Chapter VII: Extracts From Argumentation and Evidence of Prosecution and Defense (17)

The witness Laubinger, who was subject number 7, testified that he was arrested by the Gestapo in March 1943 because he was a gypsy. He was sent to Auschwitz in the spring of 1943 without having been tried for any crime. (_Tr. p. 10199._) He was later transferred to Buchenwald for a few weeks and while there, together with other inmates, was asked to volunteer for a cleaning-up work detail in Dachau. The inmates were under the impression that conditions were better in Dachau, so they agreed to go. Upon their arrival at Dachau they were given a physical examination and X-rayed and then taken to the experimental station. (_Tr. p. 10200._) Beiglboeck told them that they were to participate in the sea-water experiment and that was the first they knew of it. (_Tr. p. 10201._) Laubinger identified Beiglboeck in the dock. (_Tr. p. 10202._) He told Beiglboeck that he had had two stomach operations, but Beiglboeck did not permit him to withdraw. Beiglboeck did not ask whether the subjects wished to volunteer, and they did not volunteer. (_Tr. p. 10203._) Laubinger, who was in the Schaefer group, was given Schaefer water for 12 days and fasted for at least nine days. He got so weak he could hardly stand up. The experimental subjects received special food for only one day after the experiment. Beiglboeck had promised them extra rations and an easy work detail but these promises were not kept. (_Tr. p. 10205._) One of the subjects tried to persuade the others to refuse to drink the sea-water. Beiglboeck threatened to have him hanged for sabotage. The subject later vomited after drinking sea-water whereupon Beiglboeck had the water administered through a stomach tube. (_Tr. p. 10207._) Another subject was tied to his bed and adhesive tape was plastered over his mouth, because he had obtained some fresh water and bread. Most of the subjects were Czech, Polish, and Russian nationalities, with approximately eight Germans. (_Tr. p. 10208._). A number of subjects suffered attacks of delirium and two were transferred to the hospital. Laubinger did not see them again. (_Tr. p. 10209._)

The witness Hoellenrainer corroborated the testimony of Laubinger on all important points. He testified that the experimental subjects did not volunteer (_Tr. p. 10509_) and that the majority of them were non-German nationals. (_Tr. p. 10513._) Hoellenrainer testified further that Beiglboeck showed no concern for the experimental subjects, but, on the contrary, threatened to shoot them when they became excited. (It hardly seems appropriate to wear a gun when experimenting on volunteers.) He had no pity for them when they became delirious from thirst and hunger. (_Tr. p. 10510._) The witness Hoellenrainer unfortunately assaulted Beiglboeck in open Court. This impulsive act of the witness, however, speaks more forcibly than volumes of testimony as to the inhuman treatment of the experimental subjects and the suffering which was inflicted on them as a result of these experiments. We may rest assured that Hoellenrainer was no volunteer. When explaining his behavior to the Tribunal, Hoellenrainer characterized Beiglboeck a “murderer”. (_Tr. pp. 10233-4._)

The witness Tschofenig was committed to Dachau in November 1940 where he remained until April 1945. He was a political prisoner. (_Tr. p. 9331._). He is at present a member of the Carinthian Land Diet in Austria. (_Tr. p. 9332._) From the summer of 1942 until the end, he was in charge of the X-ray station in Dachau. (_Tr. p. 9334._) He examined the transport of gypsies in the summer of 1944 before the experiments began and excluded a number of them as being unfit. (_Tr. pp. 9334-5._) He saw Beiglboeck several times in the camp and in the X-ray station. (_Tr. p. 9335._) During the experiments a number of those who got sick were brought to the X-ray station for examination. Their physical condition had deteriorated considerably as a result of the experiments. He heard that one of the subjects had a maniac attack. (_Tr. p. 9336._) At the conclusion of the experiments, three of the subjects were brought to the station for internal diseases. One was on a stretcher and unable to walk. All of them were X-rayed by Tschofenig. (_Tr. p. 9338._) It was customary to send the results of the X-ray examinations to the hospital ward where the inmates were kept. Tschofenig received an official order from the station for internal diseases that it was not necessary to report on the stretcher case as he had died two days after his transfer. The station physician reported that the death resulted from the sea-water experiments. Tschofenig examined the death records himself. (_Tr. p. 9339._)

