The funds were assigned; that was his authority. I received no knowledge of it later, and here, in September or October, it was shown to me. Everything that I say about it I only construct from the words which are before me in the report. The only one who might be able to say anything about these matters would be Rose, who is surely acquainted with the background of this report.
Q. But, General -
A (Interposing) And Becker-Freysing cannot be called upon here, in spite of the number at the top, "55" because this is a hygiene report on typhus, which he dealt with only in the course of business but which, from a medical point of view or from a technical point of view, was handled by the Hygiene Section, or with the aid of Rose.
What I say here is merely a construction from these statements given in these reports.
Q. General, was Haagen's research assignment by the Luftwaffe classified as secret?
A. No, it was issued as an open letter in 194l or l942. It was not issued by me; it was before my time. As I said yesterday, in the case of such research assignments which could not be completed in one fiscal year by virtue of their contents, funds were assigned only to the amount that would be needed in the current fiscal year. When they had been used up, then new funds were assigned in the next fiscal year. In the course of assigning these new funds, this assignment was renewed. That is the reason why I had no knowledge of this letter. The assignment of funds as a new assignment, especially if it was on a large scale or very important, I had reserved for myself. The assignment of funds as an extension, or the renewing of existing assignments, I had turned over to my chief of staff. This is only a matter of a business dealing with a current matter which did not required any decision, and I didn't want my absence from the office on official business to delay such assignment.
My chief of staff was the only person in the office, aside from me, who could dispose of money to any large extent. I didn't want my absence -
Q. (Interposing) General, all I asked you was whether his assignment by the Luftwaffe was secret. I don't think we need to get a long speech about that. Your answer is that it was not secret; isn't that correct?
A. No, the documents show that it was open.
Q. And what, conclusion do you draw about that fact that if was not secret; that therefore it couldn't have had anything to do with experiments on human beings?
A It was production assignment for typhus vaccine. It was an assignment to develop laboratory production to such an extent that it could applied to large scale production. That was not a matter that required cr*c*.
Q Well, will you draw the reverse conclusion? Would you draw the reverse conclusion if it were, in fact, secret?
A I don't know. I can only reconstruct that. My office did not order any human experiments in the sense in which they are mentioned here.
Q Well, let's have a look at Document NO 934, and I think we will have to conclude that these were really secret assignments, General.
This is Document NO 934. It is offered as Prosecution Exhibit 458 for identification.
Now, General, let's toll the Court what this document is first, This is a list of medical research commissions of the OKL, Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, Saalew, near Berlin, Post office Zossenland, and so forth.
A That is a list, as the heading shows, of the medical research commissions which my office and the authorities in charge of research issued in the year 1944--I don't see the date, but that is what I would assume--which were going on at the time. It must be from 1944.
Q Yes, it is bound to be because, first -
A Yes, that is shown by the fact that is says "OKL, Chief of the Medical Service." That shows that it was 1944. My title was changed from Inspector to Chief only in 1944.
Q And it also has a note here, Stabsartz Dr. Becker-Freyseng, doesn't it?
A Yes.
Q Now, let's turn to page 6 of the original document. It is page 7 of the English translation. Do you find "Hygiene", Roman Numeral VI, General? It must be on page 6 or 7.
A On Page 7 of the German.
Q Do you find that?
A Yes.
Q Hygiene. Item 2. "The manufacture of typhus vaccine. Secret. Medicine Institute, Strassbourg, Oberstabsarzt Professor Dr. Haagen."
A It, as well as the next case, "I manufacture of Yellow Fever medicine", is a contradiction. In the other list they are given as open.
Q The only other list is the little letter by Haagen to the Director of the University of Strassbourg, as I recall.
A Yes. There they are both listed as open, and here they are given as secret. Perhaps Becker-Freyseng, can explain that, whether that was a typing mistake or why there was this discrepancy. In any case, there was no high degree of secrecy. They are "Secret", no "Top Secret". Other things are listed as "Top Secret".
Q Well, it might, of course, be just a possibility that it was classified "Secret" because late in 1943 after Haagen's letter to the director in which it was not noted as being "Secret", he started his experiments in Natzweiler, which hoe continued through the year 1944, so Becker-Freyseng in 1944 marks them down as "Secret". That is one possibility don't it, General?
A No, I don't believe so, because the extension in August 1944 which you were just discussing was an open letter. The extension of this typhus vaccine assignment of 29 August 1944 was an open letter. It was not "Secret".
