I took Vorlicek down to the station only because Pillwein asked me to and because he was a Viennese, and in this way he got out of his work, I think, and into the hospital which was something he wanted very much.
Q: What is your thought, Doctor?
A: For doing him this favor, although I don't really need him he has put this understanding of his down on paper.
Q: Is it necessary to keep the subjects confined when you are using them for sea water experiments, must the doors be locked and the guards be posted?
Q: The experimental subjects were locked in when the experiment began. That was necessary. They should have been locked in a lot better than they were because then they would have had no opportunity at all to get fresh water on the side.
Q: That adds to the voluntary nature of the experiments, doesn't it?
A: If you read medical literature you will see that thirst experiments are always carried on behind locked doors. That is not a special characteristic of the thirst experiments in Dachau.
Q: Professor Vollhardt didn't carry it on behind locked doors?
A: Professor Vollhardt had doctors as subjects.
Q: He didn't carry it on behind locked doors, did he?
A: No, Vollhardt didn't, but there are numerous cases of thirst experiments in literature which are carried on behind locked doors. If you really want to carry out a thirst experiment accurately you have to see to it that experimental subjects do not have access to water.
Q: Then these experimental subjects actually were locked into the experimental station, the doors were locked and guards -
A: There were no guards. The door to the experimental room was locked.
Q: Was there any watchman?
A: On the experimental station there were always nurses, day and night.
Q: I note in Document NO 910 which has been introduced by the Prosecution, page 140, the affiant Bauer states in his affidavit that several series of experiments were carried out forcibly. Is he incorrect in that assumption too?
A: He is certainly wrong in that assumption.
Q: Can you tell me how you could ascertain whether or not these subjects were getting water was that because their urinary output would be less then. It should have been had they been drinking seawater?
A: You can deduce that water has been drunk in several ways, you can judge from the samples of Urine and the samples of blood, and you can deduce it from the weight of the experimental subject.
Q: Is it customary for the person who has volunteered for an experiment to throw some of his urin away to deceive you. You stated on direct examination that some of these subjects threw their urine away. If that be so it would be next to impossible to determine the excretion of each one, wouldn't it?
A: Yes, it is impossible under those conditions. I have already said that those people were interested in receiving the cigarettes I mentioned. That was a mistake on my part. I readily admit that I promised them in advance. For that reason they drank fresh water thinking they would be able to stand the experiment longer and this would give than more cigarettes. That was their motive.
Q: That is a true act of a volunteer to throw away his urine, is it?
A: In this case where the man wanted cigarettes it is perhaps not quite customary, but it is understandable.
Q. Now, you promised all these people better food; didn't you as a reward for the experiment?
A. Yes.
Q. Why didn't you give it to them?
A. As long as they were with me they did got it and after they were released from my station and the station was closed, I demanded that they should receive the food in the future and I was told that they were.
Q. Vorlicek says on Page 2 of his affidavit, NO-3282that good food after the experiments was also promised to them, but these premises were not kept; do you know whether or not the promises were kept?
A. I only know that on my reiterated request this promise was made to me. I then left Dachau and assumed the promise would be kept. If I had known that such a thing was possible, namely that the promise would not be kept, I should probably have attempted to find even more assurances that the promise would be kept, but there was nothing else I could do. The Chief Physician promised me that this was ordered and if he says the camp commander will bo told they should receive extra calories and extra food and if in the office of the camp, I say this is the list of people who should receive extra rations, I of course had to rely on that statement as I could not stay in Dachau.
Q. Yes, but the volunteers relied on your statement, didn't they? When you left you did not care whether or not they received their food; isn't that right?
A. I did care, I made efforts to see to it that this request of mine reached the competent offices and I was told that these promises would be kept by the office.
Q. Well now, why did you not bring the food with you and reward them yourself after the experiments? I notice rather interestingly in the document you introduced on page 103 of your Document book 2 those documents concerning the food allocated to you by the Luftwaffe, that you only got enugh feed for seven days for 32 men and you used 44 men in these experiments and the experiments lasted from 18 July to 16 September; You did not seem to make much of an effort to feed these poor follows then, you left them and didn't care if they got their promised food or did you got other shipments of food?
