This question is of more practical importance to us, and for this reason we look into it because it is only after a person is fully competent after he comes to whether he or they can open the parachute, in that case we must be able to know whether he can do it. If he is not in a condition to do it, then we have to develop 803a an automatic way of releasing the parachute.
That is the point in that remark.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. With such a little demonstration by pin, is that not the custom of all countries of the world, a customary test?
A. It is a daily form of test and is used everywhere, not only on account for the usual effect in our tests, Your Honor, but by all the countries in their tests.
Q. I ask you now to look or rather did you ascertain in this report that both Dr. Romberg and Rascher had undertaken experiments on themselves.
A. I recall that out of the one passage, it can be seen that this was so, that they carried on experiments on themselves.
Q. Please look at pages 15 to 18, and tell me whether this is the passage to which you refer? I have marked them in pencil,
A. Yes, it can be clearly from this page that these are experiments on themselves within the framework of experiments on human beings, because even there in the text these names are mentioned, one abbreviated as RO and one abbreviated as R. That is, the two names Romberg and Rascher who carried on these experiments, or proved these experiments of themselves.
Q. Not look at page 18, this is an experiment on the part of Romberg, will you explain that, now? I believe it is page 18.
A. This is here. These are experiments on whether or not in the case of Romberg --- in this experiment of Romberg it was an experiment under particularly difficult circumstances, not under normal circumstances.
Q. At what height of altitude did these experiments take place?
A. At 15 kilometers. Now wait, I am not quite through. This Romberg experiment at the particularly high altitude, as I see here, and under particularly difficult circumstances it is being carried out. It is higher than Rascher's. It was between 12 and 12 and a 1/2 kilometers high and I assume it must have been about 15 804a
Q. Will you please return the report to me.
A. They were self experimenting in this, it can not be doubted.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Kippke, does it occur to you that possibly "RO" means Romberg's "patient" if I may use that term or Rascher's "patient" rather than these two men themselves?
A That is very improbable since they were the two conductors of the experiments and that was certainly explained by the experiment itself, because if that had been the case, everyone would have to assume from this report that they were in parson the experimental subjects. I consider it out of the question that should mean that it is their patients and not Romberg and Rascher themselves.
THE PRESIDENT: I would suggest to you that they would find it a little inconvenient to be both the patient and the subject.
THE WITNESS: Nevertheless, that was our basic principle in all these experiments, to use ourselves with no regard for our comfort. That is asked of a physician that he expose himself to the same conditions as those to which he exposes his patients. That is part of medical ethics.
DR. BERGOLD: Your Honors, in this question, I ask you to look at Page 17 of the original, which is on Page 164 and read there in the middle what is there stated. There is stated verbatim: "When he recovered consciousness..." That proves indisputably that it is a question of Romberg himself. The German reads in such a way as to prove that it is an experiment that Romberg carried on himself.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: While you're on Page 17, Dr. Bergold, I'd like to draw to your attention, and of course I mean by "your attention" the witness' attention, these items in the report which seem to be at variance with what the witness states, that the subject felt no pain. "Only the usual pains attendant with bends occurred. There developed very gradually a condition of weakness, combined with a peculiar headache. After ten minutes..."
DR. BERGOLD: The apparatus if faulty, apparently. I can only hear the English.
THE WITNESS: Please tell me that again.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: I have understood you to say that the subject experienced no pain in these altitude tests.
THE WITNESS: In these experiments, there is no pain. One of the experiments here described -
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Please let me finish the question, witness. I direct your attention to these items in the report on which you have been commenting. The first item is on Page 17 of the original: "Only the usual pains attendant with bends occurred." Second item: "There developed very gradually a condition of weakness combined with a peculiar headache." Further down on the same page, the third item: "After ten minutes stay at this altitude, pains began on the right side with a spasticparalytic condition of the right leg which increased continually as though RA's whole right side were being crushed between two presses. At the same time, there were most severe headaches as though the skull were being burst apart. The pains became continually more severe so that at last the discontinuation of the experiment became necessary." Now, what is meant by the word "pain" in that report?
THE WITNESS: I explained it as an exceptional case because this was not purely a sinking experiment. It was a so-called high altitude experiment where people stayed at high altitudes. People stay at a certain altitude for a certain length of time and then at this altitude have certain symptoms which in a normal experiment they wouldn't have. The symptoms that result from falling are quite different from this and here this is an exception. The technician for these matters should be namely Dr. Ruff, the man who had charge of this whole experimentation. He should be asked on this matter. He could give you a much better explanation of it than I can.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: Very well. In some instances, you will admit that the subject did experience pain? Yes or no?
THE WITNESS: Yes, but not in the experiments that were carried on here with the criminals.
JUDGE MUSMANNO: It was only the innocent ones who experienced pain?
THE WITNESS: This experiment has been carried on with a -
THE PRESIDENT: At the request of the Interpreting Department, we are going to modify the time at which we recess to ten minutes of the hour until five or ten minutes after. This is in order to split up the work of the two interpreters more evenly so that the recess doesn't come entirely out of one interpreter's time and the other works a little more than that. Hereafter, then, at eleven and three, we will recess at ten minutes to eleven and ten minutes to three, thereabouts; but right now, in any event.
