That is to say, whether the persons selected to be vaccinated were healthy enough and whether their physical condition was such that they could be used for vaccinations, because other people I did not want, I could not use, and I was not supposed to use for vaccinations, As I have already explained, these were protective vaccinations which, first of all, were to protect the vaccinees themselves, and then also protect the rest of the inmates, and, in case of an epidemic, if the camp could have been vaccinated to a large extent it would have been a great advantage to the entire population, because you know that typhus is a highly contagious disease and hard to combat. These innoculations which were made within the scope of vaccinations which had already been ordered. There were many decrees in the German armed forces as well as with the civilian health offices that, in case of danger of an epidemic, a general vaccination should be carried out against that particular disease, and for the concentration camps there existed a special decree that, in case of danger of typhus epidemic, all inmates were to be vaccinated. These were the legal foundations which made these vaccinations possible. Furthermore, these were no longer experiments, but the practical introduction of a vaccine which already had been tested, within the scope of a general vaccination program. Besides, I should like to state that each inmate knew what danger typhus represented for his own life, and he certainly knew what grave consequences typhus would bring about for him personally. Therefore, had we asked the inmates whether they would volunteer for the vaccination, I am sure that we would have got not only the number required, but many more, but I did not have any more vaccine at my disposal. I believe also that in the face of the danger they would have accepted the reactions that I described. Furthermore, I conducted my vaccinations with the active assistance of the inmate physicians, and I am quite sure that they would have resisted the vaccinations if it had been some criminal undertaking; there were two inmate physicians of whom I can say that they certainly had high ethical standards.
One was a Professor Paulsen from Oslo. In summary of all the statements I have made about my work which are called experiments here, I may say: If this work is considered a criminal undertaking, then that can only have been due to lack of specific knowledge and ignorance of the true facts; once these questions have all been clarified, this assertion can no longer be maintained. I am firmly convinced that, on the basis of my statements, the true can be separated from the false, the good from the evil, and if I may say so, true science from false science; I, have attempted, in the twenty-five years of my being as scientist, to serve scientific truth only.
Q. I thank you.
Mr. President, I have no further questions to this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Fritz for the defendant Rose may examine the witness.
BY DR. FRITZ (Defense counsel for the defendant Rose):
Q. Professor, due to the very detailed examination by my colleague, Dr. Tipp, a large portion of the questions which I intended to put to you are no longer necessary. Therefore, I should like to put only those questions to you which I have to put to you in the interests of my client Dr. Rose.
Then you were examined by Dr. Tipp, Professor, you stated that Professor visited you in Strassbourg in 1943. Was he frequently in Strassbourg?
A. Professor Rose was in Strassbourg once more. That was in the summer of 1944 or the spring of 1944.
Q. No further visits by Professor Rose took place?
A. No, no further visits took place.
Q. You mentioned in your direct examination the report -- that is Document NO. 138, which is on page 84 of the document book #12 of the Prosecution.
A. 84?
Q. In the German Document Book, 82 in the English Document Book, Your Honor.
The report of the 21st of January 1944 to the President of the Reich Research Council. I have only one question concerning this report - whether it was also sent to the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe or to Professor Rose?
A. No, I do not recall that. That was a report which, in no way, concerned the Medical Inspectorate, only the Reich Research Council.
Q. Now, to come to another subject, Professor.
If you, according to your statement, did not carry out any infection with typhus virus pathogenic to humans, then, as a typhus specialist, you certainly know that such experiments were carried out. Part of the Indictment, for example, deals with experiments of that kind at Buchenwald. Were these Buchenwald experiments, of which you must know through the publication by Dr. Ding in the Journal for Hygiene and Infectious Diseases, the first of this kind in typhus research?
A. No, prior to that similar studies had been made. I believe I mentioned at least one study by the French scientist, Blanc, and in medical literature there are quite a number of articles concerning artificial infection of human beings. If you are interested, I may tell you the more important ones.
A. Yes, please do, Professor.
Q. There are two groups of studies. One, with the sole purpose, by artificial infection of human beings, to determine how the transmission of typhus takes place. They started a long time ago -- these studies. The other group is the one where vaccinations took place and then the immunizing effect of these vaccinations was tested by subsequent infection with a virus pathogenic to humans. Of course, my list of medical literature is not complete. One may say there are several classical studies here. One by Jersin and Vasalle. Vasalle was one of the discoverers of the plague germ.