A. If you look at this document you will see that those 32 persons are called the first experimental groups that was the first shipment of food I received from the air field. I did not save the other receipts because in July of 1944 I did not think that in June of 1947 I would have to produce them in front of the trial. I saved them because I needed them as a basis for the calculation of the percentage of salt contained in the food. I can assure you that this amount of food, so long as I was there, was delivered by the Luftwaffe, with the exception of these one or two days of irregularities which I have already spoken of. Then I did not give the subjects Luftwaffe food, but asked that they receive extra rations from the concentration camp, and this was promised to me. If I had known that they would not receive these extra rations from the concentration camp after I left, I would have applied to the air field and seen that the Luftwaffe rations were delivered.
Q. Why did you not call Becker-Freyseng and say, "They are not fulfilling their obligations here; I have been promised these individuals good food; they have not been getting it;" could you not contact Becker-Freyseng or Schroeder, the people who assigned you and ordered you down to Dachau?
A. Apparently you misunderstood me. For two days the delivery was delayed because the air field was bombed. Becker-Freyseng and Prof. Schroeder could not have prevented this, but two days later this food was delivered, and as long as I was there the food deliveries were in order.
Q. Now, Pillwein says in his affidavit, which is NO-912, found in Document Book No. 5 on page 30; this will be on page 31, the second paragraph:
"When the people were chosen for these experiments, they were also promised better care for some time. In reality, this care was only accorded patients in the first group; all the others received water and skimmed milk for two days after the end of the experiment and about the third day were placed on the normal camp diet. The first group received some sausage, bread, butter, cheese, marmalade, and 2 cigarettes for 4 to 5 days. I remember that disagreements arose between the camp administration and the competent authorities of the Luftwaffe, since the Luftwaffe did not make sufficient provisions available for the diet. The ones we bore the brunt of this were naturally the participants."
Now, isn't it evident from Pillwein, from Vorlicek and these others, Tschofenig, that you did not fulfil your promise even daring the course of the experiments?
A. During the experiment, when the second group had finished the experiment, I did not receive the food from the air field for the reasons I have already given you. Rather, I did not got it immediately. If they had been fed by the camp I should hot have had any difficulties with the 88, as that was under the direction of the SS. I did have difficulties with the 88, because I asked them to give me food of this caloric content, and this caused difficulties since they said they could not do that on credit and would have to have authorization from the Luftwaffe.
After two or three days I received this food delivery, and from then on the experimental subjects did receive this diet.
Q. That is your explanation of the accusation made by Pillwein?
A. Yes.
Q. I assume, of course, that you flatly deny any deaths in the course of these experiments?
A. I have nothing to deny; there were no deaths in these experiments, nor can any deaths have taken place later as a result of those experiments; that is impossible.
Q. Did you know Tschofenig?
A. I did not know him; I know his name and where he came from; and I learned later that he was Capo of the X-ray station, and therefore I must have spoken to him once or twice.
Q. Do you know what his duties were at the X-ray station?
A. Presumably he took care of the machinery there. I don't know.
Q. Was he over in a position to have X-rayed any of the subjects you used in the course of your sea-water experiments?
A. Probably Tschofenig was present when the subjects were X-rayed on arrival and then later I sent over a couple of people for an X-ray check-up, and he was probably present then, too.
Q. Then he was in a position to have X-rayed or have seen subjects X-rayed?
A. I assume so.
Q. However, you exclude tne possibility that one of the subjects used in your experiments died three days after leaving your experimental block?
A. At the beginning I received X-rays of the subjects when the subjects themselves came to me, two of these subjects had affections of the lungs. I did not keep these two people in my experimental station, but sent them directly to the lung department of the hospital. Those were not experimental subjects of mine, they were people who came along on the transport, in whom the X-rays found a tuberculosis of tne lungs and whom I turned over to the hospital for treatment. I saw these experimental subjects for perhaps half an hour and then had them transferred, as I said in my direct examination. Now, you cannot hold me responsible for people with lung diseases being on the transport. I eliminated them immediately. If I had not had them X-rayed immediately, this tuberculosis of the lungs would probably not have been discovered at all.
