This is the document NO-262 of the Prosecution, Exhibit No. 108, and is in Document Book No. 2 on page 130 of the English Document Book. The letterhead "The Institute of the Medical Services of the Luftwaffe, dated 6 March 1943." It is directed to Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff, the Chief of the Personal Staff of the Reichsfuehrer-SS. This letter is signed by Mr. Hippke. As can be seen from its contents, it deals with Stabsarzt Dr. Rascher, and the prosecution may well conclude from this letter that you participated in this matter because you are the only one of the defendants who was working in the Medical Inspectorate during the time in question. Would you please tell us, witness, whether you had any knowledge of this letter and of the points contained therein?
A No, of that I knew nothing, as can be seen from the complete letterhead, moreover. "Let me read the letterhead once again to show that - "The Inspector of the Medical Services of the Luftwaffe. File note none, No. 2299/43, secret, and the abbreviation for the word Inspector". The abbreviation INSP for Inspector means that this is a letter that the Inspector has worked on personally, because if a Referat had worked on this letter there would have been an appropriate file number to show that. Moreover, Professor Hippke speaks so unmistakably of himself in this letter that it is perfectly clear that he had personally worked on everything mentioned in this letter.
Q Now, witness, in connection with Dr. Rascher, a further document, also from Document Book III, page 133 in the English. This is Rascher's letter to Brandt of 14 March 1943; it is Exhibit 110. In this letter Rascher reports on a conversation that took place on 12 March with your chief at that time, Professor Hippke. The entire report concerns itself with Rascher's high-altitude and freezing work, and as you say you knew nothing about these negotiations. Can you tell me something about that please, namely that you knew nothing of these negotiations of Rascher's?
A I don't know about them either. Transfers were a matter that concerned the first department, the Personnel Referat, and consequently did not touch our Referat; but from Rascher's report it can be seen that the Personnel Referat did not participate in this, because Rascher certainly wouldn't have failed in this letter to make certain remarks about the Personnel Referent, had he been involved.
Moreover, I happily remember at this time I was not in Berlin, but in the first half of March 1943 I had my annual vacation which I spent in the Alps.
Q In other words, witness, of these entire negotiations you knew nothing?
A Correct.
Q And the reason was mainly because in the first half of March you were not in Berlin. Now, Mr. President, let me put in Becker-Freyseng Document 23, also from Document Book Becker-Freyseng No. II, page 92 which I shall give Exhibit No. 10. This is an affidavit by Dr. med. Adolf Frank of Goettingen, dated 31 March 1947. The statement is very brief. After the formalities he says;
"Early in March 1943, between the 1 and 15 March 1943, I took part in the course on adaptability to high altitudes conducted by Dr. Benzinger in Kutzbuehl. I definitely remember that Dr. Becker-Freyseng and his wife also took part in this course. As far as I can remember after 4 years, the course lasted from 3 to 13 March 1943."
And let me please bring to your attention again the discussion between Rascher and Hippke took place 12 March 1943. Witness, you say that with Dr. Rascher you simply had those two aforementioned contacts, the discussion between Rascher and Hippke in July 1942 and Rascher's remarks in discussing his freezing experiments at the freezing conference. Is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Witness, did you have official relations of any sort to the SS aside from Dr. Rascher?
A No.
Q The general facts regarding Dr. Rascher have not been vent ilated, witness.
However, I should like to bring up another question that is important in the whole question of experiments, to wit, those questions that concern concentration camps experiments. Let me ask first of all, did you ever visit concentration camps before May 1944?
A No, nor did I visit one subsequently.
Q As you know, witness, you viere in the central office of the Luftwaffe Medical Service as Assistant Referent and than as Referent. In this position you undoubtedly had occasion to speak with a large number of people, Luftwaffe officers, research men, civilians, etc. On this occasion and in these discussions did you find out nothing more precise about conditions such as prevailed at that time in concentration camps? What, in brief, did you know at that time about concentration camps?
