Q What kind of a uniform did he wear, the Luftwaffe or SS?
A When he came to see me he wore a Luftwaffe uniform.
Q Who was chief medical officer of the Luftwaffe?
A That was Hippke at the time.
Q Doesn't the chief medical officer of the Luftwaffe have authority to transfer any member of the medical services of the Luftwaffe subordinate in rank to him to another place?
A Yes, he had that authority.
Q Well, now, did you discuss at this meeting of June 1941 whether or not volunteers should be used?
A Yes, as I said before that was the basis of the whole conversation.
Q I see, and then you discussed the volunteers and then you discussed the necessity for the experiments, I presume?
A Yes, and also all the points which Rascher kept bringing up as to professional criminals, volunteers. These points were reported to Hippke by Kottenhof, just as Rascher had told him himself, because these conditions were being discussed.
Q Didn't it seem a little ridiculous to Hippke who was a rather well-educated man to have to resort to concentration camp inmates? After all, all you were going to use volunteers, you could perhaps get volunteers in Munich, when the low pressure chamber would be used in another place, rather than get men in the concentration camps and use men who were not well-fed and not up to standard, and you would have to bring them up to standard to use them? Didn't Hippke have something to say along those lines?
AAll I can say about that, Kottenhof asked Hippke to define his attitude about Rascher's offer. It wasn't that we were short of volunteers in the Luftwaffe. Rascher had made the offer to Kottenhof, and Hippke was, at Kottenhof's request, to define his attitude toward that offer. That was why we had our talk that evening.
Q Did you define your attitude at the same time; you certainly must have given your attitude?
A Yes, I certainly did. I did not interfere in the conversation at first, but when the definition seemed to be a little vague I expressed my attitude on the basis of the Goldberger de Kruif examples.
Q Then you were in favor of instituting this experimentation on the human beings in the Dachau concentration camp after the qualifications you have outlined, namely volunteers and habitual criminals, and a pardon to be granted; that is, if those qualifications were to be carried out you were in favor of it, were you, at this time?
AAs far as I was concerned I never had the desire to make any experiments and the whole question would not have come up to me if I had not been faced with the necessity to define my attitude about the whole problem. The whole problem as to whether or not there would have been experiments in Dachau would not have arisen as far as I am concerned, if I had not been pushed into the whole thing by the fact that Rascher headed my institute, and I therefore had to define my attitude.
Q What was your feeling when you went away from the meeting in June 1941, was it your feeling or Kottenhof's feeling, that Hippke would be agreeable to experimentation on human beings at Dachau?
A I think I said this in detail, Hippke pointed out that the basis for research in the Luftwaffe must be experiment on ones self, except of course for certain experimental purposes when conditions which we could regard as impeccable, if those conditions prevailed then he could give his approval in those exceptional cases for those experiments to take place.
Q Well, now, we will leave the meeting of June 1941 and go on. When did the occasion arise for action on your part to lay the groundwork for the experiments to be conducted at Dachau?
A I believe I described all this.
Q Describe it again. I am going to give you the opportunity. When or what date did Rascher approach you or you approach Rascher and did you meet with Hippke or did you meet with Himmler or whom did you meet to decide you would carry out experiments at Dachau that necessitated you inviting Dr. Ruff and Dr. Romberg to collaborate with Rascher and yourself, now when did this take place?
A In the course of the summer Rascher himself came to me and proposed to me, as I have described, to try out this slow ascent. I also described how this proposition seemed to me not debatable. I turned it down for the reason which I said before, it was net necessary. Kottenhof did not like the offer very much, for different reasons.
Q Now, why did Rascher come to you, he was not a member of your institute then?
A No, he was not a member of my institute, and I can only assume, as I said before, I assume, and I can say it with certainly, because Rascher said so himself later on, at that time Rascher intended to qualify as a lecturer. And the only place where aviation medicine was dealt with in the Luftgau, and had any connection with the University was myself. There was no other agency there where Rascher could find connections with aviation medicine on the one hand and a university on the other. The testing station and I myself was the only agency and I think that must have been the reason why Rascher came to me.
Q Now, did you have a low pressure chamber right in your own institute which was in the building, in the courtyard, in the building of Physiology of the University of Munich; didn't you have a low pressure chamber there?
A Yes, we had a low pressure chamber of our own.