Q Well, I say again your Chief of Staff Kant in his letter to Haagen admonished him to keep his report secret, didn't he?
A That was about cases of typhus. That is something else.
Q "Investigations at Matzweiler" is what it says, General.
A I don't know the report. I can't say.
Q Let's move on to sea water.
A The date is not given on the list either.
Q Let's move on to sea water, General.
A Very well.
Q When did you first became interested in the Schaefer process, as against the Berker process, of making sea water drinkable?
AAs I said yesterday, in the beginning of May 1944, when Professor Struckholdt for the first time told me of this solution of the sea water problem by Schaefer.
Q What animal experiments had been conducted prior to that time by the Berker method?
A I don't know the experiments as such.
Q You testified that you tried to have the experiments on human beings carried out in a hospital at Brunswick, and you remember you contacted the commander of the hospital on 1 June 1944, because you remember quite remarkably that his promotion came through on that date?
A Yes.
Q Did you-
A Otherwise, I would not know the date so well.
Q You say you also contacted the Luftwaffe Medical Academy about this time to see if cadets could be made available. Now, when did you contact with the Medical Academy take place.
A I said in connection with the Haagen business that I was on an official trip in France, and in the last days of May I returned to Berlin--about on the 27th or 28th; I don't knew exactly, but it war around that time. In the meantime, all the discussions which are shown here by the documents took place. I was told about it, that those experiments were planned. Then I established contact with the offices, first, the Medical Anatomy. Presumably that was on the 29th, 30th, or 31st of May, at the end of May.
Q That is sufficient, General. I don't want you to go through what you did again. I am just interested in the dates right now. I therefore conclude that you did not consider going to the SS for experimental subjects until after you had exhausted these other possibilities; is that right
A. Yes.
Q Now, when Struckholdt brought this problem to your attention early in May before you went on your inspection trip to France, did you then tell Becker-Freyseng to look into this matter, to find out what should be done, and to attend this meeting on 19 May 1944, where this matter was discussed?
A That is a complete distortion of the facts. That is not how it was. In the first days of May I heard from Struckholdt of the Schaefer process through Struckholdt, and, as I have said several times, I looked at it. In the Institute Schaefer demonstrated it to me. Then I heard of the Berker process, and the next thing, the discussion on the 20th or 21st--whenever it was--that took place when I was not in Berlin, and the things were dealt with and discussed in my absence, but I should like to add the following: This part would have taken place inexactly the same way if I had been in Berlin. It was not customary and certainly not necessary for my experts to inform me about every conference which they were to attend beforehand. That would have been quite impossible. These things were settled in the various sections by the heads of the sections. I had elder, sensible people there. They sent the various experts to the meetings, and then if there were any results about which I had to be informed, then there was still plenty of time to inform me, and that is how it happened here, only that I was not there at the time, but it took place in the same way. When I came back, the section chief and Becker-Freyseng reported to me and told me about this question and what had developed in the meantime.
Q General, let's look at the minutes on that meeting. This is Document NO 177, Prosecution Exhibit 193. Now, if you say there was no intention of going to the SS until after you had exhausted all possibilities for obtaining experimental subjects elsewhere, perhaps you will be good enough to explain to the Tribunal why a copy of the minutes of this meeting was sent to the Reichsfuechrer SS.
I cannot answer that. That is asking too much. This letter was sent by the technical office, by a person who was not a doctor, it was a technician. It was drawn up without the help of my office. It is a report of the meeting put down from memory and was worked out on the responsibility of the technical office. Why they sent it to the SS I don't know. I think a certain conclusion can be drawn from another document which I have seen here in the interrogations. This shows that the technical office had offered this Berker method, this Berker drug, to the SS. There is a letter in which the SS or some office of the SS is offered a sample. It is said that it is a drug which the technical office had developed in the meantime and they might introduce it, and they are sending sample. That was sent to the SS, and so I can imagine that the person who worked out this report said that such a thing --- this is not introduced as quickly as this letter to the SS said, and he simply sent the SS a copy of this report. That is how I reconstruct it. I wasn't there.
Q. And you just knew no place to turn to get volunteers for these sea water experiments except Dachau, is that right?
A. After my own attempts had failed and the suggestion was made, I had no objections in accepting it.
Q. There were about four and a half million people in Berlin in 1944, weren't there?
A. Yes, something like that.
Q. Don't you think possibly you could have found 40 patriots among them and a safe enough place to carry out the experiments and have them don't there in Berlin?
