DR. STEINBAUER. Very well. Counsel for defendant Schaefer may proceed.
DR. PELCKMANN: Your Honor. I had read Exhibit 9 in part. In this exhibit Mr. Lehmann certified that the publications of Jewish authors were strictly forbidden b the National Socialist Party, and that it was also forbidden to quote them. In this connection I put in Exhibit No. 10. That is Document 38, from which the following can be seen.
This is a scientific paper by the defendant Schaefer regarding the blood picture of white mice in experimental infections and chemical therapy. This is Document 38, and appears in the supplementary volume. The Prosecution and the Court have the document, but the interpreters do not. However, I shall not quote from it, so perhaps the interpreters can dispense with it. The work is entitled "The Blood Picture of the White Mouse in Experimental Infections and Chemotherapy," and on page 261 is a bibliography, and it is this bibliography which Dr. Schaefer appends to his work. This bibliography contains the names Levy and Loewenstein. At the conclusion of this paper there is mention of the fact that it was not possibly to print colored reproductions because of the war situation. This proves that the paper was published during the war, that is after 1939, and the witness Lehmann in his affidavit has stated that at least since 1939 it was forbidden to quote Jewish scientific papers. Document 38 will be exhibit 10. I continue now in my reading of exhibit 9, Document 8, Exhibit 9, on page 21, the third paragraph from the last:
"In my opinion Dr. Schaefer is a research scientist with unusual intellectual gifts and ideas, of whom one may still expect great things."
I shall now skip the next paragraph and read the concluding paragraph:
"In my profession as a chemist and scientific worker I may say wit out flattering myself that I have become acquainted with almost all branches of medicine; I knew clinical physicians and private practitioners almost all over Germany, and therefore I am able to form an accurate opinion on a doctor.
A doctor must, above all be an understanding human being who is able to comprehend and appreciate the needs of sick people. Only then his medical knowledge come sin. In a Hippocratic sense, Dr. Schaefer conforms to both of these conceptions. Extensive physiological learning and inexhaustible knowledge as a physician - that is Dr. Schaefer."
The next document is Document No. 9. Page 23 of the English Document Book. This will be Exhibit 11. This is a photo-copy, and on the second page of this photo-copy there is Dr. Ilse Kuntze's affidavit of 2 January 1947, part of which I shall read:
"Since the Spring of 1943 I had been working on my Doctor thesis under Doctor Conrad SCHAIFER. I have known Dr. SCHAEFER since 1936 and through his conversations with me and with others I learned to know him as a determined enemy of National Socialism. Of that period, I know too, that his refusal to join the Party or any National Socialist association compelled him to resign his appointment as assistant at the Hydro-therapeutical Institute in Berlin. He frequently voiced his anti-Nazi opinion so openly even in the presence of strangers, that we, his friends and acquaintances feared the consequences which this attitude might have for him and sometimes restrained him.
Neither by conviction nor in his bearing was he a militarist. After his draft into the Luftwaffe he accepted a position in aviationmedical research, as he himself told me at that time, only in order to be able to continue his private work at Scharing A.G. and to escape the military restrictions to which a Truppenarzt has to submit. He detested wearing uniform. He therefore usually appeared in civilian clothes and wore uniform on official occasions only. He went into the Research Institute for Aviation Medicine only in order to deliver his reports, -- I estimate that that happened every month, since he worked in the laboratories outside the Institute.
At that time I was busy preparing my doctor's thesison the molar concentration of the blood during thirst. My collaboration with SCHAEFER enabled me to see that his scientific methods were exceedingly exact and reliable. His long activity in the realm of pharmacology had accustomed him the the practice of trying out medicaments and other remedieson human beings only after they had been tested chemically, pharmacologically and in experiments on animals.