Q Is that perhaps the reason Rascher came to you, because you had a low pressure chamber?
A I am not quite clear on that point. Rascher didn't tell me this, and I cannot even today quite imagine whether Rascher knew we had a mobile low pressure chamber, or whether he thought the Dachau people would come to us in Munich.
I don't know what idea he had at that time.
Q Will you kindly repeat slowly in German the official name of your institute?
A Institute for Aviation Medicine, Munich.
Q Well, now, Document 1602 PS; will you kindly turn to that document. That is the new version, the complete translation. In 1602 PS on page 1, Rascher refers to an institute, the name is in German. Due to my incapacity in the German language I am unable to pronounce the words. I will request the interpreter to repeat, in 1602 PS, it is about seven or eight lines up from the bottom in quotations, the name of the German institute; will you kindly read that to Dr. Weltz.
(Interpreter reads: Bodenstandige Poufstelle fur Hohen forschung der Luftwaffe.)
Q Now is that your organization?
AAt that time, on 15 May the institute for aviation medicine had not come into existence. It was founded in the autumn. At that time I was the head of the Testing Station four, which I described in detail.
Q This testing station here, that is referred to here, that is your organization?
A That is quite obvious Rascher means here, I have no doubt...
Q I am not concerned here with an explanation. I am not asking his organization, I am asking you was that the name of your organization; Lutz said it was, now do you say it is?
AAt that time I was the head of the Testing Station four, for high altitude effects.
MR. HARDY: Your Honor, I have asked the witness three times whether or not this is the name of his organization. It only requires a yes or no answer, and I request the Tribunal to instruct the witness to answer my question.
A. I am about to say in this case that Rascher chose the title wrongly. My institute was called something else.
Q Then this does not refer to your institute?
A No, I wanted to say that although Rascher used the incorrect title, but that I myself have no doubt he means my institute.
Q Then he means your institute?
A Yes, there is no doubt at all.
Q Well, then here on 15 May 1941 why is Rascher referring to your institute when he himself has not as yet contacted you concerning this problem, according to your testimony?
A I know nothing about that, because I was not in contact with Rascher at that time. The letter became known to me only here, and I can only assume that Rascher imagined it like this and Himmler had to give him permission first, and then he assumed that we all of us would say as soon as he had Himmler's permission. One thing is certain I could not talk to him at the time because I would not have been in a position to give him permission. That would have been up to the Medical Inspector and I therefore did not give him permission.
Q You had a low pressure chamber early in 1941, as a matter of fact you may have had it earlier?
A Yes, since 1938, I believe.
Q And that low pressure chamber was burned down in 1944 in your institute?
A Yes.
Q As a matter of fact the metal pots are still there, the pots that didn't burn?
A I think so. I assume that.
Q Now, when you moved your institute to your new location did you then build another low pressure chamber?
A Yes.
Q When did you begin work on this low pressure chamber?
A In 1944, but that chamber was never completed, and was never used.
Q However, from 1938 until 1944 you always had a low pressure chamber available?
A For all practical purposes, there was only the Munich low pressure chamber which was used, and it was used since 1938, I believe, up to the point when it was burned.
Q. I see, and you have stated here a moment ago that you could have got plenty of volunteers through the Luftwaffe, didn't you, that is, that wasn't the question. You stated in the meeting of June 1941 wherein Kottenhoff told Hippke about Rascher's proposal, namely Rascher could get subjects and permission from Himmler to work in Dachau, you stated that the purpose of your discussion there was to merely extend to is proposal of Rascher's to Hippke for his consideration, and, they you stated, that of course the Luftwaffe could have gotten plenty of volunteers had they wanted to. Now do you wish to correct that statement or are gone of the same conviction, that you could have got plenty of volunteers without resorting to the proposal of Rascher?
A. I believe in my direct examination I spoke quite clearly about this. Of course, the extent of the task is very important whether I have enough volunteers or not, how many volunteers there were in the Luftwaffe, I already indicated, I gave a few names and in our case, in my immediate sphere, especially as we were concentrating on animal experiments on the whole, there was never any wish expressed to use inmates as experimental persons. Our program never lead us to this wish.
Q. Kindly answer my question. You have gone astray again. Could you have got, if you had wanted to, for any experiments in low pressure or whatever it may be, ten to fifteen volunteers without resorting to inmates of concentration camps?