Q Excuse me, Professor, may I ask you to distinguish between these two groups I have just mentioned?
A Yes, yes. I will just speak about those made with artificial infections. One is from 1908 made by the two Frenchmen, where they tried transfer by human blood and even undertook a human passage. First an Indo-Chinese Coolie was infected with typhus blood, and as he became sick, his blood was transferred to a healthy person, and both became sick. If you are interested in the data of the literature, I can state them, but I think we can leave that out if you agree.
Then we have a second study by Otero from Mexico, who also infected a person by transferring typhus blood, and the person fell ill after eleven days. That study is from the year 1907.
Then there is a study by Sergeant Folli, and Violetta, which is concerned with the transfer of the disease by lice; infected lice were placed on healthy persons, or the crushed lice were injected into human beings in Algeria, and typhus was caused.
There is also a study by Veitano, who made the transfer by dog ticks, and another study by a Turkish Doctor, who used many experimental subjects and transferred the disease by transfer of the blood from diseased persons to healthy ones; he had quite a number of fatalities. Althogether 310 persons were infected with 174 cases of disease and 49 fatalities.
Then there is also an English study by Mitchell and Richardson, who also infected with typhus blood. Then a study by McCalla and Breritton, that is an American study, where the purpose was to determine the contagion of Rocky Mountain spotted fever by ticks. Rocky Mountain spotted fever is a variety of typhus.
The other study is to be mentioned by Sparrow and Lumbroso, who infected human beings by using infected brains of guinea pigs, but it only came to a mild disease.
They are the studies which are based on the artificial infection of human beings by pathogenic material. Then, in answering your ques tion, the subject of subsequent infections after protective vaccination, there are various studies here, too.
I shall only mention the most important ones. In Mexico, a study by Sanchez Casco in 1932, who first vaccinated and then subsequently infected with a murine typhus virus; of eleven subjects so vaccinated, three fell ill with typical typhus. This author then states that three persons who had not previously been vaccinated were infected as control subjects, of whom only two fell ill.
Then there is the study by Vontemillas from 1939; here also, vaccinations were first carried out and then an infection was brought about with typhus rickettsia. Here also it came to an outbreak of the disease. Finally there is to be mentioned a study by Blanc and Baltazard, who inoculated several persons with a virus mixed with gall and thus attenuated. Subsequently they were infected with pathogenic virus to determine the degree of immunity. Non-vaccinated control persons were also infected.
Then there is another study to be mentioned, which belongs in the first group, either by Blanc or Baltazard, one or the other, I cannot say at the moment which one of the two. They also carried out a pure infection on four or five paralytics. Those are all the studies I know on the subject.
Then, concerning the question itself, the question of the experiments at Buchenwald, .....
Q Well, Professor, I am interested to know whether you as an expert can answer the question as to whether the experiments of Ding had any importance for the development of vaccines in the field of typhus research?
A If I am to answer this question as an expert, then since these experiments are known, I would say the following. These comparative studies about the immunizing effect of various commercial killed typhus viruses had great practical value, because they made it possible to eliminate vaccines which are not effective, and doubtless by eliminating these less effective vaccines, many lives were doubtless saved in typhus epidemics.
These experiments confirmed the experience made in practice that with attenuated virus no anti-infectious effect could be achieved, but that the disease was merely made milder and fatalities reduced. That is about the answer I would give in making a statement as an expert.
Q The final report then, did it also show the importance of the research work that you carried on in Strassbourg; that is that the use of killed virus would not protect against infection?
A Yes, that is true, we made that observation during the war.
Q Then, again I have to refer to your relations with Professor Rose and to ask you, were you ever in any form subordinate to the Consulting Hygienist of the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, that is to say, Professor Rose?
A I was never subordinate in a military way to Professor Rose, who was Consulting Hygienist with the chief of the Medical Service. My office was an entirely different one. I was Consulting Hygienist with the Air Fleet Physician. That was my superior from the military point of view.
Q Did you have to report to Professor Rose immediately; that is to say about your work as consultant or your work in carrying out research assignments?
A My reports as consultant went to the Air Fleet Physician, as I have mentioned already, and then through channels to the Inspectorate. A direct report could not take place, because there was no subordination. Also as far as my scientific and research work was concerned there was no relation as between the subordinate and superior in any way.
Q Then, may I assume that Professor Rose did not have to supervise the manner in which your research was carried out?