A Dr. Horn and Dr. Hielscher have already spoken about this subject from the witness stand here. Had they not done so I should not answer that question here, not feeling it to be necessary. Of course, during the war I did discuss concentration camps with various people. I knew of Dachau and Oranienburg personally. That is to say, I knew the fact that there existed concentration camps there. Details regarding these concentration camps I knew as little as everybody else. I recall that I spoke to a number of people during the war who before the war in one way or another had inspected concentration camps. And the picture that these persons presented to us was one, one might say, of a largescale prison in camp form. If Dr. Horn had not stated here of his own knowledge as a political prisoner in a concentration camp how such visits and inspections were carried out, I should have had to assume that all these people -- there were 2, 3, 4 of them who knew anything about this - I should have had to say that these people were lying when they spoke to me, but now I assume they did tell the truth as to what they actually had seen. It has been said here several times that it was possible to learn from foreign radio stations what conditions were. I should like to say that during the war I was a soldier, I had taken my oath of allegiance to the flag, and I kept this oath.
I had no connections with any resistance movement or any such circles. I heard a few persons who had heard the soldier's station Calais, the propaganda of which struck me as just as credible, or incredible, as our own propaganda; and I should like to say that in conclusion the picture that I had of concentration camps corresponded with the picture I had received from other sources, one from a school comrade who was a member of the Communist Party and was put in a concentration camp, namely Dachau, for a few years shortly after 1933 and after 1936 or 1937 was set free. He got another job and was inducted into the Army at the beginning of the War. Since he now again occupies a position in a political party I shall not state his name. The second description I received during the war was from Beiglboeck, regarding which he may speak here himself and from which it was not possible to say what actually went on behind the scenes, which no one could see who was not part of the staff of the concentration camp itself.
Q. You say, witness, that your impression of concentration camps was that of a large-scale prison in camp form, is that os?
A. That was what all of us imagined under the term "concentration camp".
Q. Were you able to see in any way who the inmates of concentration camps were?
A. I knew no details about this, of course, but I had heard that both political and criminal inmates were to be found in concentration camps, and I also knew that during the war those who were considered unworthy to bear arms were also put in concentration camps.
Q. You say those who were considered unworthy to bear arm, witness, Now, you are a doctor, and before this court there has been a great deal said of a legal nature by doctors. Unfortunately, a great deal of it was wrong, Now let me ask you whence you know what you seem to know and what you understand by the term "unworthy to bear arms"?
A. I have my knowledge from my training at an air war school, in an officers' training course, specifically from the strudy of military discipline and military disciplinary law; at that time, I learned or heard that those members of the Wehrmacht who were condemned by a court martial for criminal actions while they were in the service were sentenced to penitentiaries and, in addition, were designated as "unworthy to bear arms" and, for the duration of the war, were put in a concentration camp, and that these persons served their sentence in a penitentiary only after the conclusion of the war.
Q. Very well, witness.
And now from a document one more question on this problem of the inmates of concentration camps. A document was put in by the prosecution. It is Document Book #2 on page 132 of the German, 118 of the English. It is document 1617 PS, Prosecution Exhibit 77, a letter from the Reichsfuehrer SS to Field Marshal Milch. I want to put two words out of this document to you, from the second paragraph. The Reichsfuehrer SS writes here that he takes personal responsibility for the high altitude experiments and specifically takes responsibility for using associal individuals and criminals who deserve to die from concentration camps for these experiments.
Now, witness, did you ever heard in connection with these experiments these words "associal individuals who deserve to die"?
A. No, and even today I don't quite know what those terms are supposed to mean.
Q. To sum up then, you knew only of political prisoners and of legally convicted criminals who were inmates of concentration camps, and also those considered unworthy to bear arms, who had also been legally convicted?
A. Yes.
Q. The question of the voluntary consent of the experimental subjects of which Dr. Rascher spoke at that time has already been discussed by you, witness, and you have told us that you believed the fact that these persons could and would volunteer. Is that not what you testified?
A. I believed that and saw no reason not to believe it.
Q. I may recall to the Tribunal at this time that the witness Neff for the Prosecution corroborated the fact that the experimental subjects were voluntary on 18 December, 1946, page 705, 711 and 712 of the German record, 614 and 696 of the English record.
That concludes our dealings with general questions, and now I come to the next charge since we have dealt with conspiracy; to wit, your participation in the high-altitude experiments. You are accused in the indictment of participation in or special responsibility for these experiments which took place from February 1942, to May 1943, in Dachau. There is no document on hand that proves that you took an active part in these experiments, nor has the prosecution asserted that so far. Your personal responsibility, as can be seen from the general indictment, is based on your position as assistant Referent or Referent in the Referat Aviation Medicine.