I distinctly remember the following incident in the Fall of 1943. While we were inspecting the laboratories which were put at the disposal of Dr. SCHAEFER and m. self in the Physiological Institute of the University of Berlin and discussed the preliminary results of our thirst experiments on voluntary experimental subjects, a Stabsarzt of the Wehrmacht was present, who, during a private discussion on the difficulty of procuring voluntary experimental subjects said, why not use inmates of concentration camps. Outraged, SCHAEFER rejected the idea with such emphasis that I secretly made signs to him to restrain himself since I thought SCHAEFER's remarks very hazardous, considering the rank of the Stabsarzt."
I shall read the last paragraphone another occasion.
I came now to the affidavit of Miss Ina von Boetticher. Document No. 10, page 36, of the English Document Book. This will be Exhibit 12. From this document I shall read first of ell only the last two paragraphs; page 37 and page 38 of the English Document Book, because the last of the affidavit I shall read in a different context.
"As I lived for almost two years with the Schaefer family, I was well acquainted with the political opinion of Dr. Schaefer. Right at the outset he told me that he was obliged to work in industry because he had refused to join the party and was not allowed therefore, to hold an official position. It was for this reason that he lost his last position with a University clinic and therefore could not fulfill his greatest desire of establishing himself as University lecturer.
Time and again he expressed his regret about his. Dr. Schaefer frequently had arguments and violent political discussions with Dr. Feldt who had national socialist tendencies. He was not afraid to (confess his anti Nazi views to all the other members of the department and to justify these. He actually propagated these. Mr. Kaulisch and I were much impressed by it and we have only to thank him for net joining any organization."
Document No. 11, page 39 of the English Document Book, I simply draw the attention of the Tribunal to it. It is cf the same purport as the other affidavits and it will receive Exhibit No. 13.
Finally, from Document No. 12, page 41, I should like to read one paragraph. This will be exhibit 14. In this connection, I shall read into the record only the lest paracraph. Let me say that this is an affidavit by Mrs Ursula Egloff and I quote .
"From the beginning of cur acquaintance I gathered from his remarks that Dr. Schaefer was an opponent of National Socialism. This continued through the war. Dr. Schaefer passed remarks which, as far as the ideas of that time wore concerned, were absolutely 'opposed to the state.' And it was through this attitude that ho occasionally came into conflict with our chief, Dr. Feldt, who was a convinced supporter of National Socialism."
This concludes my presentation of those documents, which I consider to be important in clarifying the defendant's political attitude and his scientific achievements. These two matters have been considered by the Prosecution important for ail the defendants, including the defendant Schaefer.
The charge that the defendant Schaefer conspired with all the other defendants is supported by the Prosecution in the charge that Schaefer occupied a high position in the Hierarchy of the Health Services in Germany ant that all the defendants know of the crimes connected because of their official contact with one another and their common medical interests. This was said on December 12th by the Prosecution at great length. In interrogating Schaefer, I shall refute this on the basis of documents in which I in delineating his official position shall prove that he was in the Institute only on rare occasions, that he took no part in the Nurnberg conference, etc.
I can dispense with discussing the defendant Schaefer's career, that is set forth in its essential points in the affidavits.
Dr. Schaefer, after you loft the Hydro-Therapeutic Institute in Berlin ...........
JUDGE SEBRING: By request of the counsel, the swearing of the witness was deferred, do you want him sworn now?
DR. PELCKMAN: Yes, Your Honor.
BY JUDGE SEBRING:
Q.- What is your name?
A.- Konrad Schaefer.
A.- Will you repeat this oath 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).
JUDGE SEBRING: You may sit down.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. PELCKMANN:Q.- Dr. Schaefer, after you left the Hydro-Therapeutic Institute in Berlin because, you refused to join the Nazi Party, what position did you take ?A.- I went to Schering Aktiangesellschaft to the Chemotherapeutical laboratory there and was under Dr. Feldt, who was chief of the laboratory at that time.
Q.- In what field did you work there during the course of the years ?
A.- In the field of chemical therapy, that is to say the examination of chemical substance to ascertain their effects on various diseases.