A No, he did not have to do that in any manner.
Q Was there frequent correspondence between you and Professor Rose?
A No, it was not very extensive; I can remember possibly five or six letters.
Q And that infrequent correspondence, as you may call it, was that of an offical or a scientific nature?
A Well, it did not have an official nature; it was correspondence, I should like to say, between colleagues engaged in the same profession where matters of the same profession are discussed. That can be seen from the documents at hand.
Q Did Professor Rose at any time visit the camps at Natzweiler and Schirmek?
A Professor Rose was never in Schirmek or Natzweiler with me, and I never heard that he had ever been at either of these camps.
Q One last question, Professor, which I should like you to answer in your capacity as a bacteriologist, because you have worked in that capacity for decades in this country and abroad; what do you know about international customs in cases where vaccines, germs, or disease carriers are transmitted?
A It has always been the custom that institutes, government agencies and recognized scientists exchanged bacteriological materials which includes vaccines. On request the vaccine or bacteriological material was supplied free of cost, without inquiring what it was needed for, because one had to assume that scientific work was being carried out on which the person concerned would not give any information. It was the general practice for us in Germany to get material from America, England, France, Sweden, etc. Even during the war I received highly infectious material from France and Sweden -- from Sweden for example, poliomyelitis virus, that is, infantile paralysis.
Q. Is it true, Professor, that a person who sends such material by sending it does not assume any responsibility for the type of work which the recipient carries out with that material?
A. That is correct, because if I send material from my institute to a reputable institute or scientist, the minute the material leaves my office and the other receives it I do not assume further responsibility for it.
DR. FRITZ: Thank you. Your Honor, I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: If Dr. Nelte on behalf of the defendant Handloser has some questions he may proceed.
BY DR. NELTE:
Q. In the direct examination you have already told us that if in the fields of your research you had any requests to make you turned to the Reich Research Council or the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe. Furthermore, you have stated, and I believe I do not have to put that in the form of a question, that reports on these experiments were sent by you to those offices from which you had received research assignments. Is that correct?
A. Yes, that is correct.
Q. In supplementing the questions concerning Professor Handloser, I should like to ask you, did you ever receive a research assignment from Professor Handloser as Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service?
A. I never received an assignment of that kind.
Q. Did you ever send a report to the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical service about experiments which you carried out for the Reich Research Council or the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe?
A. I believe I may say that such reports were never made, because direct reports which only concerned the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe I could not have made to the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service. That would have had to go through official channels. Reports concerning research assignments from the Reich Research Council never went to Professor Handloser.
Q. Did Professor Handloser ever inspect your institute at Strassbourg?
A. No, that was never the case.
Q. My colleague, Dr. Tipp has already referred to the statements made by the witness Eyer, and quoted "that reports on experiments were to the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe, to the Reich Research Council, as wall as to an office of the Luftwaffe at Barlin-Dahlem." That statement, by Fraulein Eyer is Document 883, Exhibit 320, No. u. Fr. Eyer adds literally, I quote: "I may add that I also had to send reports to the OKW." When the witness was questioned in the witness box she could not state to what office of the OKW there reports allegedly sent. Nor could she state when these reports were sent to the OKW. Therefore, I ask you, did the OKW, that is apart now from the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service regularly receive copies of reports which you sent to the Reich Research Council or the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe?
A. To the OKW, if you make that distinction, I had no connection whatsoever. There was no office where I could and should have reported. Apart from the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service, and in this case I have already said that this did not occur.
Q. To the question of hepatitis you have given us sufficient answers already, but concerning hepatitis I should like to ask you, at the conference on hepatitis in June 1944 at Breslau did anyone of the lecturers report on experiments on human beings within the scope of hepatitis research?
A. There were six or seven scientific reports, and not one of the gentlemen mentioned anything about experiments on human beings. I explained yesterday that in Germany I had not heard of any experiments of that kind. That of course also applied to the Breslau conference.
Q. Would you please tell me briefly what was the purpose of the "Arbeitsring" S formed at Breslau on the initiative of Professor Schreiber?
A. The purpose of these Arbeitsring study groups was that various specialists who were interested in the question of hepatitis got together, so that by this combined work positive results could be obtained more quickly and more easily. That system had proved itself in the case of my study group. I said that I worked with four or five gentlemen together, and in this manner we progressed very far and ver rapidly in the field of hepatitis research.