Even Dr. Steinbauer, defense counsel for Beiglboeck, has apparently convinced himself that these experiments involved torture. He said, in explaining his conduct in withholding part of a document the Tribunal had ordered to be produced, that: “I do not want to say anything about the experimental subjects, who suffered terribly.” (_Tr. p. 9378._)

c. Selections from the Argumentation of the Defense

_EXTRACT FROM THE FINAL PLEA FOR DEFENDANT SCHROEDER_[47]

* * * * *

I now come to the count of the indictment “Participation of the defendant Professor Dr. Schroeder in the sea-water experiments which were carried out in the Dachau concentration camp.”

In the case of these experiments, Professor Schroeder’s participation has been established, and he has accepted the responsibility as far as the preparation and the planning of these experiments are concerned. Professor Schroeder has mainly been accused by the prosecution of having permitted these experiments to be carried out in a concentration camp. The prosecution in its case against Professor Schroeder further stated that these experiments were not necessary at all, and it drew the conclusion that the experiments had only been ordered in order to torture people and in order to subject them to unnecessary cruelties; it also stated that it was clear that in no case had the experimental subjects been volunteers.

Therefore it is the task of the defense to show in the following paragraphs why from the point of view of Professor Schroeder, as Chief of the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe, these experiments had to be considered necessary, and just what reasons motivated him to give his approval for the carrying out of the experiments in a concentration camp.

The first question therefore is—why and from what considerations were there experiments ordered at all? It must be stated in advance here, that as far as Chief of the Medical Inspectorate Professor Schroeder was concerned, he did not have to examine the question whether one or the other method for making sea-water drinkable was more suitable; the problem for him existed in its entirety and it could not be divided. It was to rescue shipwrecked persons from death from lack of water and find the best method of protection against this danger. This problem had already been handled by various interested agencies for quite some time, and various individual questions for the solution of this problem had arisen. No method for making sea-water drinkable had been found and it was not clear what procedure should be advocated.

In the course of the year 1943 two methods for making sea-water drinkable were offered almost simultaneously. One of them, the so-called Wofatit method, had been developed by Dr. Schaefer in collaboration with I. G. Farben. Another, the Berkatit method, represented the invention of Stabsingenieur Berka.

It was quite clearly recognized that Schaefer’s Wofatit represented the ideal solution, because this method removed all the salt from the sea-water and changed it into drinking water, while the Berka method let the salt remain in the sea-water and only improved the taste of the sea-water through the addition of various sugar and vitamin drugs. We agree with the prosecution and the expert Professor Dr. Ivy when they state that a chemist in the course of one afternoon could have decided by means of a short experiment whether Wofatit or Berkatit was better. The participating agencies of the Medical Service of the Luftwaffe, Professor Schroeder and Dr. Becker-Freyseng, realized that quite clearly. From the chemical point of view this problem could also have been solved in a simple manner.