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is in recess for 15 minutes.
AFTERNOON SESSION
THE MARSHALL: All persons in the court room will please find a seat. Tribunal No. 2 is again in session.
MR. KING: I would like to correct the record with reference to this morning's session so far as the testimony of this witness is concerned. On several occasions he used the term "Staatssekretaer im Luftfahrt Ministerium", which was translated as "Under-Secretary of State", as your honor will recall. That was improperly translated and should have been translated as "State Secretary in the Air Ministry", I spoke to Dr. Bergold about this and he agreed with me that of course when he used the term he was referring to the Defendant. As the records read one might be led to believe that there was some undersecretary that is not the case.
DR. BERGOLD: Witness, I now come back once more to the experiment of Romberg which was put to you by the Court. Is it correct that this was a different type of experiment from the one on oxygen?
A. I had the impression that this is a special type of experiment, outside of the scheme of the usual experiments, therefore you can not compare this with the other experiments. It should be assumed that in the case of the doctor who is making experiments on himself that other and more severe conditions were included in this experiment. As far as I can see, there are symptoms concerning the joints. In special circumstances, this can occur as I said before, and can hurt, but only under different conditions than those, which I had intended in my experiments. To say in detail on this system, I would like Dr. Ruff to make statements about that who is particularly well informed about that, or Dr. Romberg as well.
Q. Witness, the fact that oxygen is being used, do you mean that the experimental person Romberg retained his consciousness throughout?
A. No, that is not to be concluded from that. Because in altitudes above 12 to 13 kilometers, you lost consciousness even if you use oxygen.
Q. Could one deduct from these reports that during all of these experiments no fatalities and no permanent lasting injury occurred?
A. It was expressed in a sentence that no fatality occurred and no permanent injury.
809a
Q. Is that expressed in the second paragraph of page 25 of the original?
A. Yes, it is the last paragraph in from of Roman Numeral 4. It says: "In conclusion, we must make it particularly clear that, in view of the extreme experimental conditions in this whole experimental series, no fatality and no lasting injury due to oxygen lack occurred."
Q. What did you do after you studied this report?
A. In order to answer this report I went to Milch with a draft of of a reply to Milch. I would like to be told whether I should now refer to the contents of that conversation with Milch, or whether you are putting single questions to me?
Q. Please tell us about this, but tell us first when this conversation took place?
A. It was at the end of August.
Q. Witness, tell us about the conversation with the Defendant?
A. I went to the Defendant Milch and took to him my reply which was considered essentially a letter of thanks to the sender, Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler, and I told him about this: "I have with me the draft of the reply for the high altitude experiments which were carried out by the SS under collaboration of our Luftwaffe doctors." Thereupon, he Milch put a question to me: "What interest does the SS have in these experiments?" and I replied, "The main interest it seems to me is founded on VANITY on the part of the SS --- I thought of Rascher and Himmler --- in order to make a good impression on Hitler in carrying out of such experiments, by so doing showing what the SS had done for the prosecution of such matters, also the SS wished to express by this that the Luftwaffe doctors were a little bit slow and old fashioned in the way they carried out their tasks, and that they had to be stepped up as it where.
Milch then asked me what sort of experiments these were; I answered high altitude experiments, and freezing experiments. He then asked me what the term freezing meant. I was prepared for that question as it was a new term which even among medical men was not used frequently. I explained to him this term. That it is connected with cooling, which is suffered by pilots who have bailed out in the sea, if and when the temperature of water is 810a very low, and the bodies would quickly go rigid and this would be followed quickly by death; and, therefore, a quick rescue was a very urgent matter, to be done at once; and treatment on the part of the doctor required emergency and special measures, because the pilots who were rescued, often died; that the old methods of life saving were inadequate; the wrapping up in blankets and other methods of keeping them warm, it was therefore necessary to work on this problem in order to find out how pilots who were rescued could be kept alive.
That was the subject of the present experiments of cooling and freezing with the SS.
I added also, that the work done here did not meat my sympathy but were important matters and seemed to me highly necessary. He wanted to know if I had any special reason to be opposed to collaboration of the SS; whether I had any objections. I replied to him "No" but because this work was not explained to me and because of the collaboration of two different government departments, resulting in confusion in the execution of orders, it was undesirable and secondly the SS did not seem to me competent or expert, because the question of cooling were matters of the Navy and Luftwaffe and the question of high altitude was purely a matter of the Luftwaffe. Therefore, I did not give them back the high pressure chamber which the requested; he told me that he agreed to that. The chamber should not be given back to them. I believe it was mentioned that it was then already used somewhere else. It was brought to the territory in the area of GROSSGLOCKNER. Then, I referred again to the contents of those reports and explained that it concerned experiments by our avaiation doctors and also by the SS; experiments by the SS on men who had been sentenced to death----murders---men who had volunteered and who were promised a pardon,(pause) who were promised to be pardoned from the Execution.
We then discussed the results of the experiments briefly, that they had been concluded, that is, altitudes up to 20 kilometers. And that a number of other important technical questions had been settled at the 811a same time.
