DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q Witness, please state your name and date of birth?
A Hans Heinrich Mammers. Born on 27 May 1879 at Lubinitz.
Q What position did you occupy during the War?
A I was Chief of the Reich Chancellery.
Q What was your assignment and your activities?
A The Reich Chancellery was the office of Adolph Hitler in his capacity as Reich Chancellor and it was the agency which normally handled the contacts between the Ministries and the Reich Chancellor as far as no other channel was prescribed. Its main task consisted in the formation of directives, of the legislation, laws, decrees, and Fuehrer decrees which were submitted by the Ministries or which were requested by the Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor.
Q. Witness, I am now handing three decrees to you. According to one the defendant, Karl Brandt, got a special position as Commissioner for the Medical Services and also as Reich Commissioner. Do you know of these decrees?
A. Yes, I know of these decrees.
Q. Did you play a part in their drafting?
A. Yes, I have helped to draft them and I have submitted these three decrees to the Fuehrer for his signature.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel, have these documents been admitted in evidence in the case?
DR. SERVATIUS: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: For the sake of the record, will you refer to the numbers of the exhibits?
DR. SERVATIUS: They were presented as exhibits.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you refer both to the document numbers and exhibit numbers so the record will identify them?
DR. SERVATIUS: They are: Document NO-080 - that is Exhibit 5, document NO-081 - that is Exhibit 6, and document N0-082 - which is Exhibit 7.
BY DR. SERVATIUS:
Q. Witness, will you now state your view with regard to the decrees, first of all with regard to the first decree. What was the purpose of this first decree?
A. The purpose of the first decree was to appoint a Commissioner who was to carry out the coordination between the interests of the Military Medical Services and the Civil Medical Services. Furthermore, it sets forth that the person to be appointed Commissioner for the Medical Services, Dr. Brandt, was to handle certain special tasks in the Military and Civil sectors, also for the coordination between the two sectors, and particularly he was given the right to be constantly informed and given authority to include himself in his responsibility.
Q. As a result of this did Karl Brandt become the superior of other officers?
A. In my opinion Professor Brandt did not become the superior of the agencies which have been enumerated expressly here. He only had the right to issue directives according to State legal procedures which we used. Such a right to issue directives did not yet establish a superior relationship. A typical example for this is probably the Commissioner for the Four Year Plan, Goering. He had the extensive right to issue directives toward all agencies of State and Party and he still did not become superior of these agencies. This decree had also been intended that Brandt did not become superior. He could only issue orders and issue directives if he wanted to include himself and he had that special right.
This authority depended on the fact that a certain directive existed - that he issued such a directive to these agencies for the fulfillment of his tasks. And, such a directive had to be complied. with a by all agencies and he could only give such a directive in two field of his special task. He was only authorized to issue orders within the frame work of his tasks.
Q. What was the meaning of the second decree?
A. The second decree, in my estimation, is only a relatively unimportant extension of the first decree in which Brandt was appointed to represent tasks and interests of the Medical Services and in this supervision were included certain special tasks in the fields of Science, Research, and organizational establishments a r the distribution and production of medical supplies. He had also been given the authority to appoint certain commissioners and deputies for the fulfillment of his tasks.
Q. In the order regarding science and research, what did the subject deal with?
A. This individually were the orders which Dr. Brandt received, I cannot remember it all. I only know that they were in the fields of the Medical Services or that they were connected with this field.
Q. Now, give us the reasons for the second decree, and what is its importance?
A. In the year 1944 the Fuehrer wanted a considerable extension of the authority of Dr. Brandt for the fulfillment of the task which had been assigned to him expressly. I had several notes handed notes me. I received the order to draft this decree. I myself maintained the point of view that the new authority would have to be limited that it would have to limit the competencies with regard to the other agencies of the medical Services. I feared that extensive authority would lead to strong competition in the administrative field. Therefore, as I can remember exactly, I drafted approximately four different decrees in which, first of all, I precisely limited the competencies and in the third one less, and then in the fourth and fifth decrees which was not limiting them very close.