Q.- Did you carry out animal experiments in this connection ?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Many or few ?
A.- Many.
Q.- Did you also carry out experiments on human beings?
A.- No.
Q.- Until what year did you function in this capacity at Schering ?
A.- Until the end of the war, until the beginning of 1944 as Dr. Feldt's assistant and from then on as director of the department because during the spring of 1944 Dr. Feldt was killed in an air attack.
Q.- From March of 1944 ?
A.- Yes.
Q.- But in 1941 you entered the Luftwaffe ; is that so?
A.- Yes.
Q.- How was it possible then for you from 1941 to 1945 to hold a position at Schering ?
A.- After my period of basic training, which lasted a few tenths, I returned to Schering A.G. and I remained a soldier.
Q.- And when did you become an Unterarzt of the Luftwaffe ?
A.- In the summer of 1942.
Q.- What is an Unterarzt of the Luftwaffe ?
A.- That is one grade below a lieutenant ; in other words a sergeant.
Q.- In this context, I may point out to the court that in Document Book No. 5, Document No. 177, Exhibit No. 133, there is the minutes of the conference of 23 May 1944 and Dr. Schaefer is mentioned as a participant in this confe rence and under No. 14, Dr. Schaefer is designated in the English translation as a non-commissioned officer, which of course is not an officer.
How did you come to take up your activities in the aerial medical research institute ?
A.- In 1942, I was transferred to Jueterbog and assigned to the Research Institute for Aviation Medicine in Berlin at the same time.
Q.- You singly mention the name of Jueterbog ; what was your position there ?
A.- I was in the medical training and experimental department.
Q.- In this medical training and research department in Jueterbog what position did you occupy ?
A.- None.
Q.- How is that ?
A.- That was simply a formality at the Research Institute for Aviation Medicine, there were no military ranks or offices, only civilian offices and since I had to be officially accommodated in one way or another I was put into this or was transferred to this training and experimental department in Jueterbog, which paid my salary by money order to Berlin.
Q.- The Prosecutor, however, has assumed that there was some official connection between everybody who belonged under this table of organization to Jueterbog ; is this assump tion so and Professor Holzloehner also officially belonged to this department, does that mean you had official contact with Professor Holzloehner ?
A.- No, that assumption is entirely incorrect. I heard here that Professor Holzloehner did not work in Jueterbog either, tut mainly in Kiel. I do not know Professor Holz loehner at all nor can I even remember his person.
Q.- But, perhaps you sent reports to the Medical Training and Experimental Department ?
A.- No, that never happened.
Q.- Was there any actual connection between you and this department which could be charged against you really by the Prosecution ?
A.- None at all.
Q.- You said that you simply drew your salary from there by money order ; is that so ?
A.- Yes.
Q.- Now, to clarify this position of dr. Schaefer, I should like to put in from Document Book No. 1, Document 13, this will be Exhibit No. 15, page 42 of the English Document book. This is an affidavit from Dr. Warner Knothe of Goslar. When Becker-Freyseng was on the stand and also through an affidavit, it was ascertained that Dr. Knothe was the director of the Medical Training and Experimental Department that I must state here, because unfortunately that statement is not included in the affidavit. I shall read the document, it is very brief :
"Dr. med Konrad Schaefer, whom I hardly remember personally, was not a member of the personnel of the Medical Experimental and Training Department of the Luftwaffe and never worked in Jueterbog either. It is possible that he was assigned to the department's payroll, this I cannot remember. The Medical Inspectorate sometimes put people on the budget appropriation of the department even if actually they had nothing to do with the department. The files of those people were kept in the office of the department or in the administrative offices of the Jueterbog aerodrome for purposes of administration and pay."
Let me again draw your attention to Document 177, Exhibit No. 133. This document you will certainly remember it, Dr. Schaefer was in the list of distribution that would subsequently be sent to the experimental department in Jueterbog, if that is so, can you state whether you ever saw this document ?
