, Your Honor.
Q Are your initials there, Mr. Sievers?
A Yes.
Q Now we will read this little note that bears your initials.
"Note Subject:
The carrying out of military scientific research in concentration camp Natzweiler.
"As a result of the conference on 31 August 1942 at the concentration camp Natzweiler, there is a possibility that the research ordered by the Reichsfuehrer-SS in the concentration camp Natzweiler be carried out. Working conditions on the whole are extraordinarily favorable. The difficulty lies in the reaching of the camp. For the time being, the scientists ordered to carry out the investigation, Professor Dr. Hirt, Stabsarzt Dr. Wimmer, and Dr. Kiesselback have to use the train from Strassburg to Kotau. From there, however, they have to be picked up by car. For these additional trips, twenty liters of gasoline must be made available to the local camp headquarters monthly."
And that is signed, "Sievers." I call your attention to the sentence: "Working conditions on the whole are extraordinarily favorable." That is not Hirt's idea. That is Mr. Sievers' idea, is it not?
AAs it can be seen from the letter to Gluecks, there was a man in that camp called Oberscharfuehrer Walbert who by profession was a breeder of animals and, therefore, was in a position to be in charge of the entire animal breeding there. This was something that was con sidered to be extremely favorable by Hirt, and it was so in effect.