I shouldn't think there would be any doubt in your mind.
A. I am quite clear in my mind that hero, in this court, we arc not concerned with the ten or fifteen thousand letters I wrote and received during the war, but are concerned only with a few of the letters from that great number. This does nothing to change the fact that these few letters are only individual letters from the vast mass of that correspondence, and that my capacities of recollection embrace these letters to the same extent, but to no greater extent, than they embrace the other perhaps 14,999 letters in which the Tribunal is not interested.
Q. You cannot remember whether you were connected, directly or indirectly, with the typhus experiments in Buchenwald -- is that what you want to say? That is something that slipped your mind?
A. I have testified to this at great length. It took almost a half a day -- namely, as to what I knew about these typhus experiments in Buchenwald.
Q. But you have not testified, and you still do not testify, whether you sent this vaccine you got from Ruge to Ding, either through Mrugowsky directly or indirectly; you evade the point; you say you can't remember. I think, then, the Tribunal can take the statements from the Ding Diary, that you did.
A. I can only toll you that I do not even remember the Bucharest vaccine itself. Direct correspondence with Ding is something that I really can't remember. But I must take into consideration the possibility that you are on the point of bringing up some letter to the effect that Dr. Ding sent me some application -- a reprint of a paper of his.
Q. I see.
A. And whenever such a piece of correspondence turns up here, then I have laid myself open to you and have testified falsely, and cf course such a possibility as that does exist.
Q. Did you get a report from Ding? I am interested to hear about that. You mentioned having received some sort of publication from Ding; let's hear about that; did you get one?
A. No, no, I just said -- I was a well known bacteriologist, and many people sent me reprints of their publications. I really can't say anything about this for sure; I would have to take a look through my collection of reprints which contain about ton to twenty thousand individual papers, and in the case of such reprints it is often the case that we don't read them all because one doesn't have the time, but one simply sent out a prepared printed card acknowledging receipt of the reprint. These are all possibilities I have to take into consideration, and consequently I have to be very circumspect in my testimony here in order not to lay myself open on account of some stupid matter; for instance, mentioning the example of my correspondence with Schilling in 1941: I had testified to the best of my memory that I did not correspond directly with Schilling during his stay in Italy, and the experiments that Schilling conducted in Italy are not a charge in the indictment, so that I really had no reason to deny a correspondence with Schilling in Florence. Now, since I was so incautious, so inclusions as to say that I had no correspondence with him in 1941, you then produced a letter from Schilling's files which was dated 1941; and then after I had seen this letter, I, of course, recalled the affair. Now, since that already happened to me once that I committed such an error in memory, I have become a little more cautious gradually, and I do not deny with apodictic certainty matters which arc theoretically possible.
Q. Professor, you don't want to got so cautious now that you admit the possibility of having participated in murder. Now, as I understand your direct testimony -
A. No, that possibility I do not admit.
Q. Now, as I understand your direct testimony, you remember you get the vaccine from Ruge; that you experimented oh yourself to see whether it contained a living virus, and then you returned it to him.
A. No, that is a misunderstanding. I stated that I do remember for certain that I received one consignment of vaccine from Ruge, but that was not the Bucharest vaccine, and I remember this consignment of vaccine for sure because there were a few peculiarities in this matter. Ruge had asserted that there was a living virus in this vaccine because the reactions to the vaccine were particularly severe on the people on whom he tested it. I looked at the label on this vaccine, and I ascertained that this originated from the same institute whose vaccine I had used two years before to vaccinate the medical personnel working on the resettlement. Thereupon I gave myself a double dose of this vaccine, and saw that the reaction was a perfectly normal one. Then I sent the vaccine to the manufacturer who again tested it, and also reported that the vaccine was perfectly normal. On the basis of these two reports the vaccine was again made available for general use, but as I said, this was not the Bucharest vaccine because I have put in a document here, namely, instructions to the troop doctors in the Luftwaffe, saying that the Bucharest although troop proved its efficacy in Buchenwald, was not to be used by the Luftwaffe because the results of this testing at Buchenwald were at that time not known to the Luftwaffe. To be sure, through Ding's report to the consulting conference, and through his publications in the periodical for hygiene, we found out about this testing, so that thereafter there was no reason for not using this vaccine; but I do not know whether or not it was used in individual cases alter that; at any rate, I found no directive to that effect.
Q. Well, how could you write a letter telling the medical officers in the Luftwaffe not to use the Bucharest vaccine, although it was being tested in Buchenwald, unless you knew it was being tested in Buchenwald?