I myself favored the most limited draft for giving the authority. The Fuehrer, however, favored the most extensive version, that is, the version which was contained in the decree of 25 August 1944. For the previously mentioned reason I did not like this very much and I made the remark that it would be better to transfer the whole Medical Service from the Reich Ministry of Interior and the other Ministries and to appoint a Minister of Public Health. Then the Fuehrer replied, "That is exactly what I do not want.
Brandt is only to have as free hand as possible for his special task, an extensive right to issue directives." Because this as legally of the utmost importance to me I expressly stated, that as a result of the third decree the authority of Brandt from the first and second decrees were not rescinded and the Fuehrer answered this question in the affirmative and as a result this result this third decree also contains the words "at the same time". At the same time has was Reich Commissioner for Sanitation and Health System and this was to show that the two other decrees and authorities were continued, in existence. However, as a result of this I then publicized the third decree in the Reich legal code without rescinding the two other decrees because the first two were to remain effective. In this decree, namely in the first, it is stated that the main direction was with the Chief of the Wehrmacht Medical Service and Chief of Health Service and Ministry of the Interior, competent State Secretary, and then what is not contained in the decree, naturally, to the Reich Ministry of Interior what was the superior of the Chief of the Medical Service.
Q. Witness, you are speaking of the right to issue directives. Did the first and second decrees already issued give such authority to issue directives or was this given only in the third decree?
A. Please permit me to look at the decree for a minute.
In the first decree paragraph 3 sets forth that for the special tasks Brandt will receive personal directives from the Fuehrer. However, in the first decree I do not see anything about a right to issue directives and only about the authority to intervene in a responsible manner. Of course, this may have meant a certain right to issue directives. In the second decree I do not believe that this is particularly mentioned. But then the third decree sets forth that Brandt is authorized to issue directives to organization of the state, Party, and Wehrmacht.
Q. It is therefore correct that only from August 1944 on such a right issue directives had been specifically stated?
A. It was only specifically stated in the third decree.
Q. Witness, did Brandt, as a result of this, become the head of the entire medical service?
A. This question must be answered in the negative in my opinion because as I have already stated, he was not the superior of the other agencies of the health and medical service but was only equipped with the right to issue directives for certain specialized tasks and this right to issue directives he could exercise in accordance with the directives of the Fuehrer and according to his own estimation. The head of the medical service, like a Minister for Public Health, he could not be. First of all, it had been specifically stated he was not to occupy that position and secondly, with the small administrative machine at his disposal and with the limited amount of funds which had been granted to him for his tasks by me - and I had to grant them because I had been ordered to do so - then he could not have fulfilled all the tasks presented by the medical and health service.
Q. Is it correct that he was only to have a free hand for the execution of the special tasks which were given to him?
A. According to the directive and motives which were given to. me in drafting the decree, this authority was only to extend to these special task whose extent was, however, not known to me.
Q. Will you please put these decrees aside and we will come to a different subject.
That is the question of euthanasia. Do you know that a solution of the euthanasia program was suggested by Hitler?
A. Yes, I know about that.
Q. When did you first hear about this?
A. I heard of it for the first time in the year 1939, in the fall of that year. In the fall of 1939, it may have been at the end of September of the beginning of October, the State Secretary Dr. Conti, the Chief of the Civil Medical Service in the Reich Ministry of the Interior, was called by the Fuehrer to attend a conference. I was also consulted for this conference. On that occasion the Fuehrer discussed in my presence for the first time the problem of euthanasia. He stated that he considered it appropriate that life unfit for living of severely insane patients should be removed by intervention which would result in death. As far as I can remember, he named as an example the severe mental diseases in the course of which mental patients could only be bedded on boards or excelsior because they could not keep clean and in cases where patients took their own excrement as food, and in connection with this he stated that it probably would be most appropriate to exterminate the lives which were unfit to live of such patients. He also started that this also meant a certain saving in hospitals, physicians, and nursing personnel. In my presence he issued the order to State Secretary Dr. Conti to occupy himself with this question and to use my support in handling the legal aspects. Dr. Conti replied that he also approved from the medical standpoint the extermination of such life unfit for living and that he would examine the question in detail. I had not been prepared to any extent for this subject and at that time I only made a very general statement that the subject included innumerable problems not only of a medical kind but also, to a large extent, inner political, foreign political, and also clerical political problems, and also problems of a religious and ethical kind, and I also stated that it did not seem appropriate to me to select a time of war for the solution of such problem and that the natter should be postponed, if possible. I then stated further that if it had to be carried out under all circumstances then it would be only a question of establishing a law provided with all legal guarantees. The Fuehrer did not go into my statements in detail and stated that this still could be examined, but he maintained the order which he had given to Conti and dismissed us.