A.- No, I never saw this document. That is to say that I saw it for the first time when it was shown to me during my interrogations.
Q Can you in this connection say whether you saw any of the documents which the Prosecution included in Document Book No. 5 as incriminating documents, particularly the originals of the documents on conferences, letters of Himmler's, letters from the defendant, Schroeder, etc? How was the compatible with your activities at the Aerial Medical Research Institute?
AAll of these documents I saw here for the first time.
Q Now what is the significance of your assignment to the Aerial Medical Research Institute?
A That meant that I was to make my scientific capabilities available to this institute.
Q But you just said that during this whole period you were active in the Schering firm, even as a director of a department at the end. Now how can you do this and still be active in the Aerial Medical Research Institute?
A That was quite compatible. In the Research Institute there was only a limited number of positions. Consequently, the director of the Institute, Professor Strughold, received permission to carry out the work of the Institute in the laboratories of the Schering A. G. I asked for this permission and received it.
Q And this made it possible for you to stay always with the firm, is that so?
A Yes.
Q What was the relationship between the work you did for the firm and the work you did for the Institute?
A I could keep my previous position with the firm and in addition I did the work for the Research Institute.
Q You did them sort of incidentally, you say, on the side?
A Yes; they were a relatively small part of my total work.
Q How often were you actually at the Aerial Medical Research Institute in Berlin?
AAbout once a month.
Q Why were you there?
A To report on what I had done or to settle some formalities or to fetch apparatus.
DR. PELCKMANN: In this connection I might return to Exhibit No. 14. This is Mrs. Ursula Egloff's affidavit, and I may read the following from the first paragraph:
"From 1936 to 1945 I was a medical-technical assistant in the chemotherapeutical department of the firm of Schering A. G., Berlin. In 1937; Dr. Konrad Schaefer became a co-worker in the same laboratory. Dr. Adolf Feldt was our mutual chief. During this time, that is, even after he was drafted into the Luftwaffe, Dr. Schaefer was mostly present and at work in the laboratory, except when he was away on an occasional official trip."
I should now like to put in Document No. 14. This will be Exhibit 16, page b3. This is the affidavit by Ulrich C. Luft and reads as follows:
"During the period in which he was assigned to the Aviation Medicine Research Institute, Dr. med. Konrad SCHAEFER continued his civilian work with the firm of Schering A.G. in Berlin. While carrying out his duties for the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe, he was never actually in the Aviation Medicine Research Institute building itself, but worked in his laboratory at Schering and later on in rooms at the Physiological Institute of Berlin University. His connection with the Aviation Medicine Research Institute was purely of an administrative-technical nature, and he only appeared there every 4 weeks or so to obtain equipment etc. On these occasions he usually wore civilian clothes, and remarked to me that he did not like wearing uniform. I knew that Dr. SCHAEFER did not belong to the National Socialist Party. Various remarks he made concerning political events at that time definitely proved to me that he was no Nazi.
"From January 1944 until the end of the War I was frequently Deputy Director of the Aviation Medicine Research Institute for extensive periods and made the above mentioned observations in this capacity."
That was Exhibit 16; and now let me return, please, to Exhibit No. 9, Document No. 8, from which I should like to read another passage from the middle of the document, the last sentence of the second paragraph:
"He went to the Institute only once a month because he was working at the Schering laboratory."
Q When you did come to the Institute, now, Doctor, whom did you speak to?
A Either with Professor Strughold, the director of the institute, or with his deputy. That was either Dr. Klarmann or Dr. Luft.
Q Was Dr. Strughold present?
A Frequently he was not present, and from the Autumn of 1943 on he was not there at all.
Q Where was he?
A He was at the branch office in Silesia which had been transferred to there as protection against air raids.
Q In other words, he was hard to get to?
A Yes.
Q What was your official relation to Becker-Freyseng, to Prof. Schroeder or to his predecessor Hippke?