Q. Can a person become too weak to walk as a result of being submitted or subjected to sea water experiments?
A. Thirst brings about a certain weakness in the muscles.
Q. Now, you say that these persons that were suffering from a lung disease you never used in your experiments?
A. No.
Q. How many X-rays does it take to determine whether or not you can use a person in your experiments; one?
A. One X-ray is enough for the preliminary examination yes.
A. Well, let us turn to Document NO-3342, which is offered for identification as Prosecution Exhibit 510. Would you kindly return those other two to me, Doctor? Do the interpreters have copies of this affidavit?
This is another affidavit from the affiant Josef Tschofenig, dated Klagenfurt, 14 May 1947. He states in the third paragraph of this affidavit as follows:
"In the experiments of Dr. BEIGELBOECK, which took place in the summer of 1944 in DACHAU, only healthy gypsies were used at first. I know that because I received the whole transport, which came from SACHSENHAUSEN, in the X-ray ward for lung examination. Altogether about 60 gypsies were used, chosen from a group of 80 or 90. They were certainly not volunteers, because they all wished to evade it. I noticed that from their conduct during the assignation. As regards their nationality, I only know that they were gypsies; they were described by race and not by nationality. The 20 or 30 who were not used were sent back for health reasons and were excluded from the experiments; they remained in the sick quarter. During the experiments, which lasted about 6 weeks, the state of health of the originally healthy participants deteriorated rapidly. One went mad and was taken in a strait jacket to the mental ward in the middle of the period of the experiments. I do not know what happened there. From my general experience of camps, I know that if he fell into good hands he might have got over it, if he did not get into a sick transport.
During the experiments I again made X-ray photographs in a few cases, about the middle le of the experiments, and in a few cases they were made by Dr. BEIGELBOECK himself, because he did not trust my findings; for I, as I am glad to admit, had in a few cases given him findings which had the purpose of saving the people from the continuation of the experiments.
At the end of the experiments the experimental subjects were divided into two groups, namely those who were fit to work and these who were sick, by the responsible physician Dr. BEIGELB0ECK himself.
Those who were fit tp work were directly released for 1 bar immediately after the termination of the experiments and were employed in various labor sounds. Those who were not fit to work, about 20 people, those were the obvious invalids, who were manifestly incapable of working and sick, were transferred from the experimental station into different sections of the General Prisoner Hospital. Amongst them were a number who were very weakened and apparently dangerously ill, and whose survival seemed unlikely.
I know that because I had to radiograph all the people coming into the prisoner hospital and knew that these purple came from the experimental station. I had radiographed alll of them once and some of them twice already, and therefore I knew them. Moreover it could be seen from the patients' charts where they came from?
"Amongst these various people who remained in the prisoner hospital three went into the 'internal' section; I can no longer remember their names. I know from my own experience of one death case amongst the three who went to the 'internal' section. This was a nan about 1.68 meters in height. I still remember him in particular because he was brought into my x-ray ward on a stretcher, since he was too weak to walk anymore. I am certain that on the day the experiments were completed he was transferred from the Beiglboeck ward to the 'internal' ward and next day came to be x-rayed as a normal prisoner hospital patient. I recognized him immediately as I had already x-rayed him twice before when he was still with Beiglboeck.
"I know that this man died three days later. Out x-ray ward received the mews of his death from the office. I had to send the findings according to whether the patient was dead or still lived, either to the depot (in case death occurred) or to the ward (if the patient still lived).
"I remember exactly that I reported this finding to the depot as I had been informed of his death. I remember this one case so particularly well because the lung finding was in order, that is, normal and also that he did not suffer from other pathological symptoms. There fore, I knew that this man died as a direct result of the experiments three days after they ended.
"The others who were unfit to work, about seventeen, were divided between various other prisoner hospitals; a few were handed over to the invalids' block and I do not know that became of them.
"From my general experience of camps I assume that about 30% did not survive the invalids' block and other fatigues due to their weakened condition as a result of the experiments. Without the experiments their chances of surviving the camp would certainly have been much better since they were originally healthy prisoners who formed Dr. Beiglboeck's experimental group.
"Whether experimental, subjects already died during the experiments in Beiglboeck's station itself I do not know for I was now allowed in the experimental station itself and the covering up of such cases of death in experimental stations was always very clever."