Q. At that time was the name of Professor Brandt mentioned?
A. During the discussion the name of Professor Brandt, according to my recollection, was not mentioned nor were any other names mentioned. The discussion only referred to the general solution of the problem and, immediately following the discussion, I told Dr. Conti I would think over this matter once more and that I would contact him later. I then began to draft a law which, as I imagined, would contain the legal guarantees which were necessary under all circumstances - exact limitations of the most severe cases which had to be determined by medical men, and exemptions which were to be made, for example, for those patients who had become insane during the war, during maneuvers and other civil service, or so-called "old age insanity" and similar cases. In my opinion it was also necessary to specifically state that only German insane patients should be subjected to this procedure in order to express the fact that foreigners would be exempted.
Q. Witness, these are views which you maintained with regard to the problem, However, that was not the subject of the discussion.
A. At that time this was not the subject of the discussion but I only finished this and I waited now for State Secretary Conti to contact me in accordance with the instructions he had received.
Q. Did Conti do this?
A. Conti refrained from doing this. Only after several weeks he telephoned me and told me that he had been relieved of this assignment by the Fuehrer and at that I considered this matter as closed. However, in the year 1940 I again had to occupy myself with the question. In the spring of 1940 Reichsleiter Bouhler visited me. He was the Chief of the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, NSDAP, and he visited me in my railroad coach in Belgium and told me that he was just coming from the Fuehrer and the Fuehrer now wanted to turn over the solution of the euthanasia question to him. I discussed the severe objections existing against that with him and also submitted the draft of the law to him and told him this would still be a solution if this subject could be approached in such a way so that a publicized Reich law was established.
Bouhler didn't seem to approve of my draft and did not refuse it, but he told me that the procedure to be applied could be routed through administrative channels.
At the conclusion I told Bouhler that I would have to report to the Fuehrer once more about the matter. I did this a short time later. At that time the Fuehrer read over the draft of my law. He did not expressively disapprove of it; however he stated that for political reasons such a law seemed undesirable to him. Subsequently I did not hear anything more about the subject.
Q At that time, during the discussion which you had with him, did the Fuehrer mention the name of Professor Brandt?
A That name was not mentioned.
Q Witness, when did you hear of the authority which actually was given to Brandt and Bouhler?
A I was not informed about the authority which had been given to Brandt and Bouhler through official channels. As I have previously said, after many months, it may have been early in 1940, I received knowledge that action was actually under way of which I had not previously known. At that time I found out that the Fuehrer had actually given an authority to Brandt and Bouhler for the execution of the euthanasia program. This authority did not pass through my hands. Only in the course of discussions which later on I had with the Reich Minister of Justice I found out and was informed about the contents of these authorities.
Q Now what sort of complaints were there which came to your attention?
A These complaints were not very numerous. First of all they same from individual persons and there were some from relatives of those insane patients who had died. However, the most important complaints came from the church. I also can remember that there were two complaints which I believed it to be my duty to follow up immediately. One was from the Wuerttemberg Landes Bishop, Wurm, the evangelical Bishop, and the second came from the Catholic Bishop, Count Gahlen; I believe that he lived in Muenster. These complaints were officially handled by me; I passed them on to the Reich Minister of the Interior, who was competent for this, and I brought them to the attention of the Fuehrer; I also discussed the question with the Reich Minister of Justice. After the complaints were drawn to the attention of the Fuehrer the whole action was discontinued. However, I did not get any official information about this either.
I had not been consulted but I only obtained knowledge of the fact that in the year 1941, this may have been in the spring or the summer, the action was discontinued.
Q Witness, weren't there also complaints by prosecutor's courts and other authorities?