Q. Now, your work with Professor Dohmen, how about that, the short visit in Strassbourg, and the fact that he was not in Natzweiler; since it was already dealt with in the direct examination I believe I do not have to speak about that. On the 19 April 1944 you sent a memo to the Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe, that is to say to the next superior officer to yourself, that is Exhibit 318, Document NO 310, which concerns the establishment of an institute to produce typhus vaccine connected with the Hygiene Institute of the University of Strassbourg; do you remember that memo and the events which lead up to it; it is in the Document Book, which you should have before you - on page 114, that is the German Document book.
A. Yes, I had already mentioned that the Luftwaffe intended to establish its own vaccine production, and that they had approached me for that purpose, with a request to establish that production site and to be in charge of it.
Q. How come the Luftwaffe was interested in the production of vaccines? You know, don't you, that the branches of the Wehrmacht could get vaccines from the main medical pool?
A. That is correct. The central distribution office for the Wehrmacht was the Central Medical Depot, but the amounts of vaccine that could be obtained were not large enough to cover the demand. Therefore there was always a shortage, and for that reason it was understandable that the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe wanted to have an additional source, and the simplest thing, was of course, to establish its own production as the Army had done.
Q. Therefore, the fundamental reason was the effort of the Lufewaffe to become somewhat independent as far as priority or urgency was concerned from the distribution, that came from the other source?
A. That is right, particularly since there was still additional vaccine available from the quota which the Luftwaffe received from the main medical depot.
Q. If I understood you correctly in the direct examination, and if I remember a statement made by Prof. Rose, you were of the opinion that vaccine production, as such, in principle was not to have anything to do with your proper activities. Who, in your opinion, was intended to supervise the production of vaccines?
A. I have always emphasized that production is not the task of a research institute or a scientist, but that it is a matter for the vaccine industry, as for instance the Behring Works, or the Saxonian Serum Works.
Q. Then in your opinion the pharmaceutical industry was supposed to manufacture the necessary vaccines. Do you happen to know what Professor Handloser's opinion was on this point?
A. I could not tell you that. We did not happen to discuss that.
I do not know it. *
Q. There is another letter in Document Book 12, page 77, which has already been mentioned by my colleague Dr. Tipp. It is Document NO-306, Exhibit 296, and it is a letter from Professor Rose to you. "I have drafted a suggestion to the Inspector of the Luftwaffe on the basis of which I ask you to support the demand that typhus vaccine be manufactured in the East for the entire Wehrmacht." What are the events which led to that letter?
A. As far as they concerned the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe and the Wehrmacht, I do not know. I only know of this letter where Professor Rose informed me that the demand had been put to the Chief of the Medical Service of the Wehrmacht to have typhus vaccine manufactured for the entire Wehrmacht in the East.
Q. Was that suggestion realized?
A. No, it was never carried out, and I do not know how far it went at all between these two offices.
Q. You received neither a positive nor a negative decision?
A. That is correct.
Q. That correspondence from the year 1943 and 1944 which deals with the manufacture of typhus vaccine - did that have anything to do with typhus research as such?
A. No. One is a research assignment; the other would have been a production assignment.
Q. Who was your superior as Oberstabsarzt of the Luftwaffe?
A. As I pointed out already, that was the Air Fleet Physician Reich.
Q. Was Professor Handloser as the Chief of the Medical Service of the Wehrmacht in a position to give you any orders?
A. No. As far as I know military channels, that was not possible.
Q. Now, if he had wanted to get some information about something which you might have been in a position to tell him, what would have been the right way for him to find out?
A. He had the choice between two methods, either through official channels through the Chief of the Medical Service of the Wehrmacht, Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, and down to me, and I would have had to pass on this information through the same channels the other way around. The other method, which would be much simpler and would probably have been used, would have been for the Chief of the Medical Service of the Wehrmacht to have written to me, "My dear colleague, I would appreciate it if you could give me that and that information." That is to say, simple correspondence between two colleagues, two doctors.
Q. Then officially he would have had to go through the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe?
A. Yes, that is my opinion. Whether it is quite correct I do not know.
DR. NELTE: Thank you. I have no further questions to this witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Are there any other questions to be propounded to the witness by any defense counsel?
