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.
THE RESIDENT: Counsel, at this time the Tribunal will be in recess until 1:30.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 2 June 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
KONRAD SCHAEFER - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. PELCKMANN (Counsel for the Defendant Schaefer):
Q. Dr. Schaefer, first of all, I have to ask you to come back to something you said before. You spoke about the position of the German Unterarzt. It was perhaps a clumsy formulation, which could make a wrong impression. When I asked you how you felt at that meeting, among F the higher ranking doctors, you said something about how an Unterarzt must feel among such higher officers. Will you please explain again why you did not feel quite at ease?
A. I meant by so saying that a person of academic training, that is, a physician, who has the rank of a sergeant is in a rather unfortunate position and is dissatisfied a prior. This applied in particular to my own case, since I basically disliked military subordination.
Q. I only wanted to correct the generalization which you drew. You followed up that problem after that meeting. What did you do?
A. In the subsequent time I carried on a large number of animal experiments, which were to show the influence of seawater and different forms of nourishment upon the animal organism. In this case the animals used were rabbits. I was able to save some of the records of my experiments and I should like to ask you to submit them in evidence here.
Q. What period of time do those experiments cover, roughly?
A. The experiments cover the period from the end of 1942 until the end of 1943.
DR. PELCKMANN: I should like to submit English Document 16 as Exhibit 18. The pages in the English Document Book are 54-62. That is still Document Book No. I.
MR. HARDY: In my copy of Document Book No. I, Your Honor, Document No. 16 is not here. It goes as far as Document No. 15. I don't know whether your document book contains the same documents or not.
THE PRESIDENT: Our document book contains No. 16, notes on animal experiments by Schaefer, pages 34-62.
MR. HARDY: It has that listed in the index, your Honor, but it doesn't have the document itself in the contents.
THE PRESIDENT: These documents in my book are simply charts. I assume these were No. 16, I don't know.
DR. PELCKMANN: They are merely charts, your Honor, that is correct.
MR. HARDY: Might I ask Defense Counsel what he is attempting to prove by use of these charts? " The so charts don't elicit any data on experiments that were conducted at Dachau or any experiments that are at issue in this trial. It seems to me that they are animal experiments. I can't see the materiality of them in this connection.
DR. PELCKMANN: The Prosecution is charging all the defendants. including the Defendant Schaefer, with having used non-scientific methods. The Prosecution spent a considerable amount of time trying to prove this one charge, and I want, to prove that in occupying himself with the thirst problem and with the task of finding a method of taking the salt out of sea water, the Defendant Schaefer proceeded in a strictly scientific manner, so that this particular charge does not apply to him and that for that reason he, of course, also rejected the Berka method, and his rejection of the Berka method was for scientific reasons. I shall therefore have to show generally how scientifically Schaefer worked and, particularly, how scientifically he worked on the problem for the solution of which he is prosecuted here.
MR. HARDY: After hearing the remarks of Counsel, Your Honor, I object to the continuation of the examination using this material. I don't see the materiality of whether or not Schaefer conducted himself in an ethical manner in other experiments. The point at issue here is whether or not he is implicated, whether or not he took pert in the plans and enterprises involving the seawater experiments at Dachau.
The Prosecution charges that he was implicated therein -- the two methods were to be used at Dachau and he was a party to the crime. I can't see that whether or not he acted ethically from the time he graduated from medical school until the time he became involved in this criminal plot has no bearing here.
DR. PELCKMANN: If the Prosecution would be so kind as to tell me in somewhat more detail, at least once, why the Defendant Schaefer is responsible for the application of the Berka method in the experiments, then I could limit my defense much more intelligently . But as the Prosecution only lets me infer what it considers to be incriminating, I must make my defense as sure as possible and , therefore, must bring evidence for, first, the personality of Schaefer, second, his scientific achievements generally, third, his scientific achievements in the question of the solution of the thirst problem, and fourth, in connection with the invention of the Wofatit method, and fifth in the rejection of the Berkatit method.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection of the Prosecution to the admission of these charts comprising Schaefer Document 16 and the documents will be received in evidence. What number do you assign to this exhibit?
DR. PELCKMANN: No. 18, Mr. President.
MR. HARDY: I trust, your Honor, that I will be supplied with a copy of Document No. 16 in due course.
THE PRESIDENT: Certainly. Counsel for the Defendant Schaefer will see that the Prosecution has a copy of this document, or furnish one to the Secretary General, who will furnish it to the Prosecution.
DR. PELCKMANN: Mr. President, if the General Secretary will do this -- I was not informed that the Prosecution had no copy.
THE PRESIDENT: With reference only to these photostatic notes -- those notes comprise the documents.
DR. PELCKMANN: They are merely charts supported by two affidavits, which I shall read immediately.
JUDGE SEBRING: Doctor, I understand from what you say that these photostatic papers comprise Exhibit No. 18. Is that correct?