Signed "Josef Tschefenig," Now, Dr. Beiglboeck, do you recall the case of that individual?
DR STEINBAUER: Mr. President, I wish to have this witness for cross examination.
MR. HARDY: I will be glad to, your Honor. He will be here next week also.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel for the prosecution states that the witness will be here next week.
BY MR, HARDY;
Q . Now, do you still maintain that none of these experimental subjects died after they left your experimental station or do you know whether or not they did?
A. Yes, I do. No one certainly died of the experiments or of consequences of them. There were not sick persons in my experimental group. I had given them a very careful examination before the experiments and afterwards. What Tschofenig is talking about here is completely incomprehensible to me. I can't imagine that, only in my fantasy. To imagine what he is talking about is just too much to ask of me. Tschofenig didn't know anything about my experimental station at all.
Q. Dr. Beiglboeck, as I understand it, you considered these experiments to be purely a Luftwaffe matter. Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. No association whatsoever with the SS?
A. They had to do with the SS to the extent that the SS made the rooms available and I was there more or less as a guest. The SS had no influence on the course of the experiments.
Q. The SS merely provided the subjects and the space in the concentration camp?
A. That is right.
Q. Himmler had no part in the initiation of the experiments or the conduct of the experiments?
A. What I know about Himmler's part in ti is that he approved the experiments.
Q. Now, do I understand you correctly, that your testimony is to the effect that there is no danger in the drinking of sea water?
A. I said that if you drink sea water and these experiments are under observation then one is perfectly capable of interrupting the experiment when the danger zone is reached. I didn't say that it was not dangerous to drink sea water. That depends, of course. Under certain conditions drinking sea water is dangerous and ran be fatal.
Q. And among sea farers the dangerousness of consumption of sea water is a well known and accepted fact. Is that right?
A. Of course, it is clear and well known that shipwrecked persons have had very unpleasant experiences from drinking sea water because they did so in uncontrolled quantities and because the important point is the quantity consumed.
Q. Now, in your self-experiment that you conducted prior to the experiment on the inmates, how long did you drink sea water?
A. Four and a half days.
Q. How many cc's per day?
A. Half a liter.
Q. Five hundred cc's?
A. Five hundred cc's. That is right.
Q. Did you eat any food?
A. I ate sea emergency rations.
Q. And you drank exclusively sea water--no other water?
A. Of course.
Q. How long did you have the experimental subjects remain on exclusive sea water?
A. That depended and it depended on how the experiment was carried out. Some of the experiments which were carried out properly, were interrupted on the fourth or fifth day. Those who did drink fresh water in the meantime kept the experiment up longer. In this experiment it depends on how much water is lost. If a subject compensates for his loss of water by drinking fresh water then, of course he comes out in a very good condition.
Q. What was the longest stretch wherein a person or innate drank sea water exclusively in the experiment? Eight days? Nine?
A. I believe for or five days. I can't give you any exact answer to that just at the moment because I have to look that up in my notes.
Q. We will get into that later, doctor. Did they also get emergency sea rations?
A. Yes.
Q. The same as you had?
A. Yes.
Q. How many calories in an emergency ration kit?
A. In the emergency ration for four days there are twenty--four hundred calories. They got a little bit more than that because I had a little more than I needed. They received roughly eight hundred calories a day.
Q. How long can a person drink five hundred cc's of sea water-how many days?
A. You mean before reaching the danger zone?
Q. Yes.
A. You could calculate that at seven days.
Q. How long did the subjects drink it?
A. Those who drank no fresh water did not drink it under any circumstances longer than six days and I believe there were none who carried it on further than five days without drinking fresh water.
Q. How long can a person drink a thousand cc's of sea water?
A Four and a half days.
Q That long?
A Until you reach the danger zone.
Q That long, four and a half to five days?
A Yes, four and a half days.
Q Well, that is a considerable length of time, if you can drink 1000 cc's of sea water in four and a half days, and you can only drink 500 cc's in six days?
A That depends upon the fact that the elimination of water through the skin and the lungs is the same in both cases, and the additional sea water only leads to an additional elimination of urine. This additional quantity of urine that is eliminated -- whether a person drinks 1000 cc's is not so really very large over the amount when drinking 500' cc's; it amounts to roughly 250 cc's a day.