A. I remember no such letter.
Q. May be I misunderstood you; I thought that was just what you said.
A. No, no, I said just the opposite. If you understood that, it must be an error on the part of the interpreter -- strange as that may seen. I shall repeat so this is perfectly clear. In evidence is a document, namely, Directive to Troop Doctors of the Luftwaffe in which ton different typhus vaccines arc listed and that are permissible for use in the Luftwaffe. The Bucharest vaccine is not included in that list, and this list was published a long time after, according to Ding's Diary, the testing of this Bucharest vaccine had been concluded and the reports on it had been sent to Berlin. I conclude from this that when this directive was issued, I could not have know of this testing in Buchenwald because the testing in Buchenwald had proved that the vaccine was a good one, that is to say, had I know that we had another good vaccine on our hands, then I should certainly have appended it to the list as No. 11.
Q. Now, how did it happen that Ruge, a Navy officer, would send you typhus vaccine?
A. That is to be explained by the fact that the Fleet Physician, Ruge, was detailed to the Luftwaffe for three years by the Navy -correction, two years -- he was consulting hygienist with the Air Fleet 4, and Air Fleet 4 covered the southern area in the cast, which included Roumania. After Ruge's release to the Luftwaffe had come to an end, which I believe was around 1944, Ruge was detailed to the army and remained in Roumania.
Q. Now, do you recall telling me in an interrogation on 31 October 1946 that you gave this vaccine, which you received from Ruge, to Gildemeister?
A. That is quite possible that we discussed that possibility in an interrogation.
Q. But now you do not remember whether you got the Bucharest vaccine at all?
A. I have said that I cannot testify with certainty on that matter. I have repeatedly said that there is a possibility; you stated to me as a fact at that time that I had this Bucharest vaccine, and then I told you the ways how I sent such vaccine on to other people, but I most assuredly did not tell you of my own knowledge in this interrogation that I had received this Roumanian vaccine from Professor Ruge.
Q. Can you remember ever having sent a vaccine to Mrugowsky?
A. No, I cannot remember that.
Q. And you are supported in that by Frau Block in that testimony?
A. Yes, I believe she said something to that effect.
Q. Well, what he out the Copenhagen vaccine that you got; you got that in 1944 -- that's only about two and a half years ago.
Do you -
A. You arc in error, Mr. Prosecutor -- 1943. I already put in the document concerning this.
Q. I remember, I remember.
A. That is in a supplementary document, Document 46, Exhibit No. 20, and also -
Q. I remember, I remember.
A. The document of the Behring Works in Marburg: both these documents mentioned 24 September 1943 as the date, and the date of my report was the 29th of September, 1943, If I had not been able to get a hold of these documents, then I really should not have been in a. position to tell you the year in which these events occurred, but now I do have the documents and do have the opportunity to refresh my memory on the basis of these documents.
Q. Well, let's look at the other entry in the Ding Diary which affects this. That is on page 49 of the Prosecution Document Book #12. Do you remember that? The experiment that started on the 8th of March 1944? The first sentence is: "suggested by Oberstarzt of the air Corps, Professor Rose, the vaccine Copenhagen (Ipsen-Murine vaccine)."
A. Yes, I have this entry before me now and I have also put in the documents that refer to this, including my official report in which there is mention of the suggestion I made in connection with the Copenhagen Vaccine.
Q. Well, do you concede that there is a possibility that this entry is correct?
A. Yes, if Ding is here referring to my official report and referring to it as a suggestion, then the entry is correct, but I believe that if an impartial person reads through this official report he would not see in it a suggestion for experiments on human beings. That is a question of interpretation.
Q. Well, did you send that report mo him? I thought the testimony was to the effect that the Copenhagen vaccine only went to about four people and none of the four included either Haagen or Ding or Mrugowsky. Now, are you suggesting the possibility that you did send it to Ding?
A. No, you've completely misunderstood me. It is just the opposite that I wanted to say. The report is available and the list of distributes is in the list to whom the report was sent. Neither Ding nor Mrugowsky is mentioned in that list. Consequently, you cannot understand me to have said that I sent this report to Ding.
Q. No, I didn't but Haagen is not included in that list either, as I recall, is he?
A. Your recollection has deceived you. Haagen is listed there or his Strasbourg Institute. Let me just find the document. This is Document 22, Exhibit 21. The list of those to whom it was distributed is on pages 18 and 19.