A The Research Institute was subordinate to the Medical Inspectorate. Professor Schroeder or Hippke was the chief. Subordinate to him was the chief of staff. Then came the departmental chiefs.
Q Please name the names as you go on.
A The chief of staff was Kahnt; the departmental chief was Mertz, and subordinate to the departmental chief were the referats. But in how the Research Institute was specifically subordinate to the Medical Inspectorate, that I do not know.
Q How often did you see Professors Hippke or Schroeder or speak with them?
A Hippke I saw once, Schroeder twice.
Q How did the orders that Schroeder issued or which were issued in his name reach you?
A First they were sent to the Institute, and the Research Institute informed me of them since I was not active in the Institute itself.
Q Did you currently receive such written communications, daily, or just what did happen?
A No. In unimportant matters I found out about these matters on the occasions of my visits to the Institute. In important natters I was called up by the Institute, which, however, was not always possible because in Berlin telephone communications were often disrupted for weeks at a time.
Q Were you the only collaborator, in this Aero Medical Research Institute?
A No. There were many collaborators who, however, did hot work in the Institute building and whom I do not know today even.
Q You said not all of them worked in the building. Is it correct that only very few did so?
A Well, I had that impression, yes.
Q I now come to the freezing conference in October, 1942, in Nurnberg. At that time you were an Unterarzt and had been assigned to the Aviation Medical Research Institute for just three months, is that correct?
A Yes.
Q During that time did you know the numerous collaborators of that Institute?
A No.
Q How many did you know?
A I know Professor Strughold and possibly Dr. Klarmann or Dr. Luft. However, I cannot recall that in detail today.
Q After this time, namely, October, 1942, until the conclusion of your activities, did you make the acquaintance of others? Did you make the acquaintance of many or few? I'm satisfied with the number of them.
A I made the acquaintance of a very few.
Q Did these few have anything to do with experiments which are counts in the indictment in this trial?
A No.
Q Whom of the gentlemen in the Medical Inspectorate did you know in October of 1942, in other words, at the date of the Nurnberg conference?
A I knew Professor Anthony and Dr. Becker-Freyseng.
Q You say you know Professor Anthony. Will you, please, explain that?
A I saw him once when he gave me the order to speak on the thirst problem in cases of sea distress at the Nurnberg conference. That was an order on the part of the departmental chief at that time, Generalarzt Martius.
Q How did this order to you come about?
A In the Summer of 1942 I was told to work on the thirst problem in cases of sea distress and in the meantime I had collected some literature on the subject and had oriented myself by way of animal experiments.
Q What was the content of your paper read in Nurnberg?
A This was a report of a bibliographical nature on works by German and foreign scientists concerning the problem of salt and the water content of the body.
DR. PELCKMANN: I put in now Document No. 15 which will be Exhibit No. 17, listed on Page 44 of the English Document Book. This is the report on Dr. Schaefer's paper which is to be found in the official minutes of that Nurnberg conference. Since the prosecution put in evidence only fragments of the total report on that conference, but did not put in Dr. Schaefer's paper, as contained in the official report of the Nurnberg conference, I shall do so now.
BY DR. PELCKMANN:
Q In the session of the 12 December the prosecution asserted that you, Dr. Schaefer, read a report on experiments that had been carried out on human beings. Is that correct?
A No, that is not correct. I, until that time, had carried out no experiments on human beings.
Q And consequently you did not report on such experiments?
A No, I did not.
Q Did you report on experiments that others in the Luftwaffe had carried out?
A No, I didn't.
Q Who of those who were present at the Nurnberg conference did you know, Dr. Schaefer? I am referring now to the list of those who attended, which has repeatedly been cited by the prosecution. This is Document N0-401, Exhibit 93. Presumably this is on Page 80 of the English copy.
You don't have to go through the list in detail, but let me just ask you, Doctor, whom did you know who was at that conference?