A. That depended on the task, what the people were expected to do.
Q. The people were expected to go through these harmless high altitude experiments, now could you get ten or fifteen?
A. It depended entirely on what I wanted the people to do and how much time they had and how much I was justified to demand of their time. Surely, it is obvious that sometimes I could get students and sometimes I couldn't. In my sphere in any case, within my program there was no necessity to fall back on prisoners because we did not have a program which would make that necessary. Now is Ruff's case it was quite different......
Q. Just a moment Doctor; you have stated now when I asked you concerning the meeting in the summer of 1941, why this discussion arose, and Hippke was there, about these matters, and you have volunteered the information to us that it wasn't necessary to discuss it because we could have gotten all the volunteers we wanted to, but this was merely a manner in which Kottenhoff wanted to present this proposal to Hippke for consideration. Now you made the statement: We can get all the volunteers we want to. Could you get ten or fifteen volunteers if you, Dr. Weltz, had decided you would like to experiment in high altitude research on human beings, could you yourself have obtained these many volunteers you spoke about?
A. Probably not, I didn't try - but
Q. Then why did you say you could in defense to that other question here some hour ago?
A. I said the question would not have arisen as to experimental persons if Rascher had not brought up that subject and forced us to define our attitude toward that problem. That is what I said.
Q. Well then you had a low pressure chamber available in your institute in 1941, didn't you?
A. Yes.
Q. And volunteers could have been made available, could they?
A. It depends upon what for and to what extent.
Q. Well I am asking you specifically: Do you think at that time you could have got a volunteer to volunteer, a volunteer to volunteer for high altitude experiments as outlined by Ruff and Romberg and Rascher at the concentration camp Dachau?
A. Without any difficulty.
Q. Then you could have got ten or 15 volunteers without any difficulty?
A. That is more difficult.
Q. Well, let's don't get involved, why in the world did you then enter into a conference with Ruff, Romberg and Rascher to go to Dachau and make all of these arrangements and spend all of this valuable time during war time when you could do other research, when all you had to do was to go oat and get ten or fifteen volunteers and say now Ruff here is the low pressure chamber and ten or fifteen volunteers, go to it? It was just as simple as that, wasn't it?
A. First of all I should correct here that the experiments could not have been made with our low pressure chamber because our model was a different one.
Q. It could have been made with your low pressure chamber couldn't it?
A. The experiments made by Ruff and Romberg could never have been made with my low pressure chamber.
Q. Couldn't you have made ten or fifteen subjects available to Ruff and Romberg to be used in their pressure chamber, bearing in mind, if course, that the low pressure chamber stopped in your institute overnight you could have merely held it there and said to them now here are ten or fifteen subjects, you make your experiments right here.
It would have avoided all this confusion, wouldn't it, and you could have seen what went on in these experiments, because you wouldn't have had to have a pass to get into a concentration camp, isn't that true?
A. No, this is not true, because first of all our low pressure chamber was unsuitable for these experiments, because it did not have sufficient capacity. Secondly, if I had had the experimental subjects in Munich, Ruff in Berlin would not have had any advantage of that, and thirdly, the situation as far as I was concerned was this; That I had to define my attitude to Rascher, and moreover Rascher had orders from Himmler, in which he was ordered to come to my institute to carry out the experiments.
Q. Just a moment now, Rascher wasn't in the SS, was he? Rascher was in the Luftwaffe. Let's straighten that out now. In 1941 at the time of these activities and this planning of the experiments at Dachau, Rascher was not in the SS, am I correct? Please correct me, doctor, if I am wrong.
A. At that time Rascher was in the SS and was also a Stabsarzt in the Luftwaffe.
Q. He was on active duty in the Luftwaffe, wasn't he? Don't we have a lot of correspondence here wherein they are bickering back and forth about Rascher?
A. He was an SS officer and in the Luftwaffe.
Q. In the Luftwaffe?
A. Yes in the Luftwaffe.
Q. I have to study the documents. This is news to me. Now in December 1941, you proceeded to Berlin to see Ruff?
A. Yes.
Q. Prior to that time you had discussed these experiments with Luts and Wendt, hadn't you?
A. No, that is not true.
Q. Lutz said you had.
Q. Yes, I had discussed it with Lutz and as I said in my direct examination I told Lutz about this conversation with Hippke and we carried on that conversation and discussed the possibilities for and against the problem. I did not speak in detail to Wendt. I don't recall at all having discussed it with Wendt.