Now, let me ask you then, for the sake of clarity, were the questions of high-altitude research among those fields which you, as assistant Referent, dealt with independently in 1941, 1942, and 1943?
A. No.
Q. These questions were treated by whom?
A. They were dealt with by Anthony so far as the Referat had anything to do with them at all.
Q. Witness, the Prosecution has put in a large number of documents all of which I should not like to discuss in detail. First of all, 1602 PS, Exhibit 44 the famous letter of Rascher of 15 May 1941, to the Reichsfuehrer SS, which is probably the indication of the beginning of this whole lamentable event. Then there is 1582 PS, Exhibit 45, also from Document Book #2, in which Dr. Brandt tells Rascher that the inmates are available for the high-altitude experiments. These letters have nothing to do with the Medical Inspectorate, consequently I should like to ask you, to keep things in order, whether you ever learned of these letters in any way at all?
A. No, and in May 1941 I didn't even belong to the Medical Inspectorate.
Q. Now, witness, there comes a letter that seems to indicate the connection of the Medical Inspectorate with the high-altitude experiments and also seems to indicate that you had some connection with them. This is Document NO 217, Exhibit 46, which is to be found in Document Book #2 page 58 of the German, and page 55 of the English. I put this document to you because the low-pressure chamber is mentioned here and because you said that you worked on the question of low-pressure chambers in the Medical Inspectorate. Rascher writes, let me quote briefly the third paragraph:
"May I also ask that you grant soon the perhaps possible permission for carrying out the experiments (high altitude low-pressure) within the camp of Dachau itself.
I forgot to mention to Hauptsturmfuehrer Faelschlein that a movable low-pressure chamber has been provided for this purpose out of the Research fund of the Reich Aviation Ministry."
In other words, Rascher asserts that a mobile low-pressure chamber was put at his disposal for these high-altitude experiments from the research fund of the Reich Aviation Air Ministry. Now, you worked on low-pressure chamber problems in the Medical Inspectorate and so I ask you, is this statement of Rascher's correct?
A. This assertion is wrong from beginning to end. First of all, there was no research fund of the Reich Aviation Ministry which could have paid for such a chamber. If they were paid for at all, the chambers were paid for by the Medical Inspectorate. Secondly, the four low-pressure chambers that the German Luftwaffe owned had been ordered before Rascher wrote his first letter to Heinrich Himmler. The last chamber was ordered on 28 April 1941. Rascher wrote his first letter to Himmler regarding this matter three weeks later; namely, on 15 May 1941. Moreover, this whole business, including the ordering of the four low-pressure chambers, lies almost half a year before I entered the Medical Inspectorate.
Q. Now, Mr. President, in order to corroborate what the witness has just said, let me put in Becker-Freyseng Document 24 which will be Becker-Freyseng Exhibit 11, on page 93 in Document Book II. This is an affidavit by the engineer, J. O. Zeusem, of 23 January 1947. Witness, first let me ask you, who is Mr, Zeusem?
A. Mr. Zeusem is the proprietor of the only firm in Germany that manufactured such low-pressure chambers.
Let me quote briefly from this document:
"I delivered a total of 4 mobile low-pressure chambers with machine equipment to the Reich Aviation Ministry, Medical Inspectorate, Berlin.
"The first low-pressure chamber was commissioned on 1 December 1939, and delivered on 30 January 30 1940, to the German Experimental Institution for Aviation, Berlin Adlershof. The second Low-pressure chamber was commissioned (I am not quoting verbatim) on 15 June 1940 and delivered on 15 August 1940. Third and fourth low-pressure chambers were commissioned on 28 April 1941, and delivered in January 1942.
I shall return to this document later.
Q. Witness, we continue now with the question of your participation in the high-altitude experiments. When Dr. Romberg was in the witness stand I discussed with him his affidavit in which you seemed to be incriminated. This is Document No. 476, Prosecution Exhibit 40, to be found in Document Book 2, page 1. I need not quote this. Let me, however, remind you that Romberg expressed his assumption that you knew of these experiments. When I asked him about this on the stand, page 6873 of the record, Mr. Romberg stated this was an expression purely of conjecture on his part. Now, witness, had you seen the concluding report on the high-altitude experiments of which Romberg spoke?