A Yes, we had such complaints, especially by judges and guardians who had to care for their adopted children. I followed up this matter and I contacted the Reich Minister of Justice. The Reich Minister of Justice started an investigation and I can remember exactly that two detailed reports arrived, one from the General. Attorney at Stuttgart and the second one from the Chief Prosecutor at Naumburg. These reports occupied themselves with these questions. The Reich Minister of Justice passed them on to me and I took them to the Fuehrer and then passed them on for further handling to the Reich Minister of the Interior. You have these complaints here in the form of documents and they have been presented to me in previous interrogations.
Q Witness, what did the Reich Minister of Justice do then? Did he consider the matter illegal and did he declare it illegal or was it legalized in the end?
A The Reich Minister of Justice, Dr. Guertner, came to see me and at that time he was in a great difficulty. He had grave misgivings and he did not know what to do. I advised him that he could only report to the Fuehrer -- I myself could not give him any advice. I considered a law necessary under all circumstances. I had played no part in granting the authority and now I could also not take a stand at this time. However, the Reich Minister of Justice, Guertner, as far as I know, did not consult the Fuehrer but he probably maintained the point of view that in issuing the authority the Fuehrer had laid down a law which he had to comply with. I do not know--this is only an assumption on my part. Any later procedure which he wanted to do in this matter, was stopped.
Q Do you know how the authority was distributed between Bouhler and Brandt
A I do not know the least thing about it. I only know that only Bouhler confronted me in the matter in the spring of 1941. Brandt has never made his appearance before me.
I know that Bouhler has made his appearance with the Reich Minister of Justice. However, I have never dealt with Brandt at all in the whole matter, neither before the action or after the action, and I have only discussed with him a long time after the action, when I was a prisoner together with him at Mandorf, in Luxembourg, in 1945. However, I knew that the authority was in the name of Bouhler and Brandt.
DR. SERVATIUS: May it please the Tribunal, I do not have any more questions to put to the witness.
DR. FROESCHMANN: (Defense counsel for Defendant Viktor Brack): Mr. President, I want to ask the witness a number of questions. However, I believe that the time would now be appropriate to call a recess.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will be in recess until 1:30 o'clock.
(A recess was taken until 1330 hours.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The hearing reconvened at 1330 hours, 7 February 1947.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. SEIDL: Mr. President, the Defendant Oberheuser asks the Tribunal, in consideration of her status now, to be excused again today at 3 o'clock.
THE PRESIDENT: Upon request of Defendant Oberheuser extended through her counsel, the defendant may be excused from attendance in the court for reasons of her health at 3 o'clock this afternoon.
Counsel may proceed with the examination of the witness.
HANS HEINRICH LAMMERS -- Resumed.
EXAMINATION BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q. Witness, you were Chief of the Reichs chancellery?
A. Yes.
Q. As such you had opportunity to meet high personalities of the former German Government--at least part of them?
A. At least part of them.
Q. Do you know Martin Bormann?
A. Yes.
Q. What position did Bormann hold?
A. He was at the end, head of the Parteikanzlei, after Minister Hess left in '41.
Q. I merely want to have this cleared up for the information of the Tribunal. Martin Bormann was a personality who will play an important role in the course of this trial. Fitness, I should like to ask you what kind of a person was Martin Bormann?
A. That is very difficult to say in a few sentences. Please, make this question a little more concrete.
Q. What character traits were predominant in the thinking and actions of Martin Bormann?
A. After I had been mistaken about his character I finally reached the conclusion that he was a very subtle and hypocritical character who was able to mask his true intentions skillfully.
Q. Was Martin Bormann a man who tried to concentrate as much power as possible in himself?
A. He actually did attempt to do that. He always denied it, he always said that he wanted nothing loss than power. But on the basis of my knowledge of developments of which I learned to a large extent only after the collapse in 1945, I came to the conviction that he actually tried to obtain a certain power and tried to eliminate other people in his field. In particular, I had the experience that he tried.
Q. Please speak a little more slowly, witness.
A. I was convinced that he tried to take away as much power as possible from me since I was a state agent from which he believed that he was constantly receiving opposition in his actions. This position which I might have had he constantly tried to undermine, especially by having himself appointed Secretary of the Fuehrer and as such became active in the state sector too.