First, Robert Koch Institute, attention: Professor Gildemeister; then, second, is the State Institute for Experimental Therapy, Geheimrat Otto; thirdly, Institute for Typhus and Virus Research in Cracow, Professor Eyer; fourth, Hygiene Institute of the University of Strasbourg, Professor Haagen; and then, Behring Institute for Typhus Research in Lemberg, #5; and sixth, Behring Works in Marburg on the Lahn.
Q. What's the date of that?
A. 29th of September, 1943.
Q. Did you later send this vaccine to Ding or Mrugowsky for testing in Buchenwald?
A. No, I have already testified hero that if I had been asked about this directly before Frau Block testified I should have said that I had sent the whole vaccine sample to Professor Schreiber. But, in the mantime, Fran Block has testified here and this assumption on my part was incorrect and the samples that came from Copenhagen were divided up into several parts and sent to several institutes. I consider it possible - I consider it likely that Frau Block's testimony on this matter is more reliable than mine would have been because she had less to do than I did and was concerned especially with the sending off of such things, so it is probable that her recollection of this is more precise than mine.
Q. Well, how can there be any doubt about it? Don't you have this document here which tells exactly what you did with the Copenhagen vaccine?
A. I beg your pardon. I didn't quite understand the question.
Q. Well, I don't understand how there can be any question about what happened to the Copenhagen vaccine in the face of this document that you have submitted?
A. This document states what suggestions I made in connection with this Copenhagen vaccine and with regard to the vaccines themselves I suggested they be used on persons who were in especial danger.
Those persons in especial danger - people who were in particular danger of being infected with typhus - this was a generally current technical expression and the medical officers, both in the civil administration and in the military medical service, were familiar with it, and it is used not only in connection with typhus but in connection with other diseases also. The phrase is used "persons in especial danger ", for example, only sewage workers are vaccinated or minors or people where there is a particular pestilence of rats in tho case of tho Weil Disease. These people I have just mentioned are in especial danger and are consequently vaccinated whereas other people are not.
Q. Professor, let's not wander off the point. I am not interested in all of this, but do I understand you to say that a sample of the Copenhagen vaccine was sent to each one of those men in the distribution list, along with the letter?
A. No, I don't believe so because the sample couldn't have been large enough for that. As I remember it, the amount was only large enough to suffice for one consignment. Now, Frau Block has said it was divided into three portions.
Q. And who get the portions?
A. I don't remember precisely what Frau Block testified to that effect. I should have to look it up in the record.
Q. We know that Haagen got one of the portions, don't we?
A. That I do not know. It cannot be seen from the correspondence. At any rate, he did net make use of this Copenhagen vaccine or, at least, never reported on it if he did. So there was only correspondence on tho question whether this Copenhagen vaccine was to be used as a parallel series in the experiments that were testing to alleviate the reaction cf his subjects to the living avirulent vaccine. That interested him particularly because this Copenhagen vaccine was a dead vaccine from murine virus and there was no other such vaccine in Germany, bur Professor Haagen succeeded in weakening this vaccine so that there was no reaction whatsoever and he did so before carrying out his series of experiments, and this meant that he was no longer interested in the Copenhagen vaccine and there was no further correspondence on the subject.
I have attempted to inquire of the Institute at Copenhagen whether he received consignments of their vaccine. That was denied. The Copenhagen Institute believes that this Vaccine was sent only to Danish and Norwegian doctors.
Q. Now, Professor, without pursuing this point much further, how could you suggest to Haagen that he Carry out an experiment with the Copenhagen vaccine unless you had sent him a sample of the Copenhagen vaccine?
A. Any time he wanted to he could write a letter to Copenhagen and ask for a sample. He certainly knew of Ipsen - both of them were research men in typhus, and I am quite sure that they exchange reprints of their scientific publications, In fact, Haagen had the chance to visit Ipsen personally because he was then consulting hygienist with the Air Fleet Reich and Copenhagen fell within the jurisdiction of that Air Fleet Reich. In other words, if the matter interested him, he could have made an official trip to Copenhagen within the framework of his normal activities. He simply would have had to apply for permission to go and take a look at something up there and he would have got permission.
Q. Well, Can you tell the Tribunal what happened to this Copenhagen vaccine? I don't know myself. I haven't found out what happened to it. You got it, but who did you give it to?