A. I saw that report for the first time here in Court.
Q. And when did you first hear of these experiments?
A. I heard of them for the first time or that they did experiments when Rascher and Romberg read their paper and showed their moving picture before Field Marshal Milch, and read when they wanted to do that. I found out about that as follows:
I was called up by telephone at the Referat either by Professor Kalck or his assistant, Dr. Buehl, and asked whether the Referent knew anything of his intended film showing before Field Marshal Milch. I answered that he would have my clerk get in tough with my superior personally about this matter to find out. From then on I had nothing more to do with this matter, and it has only been here in Court that I have been able to figure our what this whole thing was about.
Let me draw your attention also to the chief of staff of the Inspectorate, who had this matter brought to his attention and did attend the film.
Q. Then Dr. Wuerfle, who testified here for Handloser on 19 February 1947, and whose testimony on page 3135 of the English record---
A. That is the testimony to which you just referred?
Q. Yes, it is. Now, witness, as you know, there is another document put in by the Prosecution to-wit, No. 224, page 116 of the English Document book 2, Exhibit 76. This is a report by Romberg, undated, regarding reports that were to take place on the 11th of October before field Marshal Milch. This is apparently the report that you were talking about before?
A. Yes, it must be that.
Q. In this document, witness, at the beginning it was said that this film was to be shown in the course of a discussion of the way this work was being developed. Tell me, witness, who organized these departmental discussions, the medical inspectorate or somebody else?
A. The Medical Inspectorate did not order them, because this is a discussion of technical developments and in the Air Ministry and in the Technical Department of it there was one section that was entitled "Developmental Section". I presume that it was this section that arranged for this discussion of development, but I don't know.
I never participated and therefore know nothing of it.
Q. But witness, you can see that the Technical Inspection had nothing to do with arranging and calling these discussions of Medical Development?
A. Yes, that I can say.
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q. Witness, you were present at the film showing?
A. No, I was not.
Q. You don't know what was shown there in the film, do you?
A. No, I do not know that.
BY DR. FRITZ:
Q. We know that Dr. Wuerfle, the Chief of Staff at that time said regarding what he himself knew about this matter; I have already quoted the passage from the record that pertains to this. Now, since you were active in the competent referat, did you discuss this whole occurrence with Dr. Wuerfle at all?
A. No, Never. I Believe Dr. Wuerfle said that here himself.
Q. I have to correct an error by the interpreter. You said, witness, with regard to the telephonic conversation that introduced this whole question, that the person who talked this up presumably Dr. Kalck, and said that he would speak with your superior, is that correct?
A. Yes, that is so.
Q. I have just been told that the interpreter translated that you would speak with your superior?
A. No. The person with whom I was telephoning con cluded the conversation by saying that settled the matter for him,
Q. And that he would get in touch with your superior and that was probably Herr Kalck. That clears that up. Now, Witness, the Document 224, a number of Medical Inspectorate doctors were mentioned who apparently were present at this film showing; Dr. Wuerfle has already been discussed by us. Dr. Wuerfle came after the showing was concluded, but according to this document Professor Kalck and Stabsarzt Bruehl, in other words, two officers of the Medical Inspectorate were present and Kalck was the consulting internist with the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe, as we know.
Q. Did you in this way hear from Kalck and Bruehl anything about this discussion or about the contents of that film?
A. No, throughout the War I did not speak with Bruehl at all. I did not even know him. Nor can I hardly recall any conversation with Professor Kalck either, nor can I recall anything about this matter.
Q. Were these two medical officers members of the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe?
A. No.
Q. What office did they belong to?
A. Kalck was the consulting internist with the Medical Inspectorate, but was not subordinate to that office, the Medical Inspectorate, that is in any rate not in the way that he was there all the time. But Kalck and Bruehl so far as I know had close connections with Field Marshall Milch and were at this discussion in that capacity.
Q. Witness, this report has been put in by the Prosecutor which is the final report of saving rescue from high altitude and signed by Dr. Ruff, Dr. Romberg and Dr. Rascher.
