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?
A. Of that I knew nothing.
Q. I understood your testimony to be that from the time you went to Strassbourg in October 1941 until the summer of 1943 you were not a member of the Luftwaffe.
A. From 1 October 1941 until the middle of 1943 I was on leave from my military duties. I had leave to carry on work.
Q. And you did no work for the Luftwaffe during that period?
A. No.
Q. I am under the impression that you received an influenza research assignment in 1942.
A. That is so, yes.
Q. And you did nothing about it?
A. How am I to understand you to mean that, that I did nothing about it?
Q. As I understand it, you testified that from October 1941 to the summer of 1943 you were on leave from the Luftwaffe and had nothing to do with them. I point out to you that in 1942 you received a research assignment on influenza from the Luftwaffe. I have some difficulty reconciling these two propositions.
A. You have to discriminate between two things here: on the one hand, my military activities, and on the other hand my activities as professor and scientist. I received this assignment not as a member of the Luftwaffe but as a researcher and specialist in this field.
Q. But you were working for the Luftwaffe in whatever capacity, weren't you, Professor?
A. I received this research assignment from the Luftwaffe but that does not justify you in saying that this research assignment iwas for a specific office of the Luftwaffe. I have already told you that when we wanted research assignments we turned to whatever office could provide us the funds.
Q. Professor, I am not interested in that. I am just inquiring from you whether you were doing research.
We will leave it to the Tribunal to decide whether or not any of the defendants in the dock were responsible for that, but your testimony had left the impression that from October 1941 until the summer of 1943 you weren't doing anything in connection with the Luftwaffe and I just wanted to point out that is not quite accurate. Now, when you were on active duty with the Luftwaffe, you were subordinated to the Air Fleet Physician Reich, were you not?
A. On leave I was not subordinate to him.
Q. During the period when you were not on leave.
A. Until 1 October 1941 I was subordinate to the Air Fleet Physician; from 1 July 1943 I was again subordinate to him.
Q. But he could issue orders to you, couldn't he?
A. He could give me no orders.
Q. Couldn't give you any orders?
A. No.
Q. Did he have any disciplinary rights over you?
A. No.
Q. Then you really weren't a member of the Luftwaffe? You had no commander, no one to issue orders to you, is that right?
A. The Air Fleet Physician was not my superior and could not give me orders, nor was I subordinate to him disciplinarily.
Q. Did anybody give you orders in the Luftwaffe?
A. Yes.
Q. Who?
A. The Luftgau physician No. 7 in Munich.
Q. He could issue orders to you?
A. That is right.
Q. And he could discipline you for any infractions of the regulations, is that right?
A. That is so. Of course, he could give me disciplinary penalties.
Q. And if Luftgau physician No. 7 indicated a desire that you carry out research on typhus.
I assume that you would comply with that, would you not?
A. It is my opinion that research assignments cannot be ordered and I don't believe any superior could have been found who would have given such orders.
Q. Nell, I don't recall that I used the word "orders" but you were a virus expert. I don't assume they would come to you with a problem on surgery but if they indicated a desire you work on typhus, as distinguished from epidemic jaundice, I am asking you if you wouldn't comply with that request.
A. I should not have had to accord with this request unless the request had interested me.
Q. But I assume you were a patriotic scientist working for the benefit of the German war effort and if Luftgau No. 7 and the chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe felt that typhus research was a particularly important problem, I am asking you if you wouldn't work on it and subordinate any personal interests you might have in other fields. Isn't that right, Professor?
A. If someone had asked me to do this, that would have had to be a specialist in this field and the Luftgau physician who could give me orders was no specialist and would have left the decision up to me whether or not I wished to work in that field.
Q. Well, did you ever get any such suggestions from anybody?
A. No, no such proposals were ever made to me.
Q. What did Rose suggest to you in 1943?
A. Yesterday and today I explained what Rose and I talked about; to wit, the taking over of a vaccine manufacturing plant.
Q. Well, then he encouraged you to do that, didn't he, and also to develop an effective vaccine which you would produce?
A. That is so. We spoke of the vaccine that was to be produced.
Q. From what office were your research assignments by the Luftwaffe issued?
A. The research assignments that I received from the Luftwaffe were, since they were in the field of hygiene, primarily directed by the hygiene Referat, namely, Stabsarzt Atmer, as I have already said.
Q. You are testifying that Stabsarzt Atmer issued the research assignment to you, is that right?
A. Yes, in collaboration with Guenzel, who was in charge of the funds.
Q. Well, all of the research assignments that we have in our documents carry the Referat number 2 II B - that is, arabic 2, Roman 2, capital B - or 2F. Becker-Freyseng has testified that up Until sometime in 1944 Anthony was chief of that office and thereafter he was chief of it.