A. The men might have been found, but you are again forgetting what I have said severel times, that we had airraids, airraid alarms daily, and that there was no calm and no opportunity to work in Berlin. Our own offices had moved out to the suburbs.
It was impossible to carry out any peaceful work in Berlin at that time. I had a hospital, a military hospital, in Berlin. I was able to see it there. No work could be done.
Q. Any law against experimenting on members of the Wehrmacht?
A. No.
Q. Isn't it a fact that you knew that these experiments were apt to kill somebody and you weren't interested in volunteers, so you went to the SS?
A. It is quite impossible. I would not expose the candidates of the academy or hospital patients to experiments if I knew that such things were even possible.
Q. Well, General, I don't mean to be unreasonable with you, but isn't that exactly what this document NO 177, Prosecution Exhibit 133 says, just as clearly as it can be said in any language? This is a report on the meeting of 19 May 1944, and your man Becker-Freyseng was there, together with Schaeffer and it says that at this meeting -- I am quoting -- "Capt. Dr. Becker-Freyseng reported on the clinical experiments conducted by Col. Dr. von Serreni and came to the final conclusion that he did not consider them as being unobjectionable and conclusive enough for a final decision." In other words, Becker-Freyseng was saying that von Serreni's experiments with Becker were not realistic enough. They hadn't been carried out properly. And the report continues: "The chief of the Medical Service -- "that is you, General -- "is convinced that if Berker method is used, damage to health has to be expected not later than six days after taking Berkatite, which damage will result in permanent injuries to health, and, according tp the opinion of Dr. Schaeffer,will finally result in death after not later than twelve days.
External symptoms are to be expected, such as drainage, diarrhea, convulsions, hallucinations, and, finally, death." Now, General, as I say, I don't want to be unreasonable with you, but this report states on its face that, in your judgment, Berker, if used beyond six days, was apt to kill somebody. And I had suggested to you th t under these circumstances you never had any intention of going anywhere except to Dachau; isn't that right?
A. No. First of all, this report was not written by a doctor or with the assistance of a doctor. It was written by a technician from memory. When the sea water complex is discussed, I ask you to question Becker-Freyseng about it, who can give more information. Second, this expression "chief of the Medical service is convinced --" that is not synonymous with my person, according to the way we use the language. It means the representative of the agency who was there. Third, it says after six days damage to health is to be expected. Fourth, Schaeffer thought death could occur after twelve days. Against this, the clear and unambiguous instructions which I issued were to carry out the experiments only to the extent that no damage would result to health. That cannot be explained away. If with the Berker drug any damage had been shown after one or two days, it would have been the duty of the person in charge of the experiments to break off the experiment. That was true of the candidates in the academy, the patients in the hospital, and for the camp Dachau. I was not interested in finding out that people get sick from it. I can do that with the most harmless drug if I give an overdose. What was important was to establish what can be endured, what can be tolerated, to help these people in distress at sea. That was the purpose, not to establish what they could tolerate.
Q. Now, General, it seems to me to be pretty clear from this document that they outlined the experiments right there, because on the next 366l page it says, after talking about experiments to be carried out for six days it says, in addition to these experiments, a further experiment should be conducted as follows:
two persons nourished with sea water and Berkatite and as diet also the emergency sea rations. Duration of experiments, 12 days. Since, in the opinion of the Chief of the Medical Service, permanent injuries to health as well as the death of the experimental subject has to be expected, as experimental subjects such persons should be used as will be put at the disposal by the Reichsfuehrer SS.
A. I have already said that this report did n t come from my office. I did not work on it. It came from the technical office. Again I ask you to question Becker-Freyseng about it. You con see that I wanted to use the academy or the hospital first, and in any case, if it was to be said that way, I never identified myself with these experiments. I did them in a different way.
Q. You never even saw this report; is that right, General?
A. I saw this report for the first time here in Nuremberg. There was no reason at the time for it to be shown tome. Becker-Freyseng reported his opinion on these experiments. He didn't have to show me this report. He did not identify himself with these any more than I did. I heard later that he informed the technical office that there were serious mistakes and they should issue a correction. But he can speak about that himself. He is better informed than I am.
Q. Well, I was going to suggest to you, General, that you admit -you must admit that on the face of it, this is an outrageous document, and if it had been sent to me concerning anybody subordinated to me, I certainly would have seen to it that it was corrected, and I certainly would have insisted that my subordinate, such as Becker-Freysing was to you, bring such a document to my attention.