This is clearly a report on aviation medical problems. Was this report sent to the Medical Inspectorate in toto as Dr. Ruff has already explained here, or just what can you tell us about this?
A. On my own knowledge I can tell you nothing about it. I can only tell you what I can deduce from the documents here before me. Whether this report was sent to Hippke, the Chief of the Medical Inspectorate, I do not know, nor do I now whether Anthony saw it. I know I did not see it. It was according to the documents here not distributed by the Medical Inspectorate, but Milch drew up the list of persons who was to receive it, and as Ruff has explained it was distributed by the German Institute for Medicine.
Q. Now, witness you say you did not see the report at that time, and to make this perfectly clear it was not in the files that you know of, 44 as Referent took over?
A. That is perfectly clear. I never saw it.
Q. Did you find out nothing at all about these experiments or when did you find out about them for the first time?
A. I already said I found out that some sort of experiments had been made which were to be discussed at this developmental institute. I found out about it through this telephone call from Kalck or his Assistant Bruehl. Regarding the results of these experiments I read something in a reprint from the publications of the German Academy for Air Aviation Research which was sent to us where a report of Dr. Ruff on saving from high altitudes was reprinted.
Q. About this Dr. Ruff spoke already on 29 April 1947, page 6620 of the English record.
That, if I understand you correctly, concludes what you knew before this trial or before the end of the war, regarding these high altitude experiments?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, there is a document here that establishes a connection between the Air Ministry on Aviation Medicine your Referat, and Rascher's experments. This is Document No 264, page 73 of the English Document Book 2, Exhibit 60. It is headed "File Note for SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Schnitzler". It concerns itself essentialy with Dr. Weltz, but one paragraph is interesting to us. Quote:
"RLM asks Oberstabsarzt Dr. Weltz how long the experiments will last and whether it is justifiable to detail a medical officer for so long a time. RLM demands from Weltz an opinion on the experiments, which he, however, can not give unless he is fully informed about them."
Did you call him up or did somebody else call him up?
A I did not telephone him. I can only refer to what Professor Weltz said later, namely, that he had received the call from Professor Anthony.
Q Now, witness, another question, namely, did the question of low pressure chambers - you have heard both Dr. Ruff and Dr. Romberg say that the low pressure chamber, when the high altitude experiments were interrupted at Dachau, was taken away from Dachau and was not returned thither. We also know that Rascher made many efforts to get the chamber send back to Dachau. Now, since you worked on low pressure chamber problems, let me ask you what do you know from your own knowledge as to whether or not the chamber was ever returned to Dachau?
A I know that from the Summer of 1912 on, no other Luftwaffe mobile pressure chamber was ever sent to Dachau. That is absolutely out of the question.
Q How do you have this absolute certainty?
A From the summer of 1942 on, all four low pressure chambertrains that the Luftwaffe owned were in constant use, and it is quite out of the question that the chamber should have been in Dachau even for a few days.
DR. TIPP: Your Honors, let me state that the statement that the chamber was only once in Dachau was also made by the prosecution's witness Neff on 17 December 1946, page 667 of the English record.
Q As we know from the documents, Rascher made considerable efforts to have the chamber sent back to Dachau because he wanted to qualify as a lecturer through his work in this field.
Did Rascher ever turn to you, personally, as a specialist in the employment of low pressure chambers?
A Yes, in October 1942, at the freezing conference in Nurnberg he met me; he must have found out in some way that I was working on this low pressure chamber question and he asked me in a rather insolent manner, to have the chamber sent to Dachau for him; he said that he was going to get it anyway, because Himmler would back him up. I told Rascher that was not something I could decide, and that I would submit his wish to my departmental chief, and did so, suggesting at that same time that if such an application came from Rascher he should be turned down because, after what Rashcer told me in the course of this same conversation, I did not have the feeling that Rascher experiments were in any way necessary. Above all, I asked him who his collaborators were, and he said they were things he would do alone. I know that in the course of the winter of 1942-43, such on application must have reached the Medical Inspectorate, of which, however, I did not see the original, but at the same time - I do not now recall the exact date - I was asked to state my opinion regarding the question of mobile low pressure chamber - to say whether any such chamber was available, and I did tell my chief what I thought. At about the same time Ruff had called me up and told me he had found out that Rascher intended to ask Himmler's permission to set up his own aviation medical institute, which neither Dr. Ruff nor I considered either necessary or expedient. At this time, I reported to my departmental chief and was ordered by him to tell the Zeuzem firm, which built our low pressure chambers and delivered them to us, that if any orders came from any other sources but Luftwaffe sources, he was to turn it down at first until he had the approval of the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe.