A. I have already said that from the purely formal point of view the research assignments were worked on there but that the real decision on them was made by the hygiene Referat.
Q. I didn't ask you who made the decisions. I asked you who issued the assignments. You testified that Atmer didn't. The fact is that Becker-Freyseng's office, the Referat for Aviation Medicine, issued them, isn't it?
A. I never saw that any research assignments emanated from his office.
Q. Then Dr. Rose wrote you a letter in June 1943 saying something about Anthony being away and that he wished him to issue you the order when Anthony returned. You remember that, don't you?
A. I remember that and I also have just stated that this office worked on these assignments in a purely formal way. I also said that I am not intimately acquainted with the internal structure of the Medical Inspectorate so I cannot give you the precise data on this matter, but I can tell you that Becker-Freyseng had nothing to do with any research assignments.
Q. They just came formally through his office; that is all he had to do with them; is that right?
A. That is all I know about it.
Q. And from whence came the money? Didn't that also formally come out of 2 II B and 2 F?
A. I spoke only with Amtsrat Quenzel about financial matters, and he provided the money.
Q. That department was he in?
A. I don' t know what the name of the department is. I do know that he took care of the financial matters.
Q. Never called Anthony or Becker-Freyseng about that?
A. No.
Q. How did you account for the moneys that you received from the Luftwaffe?
A. The money was paid into the University treasury and I had to carry my accounts through the University treasury.
Q. You mean to say that when the Luftwaffe granted you a research assignment and 4,000 marks, that then they delivered the 4,000 masks to the University of Strassbourg?
A. It was sent to the Strassbourg University Treasury and they made the necessary payments, and so forth.
Q. What do you mean, they made the necessary payments? Suppose you made a trip to Natzweiler or Schirmak and it cost you 50 Reichmarks. How did you got your money back?
A. The trip to Natzweiler was made by car. The gasoline was purchased and a bill sent you a voucher made to that effect.
Q. And to whom did you turn over the voucher?
A. They all went to the Medical Inspectorate to Mr. Quenzel.
Q. They went to the Luftwaffe Medical Inspectorate?
A. They went to Quenzel, who was taking care of the finances.
Q. And did you render an accounting? You didn't send in each little bill, I assume. I guess you ran for a three month period or some such period like that and then tallied up the items and made an accounting, didn't you?
A. That, of course, is true. Not every little bill was sent in, but when the sum allotted was almost used up, a final account was drawn up and sent to Mr. Quenzel.
Q. And was he with the Strassbourg University or the Luftwaffe? I am a little confused here.
A. He was a member of the Luftwaffe.
Q. And did you show these trips to Natzweiler on these accounts you turned an to the Luftwaffe?
A. In the accounts there was only mention of the gasoline I bought at some gas station.
Q. I am asking you if the accounts you turned in were in such detail that they could see that you were incurring expenses in connection with trips to Natzweiler and Schirmek?
A. No.
Q. Didn't you ever make any telephone calls to Schirmek or Natzweiler, long distance calls?
A. Yes, I did.
Q. You didn't charge those up on the expense account?
A. I didn't include them in the expense account because that was taken care of by my phone bill with the University.
Q. You worked with the Luftwaffe for some time and I take it you rendered a lot of these statements. You are pretty clear in your testimony about this, that you couldn't tell from these statements that you were making trips to Natzweiler and Schirmek concentration camps?
A. The Luftwaffe could not see from these accounts that I was making trips to Schirmek or Natzweiler.
Q. Where was Schirmek in reference to Strassbourg?
A. Schirmek is west of Strassbourg in the Bosges Mountains.
Q. How far?
A. Approximately 35 to 40 kilometers.
Q. Schirmek was a concentration camp, wasn't it?
A. Schirmek was officially a Sicherungslager, that is, a camp to house parsons under security detention.
A. That is a concentration camp, isn't it? It is like Naztweilar.
A. There must have been some difference because one is a concentration camp and the other is called a security detention camp.
Q. How big was Schirmek?
A. I can't tell you. You probably want to know how many inmates it had, but I can't tell you.
Q. Can't you give us a rough estimate?
A. That is terribly difficult. I should prefer to refrain from doing so.
Q. How often, were you in Schirmek?
A. In Schirmek maybe four or five times, if I am estimating correctly.
Q. When did you go there first?
A. I can't tell you the exact date. I really can't be definite about that. We did our vaccinating in May, 1943, but when I was there for the first time I can't tell you. That was too long ago.