But that didn't happen?
A I ask you again to question Becker-Freysing about this. He can tell you more than I can.
Q Now under Item 2 on Page 3 of the original, General, you can see that the navy wasn't even very much interested in these sea water experiments. It suited than if they had a water that would carry a man for three days. The Luftwaffe was really pressing for these experiments for twelve days. General, do you find that? It says, "In the opinion of the navy, the results obtained at the clinical experiments are sufficient, since they arc mainly interested in being able to nourish their men three to five days with the preparation." They didn't care anything about making any further experiments, did they, General?
A That is also an inaccuracy. As far as I know from later discussions with Becker-Freysing, this number, twelve days, comes from the navy, because the navy had a case of distress at sea where a drifting boat with survivors was found after twelve days, he in the Luftwaffe-the case which I mentioned yesterday with the six days and seven days was one of the longest. I think later there was one with eight days, be had, this 3-day limit. This 12-day limit, to my knowledge, comes from the navy. That is another inaccuracy in the document. But I come back to the 3 to 5. days I was talking about yesterday. If the Berker drug had proved usable for a few days, than that would still have been a success. Then we could have used the other drug a little more sparingly. We could have used it a little less. We had raw material difficulties there.
Q General, let's look at the distribution of this document. First, it was sent to the information of the Medical Experimentation and Instruction Division of the Airforce, Jueterbeg. Holzloehner was attached to that establishment at Jueterbeg, wasn't he?
A That was --- Holzloehner was only-- he was at the planning office at Jeuterbeg, yes, but I don't believe he was there immediately at that time. That was in May. He was certainly not there. He was in Kiel, holding lectures.
Q Look at the Institute for Aviation Medicine, DVL, Berlin, Adlershef, which was troubling Dr. Sauter the other day-
A I explained that yesterday. That is certainly a mistake. The Ruff Institute had nothing whatever to do with this matter.
Q General -- General, it is immaterial to me whether it was a mistake or wasn't a mistake. The important thing is that he get it, whether by mistake or otherwise. This says that it was distributed to his institute doesn't it?
A It says so here, yes. I don't know whether he got it.
Q Now then, after Mr. Ruff got this and Mr. Holzloehner, or his institute, both of them had been quite active at Dachau themselves at an earlier period--did neither of them come to you to say, Watch your step; things are bad down there; men were killed in the earlier experiments? You find that unnatural? You think that would to very strange that if Ruff knew they had killed three men down there, that the SS, as he says, sort of took things out of his hands, you find it amusing that I suggest to you that when he gets a report like this which indicates that the Luftwaffe is carrying out another experiment in Dachau with the SS, you find it amusing that I suggest to you that he should have talked to you about it? Is that right General?
A Nobody talked to me about it, neither Holzloehner nor Ruff. I said on another occasion that in the late fall I happened to see Holzloehner; and Ruff never talked to me about these matters. These implications I don't agree with.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will now recess until 1:30 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 27 February 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats Tribunal is again in session.
OSKAR SCHROEDER Resumed CR0SS-EXAMINATION (Continued)
DR. MC HANEY:
Q Herr Schroeder, I want to ask you one additional question about the distribution of these minutes, that is Document NO 177, Prosecution Exihibit 133, the minutes of the meeting held on the 19th and 20th of May 1944 on the sea water experiments. I notice that in the distribution list a copy was sent to Luftwaffe Inspectorate 14, 1st Abteilung, 2nd Abteilung, Gruppe 3, and than the initials KGB. Can you tell tho Tribunal what persons received copies of those minutes?
A Roman numeral I was the first, was it not?
Q. 1st Abteilung.
A Yes. That was the departmental chief at the time Oberstarzt Range.
Q How do you spell that?
A R-A -N-G-E.
A Yes, that is Oberstarzt Mertz.
Q Gruppe 3?
A Gruppe 3 and KGB belong together. That was the ran who worked on The War Diary -- I think it was Oberstarzt Zerkehlen.
A But you yourself never saw a copy of this document?
A No.
Q Did you talk this meeting over with Becker-Freyseng?
A He reported to me about this meeting when I returned from my trip. He mostly mentioned the points which were important for me, that is to say, that the experiment was planned.
Q Did he tell you that he and Schaefer had reported on behalf of the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe?
A He represented my agency and, therefore, they interfered in the discussion--this was part of their order.