BY DR. WEISSGERBER (For the defendant Sievers):
Q. Professor, since when do you know Sievers?
A. I saw Sievers for the first time here in Nuernberg. That was in 1945-46.
Q. Then you never saw Sievers in your Hygiene Institute at Strassbourg?
A. No, never.
Q. Do you happen to be informed about the fact that Sievers was at the camp of Natzweiler while you carried out your typhus vaccinations there?
A. No, I know nothing about that. At any rate, I never saw Sievers at Natzweiler.
Q. Did you ever send a report on your research work either to Sievers or to the Ahnenerbe Society or to the Institute for Military Scientific Research?
A. Only the letters discussed here to Hirt, and Hirt on his part may have passed on these letters or made reports or included them in reports of his own, but as far as I was concerned, I never made any report to the Ahnenerbe or to Sievers personally.
Q. Who put the rooms and equipment at your disposal for your vaccination work at Natzweiler? Did these requests go through Sievers?
A. Well, special rooms or equipment were not put at my disposal. The vaccinations were administered in the hospital where the vaccines were quartered at that time.
Q. In answering a question put by my colleague Tipp, you have already stated that to carry out the typhus vaccinations you requested inmates as vaccinees. Now I should like to find out whom you approached for that.
A. I have already stated yesterday that these vaccinations were based on discussions which had taken place between the camp commandant and myself, that originally there had been no intention of having any other agency concerned in them, but that Hirt, when he heard about it, considered it necessary, since this was a new type of vaccination, to request special approval for it, and that started the entire correspondence.
Q. You also mentioned the reports on your work which you sent to the Reich Research Council. To whom were these reports addressed, as far as they went to the Reich Research Council?
A. The Reich Research Council.
Q. But did they go to the head of the specialized department (Fachspartenleiter), for instance to Generalarzt Schreiber, or what do you know about the way the correspondence was received there?
A. For years I had the habit of sending my reports to an administrative official whom I knew for many years, that was a Dr. Breuer, and he probably forwarded them to the official in charge of that particular subject; I assume that Dr. Breuer might have taken my reports together with others and given them to Schreiber, or whoever was dealing with that matter.
Q. Concerning the typhus vaccinations, may I then sum up that Sievers was of no importance as far as the execution of these experiments was concerned, and also as to the typhus research itself, and had no connection with it as far as you know?
A. With the work itself Sievers had nothing to do, of course, and as far as I understand it, Sievers only passed on my application with a recommendation. I believe there is a letter to me where Sievers informs me that he has passed on my request.
Q. The prosecution has submitted a Document NO 881, Exhibit 280. That is an affidavit by Rene Colomba Wagner, who was a scientific draftsman with Professor Hirt in Strassbourg. In this affidavit Wagner speaks of Sievers as being the superior of professor Hirt and says literally, and I quote, "Sievers was frequently in Strassbourg and was informed about the facts mentioned below. He received regular reports on all work conducted by Professor Hirt at the University of Strassbourg, and through Hirt he was also always informed about the work done by Professor Haagen. I myself frequently saw Sievers at Strassbourg in Hirt's office where I worked." You were also a professor at the University of Strassbourg, were you not, and a colleague of Professor Hirt, as you have explained today? From your work at Strassbourg do you know that Sievers was the superior of Hirt, or did Hirt in conversation with you Speak of Sievers as his superior?
A. In his position as a professor and director of the Anatomical Institute Professor Hirt could not have been subordinate to Sievers.
Q. Did you know Hirt's office in the Anatomical Institute?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. Did you ever meet this Wagner there?
A. I cannot remember ever having seen him.
Q. Suppose you went to a conference in Hirt's office. Could Wagner find out about that?
A. Surely. Yes.
Q. Do you know where Wagner's room was?
A. No, I do not know that. But it is possible, of course, that one met in the corridor. That is not excluded. That is quite possible.
Q. By coincidence.
A. Yes, by coincidence, of course.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, how many more questions have you to propound to the witness?
DR. WEISSGERBER: I have approximately four or five questions, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now be in recess until one-thirty.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION "The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 19 June 1947.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the Courtroom will please find their seats.
The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record the absence of the defendant Pokorny, who has been excused to consult with his counsel.
Counsel may proceed.
EUGEN HAAGEN - Resumed EXAMINATION (Continued) BY DR. WEISGERBER (Counsel for defendant Sievers):
Q Professor, in view of your long years of teaching at Universities, you can assuredly answer the following question. What role does the scientific draftsman play in a dissecting room? Does he have complete insight into his chief's activities; does he have an opportunity to see reports that this chief has drawn up; and, above all, is he capable of understanding their contents completely?