A I knew Professor Anthony whom I saw on the occasion that I just described; and I knew Becker-Freyseng and Professor Strughold.
Q You did not know Professor Huebner?
A No, I didn't.
Q You know that the prosecutor, on the 12 of December 1946 for the first time, and then a few days ago on the 27th of Hay, for the second time, asserted that Professor Huebner, who appears in this list, is the same Dr. Huebner as the one who later took part with Schroeder in the sea-water experiments. You also know that this error was corrected and that at the conference there was a Professor Huebner but that the man who appeared as an expert in the sea-water experiments was a Professor Huebner from Berlin, not the same man. Is that correct?
A Yes, that is so.
Q Then Professor Huebner was not at the conference?
A No, he wasn't.
Q Whom of your co-defendants do you know?
A Professor Schroeder whom I have seen twice. Then I believe I saw Professor Rose somewhere or other. In addition I know BeckerFreyseng and Professor Beiglboeck.
Q You were an Unterarzt in the Luftwaffe at the Nurnberg conference. There were many other participants. Were others present who did not have officers' rank?
A Yes, there were a few there.
Q How many? One, two, three?
A I should estimate four or five.
Q And how many attended the conference as a whole?
AAbout seventy.
Q Did you attend the conference with Dr. Becker-Freyseng?
A No, I didn't.
Q Is the reason for that this, that the officers sat in the front rows and you in the back?
A Well, that was one reason. Moreover, Dr. Becker-Freyseng was very busy at this conference. Moreover, I was so unacquainted with the other participants at the conference that I didn't meet Professor Becker-Freyseng there nor any of the others actually.
Q We have heard here about your attitude toward the army and military matters. Did you feel at home there at that meeting, as a non-commissioned officer?
A No, I didn't; and I don't think any Unterarzt in the German army felt at home in the company of officers because up to the rank of Sargeant a soldier was, so to speak, second class human being, in comparison to the officers.
Q Did you hear Holzloehner's and Rascher's statements at the conference?
A I cannot recall neither Holzloehner nor Rascher nor what they said. I must say that I did not hear the papers read on the first day of the conference because they were exclusively papers dealing with cold. Neither before nor after that time had I had anything to do with cold. Moreover, I had not yet fully prepared my own paper and busied myself exclusively with it.
Q How is it that you had to prepare a paper?
A The period I had in which to do so was relatively short. Moreover, my job at Schering meant that I had a great deal to do and this paper was to be particularly well prepared since it was my first public appearance and the audience consisted solely of persons of scientific renown and in high ranking offices.
Q Could it be said that you had stage fright?
A Yes, that could be said.
Q You do not recall having heard Holzloehner's or Rascher's reports?
A No, I don't.
Q After reading your paper, did you hear anything about these reports, Holzloehner's or Rascher's reports, or the experiments that preceded them in conversations with private persons?
A No; I had no private discussions with the other participants in the conference at all.
Q Good. Did you perhaps speak with Professor Becker-Freyseng about that report?
A No.
Q Then that is all you have to say about the Nurnberg conference?
A Yes.
Q Did you take part in other conferences? Dr. Becker-Freyseng stated when he was on the stand that there were roughly twelve such conferences.
A I took part in no other conference at all.
Q Now, to return to your paper, what conclusions did you arrive at in your paper? Perhaps you would like to quote something from your paper to shorten this matter?
A This is Document 15, Page 44 to 53. On Page 52 of the English Document Book under No. 2 it says:
"2. Measures to be adopted when combating death from thirst:
a) do not drink any hypertonic sea water,
b) take as little nourishment as possible, with the exception of dextrose,
c) use drugs as sparingly as possible, and no drug recommended for quenching thirst,
d) do not bathe in sea water,
e) take as much fresh water as possible, which contains only a little salt."
From this it can be seen that I always recommended not drinking any sea water.
Q Did you continue your research after you read your paper?
A Yes.