Q. Witness, are you aware that Martin Bormann was filled with ardent hatred of Jews?
A. He did not emphasize it when speaking to me but I am convinced that he was an opponent of the Jews.
Q. Witness, do you agree with my opinion that Adolph Hitler, under the influence of Bormann in the years 43 and 44, made and partly realized these plans to evacuate and exterminate Jews in Europe?
A. Yes, those were things which I as a witness under oath, testifying to facts, those are things about which I can say nothing.
Q. Witness, do you have any indications, any reasons to share this opinion which I have just expressed?
A. At the moment I could not give any indication.
Q. Did you have the impression, witness, that Hitler was under the influence of Bormann?
A. In my opinion Bormann's influence on Hilter was rather great, exactly how great it was I am not able to judge. Those are subjective things that happened to Bormann and Hitler about which I can say nothing as a witness.
Q. Then you will not be able to answer the question whether Martin Bormann was Adolph Hitler's evil spirit.
A. That was as a personal opinion which I would like to affirm, but that is only a subjective feeling, intuitive feeling which I cannot prove by any concrete facts.
Q. Do you I now Obergruppenfuehrer Heydrich who was murdered?
A. Yes, I knew Heydrich.
Q. Was Heydrich also a person like Bormann who was striving for power?
A. In my opinion Heydrich was to a much greater degree even, and it was expressed much more openly.
Q. Did Heydrich influence the Reichfuehrer SS Himmler strongly? Do you know anything about that?
A. He certainly had an influence on him but I cannot give any concrete facts about these things.
Q Now, witness, what was the relationship between Martin Bormann and Reichsleiter Bounler?
A I believe it was rather loose, they did not see each other often and they were in a sense rivals. The agency of the Reichsleiter Bouhler which was called the Chancellery of the Fuehrer of the NSDAP was a party organization. In addition to the Party Chancellery, there were certain organizations, and I know there was strong friction between Bouhler and Bormann, because Bormann wanted to control matters himself?
Q Witness, did you learn that Martin Bormann did not approve of Bouhler' s so-called weak attitude on Jewish questions?
A I never talked to Bouhler about it and I did not hear about it.
Q Did Dr. Conti belong to Bormann's staff?
AAs far as I know, no. He was under the Reichs Ministry of the Interior, also he was an honorary officer in the SS - I must correct myself, he was later made subordinate to Bormann by being made legal health leader in the party sector.
Q Witness, do you know anything about the fact that Adolf Hitler, before the events which you discussed this morning, gave the assignment to Bouhler to introduce Euthanasia?
A I can say nothing about that formally, but today I am convinced that the powers which were given to Brandt and Bouhler bear a different date --
Q I will come back to that witness.
A Than the date of the signature.
Q I merely wanted to ask you when in the summer of 1939, or in August 1939, Adolf Hitler might have given Reichsleiter Bouhler the assignment to introduce Euthanasia for uncurably insane persons.
A I know nothing about that.
Q Do you know that Martin Bormann heard about this and tried to appropriate these Euthanasia measures?
A I do not know anything about that either.
Q Then you do not know either that Martin Bormann suggested to Hitler that he assign this to Dr. Conti.
A No, I do not know about that either.
Q You probably do not know that Conti did not want this assignment and then the situation became as was described?
A I can only say that Conti told him the assignment had been taken away from him.
Q Witness, I shall show you Document 630-PS, Exhibit 330. That is the decree of Hitler of September 1, 1939, which I need not read again as it has been mentioned several times. Please read through this decree witness. What do you consider the legal character of this statement of Adolf Hitler?
A If I may express myself generally, I can only say that in this extreme form it does not correspond to the form which was customary for state decrees.
Q Did Adolf Hitler issue many such important decrees in such form?
A In individual cases, but I believe there were only a few cases. The Fuehrer did not like to worry about external forms, sometimes he used this form when it was not submitted by an expert but that happened very seldom.
Q Now, witness, what did you do when such significant instructions from Adolf Hitler came to your attention and they were not in the correct form?