Q Well, but you say Becker-Freyseng and Schaefer reported to this during that in their opinion Berker would cause permanent injury after six days and death between six and 12 days. Did Becker-Freyseng tell you that?
A That was not correct. They did not report that was my opinion at that was the opinion of the man who worked on that record, it is the repe* an engineer who from his memory wrote these things down. Afterwards this is not my personal opinion. My personal opinion. My personal opinion was at the subject of discussion at all.
A Well, now, Christensen and the other gentlemen from the Technisches were not representing your office, they were representing the RIM. Becker-Freyseng and Schaefer were who only persons present at this meeting representing out office and these minutes clearly state that it is the ******** of the Chief of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe that Berker will cause permanent injury after six days. And it expressly states that Shaefer said it will finally result in death after not later than 12 days. Now I am asking you if Berker-Freyseng told that that had been reported to this meeting.
A I cannot say that now. Why don't you ask Becker-Freyseng himself, probably will be able to tell you were about. It was not my opinion on the basis of my experiences.
A It is rather important to know, General, whether this was reported to you and what you reactions was with respect to that report, because those inmates outline an experimental program to give experimental subjects Dachau, Berker for 12 days. You don't remember that he told you that?
A No. In addition the planning of the experiment was merely initiated there, it wasn't established in every way. I personally didn't accept it in that form. I at first endeavored to perform these experiments on my own and with regard to that record which I didn't know myself I didn't c*o*t it at all.
Q Well, did you think in May and June 1944 that if Berker water was used for six days that it would cause permanent injury to the experimental subject?
A No, I didn't believe that because Berker water was identical, as far as I thought, with sea water. The adding of that Berker drug did not change the character of the sea water at all. The fact that was water with five or six days undergoes, or, rather, has as a result permanent physical damage. I could not confirm on the basis of my own experiences, which I at that time made in my capacity as Fleet Physician about this very point.
Q In other words, it is your considered judgment, as an expert, that even if a man drank sea water for six days that it wouldn't cause and permanent injury; is that right?
A That is correct, yes.
Q Did you talk this meeting over with Schaefer?
A No, according to my knowledge, no.
Q Did Schaefer tell you that in his judgment it would kill a ma* to take Berker water for as much as twelve days?
A It is possible he said that; I don't know, it wasn't the subject of discussion at all. Moreover, the directives to interrupt these experiments as soon as there was suspicion of any harm or personal injury to ar* person that was one of the basic conditions of the experiment.
Q We will come to that in a minute; right now I am interested in whether Schaefer told you that in his judgment it would kill a man to fe* him Berker water for twelve days. I want to remind you of something you in your interrogation of the 2nd of October. You were asked the following question: "Now, a question; I ask you to consider it carefully. Can you tell me here if Dr. Schaefer did not attempt, that in fact he omitted to call your attention, as head of the inspectorate of aviation, to the dan of the Berker method and to his report, but that he further attempted to convince you as his chief, and as a physician, that such experiments show not be undertaken in the concentration camp of Dachau." You answered: of course, he did not do. It was, to begin with, not his business." Can you tell the Court whether Schaefer came to you after this meeting and sa "Now look, there is some mention of carrying out experiments for twelve days on concentration camp inmates at Dachau; as an expert in this matter I am telling you that that is going to kill them if you do it." Now, you ought to remember if he told you something like that; did he, or didn't he?
A Under oath I cannot say whether that was the case. Please ask if himself or let him report about it. For me it was quite certain that the experiment should only be carried out to such an extent as was possible is out doing any damage to health.
Q I have long since asked him that question, and he insisted at great length that he told you; that he warned you; that he wanted no part of the Dachau experiments. Of course, you didn't know that when you were interrogated on the 2nd of October; and there you denied that he told you and that he warned you. Now, which position is correct?
A If Schaefer had testified to that here during an interrogation, namely, that he said something to me about it, I would believe him and wouldn't deny it at all; but I really don't know it any more; I have so much to think about that I can hardly remember every detail; that applies to me as it applies to every one else, but I am not going to deny that he made those statements. It doesn't make any difference to me because my v** about the entire affair was very firm, namely, that the experiments only be carried out in the frame that didn't harm any persons and didn't cause any bodily injury.
Q Now General, you will recall that both Schaefer and BeckerFreyseng were asked about this at the conference in Nurnberg in October, 1942. Didn't they give you any of the details about what was reported or those Dachau experiments so you could, go into these sea water experiment with your eyes open?