I believe to remember that I mentioned automatic openings of parachutes on that occasion.
Then the form of letter was decided on because, my draft was very extensive; since I wished to explain to Himmler why further experiments need not be made. Milch thought this was too comprising, he corrected it and had it rewritten. This also included orders of Rascher and Ruff to report to him. Whether he sent the letter off or not I do not know. He probably coped with the matter. That is my conversation with Milch at the end of August, I think, probably, by the 31st of August-
DR. BERGOLD: Witness, did you on that occasion--
BY JUDGE PHILLIPS:
Q. The 31st of August of what year?
A. 1942.
Q. How long did these experiments continue: over what period of time were they being carried out.
A. They probably began at the end of February or the beginning of March, and should have been concluded by the end of May.
Q. When were they concluded?
A. The date when the results were concluded I do not know, all I know is what Dr. Ruff tells me, that he withdrew the chamber and later on-
Q. Witness, and you tell the Tribunal the first time that the defendant Milch knew of these experiments was when you had this conversation with him. About the 31st day of August 1942?
A. Personally yes, in a written letter on the 20th of May?
Q. Did he know of them my way except personally?
A. I cannot answer that but I saw him on the 31st of August and I had the impression that this matter was knew to him, nor did I think that he had worked on this report himself because otherwise he wouldn't have asked me to tell him about the report.
Q. You were his subordinate, and considered these experiments so important; why didn't you tell him about it before they were completed?
A. I didn't think it important enough for me to go to Milch and report to him. They were the same type of experiments which were made by ourselves; this was purely a supplementary experiment, and the only knew element in it was that other people took part in it; and I did not come across any danger element in the experiment.
Q. I understood you to say that these were experiment of the utmost importance to the Luftwaffe.
A. The results were very important to the Luftwaffe, but I say that the danger element is very small.
BY DR. BERGOLD:
Q. In that conversation on the 31st of August 1942, did you tell Milch 813a That there had been fatalities?
A. I mentioned in the report that nothing had happened because it said so. I mean we did not refer to it.
Q. Did you tell him about these suspicions Ruff passed on to you that Rascher had one fatality---one casualty?
A. No. I was convinced that this matter had been settled by Rascher's report to me. I saw Rascher's report and therefor looked upon this matter as settled; and therefor did not report to Milch about it; I did not do so?
Q. Thank you. Witness, do you know if Milch according to the letter of 31st August 1942 asked Rascher or Romberg or Ruff to report to him and did he receive them?
A. I know nothing of such a report. I only saw it from the files at which period they came to see him, but I did probably later hear about this oral report because I expressed my indignation that those two Doctors when they appeared at Milch's office did not see me, who was concerned as a Doctor; but went directly to Milch; and even afterward they did not see me, but only in the Ministry showed a film without me being present. Therefore I was amazed that I was not included in this business.
Q. Should you, according to the rules, have been invited to this oral report?
A. As it was in my field of activity that I should have been referred to. Why it did not happen I cannot say. I was amazed that I was not present. Later on I formed the opinion that the whole thing was or must be the result of vanity that the SS with its achievements of their own wished to take the floor and make the impression on Milch from whom there was a direct channel to Goering, whereas an oral report to me would have found it a final settlement.
I say that the vanity is the strongest motive.
Q. Witness, after the report on high altitude experiments had been submitted, what did you hear about the freezing experiments?
814a
A. As I said before Holzloehner came to see me; I wanted to first clear up one point in the experiments, one particular point, and that is as to what they should be confined. I was not present at the beginning of the report, at the start of the experiments, but I heard its conclusion by calling a meeting in Nurnberg on the cooling and freezing questions and it concerned the Luftwaffe; and on that meeting, which was held on the 26 and 27 of October, 1942, in Nurnberg, on that occasion Prof. Holzloehner reported on animal experiments and Prof. Hirta explained his experiences in the Sea Rescue Service in the North Sea area, but also Dr. holzloehner gave us his results of the Dachau experiments.
Q. Witness, I shall now show you the final report on freezing experiments of 10 October 1942. This is Exhibit No. 106, Document No. 428. I am unable to give you English page No. I had it in my book but it fell out. Perhaps Mr. Denney can help me.
MR. DENNEY: Page 83, in Document Book 53.
Q. Witness, please go to the last page and look at the report. Have you got the right page?
A. Yes.
Q. This report is dated 10 October 1942. Is that correct?
A. The report is dated as having been concluded on 10 October 1942.
Q. Witness, were you ever given that report either directly or again via Himmler and Milch?
A. This report was never passed on to at all.
Q. Before I showed you this report, did you ever see it?
A. I saw it for the first time here during my arrest in Nurnberg.
Q. May it please the Court, may I ask you once again to see the last Document in my Document book, the chronological index, which is sort of a time table, from which you can see that on 10 October 1942 there is an entry freezing experiments concluded. Witness, did you up to that date hear anything that in freezing experiments there were fatalities?
A. No, up to that date I heard nothing at all about the details about freezing experiments. Therefore I know nothing about the question of 815a possible fatalities.