A That happened very seldom, only once or twice. If such a decree in this form was submitted to me, because I also had to sign it, then I adjusted the form to what was customary for a state decree; that is I crossed out Adolf Hitler and at the bottom above the name Hitler, I wrote The Fuehrer or the Fuehrer, Reichs Chancellor, or I changed it at the top and I wrote the Fuehrer or Reichs Chancellor and that was changed in the course of time. Then, I put the Reich seal on such decrees and since I had to certify these statements of the Fuehrer, I signed them.
Q Witness, now this statement of Adolf Hitler of September 1, 1939; did you ever see it?
A I believe I saw a copy or the original; I do not know. For the first time when the Reichs Minister of Justice Dr. Gurtner, at the end of 1940 or the beginning of 1941, visited me, as I testified before, and talked to me about what was to be done about the information received, that was the first time I had seen it.
It did not go through my hands, but today I cannot say with certainty whether I saw the original or whether I saw a copy.
Q Witness, you just said that a person who did not have the necessary specialized information could not find any objections to the form of such statements of Adolf Hitler; is that true?
A Yes, it happened that if Minister Speer submitted something in a form which was not correct, if it came to my hands I corrected the form. The Fuehrer himself did not think it was very important, if something was shown to him, he thought it must be right and he signed it.
Q Witness, I asked you before what you consider the legal character of this statement of Adolf Hitler without consideration of the form; please answer this question.
A That is a question which is very difficult to answer, it is debatable. I said before expressedly that I explained to the Reichs Minister of Justice that I considered a law necessary. I did not consider this enough, but the Reich Minster of Justice Dr. Gurtner was apparently of the opinion that this was a valid order from the Fuehrer, that is a law, consequently, he stopped the proceedings.
Q Witness, if outstanding jurists were of the opinion that this decree of Hitler was a fully valid legal decree, that it had the value of a law, then persons without legal training certainly had to think that this decree was a fully valid law?
MR. McHANEY: Just a minute, please. I must object to the question and I ask that it be stricken. I know of no testimony in the record which gives the opinion of any great legal experts that this was a valid law and I don't think that the question can be put to him in that form. He has been asked for his opinion and he has given his opinion.
THE PRESIDENT: The objection of the Prosecution will be sustained. The matter is not pertinent to the question in its present condition and the answer insofar as it has been made will be stricken.
BY DR. FROESCHMANN:
Q Witness, this morning you spole of a meeting between you and Reichsleiter Bouhler in 1940; do you know whether Reichsleiter Bouhler in May or June of 1940 visited Adolf Hitler in order to ask him that he be relieved of his duties as head of the Chancellery?
A No, I do not remember that.
Q I have no further questions, Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Is there any further examination of this witness by the defense counsel?
(No reply.)
Prosecution may proceed to cross examine.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. HARDY:
Q Dr. Lemmers, do you still have the three decrees, the Fuehrer decrees, concerning Karl Brandt's appointment as a General Commissioner before you?
A I do not have the decrees.
(Documents handed to witness.)
Q Witness, you say that Dr. Karl Brandt was authorized to issue instructions within the medical field of his special tasks. Now, these tasks have not been defined. Do you know what these special tasks were?
A This morning I said that the contents and extent of the special tasks were not known to me in detail; that I only know that they were in fields of economics and science which had some connection with the medical and health service; for example, in obtaning drugs, other medical supplies, and similar things and in scientific research in the field of war injuries. That is what I know about it. I did not concern myself with the details, and I had no interest in tho details of Dr. Brandt's special assignment.
Q Now, Doctor, will you kindly lock at the first section of the July decree of 1942 and which you aided in the drafting thereof concerning the powers given to the chief of the medical services of the Wehrmacht; namely, Dr. Handloser, and will you tell us what powers as a practical matter did this first decree give to Handlower?
A Paragraph 2 of Number 1 says about Handloser's tasks. "The Chief of the Medical Service of the Wehrmacht is to represent the Wehrmacht before the civilian authorities in all comman medical problems arising in the various branches of the Wehrmacht, the Waffen SS and organizations and; units subordinate or attached to the Wehrmacht, and will protect the interests of the Wehrmacht in all medical measures taken be the civilian authorities." This defines the task of Handloser.