Q Wouldn't there be twice the drain on the bodies water and dehydrate the person faster if he was drinking 1000 cc's per day as opposed to 500 cc's?
A I just told you what happened. A greater quantity of urine is lost, and the difference between the quantities when drinking 1000 and 500 cc's is not so very important because the ways in which water is otherwise eliminated throughout the body, namely, through the skin and lungs remain the same. It can even be assumed that with 1000 cc's the amount is less. The dryer the skin is, the less water it excrets....
Q How long did the subjects drink 1000 cc's of sea water?
A I just told you, according to theoretical calculations, if experimental subjects could live four and a half to five days, drinking sea water and nothing else until he reached the danger zone of a 10 percent loss cf body water -- danger to life comes with the loss of 20 percent, and that is roughly after 12 days.
Q How many days did your subjects drink 1000 cc's of sea water?
A The experimental subjects, well, in the group that drank 1000 cc's, I had none who went four days without drinking fresh water.
However, none of the experiments made with this group was useful. On the second or third day, these people began to drink fresh water by the litre. So, the duration of the experiment is unimportant in this case. The importance is not how long the experiments lasted but how long it lasted only with sea water. And, if he drank only sea water, then the experiment had to be interrupted after four days, but if he drank a lot of fresh water, then under some circumstances these experiments may last as long as a month.
Q What was the highest temperature you reached in these experiments?
A During the experiments, as far as I remember -- you probably know this better than I do because you have my notes at the moment.
Q 37.8 Centigrade; that is not very high is it? Is that a dangerous temperature?
A Certainly not.
Q Is that above normal?
A Somewhat more than normal, yes.
Q Well, now, when you stated on direct examination, something that interested me, that when you gave this water to the inmates, that you had to drink it in front of the subjects yourself; now, why was that?
A That was not necessary, I considered it expedient.
Q What was the reason for you drinking it first in front of the subjects? I do not get the significance of that statement, Doctor? Was it because they thought you were fooling them and insisted you try it first?
A We doctors, we are used to the fact that medicines given to patients which are somewhat foreign to him, and in order to awaken his confidence in this medicine, we take some of it ourselves; that is the customary procedure in clinics and particularly in treating children: that was the reason I did that. There are lots of people when they hear the word sea water, they imagine Lord knows how dangerous a substance it is, and in order to convince them that sea water is really something that is potable, I drank it in their presence.
Q Now, you spoke of murder rumors in the camp in connection with the sea water experiments: what was that about?
A I never said anything about murder rumors, as far as I know. I said there were rumors afoot, and since I have had considerable experience in such camps, I can assure you that all sorts of rumors arise in such camps or prisons, and arising from the most innocent of circumstances; that it is on the basis of such rumors that such "memories" as this last affidavit you put in is based.
Q What was the murder rumor in camp? Was it a prevelant rumor that people were being murdered in your station, is that what you mean?
A I know nothing of a murder rumor. I am hearing now for the first time there was any such rumor in the camp. I said that Tschofenig could have based his statement that somebody went mad only on rumors but not on knowledge; that is all I said; that does not mean that there were murder rumors current in the camp.
Q How long did you observe each experimental subject after they had completed their experiment? Three or four weeks?
A The first group as far as I recall now, was 16 days, was under my observation for 16 days after the experiment was concluded, and the other group 12 to 14 days.
Q You observed each one of them for that length of time?
A Yes.
Q. Did you keep them right in your experimental station all that time?
A Of course.
Q When were they turned back to the hospital or the labor groups?
A I released the experimental subjects on the 15th of September when the experimental station was broken up.
Q Did you ever return to Dachau thereafter to see how they were getting along; to see whether or not they had received their pardons and and were getting their fulfillment of promises that you made?
A I assumed as a matter of course that those promises would be kept, at that time, and I asked that these subjects should be given a physical examination subsequently; this was also promised me. It was very improbably that any symptoms should be developed but should any develop I wished to be informed of them.
Q Now, this chart you have submitted to the Tribunal, drawn by Fritz Pillwein, giving the location of the various blocks in the camp. Do you have that before you there?