A That question cannot be answered so easily. It depends, first of all, on what position this draftsman occupies, what special training he has had and, of course, it is important also, whet his personal relations are with the professor in question. Now, just what the relations are in this case, I unfortunately cannot tell you. It is to be assumed, of course, that if the person is making drawings of such a specialized field he probably is in pretty close contact with his superior because there will be things to discuss; but, as I said, I cannot give you details about this.
Q If this man is a professional draftsman who has taken this position in a dissecting room during the war, in 1941, however, one night assume that the contact with his chief was not so very intimate that he would know all about the chief's activities? I am referring, as you may notice, to the situation at the Strassbourg University. Do not these facts I just mentioned also play a part?
A Certainly; in judging such personal matters these things are important. If this draftsman visited his chief all the time and entered and left the room all the time, they may have had pretty close relations. But, as I said before, I cannot tell you how close they were.
Q Did Professor Hirt ever tell you that he had informed Sievers of your work?
A So far as I know he did this only in the course of his correspondence that dealt with the vaccines he was asking for.
Q No other cases that you know of?
A No.
Q. Do you assume that in other cases Hirt might have informed Sievers of your work?
A No, I don't believe he did.
Q Thank you. I have no further questions.
DR: KRAUSS: (Counsel for defendant Rostock):
Q Professor, did the research assignments in typhus and hepatitis which you wore given by the Reich Research Council bear Professor Rostock's signature?
A I cannot recall ever having seen Professor Rostock's signature.
Q Professor, when you applied to the Reich Research Council, for financial reasons, for a research assigment, did you then deal with Professor Rostock?
A No. These applications were always made in writing and were sent to the Reich Research Council as an organization, or to Dr. Breuer.
Q Did you send written reports on your research to Professor Rostock?
A I do not believe so I cannot remember that I did.
Q Did you ever report on such things to him orally?
AAt most it is possible that we might have spoken about these things at the hepatitis conference but I cannot recall that we did.
Q Did you ever visit Professor Rostock in Berlin?
A No.
Q I must refer briefly to the affidavit that your former secretary, Miss Eier, signed. This is Document No. NO-883, Exhibit No. 320. In it, under No. 8, Miss Eier made statements to the contrary in this matter. I shall have the affidavit put to you and ask you to read No. 8, which is on pape 104 of Document Book 12.
A Yes, I see this, but Miss Eier says "I think." She says, "Professor Rostock was in constant touch with Haagen and they made numerous oral reports to each others; Haagen used to visit Rostock in Berlin."
Q Please read No. 8 and then I will put a question to you.
A Very well.
Q Professor, the witness, Weltz, has corroborated in its major points what you have just said. Can you also state, with absolute certainty, that this is an error in memory on the part of Miss Eier?
A Yes, that is the only way I can construe this because Miss Eier must have known to whom I wrote letters and from whom I received them.
Q Then you Did not send or receive letters involving Professor Rostock?
A No.
Q Thank you. No further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Any other questions of the witness on the part of defense counsel? If not, the prosecution may cross-examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. MC HANEY:
Q. Witness, did you know the position held by the defendant Rostock in the office of the defendant Brandt?
A. I can say about this only that from letterheads that I have seen I knew that Rostock did something in Brandt's office.
Q. Did you know what this "something" was?
A. No, I didn't.
Q. Where did you see these letterheads? I understood your testimony about two nights ago to have been that you had no correspondence with Rostock.
A. Just at the conclusion I said that I had no correspondence with Rostock in this matter. That is just what I got through saying. I received a few letters from Professor Rostock. These letters were concerned with the training of a technical assistant and it is from them I saw the letterheads I just mentioned.
Q. Did you have correspondence with him about anything else?
A. No, I can't recall that I did.
Q. What about the electronic microscope?
A. I never had an electronic microscope.
Q. And you can remember that you definitely had no correspondence with Rostock concerning the electronic microscope?
A. I cannot recall ever corresponding with Rostock in that matter.
Q. You knew that Rostock was chief of the office for science and research under Karl Brandt, didn't you?
A. I have just told you that I do not know exactly what position Rostock occupied in Brandt's office
Q. Did you know whether it had anything to do with research?
A. That I assume.
Q. Did you know that Rostock in August of 1944 classified your typhus research as urgent?