DR. PELCKMANN: It is pages 54 to 62 of the English copy, Your Honor -- that is Exhibit No. 18. Then I should like to return to Exhibit No. 12, page 36 of the English document book. I should like to read the following from Miss von Boetticher's affidavit, the first paragraph:
"I, Ina von Boetticher, 10 January 1939; joined the scientific department of the firm Schering A.G., Berlin-Charlottenburg, as a technical-medical assistant. At that time Dr. Feldt was chief of the department; Dr. Schaefer, his assistant, whose laboratory assistant was Mr. Kaulisch. My main task was to make animal experiments, and, as this work for Dr. Feldt did not take up all my time, I frequently also worked for Dr. Schaefer, who could explain everything particularly well and whose work was always interesting. I constantly carried out hunger and thirst experiments on rabbits and mice for him, after Dr. Schaefer had again taken up his work with Schering in the spring of 1942, following upon a few months of training after being drafted to the Luftwaffe (autumn 1941)."
Then I should like to add to the charts Document No. 39 which will be Exhibit No. 19, and may I be permitted to read a few pages only out of this affidavit.
(Int. Wartenberg) I ask you to excuse me for a moment.
I shall find it in a minute.
It begins: "Dr. Konrad Schaefer, M.D., during a very heavy air raid on Berlin during the night of 22-23 November 1943, which destroyed almost the whole Hansa-quarter, lost his apartment and all his property." Excuse me. I believe the Court and the Prosecution have the supplementary volume.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal has this supplementary volume.
DR. PELCKMANN: It has been translated. It must be just an oversight that the interpreters did not receive it. I have just given them a copy of the translation.
"My husband and I received the Schaefer family into our house, and I thus became very well acquainted with Dr. Schaefer and his wife. From that period until the end of the war I assisted Dr. Schaefer in sorting out the literature and undertook his written work, which consisted chiefly of copying notes on the experiments of Mr. Kaulisch and of dictation into the typewriter. The copies of the notes on Schaefer's Animal Experiments' (hunger and thirst experiments with rabbits), Document No. 16, and the two last tables of Document No. 18 regarding the compilation of the results of thirst experiments on voluntary subjects, the originals of which were shown to mo by Counsel, Attorney-at-Law Pelckmann, were drawn up by me.
"Dr. Schaefer dictated to me in May 1944 his views on the records of the experiments of Oberarzt von Sirany, on making sea water potable by Berka (Documents No. 26 and 27), the originals of which I was also shown by Attorney-at-Law Pelckmann. Through this collaboration I received the impression that Dr. Schaefer was a very conscientious and serious research worker. His zeal often made him work untiringly throughout the night."
BY DR. PELCKMANN:
Q This for the identification of the tables on the animal experiments, Exhibit No. 18. Dr. Schaefer, did you not also study the thirst problem by means of experiments on human beings?
A Yes, during the course of 1943 I carried out some hunger and thirst experiments on voluntary human subjects who were free. They were technical assistants who in part were working for me. The experiments showed that while continuing one's full work one can very well hunger and suffer thirst as long as four days without suffering from it mentally or in the ability to concentrate.
Q In order to prove this, I submit the affidavit of Dr. Kuntze, which I have already introduced as Exhibit No. 9. I ask to be allowed to read now only the last sentence from this affidavit. It is pages 23 to 35 in the English Document Book. The last sentence reads as follows: "In 1943 I carried out for my doctor's thesis simultaneous hunger and thirst experiments, lasting three to four days, on myself and other persons. I enclose the results of these experiments and concentration tests." These are the following pages attached to this affidavit.
DR. PELCKMANN): I ask further to be permitted to introduce into evidence Document No. 17, page 63, English document book, as Exhibit 20. These are records of the experiments - the hunger and thirst experiments - carried cut on a Miss Gerda Maria Schmidt. Likewise, Document No. 18 as Exhibit 21, pages 70-80. These are records concerning experiments on Miss Irmgard von Boetticher. And, finally, I ask permission to refer again to Document No. 10, affidavit 12, the affidavit of Miss Ina von Boetticher, from whom I just introduced the record of the experiment as Exhibit 21.
From this document, that is Exhibit 12, I should like to read the following, on page 36 beginning with the third paragraph of the affidavit; "After the animal experiments, thirst experiments on humans were also carried out. I myself volunteered three or four times, just as some of my acquaintances end once my sister did. We found the experiments most interesting and suffered no harm as a result. During the first two days one had really only a sensation of hunger, which then changed to thirst. Once I fasted and thirsted for four days, usually for three days. I went about my work at the laboratory as usual, staying home only on the fourth day, because I was very weak and depressed, which however passed immediately after drinking. Naturally I observed the regulations strictly and really took neither food nor drink during the experimental period, because I knew that the experiment would otherwise have been absolutely senseless. I believe it possible to go without food or drink for one or two days longer if one can remain in bed.