A No, neither one or the other told me oven a word about it.
Q Now, between this meeting of 19 and 20 May, 1944, and the first of June, you scurried around and tried to arrange for these experiments at the Luftwaffe Medical Academy and at the hospital at Brunswick; that right, isn't it?
A Yes.
Q And then, after exhausting all other possibilities, you finally went to the SS, as it was said in the minutes of the meeting in May; that is right, isn't it?
A I am saying that I didn't know the record of that meeting; therefore, my decisions cannot have referred to any statements contained in record. My decision was based on my own views in that matter.
Q It is just a horrible coincidence, is that right,-- General -
A That is what you constructed of it.
Q When did you see Grawitz?
A I can only reconstruct that from the letters, since the last conference took place on the first of June, and the later information from me to Himmler was written I think on the seventh. I must have seen Grawitz, before that; this could only have taken place between the first and the seventh.
Q Where did you see him; did you go to his office?
A Yes, the office of which he was a representative, the German Red Cross in Babelsberg. This was closer to where I lived and I had somebody to speak to at that time and that was the reason I went there.
Q How long did you talk to him?
A I don't know that any longer; perhaps a quarter of an hour, or twenty minutes. I had no other subject to discuss with him than this after I dealt with it shortly, as I said, he and I, and I think it took about twenty minutes.
Q And you told him you wanted these sea water experiments carried out on dishonorably discharged Wehrmacht soldiers; is that right?
A Yes.
Q Did you tell him that you were limiting the experiments to those type of experimental subjects?
A No. I merely told him that as a suggestion since the selection experimental subjects was a matter of the police; that wasn't my concern. Therefore, I couldn't really exercise any influence. That was the only thing in the entire experimental affair which was outside my influence. Therefore I made this suggestion in order to get a number of people for the experience who could be put on the same level as soldiers.
Q But you were willing to take anything that the SS handed you; the SS handed over to you; is that right?
A That wasn't discussed. Grawitz told me that he would represent wish.
Q But you were prepared to rely upon the SS in producing these experimental subjects?
A I had no reason to have any objection or any doubt regarding to.
Q Well, General, if any of your associates who knew all about the experiments in Dachau during the high altitude and freezing experiments whispered a word about it, there might have beer, very good reasons for you not to rely on the SS in this rather important matter isn't that right?
A Well, how much longer shall I repeat here in order to establish that I hadn't known these things. Why should I have known them? Every opportunity I have emphasized thaw.
Q You say you thought that they only had these dishonorably discharged Wehrmacht soldiers and a social elements in concentration camps. What do you mean by a social elements?
A This word "a social" I only heard hero in Nurnberg for the find time. No word as "asocial" was mentioned to Grawitz.
Q Well, who do you think they had in concentration camps other the dishonorably discharged soldiers?
AAlready yesterday I emphasized that I, just like many other millions of Germans, didn't know anything about it. Here apparently I have to repeat that every few minutes. I only knew that Germans were kept in concentration camps; dishonorably discharged soldiers from the Wehrmacht or other criminals who did not deserve their sentence in the prisons, but in the concentration camp in order to be committed for the war effort, and furthermore, that politically unreliable people and many other Germans with any way were not politically reliable were kept there too. This is what I knew about it; I already stated it here a few times. I can only say the am here under oath and I have to say that -- either you believe me or you don't.
Q Now, General, how did you get Grawitz to understand that the experiments had to be carried out on volunteers or not at all. Did you give Grawitz this understanding?
A I told him that there would be volunteers for that purpose if they would, be given an improvement in their nourishment as a reward. I still know that every soldier is ready to put himself at the disposal for any special task if he would get any increase in his nourishment; that is in accord with the mentality of every soldier.
Q I think perhaps it is not necessary to go over your letter to Himmler of June 7th, that is document NO 185, Prosecution's Exhibit 134, but I would like to ask you one question. You stated "that direction of experiments shall be taken over by Stabsarzt Beiglboeck,civilian Professor Eppinghaus, Chief Physician of the Medical Clinic in Vienna. After receive of the basic approval, I shall list by name the other officials who are the participate in the experiment." Who were these other officials who participated in the experiments, General?
A They were no physicians who were concerned with the question of clinical assistance; they were assistants; I don't know their names. The were considered in order to perform those scientific observations of the work which was performed. Perhaps Becker Freyseng will be able to tell you more about that than I. These were merely technical assistants in order perform exact observations.