The grounds for this were that we could adopt such an attitude toward this firm, because the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe was just about this firm's only customer.
Q To prove what the witness has just said, Mr. President, let me turn to document 24, Becker-Freyseng Document No. 24, the affidavit by the engineer of the Zeuzem firm that I have put in as Exhibit No. 11. Zeuzem writes here on page 2 at the bottom:
"In winter 1941/42, I can not remember the exact date, and many times afterwards, Dr. Becker-Freyseng told me that under no circumstances was I to accept orders from other departments for the delivery of low-pressure chambers unless they had been approved by the Medical Chief of the Luftwaffe. Dr. Becker-Freyseng especially warned me repeatedly against making deliveries to the SS, because otherwise every single Luftwaffe order to my plat for the Medical Inspectorate would be stopped.
"In the event of any such order, I was to inform the Medical Inspectorate immediately and to tell the department placing the order that my plant was fully occupied with the execution of Luftwaffe orders and that we were even in arrears."
Witness, that concludes the problem of the high-altitude experiments. I may sum up your testimony as follows: neither in the planning or carrying out of these experiments for the rescue from high altitude did you in any way participate and only after they were concluded did you hear about these experiments and then only in the most general terms; is that correct?
A Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess until 9:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 21 May 1947 until 0930 hours.)
Official Transcript of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America, against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 21 May 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the court room will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I.
Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the court room.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you ascertain if the defendants are all present in court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honor, all the defendants are present with the exception of the Defendant Hoven who was excused from the Tribunal yesterday.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary-General will note for the record the presence of all the defendants in court save the defendant Hoven who was excused pursuant to a request by his counsel that Defendant Hoven might be excused today in order to consult with his counsel.
Counsel may proceed.
HERMANN BECKER-FREYSENG - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. TIPP (Counsel for the defendant Becker-Freyseng):
Q Doctor, Becker, yesterday we closed the charge regarding high-altitude experiments and I come now to the next charge, your responsibility and participation in the freezing experiments. Here also it is not asserted by the prosecution that you are an active participant. The prosecution bases its charges mainly on your position as an assistant referent or referent in the medical inspectorate. The first question regarding this then is, from 1941, 1942 and 1943 did you deal with the problems involved in freezing research in your position as assistant referent in your referent?
A No.
Q From a document put in by the Prosecution it can be seen that discussions of sea-distress problems were discussed. This is from Document Book No. 3, English, page 10, Exhibit 42, Document number 343. That is a letter from General Milch of the 20th of May 1942 addressed to Obergruppenfuehrer Wolff, and it is headed "Dear Wolffy!" It refers to the high-altitude experiments, saying that they are concluded, and continues, "on the other hand, the carrying out of experiments of another sort, namely, those on sea distress are necessary and preparations have already been made for them by our office." Now, under this word "office" you can understand only the SS office or, on the other hand, the competent office in the medical inspectorate. Do you know that before the 20th of May 1942 any such discussions were carried out?
A No. I did not.
Q Now, witness, you told us that you heard of Rascher's experiments for the first time during the discussion between Professor Hippke and Rascher in June of 1942. A document has been put in by the prosecution regarding this discussion. It is in Document Book 3, page 12, Document number 283, Exhibit 82. This is a letter from Dr. Rascher of 15 June 1942 and headed "Esteemed Reichsfuehrer!" In other words, this letter is addressed to Himmler. You know this document, witness. Is this the discussion to which Hippke ordered you to attend at that time?
A Since I was ordered to attend only one such discussion between Hippke and the Reichsfuehrer, this must be the one but let me make a small correction. I found out for the first time about this think not on the occasion of this discussion but from my superior, Dr. Martius.
Q Yes, thank you, you have already said that. Now, you were present at the discussion on this letter, consequently.