A Yes.
Q Now, we will note the Tribunal has it before them. I have a few questions to ask.
I may be of interest to the Tribunal in connection with this map or chart, you will note the Malaria Station of Schilling's and the name Vieweg in parenthesis.
Directly to the left of that is a block containing your experimental station, right?
A Yes.
Q. What was between the two blocks, a street?
AA court; that was the court yard in which my experimental subjects walked around, and that is where I spoke with the subjects, and this is the court yard in which Vieweg was not in a position to acquire enough information about what went on in my experimental station.
Q Vieweg could see in that court yard could he not?
A Of course, he could; his windows give onto this court yard.
Q Well, now look up to the front of the block containing your experimental station.
If your Honors will refer to the photostatic copies of the German it gives a much more accurate view of the situation in as much as that is the affiant's draft, and that is a translation which is out of proportion to the original.
Now, in your block there seems to be a doorway between the toilet and washroom; is that correct? That is in the right hand corner of the block, is that a doorway going out into the street?
A The exits, there were two exits from my experimental station; one through the room where the name "Mediziner" is written, that went down to the court yard; and, the other exit went past the washroom.
Q The other exit went past the washroom; that is right here (indicating)?
A Yes.
Q What was right here (indicating)? In between the Malaria Station and your Hock, we have a court yard, and we have a line drawn here between the court yard and the block street. Now, what was here, a wire fencing? (indicating*)--
JUDGE SEBRING: (Interposing) Mr. Hardy, I would suggest that perhaps when you say what was here or what was there, or what was over there, that when you begin to read the written record it does not convey very much information unless, when you are directing those question, you at the same time, perhaps will say: What is here, the point I now mark "A"; what is here, the point I now mark "B". That is just a suggestion.
MR. HARDY: Thank you, your Honor.
You will note from the chart, Dr. Beiglboeck, the malaria station - the block that has Vieweg's name in it. Now we go to the left hand corner. We mark that point A. We follow that over to your experimental station. We mark that point B. Now between A and B that is the point between, or the line drawn between the yard and the block street, what is this supposed, to represent, this line? Does that represent a wire fence or does that represent a brick wall or does that represent some sort of obstruction?
AA wooden wall.
Q Wooden wall?
A Yes.
Q Could you see over the wall?
A No.
Q You are certain it was wooden and not wire? You are certain of that?
A I am suite certain it was wooden.
Q You are certain it was not wire?
A Yes.
Q Would it have been possible to stand in the malaria station and have seen over that wall, be able to view people passing up the block street?
A If you stood on the roof of the malaria station you right.
Q Didn't Vieweg tell us that he could from his position in the malaria station see the morgue?
A If he was in his malaria station he could see anything. That was impossible.
Q You don't think he could see the morgue from the malaria station?
A No, but he could see it if he were somewhere else in the camp. He wasn't locked up in the malaria station. But from this malaria laboratory in which he apparently was, and I assume that is where Vieweg stayed in his laboratory, when he was in there he could not see into that part of the hospital.
Q Assume that it became necessary for you to carry one of your experimental subjects to the margue. I am not suggesting that your experimental subject was dead but assume hypothetically that you had to carry an experimental subject to the morgue, would you carry him through the passageway or exit facing the main corridor of the hospital block on would you take him out through the exit facing the malaria station?
A I would never carry a living person to the morgue. And, for that reason I never had any reason to bother myself about this little problem. Consequently I don't know what I should have done.
Q Well, how did you take your subjects to the x-ray station, through the door facing the main corridor or through the door facing the malaria station?
A Where it says "wash room". They were taken there along the course of the arrow, then to the right where it says "Labor". They were taken there. They were taken in between where it says "Revierstation" and "Labor". And then they were taken to the barracks where the x-ray station was.
Q How many floors did each barracks have, was it a one story, to story, or three story building?
A Only one.
Q Only one. Would it be possible to stand at a point in front of the Eye, Ear, Nose & Throat station on the block street and view persons coming to your experimental station or coming out of your experimental station?
A If you were in the Eye station, the ambulant patients of the hospital were in there waiting for medical examination. Now in there where it says "Gang" that means corridor, you would have to stand there to see what was being carried anywhere.