The difficulty which existed for Professor Schroeder with regard to this problem, however, lay in another field; this was the shortage of raw materials prevailing at the time, which had arisen in Germany because of the war. This circumstance made it possible for the Technical Office of the Luftwaffe to oppose the introduction of the Wofatit and to consider the Berkatit method, because the raw materials for the latter method could be procured without any difficulty and production could be started right away, since production facilities for the appropriate amounts were already in existence. It was different in the case of Wofatit. Considerable amounts of silver were required for its production, which could not be set aside for the production of Wofatit without damaging other production branches which also needed this metal. The Technical Office of the Luftwaffe, therefore, had already decided in favor of the introduction of Berkatit on 1 July 1944. Professor Schroeder, in his capacity as Chief of the Medical Inspectorate, however, could not have assumed the responsibility for having the units which were entrusted to his professional medical care equipped with the Berka method, because the danger existed that shipwrecked aviators, deceived by the improvement in the taste of sea-water, would drink it in larger amounts and thus increase the danger of their dying of thirst. The question also had to be clarified whether the shipwrecked crew of an airplane completely adrift at sea should go without any food or water whatsoever or whether they should consume a certain amount of sea-water rather than no water at all. This last question could only be clarified by carrying out an experiment on human beings. An experiment on animals would not suffice in this respect, because the distribution of water in the body of animals differs from that in a human being. By proving its medical objections, the Medical Inspectorate would also have been able to make its point of view heard by the Technical Office, if the medical expert, Professor Dr. Eppinger, one of the best known specialists for internal diseases not only in Germany, but in Europe, had not sided with the Technical Office. Professor Eppinger, in the conference at the Technical Office on 25 May 1944, expressly voiced the opinion that the Berka method was suitable, because for a certain time the human kidney could concentrate salt up to 3 percent, and because the vitamins which had been added to the Berka method would be suitable for speeding up the excretion of the salt from the human organism. This opinion was also shared at the same conference by the pharmacologist Professor Heubner, who is still one of the leading specialists in the field today.

Professor Schroeder would not have been able to turn down both methods. He would then have been reproached with the fact that he had not done everything within his power in order to make the position of shipwrecked German soldiers more bearable and to save them from dying of lack of water. It, therefore, becomes evident that these considerations on the part of Schroeder give us proof of his great feeling of responsibility; it was not easy for him to give his approval for the carrying out of such experiments.

Further developments also show clearly that Schroeder, in spite of the fact that he was extremely busy with official matters, devoted the greatest care and conscientiousness to this matter. He did not just decide to select Dachau as the place where the experiments were to be carried out. Originally he did not even harbor such a thought, but he intended to have the experiments carried out as a troop experiment in institutes which were owned by the Luftwaffe. He was primarily considering the Luftwaffe hospital at Brunswick for this purpose. On 1 July 1944 he turned to the chief medical officer of this hospital, who was competent in the matter, who, however, disapproved of it. This becomes evident from the certificate of Dr. Harriehausen, who was a Generalarzt at the time. Now Professor Schroeder began to consider the Military Medical Academy of the Luftwaffe in Berlin, where he intended to use the young cadets in this academy as experimental subjects. An inquiry which he made there was also unsuccessful. The reason why his requests were turned down in each case was that just at this particular time the OKW had issued a strict order to the effect that all convalescents were to be returned immediately from the hospitals to their units, and that the cadets of the academy were to be given a combat assignment. For the same reason, the suggestion of Professor Beiglboeck to carry out the experiments at the Tarvis Field Hospital also remained unsuccessful.

The further possibility of perhaps using German civilians for the experiments was completely out of question because at this time it was not possible to find young men in the age groups necessary in this case among the German civilian population, because all of them had either been conscripted for military service or for labor service. Professor Schroeder, therefore, had no choice but to follow the suggestion of considering Dachau concentration camp for his experimental station.