Q. Well now Lutz testified you offered him an opportunity to collaborate with Rascher?
A. Well, I dispute that.
Q. It became apparent sometime before December 1941, or maybe in December 1941, that Rascher was to conduct experiments at the Dachau concentration came, didn't it?
A. Rascher wanted to carry out his experiments in Dachau.
That became clear when Ruff accepted my proposition.
Q. Why would you have offered Ruff a proposition if there hadn't been some discussion about it before then?
A. I do not understand that question.
Q. You invited Ruff to collaborate with Rascher. How did you happen to have knowledge, how did you happen to know Rascher wanted somebody to collaborate with him, what did you go up there for? Did you have a vision suddenly and decide he wanted to have some experiments and say to Ruff: Do you want to collaborate with Rascher I will assign you to him? Didn't you have some sort of a meeting with Rascher beforehand and have some sort of a plan? You wouldn't have invited Ruff and Romberg to assist you if you didn't have some sort of a plan. It didn't just come out of thin air, did it?
A. I thought I had described this sufficiently. Probably in November 1941 Rascher was ordered to my institute without my doing anything about it, without my knowledge even, and now he was a member of my institute and he had an assignment from Himmler to carry out these experiments, and I did not know what to do with him, that was the situation.
Q. Now we are getting to it. In November, 1941, Rascher was assigned to your institute, wasn't he?
A. I assume that, yes.
Q. He became your subordinate in the Luftwaffe, didn't he?
A. As it was called technically he was ordered to work in my institute.
Q. And he was your subordinate? When you are in the Luftwaffe or any other branch of the Wehrmacht before you can put a man from one job to another it is necessary to order him, he has to have written orders, the same in the German Army as in the U S Army or in the Navy or any other army, and so Rascher received orders wherein he was trans ferred, to the Institute Weltz, wasn't he, and he became your subordinate?
Let's not quibble about it, doctor.
A. Yes, that is his position.
Q. Then Rascher had an assignment wherein he could, if he so wished, use subjects of the concentration camp Dachau, is that right?
A. Yes.
Q. He could have equally as well have accomplished his objective by using volunteers other than volunteers of inmates of Dachau concentration camp?
A. That depends on what Rascher's aim was. Rascher did not have an aim at that time. That was the difficulty. He proposed experiments to me for which Himmler wanted to use the experimental subjects , and I did not approve of Rascher's aim and that was how the unhappy situation, as far as Rascher was concerned, arose. On the one hand he had Himmler's permission and on the other he had no aim to do anything with that permission, and he proposed to me this slow ascent experiment, which I turned down.
Q. When was that, in November 1941?
A. That proposal he made to Kottenhoff when he met him for the first time.
Q. Now what proposals did he make to you after he became your subordinate in November 1941?
A. When in November 1941 he became my subordinate and when I had turned down his first proposal, he then, as I said before, he then made a proposal to me for the cold experiments to be carried out in Dachau, and that I also turned down, as I said before.
Q. Well then when did he propose that he wanted to use the low pressure chamber? He must have proposed it some time in November-when?
A The use of the low pressure chamber?
Q Yes.
A His first wishes to make high altitude experiments were based on the fact that a low pressure chamber must be used, but we never reached that point in our conversation because, from the beginning, I said "We shall not make those experiments" and Rascher had no reason to ask me what low pressure chamber to use.
Q Let me ask you a question. Did they perform some experiments in Dachau on high altitude from your knowledge, from sitting here in the dock for five months? Did they?
A Yes.
Q Well, now, who proposed them? In November, 1941, Rascher came to work for you, as your subordinate in your institute, ordered there by the Luftwaffe. It was only the Luftwaffe which could change his assignment because he was a member of the Luftwaffe. Now, when did he propose these experiments? If he didn't propose them, then Weltz proposed them and went to get Ruff and Romberg. Now, why did you ask Ruff and Romberg if somebody didn't propose these experiments? Who proposed them in November, 1941? You had rejected his other proposal earlier on the slow descent proposition. Now then, did he extend a new proposal to you in November, 1941, or by what token did you step forward and invite Ruff and Romberg down to Dachau and get those two men in all this trouble? Now, how did that happen?