A I said that before. If I were relying on my own memory I should have said that he sent the vaccine, the whole amount of it to Professor Schreiber along with the main report that I wrote. However, Frau Block corrected my memory in this matter to the extent of saying that the vaccine was broken down into three portions which were sent to three offices, including Professor Gildemeister; but as I said, I am not in a position to state that of my own knowledge. In this whole examination we find ourselves in' a most unfortunate position in that individual letters and individual consignments which were simply single events in the course of an enormously extensive official activity and were made the subject of inquiry, and we are simply not in a position to refer to our own files or other persons we worked with. Of course it makes a poor impression if you cannot give a straight yes or no answer to a point as important as this, and I am quite clear about that, but that can be explained from the whole position in which I find myself. For two years I have been in custody with no access to any of my files, but you have my files. You got these letters from Schilling from my own file cabinet and you must have the documents. Why are you asking me? You have these documents. You got the letters that you are speculating on the existence of here from my files, because all of these letters must have been in the same drawer where the letters were found that Schilling wrote to me.
Q Then you know the letters exist too, don't you, Doctor; it is not difficult to tell the truth. The difficult thing is to tell just about half the truth or none at all, and hope to get by with it. Now, you very well know whether you sent any of this vaccine to Mrugowsky or Ding to be tested at Buchenwald, just as well as you well remember that 40 years ago you ran over a man with an automobile and killed him. We are not dealing with miscellaneous letters. We are dealing with unique letters concerning murder. I am asking you to tell the truth about it. If you gave any vaccine to Mrugowsky and Ding, Copenhagen or Bucharest vaccine you would remember it?
A To the best of my knowledge I have answered all these questions here. I never run over anybody 40 years ago with an automobile, but I grant you I should probably remember it had I done so, and if I had killed anyone two years age I would certainly remember that too, but correspondence on typhus vaccines that fell within the framework of my whole official activity I cannot remember any more clearly than I can remember the other 15,000 letters that I received and sent, and in addition to that an enormous pile of documents that went through my hands everyday. You are asking somewhat too much of me. That I issued no orders for Buchenwald and could not issue any orders for Buchenwald in view of the general situation, and my position, that is clear.
Q Certainly that is clear, and it is ridiculous for you to make the statements, but it not so clear for your knowledge that Buchenwald existed and that Ding was testing vaccines there and using avirulent typhus to infect people; it is not so clear with that knowledge whether you sent vaccines there to be tested, and those are the questions I am directing to you and getting no answer. The Ding diary says you did send them where and as I understand your testimony you admit the possibility that you did it?
A No, I have expressly said that I do not grant that possibility.
Q You remember the testimony of Kogan, Kogan testified that he remembers very well when Ding got the letter, he didn't say whether from you or Mrugowsky, suggesting Copenhagen vaccine be tested in Buchenwald, and he was very elated; now how do you explain the testimony of Kogan?
A I should recommend that the Prosecution read through the record of Kogan's testimony. The matter is set forth there materially differently. Kogan said nothing to the effect that Ding had ever received a letter from me. On the contrary in discussing Ding's correspondence he purposes omitted my name. Moreover Kogan said nothing to the effect that I had given the assignment that the Copenhagen Vaccine be tested in Buchenwald.
He testified here that Ding had expressed his satisfaction that a vaccine was to be tested to my suggestion, and the text of this suggestion, which was directed neither to Ding nor to Mrugowsky I have been able to bring in here as a document. By accident one of the six copies of that report could be found, and I deny that that is a suggestion for human being experiments in Buchenwald, but I do admit that a man like Ding, who hated me so violently because of my criticism of his work, as Kogan here described it, and hesitated to repeat the phrasing that Ding used to describe me, as I say he did say that Ding was glad that ho had received a vaccine to which I had drawn his attention as something particularly important.
Q It is the only important
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment Counsel.
The Tribunal will be in recess.
(Thereupon a recess was taken.)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
THE PRESIDENT: Counsel may proceed.
BY MR. McHANEY:
Q Herr Professor, did Mrugowsky ever request that you give him vaccines for use in typhus experiments?
A No.
Q Did you ever discuss the question as to whether the louse could be infected by a vaccinated typhus patient with the defendant Mrugowsky?
A That could be possible. This question played an important role in the discussion about the vaccines and their effectiveness for a time. We had some old Polish observations available to the effect that if vaccinated persons received typhus in spite of that vaccination, no further illnesses could be transferred by such persons. It is possible throughout, since this question was of considerable importance, that something like that could well have been discussed by me and Mrugowsky. We talked a lot about that question.