Q. All, you were, there for a time or two before, you carried out your vaccinations in May, 1943, is that right?
A. I cannot say that for sure.
Q. You didn't visit concentration camps very often, did you Professor? I should think you would have a pretty keen recollection about your trips to concentration camps.
A. Please don't forget that I was also in Natzweiler, which was very nearby, and that altogether I paid a lot of visits.
Q. Any besides Natzweiler and Schirmek?
A. No.
Q. Who gave you permission to enter Schirmek?
A. The camp management.
Q. Did he come to see you or did you go to see him?
A. As I said yesterday, the camp commander of Natzweiler and his adjutant of Natzweiler with which Schirmek was affiliated and the camp physician came to me.
Q. What was the purpose of Becker-Freyseng's visit to Strassbourg in July 1944?
A. Becker-Freyseng's visit to me in Strassbourg in 1944 was made because I had previously spoken to Professor Schroeder about the difficulties I was having to get animals, and he promised me that Becker-Freyseng would get in touch with me on the question of acquiring more animals. For this reason Becker-Freyseng came to me in Strassbourg.
Q. What kind of animals?
A. Our laboratory animals, primarily mice and also rabbits?
Q. Any guinea pigs?
A. I don't believe I asked for guinea pigs. Only mice and rabbits.
Q. He was not with Schroeder on the occasion of Schroeder's visit to see you in Strassbourg?
A. No. Dr. Becker-Freyseng was not with Prof. Schroeder at the same time in Strassbourg.
Q. And when did Schroeder come?
A. Schroeder had been there before.
Q. Do you remember in what month?
A. I said yesterday that Prof. Schroeder was with me in Strassbourg at the end of May.
DR. TIPP: Mr. President, for tea minutes Mr. McHaney has been asking questions, all of which have already been asked in the direct examination and have been answered. The Tribunal wished explicitly that the examination of this witness be limited to the necessary minimum, and I object to his putting questions which I have already put. Perhaps the reason is that Mr. McHaney wasn't present during that part of the direct examination, but the questions really are not necessary, and I object to their being put.
THE PRESIDENT: This is a cross examination. Counsel may proceed.
BY MR. MC HANEY:
Q. Has Rose with Schroeder on the occasion of his visit to Strassbourg in May 1944?
A. No.
Q. And when did Rose see you in 1944?
A. Professor Rose was there at a different time. It was also some time during the summer, but not at the same time that Schroeder was there.
Q. And Rose also visited you in 1943?
A. Yes.
Q. Do you remember any other visits by Rose, other than these two?
A. Rose paid me no other visits.
Q. How many research assignments did you get from the Luftwaffe on influenza?
A. I had one research assignment from the Luftwaffe, and this was then subsequently extended, when the fund's were used up.
Q. Well, including the original assignment, plus the extensions , there were three, were, there not, beginning in '42? Another one in '43 and another one in '44, is that right?
A. No, you can't put it that way because I only asked for such funds when they were exhausted. It was all the same research assignment which in each case was extended.
Q. It was extended twice then, once in 1943 and once in 1944?
A. That is possible, yes.
Q And were you using a living virus in the influenza vaccine? I understood you to testify that you were.
A I explained very carefully yesterday that in the influenza vaccine a living virus was used in the same way that vaccine is manufactured in other countries, such as America and England.
Q Now, Professor, couldn't you have answered that question "yes" without the three or four sentences?
A Yes, I could do that too.
Q I would appreciate it if you would. Now, how many trips did you make to Schirmeck in connection with the influenza vaccinations
A For the purpose of influenza vaccinations I went to Schirmeck twice.
Q And you vaccinated twenty women?
A Yes.
Q What was the purpose of the second visit?
A The second visit was to ascertain whether there had been any reaction. In other words, to look into the tolerability of the vaccine.
Q And you found out the tolerability was good?
A Yes, the tolerability was good. No one's ability to wrork was in any way interferred with.
Q Do you remember how high their fever went?
A The temperatures hardly rose at all. If they had risen at all it certainly would have struck me.
Q How much influenza vaccine did you have available?
AAbout enough for 250 to 300 persons at that time.
Q Was influenza vaccine generally available in Germany?
A Various agencies were concerning themselves at the time with the manufacture of influenza vaccine, just at that time.
Q Was there any concerted effort to have large scale influenza vaccinations carried out on German soldiers or on civilians?
A Many vaccinations were made at that time, particularly on civilians and soldiers.