A I believe I described this in detail. I say once again that in November, 1941, that Rascher came to my institute. He made the new proposal to have cold experiments. I then told Rascher that "we are not interested in cold experiments. Our animals are quite sufficient here. There's no point to it." Then I described how, by chance, when I was on a trip to Berlin, I visited Ruff and Ruff told me of the difficulties of his own program and other difficulties which he had with experimental subjects. I, in turn, told Ruff that Rascher was hanging around my institute and I did not know what to give him to do;
that Rascher had permission to make experiments in Dachau; and, thereupon, I proposed to Ruff to have his experiments carried out on the basis of Rascher's permission in Dachau. Surely I described this all in detail, and Ruff did too.
Q Now, I have listened with great interest to what you have just said. Do you want to think for about one minute and confirm to the Tribunal that that is how the experiments started at Dachau? That is just the answer I wanted. Now, think about it a minute and will you confirm to the Tribunal that that's how the experiments started in Dachau.
A The experiments came about that I said that on a trip to Berlin, I talked to Ruff, that I told Ruff that there was a possibility to have experiments carried out in Dachau and that Ruff, in turn, told me how short he was of experimental subjects. That, I think, is all I have to say in this connection.
Q That's perfect, Doctor. We won't have to discuss that any further.
Now, after you talked to Ruff, then you set a date for a meeting, didn't you, in Munich, and this date for a meeting in Munich took place when? When was that date? When did it actually take place in Munich?
A I cannot give you the date. I assume that it must have been in December. Perhaps the middle of December, 1941.
Q That was also in December that they went to Munich? You went to Berlin in December and they came to Munich in December, is that right?
A No, I'm sorry, I made a mistake here. I assume that the conversation in Munich took place in January. I slipped there.
Q All right. Now, Ruff and Romberg were invited to participate in these experiments with Rascher by you because they were experts on the subject, is that right? You wanted some experts to work on this. If you were going to use inmates of the concentration camp, you decided you would like to have experts doing it; and that's your reason for asking Ruff and Romberg to collaborate with you and Rascher, is that it; because these men were experts in the field?
A That is a distorted description and Ruff and Romberg's affidavits are on the basis of this; and in their cross examination they have corrected their affidavits. It is a distorted way of putting it to say that I had called in the experts Ruff and Romberg to my experiments. How it really happened was I offered to Ruff whether he wanted to make experiments with Rascher. Romberg, in turn, had decided on the program. The program was not my contribution. And on that basis, the collaboration occurred.
Q And, in the event that you had not offered this to Ruff and Romberg; then Ruff and Romberg would not be in this dock today; would they?
A I assume so.
Q Well, now, the hurdle I am trying to get over is that Mr. Lutz says you offered it to him. Of course; you deny that. And he refused; and gives very elaborate reasons for his refusal in that he wasn't strong enough -- that is, in his heart - to perform these experiments on human beings. And the hurdle I am trying to get over now is the statement you made on direct when you said that such a play oh words by Lutz was ridiculous; that you had never noticed Lutz to be religious or to have any misgivings about such things and you made a statement which has bothered me considerably wherein you state: "I would have reminded Lutz of things which make this answer ridiculous." Now, was Lutz mixed, up in something criminal? What was this here that would have made his answer ridiculous?
A Lutz' reply would have been ridiculous according to the views held at the time by Lutz on the overall situation. Lutz; at that time, was an ardent advocate of total war with all means and his conception roughly was - I now speak of 1941 - he realized that the war would be a hard and severe one and he was of the opinion that this war must be fought with all means at our disposal.
At that time he used the following expression quite frequently, the expression: "If we are to win this war we, in Germany, must use shooting in the neck more frequently." I think Lutz didn't mean this literally. What he meant was perhaps this. He believed that we, in Germany, were sitting between two chairs. On the one hand, the democratic methods with which you could wage war successfully we had got rid of, and, on the other hand, he thought that the total warfare methods which we saw embodied in Russia had not been introduced 100%, and that was his opinion that he expressed in the words that "In Germany, we should shoot people in the neck more." Just at that time and just before, there were small differences between Lutz and myself on the point that Lutz used his elbows quite a bit. I tell these things which are not of vast importance - I am not very keen about telling these things about my assistants - but if it helps to clarify these things I have to tell these things. If ever I had small difficulties with my subordinates-it occurred rather rarely - it was always on the point that Lutz used his elbows too ruthlessly. Later on, he had a difference with our charwoman, and when I sent him on an assignment he had arguments when he misbehaved rather awkwardly with the Gauleiter and I had to rescue him from a very heavy difference of opinion with the Gauleiter which was not without considerable risk as far as I am concerned.