Q Did you ever negotiate with Mrugowsky concerning vaccines to be tested in Buchenwald?
A No.
Q Let's look at Document NO-1754.
(Document submitted to witness.)
MR. McHANEY: I AA ask that Document NO-17% be marked as Prosecution Dxir lit :?1 j e4ti.ficaticn.
Q (Continuing) Herr Professor, will you read this document aloud?
A "Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS; Journal No. 795/42.
"Berlin W 15, Knesebeckstrasse 43/44; 16 May 1942.
"To the Oberfeldarzt Professor Dr. Rose; Berlin NW, Foehrerstrasse 2.
"Robert Koch Institute.
"Dear Professor:
"The Reich Physician SS and Police has consented to the execution of experiments to test typhus vaccines. May I therefore ask you to let me have the vaccines.
"The other question which you raised, as to whether the louse can be infected by a typhus patient vaccinated for protection, will also be dealt with. In principle, this also has been approved. There are, however, still some difficulties at the moment about the practical execution, since we have at present no facilities for breeding lice yet.
"Your suggestion to use Olzscha has been passed on to the Personnel Department of the SS Medical Office. It will be given consideration in due course.
"With King regards, and Heil Hitleri Your, M*. Mrugowsky, SS Obersturmbannfuehrer."
There is a footnote to this letter, and I quote:
"According to telephonic inquiry Dr. Mrugowsky asks to be called by telephone after Professor Dr. Rose's return. Dr. Mrugowsky will not yet be in Berlin in June. His deputy, Dr. Bing, is informed. 20 May 1942."
It becomes apparent from that letter that Dr. Mrugowsky once informed me that the Reichsarzt SS and Police had consented to the testing of typhus vaccines. He then asks me to send him these vaccines. What vaccines he is speaking of I do not know any more now.
Then the question is discussed about lice being infected by typhus patients vaccinated for protection.
I admitted that a possibility exists, and I said that this question was at one time discussed with me.
The final paragraph says that one of my assistants had been drafted into the Waffen SS and that I endeavored to have him used in the Hygienic Service.
Q. Herr Professor, let's go to the foot-note first. What are the initials "B.L." at the end of that foot-note for? Isn't that Frau Block?
A. Yes, that would be Frau Block; yes.
Q. And Frau Block has been in touch with Dr. Mrugowsky. She notes that Dr. Ding, who I suppose you will admit is Dr. Ding, has been informed. In view of this note we can pretty well disregard the testimony of your witness Frau Block before this Tribunal can't we since she testified of your witness Frau Block before this Tribunal, can't we, since she testified you had not corresponded with Mrugowsky didn't she?
A. She said that she could not recollect any correspondence with Mrugowsky, but you will see from the documents from me which you have before you, that this correspondence in effect was of so little extent that it is quite understandable if she does not remember it in detail. It is a result of my express order that you have these documents available. I ordered that in my institute at Pfafferode no documents should be destroyed under any circumstances. There is a written document available to the effect that I gave such order.
Q. Herr Professor, this letter is in response to one which you wrote to Mrugowsky, isn't it?
A. That's possible.
Q. And in the letter that you wrote to Mrugowsky you asked him to have the Bucharest vaccine tested in Buchenwald, didn't you?
A. I told you before in great detail that I could not remember this matter about the Bucharest vaccine. If you have a letter before you about this matter this would, of course, give me a possibility to refresh my memory.
Q. I should think this letter would refresh your memory, Herr Professor, particularly in view of the Ding diary, which has an entry shortly following the date on this letter where Ding carries out his experiments with the Bucharest vaccine among others and says in the diary that the vaccine was obtained from you; and Mrugowsky in this letter asked you to send him the vaccines which you have mentioned in your previous letter.
There's really no doubt about it, is there, Professor?
A. This possibly becomes apparent.
Q. And was this person Osascher (?) mentioned in the letter? Was he to assist in Buchenwald?
A. He was to be used in the Hygienic Service. Since he particularly dealt with entomological questions I asked that he should work on these questions there.
Q. You got a report from Ding, too, on these experiments testing the Bucharest vaccine, didn't you, Professor?
A. I cannot remember that, and I already told you one that had I received any such report I would have drawn the conclusions from it and since I did not do that, I think it is improbably that I received such a report.
Q. In view of this letter, doctor, do you want to go back and Change your testimony about the Copenhagen vaccine? Didn't you also suggest those experiments, and didn't you also supply the Copenhagen vaccine for the experiments in Buchenwald?