"All these hunger and thirst experiments were carried cut by Dr. Schaeffer for the Luftwaffe; otherwise he continued working for the firm Schering."
Q. Only one thing for clarification, Dr. Schaefer. With these experimental subjects you experimented neither with Wofatit nor with Berkatit, because you hadn't proceeded that far yet?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. How did it occur to you to occupy yourself with removing the salt from sea water?
A. All theoretical considerations and all practical experiments showed that sea water is not usable. Therefore, it was of course natural to consider a method to remove the salt from sea water, since in many cases one is not able to take along sufficient fresh water.
Q. And if one has no fresh water one must remove the salt from sea water?
A. Yes.
Q. About this development of the research of Dr. Schaefer I submit the followings documents: Document No. 19, on pages 81-83 of the English Document Book. It is to be Exhibit No. 22. This is an affidavit of Dr. Griessbach, Dr. Lauth, and Pahl. It reads: "For many years the treatment of water, in particular by absorption preparations, was a scientific field of work in the inorganic branch of the Wolfen dye works, in which we are employed."
The Wolfen dye works belonged to the I.G. Konzern, I may add.
"In the summer of 1943 we were assigned the task of making salt water potable for use in the rescue at sea of airmen, submarine crews, etc. A research assignment for this was issued by the Luftwaffe. Unterarzt Dr. Konrad Schaefer was commissioned as an expert for this work by the Research for Aviation Medicine.
"At the same time the Navy was also interested in this problem, and a similar development order was issued by the OKM.
"The I.G. itself undertook to pay the cost of the research work, including the expenses for those men detached from the Wehrmacht for work in Wolfen. No other kind of financial agreement, was made, either with official agencies or with any of the participants.
"The process developed involved the removal of the salt from the water by using the special preparations for this purpose to absorb the calcium, magnesium, and alkali content and to precipitate the chloride and sulfate content in the form of insoluble salts.
The desalting was so effective that a compound was achieved with a salt content below that of a physiological sodium chloride solution. The water was not exactly tasty, but was de-salted enough for really successful use.
"Certain doubts, expressed in particular by Dr. Schaeffer, led to experiments concerning eventual silver and barium ions in purified water. The tests, however, disproved the existence of medical scruples in this direction.
"otherwise the problem was dealt with on a strictly scientific basis, and two applications for patents were filed.
"By late fall 1943 the process was developed to such an extent, that at a lecture given by Dr. Schaefer no criticisms were raised by the Medical Inspectorate. Thereupon, at the beginning of 1944, Wolfen filed an application for the establishment of a manufacturing plant.
"At first, however, no order for this was given. Later on we learned from Dr. Schaefer that another method had recently been recommended which had first to be tested. He hinted that according to observations made with tomatoes it had something to do with mixtures of fruit juices, etc. Dr. Schaeffer said that he had objected to this method, as it was useless from a medical point of view. But his objections were not sustained. In view of the scientific facts we had to agree with him.
"Later - at the beginning of 1945 - Dr. Schaefer's (and also our own) views on the suitability a.nd incontestability of our process were confirmed, when news reached us from England andAmerica, that the same method was being used there. The periodical "The Illustrated London News" published research, reports of the Royal Air Force Physiological Laboratory, the Ministry of Aircraft Production, and the English Permutit Company. At the same time publications appeared in Sweden to the effect that in America also the Permutit Company, New York, had de-salted seawater in a similar way.
"The effect achieved with the Anglo-American method was not so farreaching as that achieved with ours. Apart from the fact that our remaining sodium chloride content was only half that of the Permutit Company, we also achieved an almost complete elimination of the sulfate content, while with the Permutit process the sulfate Content remained in the water. We had occasionally voiced our intention of not removing the sulfate from the water. Dr. Schaefer, however, raised objections, pointing out the disadvantage of a laxative effect of the sulfate content.
"On the whole we can state that in the discussions with Dr. K. Schaifer we always had the impression that he was a serious scientist and a conscientious medical man.
Dr. Griessback Dr. Lauth Dr. Pahl" This already states in detail that the Wolfatit method, which Schaefer recommended was unobjectionable and was the best method that existed.
Now, turning to Document 20, page 81 of the English Document Book, excuse me, page 84 of the English Document Book. This document confirms that at the request of Schaefer the experiments regarding the possible damage of the potable water produced with Wofatit were carried out. Dr. Schaefer, have you turned to that page in the document, yourself?
A. No, I haven't.
Q. I should like to quote from the end of Document 20 - Exhibit 23it says: "Summary: When preparing potable water from sea water by means of Wofatit SW, no silver or barium ions appear in the drinking water either if the given proportion of Wofatit to seawater, i.e. 1:3, is increased or reduced, nor if diluted seawater is used, nor if sea water of a higher temperature is used. Only after the water has been filtered may any sort of additions be made or may the drinking water be used for cooking purposes."