Q So now, Doctor Weltz, these little incidents of Lutz' personality - what you refer to as making his refusal to participate in human being experiments in Dachau ridiculous - is that what you base it on? That slim evidence of his character? You base it on that?
A A man who tells me that "more people should be shot in the neck in Germany" cannot tell me in the same breath "I am too softhearted. I am not robust enough." I must say I would have declared that ridiculous. I don't know that that is only my opinion.
Q Well now, in this meeting in January, 1942, wherein Ruff and Romberg attended, who else was present at the conference?
A Present were, at that conference, Ruff, Romberg, Rascher and myself.
Q Ruff, Romberg, Rascher and yourself, yes?
A Yes.
Q And Lutz was not there?
A I described this. Rascher was late. Ruff and Romberg were present. Before the conference opened we talked in my room on different matters and when Rascher arrived - he had a car accident and made apologies and when Rascher finally turned up I told these gentlemen "Thank you very much. I wish to begin now" and began the conference, and the gentlemen left my room.
Q I see. Then Lutz' testimony that you told him you were going to have a conference and that you didn't want him in the room is true, isn't it?
A Yes, it is.
Q This is a good breaking point, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess until 9:30 tomorrow morning.
DR. FROESCHMANN (Defense counsel for defendant Brack): May it please the Court, may I ask the Court's indulgence for two minutes? In the courts of the trial the following witnesses have been proposed: Wolff, Dietrich, Seivert - I am defense counsel for Brack - Wolff, Dietrich, Seivert, Hederich and Pfannmueller. I have decided not to use Seivert and Hederich. Wolff was turned down as a witness. Now, there is a difference between myself and the Secretary General about the two remaining witnesses: Dietrich and Pfannmueller. They should be called into the witness stand as witnesses. I would be grateful for a ruling of the Court to allow me those two witnesses on the stand.
MR. HARDY: May it please the Tribunal, I may be able to help you here. I don't know the status of Pfannmueller right now. The Doctor does. But I turned Pfannmueller over to the German courts for trial some two months ago and I don't know whether he has departed from Nurnberg yet.
They are proceeding very rapidly. He may be here now I don't know that - but I assume that he is in Frankfurt awaiting trial. I don't know whether he will be available for this Tribunal.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, if counsel for the defendant Brack and the prosecution will come to my office immediately upon this recess, we'll discuss the matter with them there.
(A RECESS WAS TAKEN UNTIL 0930 HOURS, 8 MAY 1947).
Official Transcript of the of the American Military Tribunal in the matter of the United States of America against Karl Brandt, et al, defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on May 8 1947, 0930, Justice Beals presiding.
THE MARSHAL: Persons in the courtroom will please find their seats.
The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal I.
Military Tribunal I is now in session. God save the United States of America and this honorable Tribunal.
There will be order in the courtroom.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Marshal, you ascertain if the defendants are all present in the court.
THE MARSHAL: May it please Your Honor, all defendants are present in the court.
THE PRESIDENT: The Secretary General will note for the record tho presence of all tho defendants in court.
Counsel may proceed.
DR. GEORGE WELTZ - Resumed
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. HARDY:Dr. Weltz -
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, just one moment.
The Tribunal desires to meet three members of the German counsel, to be chosen by the German counsel, at a quarter before four this afternoon in the Judges' anteroom to discuss tho matter of the time to be allowed counsel for argument at the close of the case. If counsel for the defendants will choose a committee of three to meet with the Judges this afternoon at a quarter before four, the matter will be discussed.
Counsel may proceed.
CROSS EXAMINATION (Continued) BY MR. HARDY:
Q Dr. Weltz, at the close of yesterday's session we had taken up the meeting in Munich in January 1942, and you stated that Ruff, Romberg, Rascher and yourself were present at that meeting.