A. No, I have no intention to do that.
Q. Well, in that event I will ask that Document NO-1186 be passed up to you, and this will be marked as Prosecution Exhibit 492 for identification. - Will you read this letter aloud please?
A "Oberstarzt Prof. Rose O.U., 2 December 1943 To Standartenfuehrer Dr. Mrugowsky.
Head of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS Berlin-Zehlendorf 6 Spanische Allee 10 Dear Mr. Mrugowsky:
At present I have at my disposal a number of samples of a new murine virus typhus vaccine which Was prepared from mice livers and proved in animal experiments to be quantitatively a 1000 times more effective than the vaccine prepared from nice lungs. To decide whether this first rate murine vaccine should be used for protective vaccination of human beings against lice typhus it would be desirable to know if this vaccine showed in your and Ding's experimental arrangement at Buchenwald an effect similar to that of the classic virus vaccines.
Would you be able to have such an experimental series carried out? Unfortunately I could not reach you over the phone. Considering the slowness of postal communications I would be grateful for an answer by telephone. My numbers, all of which go through the same switchboard, are: Berlin 278313 Rapid Exchange Berlin 09, Zossen 559 Luftwaffe Exchange 72, there you ask for R.L.M.,
L. In.14 With best regards Heil Hitler Yours ROSE" The signature which you see on this photostatic copy is, in effect, my signature.
It becomes evident from this letter that I also informed Mrugowsky about the Copenhagen vaccine which I did not remember up to this point.
Q. And you asked him to test the vaccine in Buchenwald, didn't you?
A. This question is dealt with here whether this vaccine can be tested in Buchenwald.
Q. Do you see the name "Ding" written at the botton of the letter?
A. Yes, you can see it at the botton of the page.
Q. And it appears that the testimony Hogan was very precise, wasn't it, because Ding got a copy of this letter, didn't he?
A. Yes. Ding's utterances do not only refer to my memorandum but also to the correspondence which was carried on between me and Mrugowsky. Apparently it was then transferred to the Reichsarzt SS.
Q. Is the date on this letter 2 December 1943 or February 12, 1943, and I direct your attention to the receipt stamp on the letter which is 21 February 1944?
A. The difference between the two dates can be explained by the fact that considerable time had elapsed after sending my letter and the tine this letter reached Mr. Ding during which those agencies dealt with that natter who had to decide upon the approval for carrying out experiments on human beings.
Q. So you maintain that 2 December 1943 is the correct date on the letter?
A. Certainly, that certainly is the correct date.
Q. On the basis of the two letters which I have exhibited to you you will concede that the Ding diary was precisely accurate in what it said, won't you?
A. No, one can't conclude that just like that. The order to carry out experiments in Buchenwald could not be issued by me in any way.
Q. That's very clear--
A. That vaccines were requested from me seems to become evident from one letter. I didn't remember it and I still don't remember it now, but on the basis of this letter one has to consider that fact proved. Then it also becomes evident that I hero drew the attention of Mr. Mrugowsky to this vaccine and that I mentioned a discussion dealing with human experiments regarding these vaccines.
Q. And you suggested and asked him to carry out experiments with the Copenhagen vaccine in Buchenwald, didn't you?
A. I am asking whether there is still a possibility to carry out such a series of experiments. That is quite understandable, considering the situation, because one can see from my report of 29 May 1943, that this seemed to constitute a considerable progress on tho basis of experiments already made on animals. It wa s known to me that such experiments had earlier been carried out, although I basically objected to these experiments. This institution had been set up in Germany and was a proved by tho State and covered by the State. At that moment I was in a position which perhaps corresponds to a lawyer who is, perhaps a basical opponent of execution, or death sentence. On occasion when he is dealing with leading members of the government, or with lawyers during public Congresses or meetings, he will do everything in his power to maintain his opinion on the subject and have it put into effect. If, however, he does not succeed, he stays in his profession, and in his environment in spite of this. Under circumstances he may perhaps even be forced to pronounce such a death sentence himself, although he is basically opponent of that set-up. This, of course, docs not go that far in my case. I am only in touch with such people from whom I assume that they somehow arc included in the official channels of such an institutions which I disapprove of basically and which I want to see removed.
Q. Professor, 6 persons died in this experiment with the Copenhagen vaccine, didn't they?
A. Yes. These were 6 Persons who were furnished by the Reich Criminal Police Office through ordinary channels as they had boon determined by competent agencies.