Professor Schroeder was not informed at all about conditions in a concentration camp. He thought the circumstances in such a camp were no different from those prevailing in a military camp, and only the names Dachau and Oranienburg were known to him as concentration camps. In this connection, it may be pointed out that the SS surrounded events in the concentration camps with an almost impenetrable veil of secrecy. Schroeder never listened to foreign radio stations. In the circles of his medical officers such events were never discussed. I may point out here that an express opponent of National Socialism, no less than the former Prussian Minister of the Interior, Severing, testified as a witness in the IMT trial that he had had no knowledge of the events in the concentration camps, and he had different sources of information at his disposal from Professor Schroeder. If Professor Schroeder had had any idea of what happened in concentration camps while he was away from Germany, then in view of his ideology as a faithful Christian, he would have refused such contact with concentration camps arising out of ordering these experiments. The decisive point in Schroeder’s favor is that the experiments were not to be carried out under the supervision and command of the SS camp leadership but completely separate, under the special leadership of a Luftwaffe medical officer and recognized specialist. As a further consideration, Professor Schroeder had to take into account that a useful result could be achieved in these experiments only if they could be carried out without interruption or hindrance. Because of the then prevalent almost daily air raids over the whole of Germany, no guarantee for an uninterrupted execution of these experiments could be given in any spot in Germany. However, it was known that air raids on concentration camps did not take place. Moreover, the charge cannot be brought against Professor Schroeder that he chose a concentration camp because he then had available defenseless tools who perforce had to subject themselves to the experiments. The very opposite is true. It was clear to Professor Schroeder that if he wanted to be successful he could carry out these experiments only with voluntary experimental subjects, for the director of the experiments was dependent on the willing cooperation of the experimental subjects, since in no other way could usable clinical data be achieved. Every involuntary experimental subject would have had the power to drop out of the experiment prematurely by feigning indisposition or pain, and, in this way, would have caused the director of the experiment to terminate it prematurely.

For the further evaluation of Professor Schroeder’s conduct, his conversation with the Reich Physician SS Grawitz must be considered especially. Professor Schroeder expressed the opinion to Grawitz that he could only work with healthy and voluntary experimental persons, whose age corresponded to that of the pilots under his command, and he made the further condition that the experimental persons should have the same physiological and racial requisites as the members of the German Wehrmacht in question. On direct examination, Professor Schroeder testified under oath that in this connection he talked to Grawitz about dishonorably discharged former members of the German Wehrmacht who, he knew, had been transferred to concentration camps because of the seriousness of their offenses.

Professor Schroeder could not assume, nor was any report on the part of Grawitz or the SS leadership made to him, that the SS leadership did not accept this suggestion and that instead of former members of the German Wehrmacht, gypsies had been decided upon for experimental purposes. Professor Schroeder, from his point of view, could rely on Grawitz to make arrangements according to his suggestions; he had no reason to expect that the SS would decide upon experimental subjects, against his well-founded wish, who, racially and physiologically did not have the prerequisites demanded by Professor Schroeder.

Because of the extremely heavy official duties caused for Professor Schroeder in his capacity as chief medical officer by the imminent collapse of German military resistance, this affair was only a small segment of his official duties and it must be admitted that he could not concern himself further with this affair.

A further consideration which Professor Schroeder had to bear in mind was whether such experiments were dangerous and possibly damaging to the health of the experimental subjects. Professor Schroeder had thoroughly studied this question and contemplated all possible aspects of the problem. Professor Schroeder also knew that sea-water is used by doctors for drinking cures and that the criterion of harmfulness depends on the doses. If there was medical supervision then there would be no danger to health. Therefore, the prosecution’s charge that he failed to take the possible hazards sufficiently into account is not justified.

Nothing shows the high degree of responsibility which characterized Professor Schroeder more than the instructions which the medical inspector issued to the man carrying out the experiments.

Professor Schroeder was convinced that the experiments held no danger to the experimental subjects and he expressed this opinion to Reich Physician SS Grawitz. Such danger was excluded particularly if and when the quantity of sea-water to be taken was regulated in accordance with the best medical experiences, and when it was definitely ordered that the experiments should be stopped at a certain time; and, furthermore, if the selection of the man in charge of the experiments guaranteed, on the basis of professional and ethical standards, that the experiments would be carried out in a humane manner, taking into account all medical and clinical considerations.

Therefore, it is fully justified if Professor Schroeder claims that he, from his position as a physician and a leading medical officer, considered all possible situations and attempted to avert all possible sources of danger as far as humanly possible. His direction to the man in charge to discontinue the experiments as soon as the experimental subject refused to take in further water, and if dangerous injury to the body were recognizable, must be mentioned in Schroeder’s favor. The person carrying out the experiments was furnished with all necessary assistants and a number of special co-workers from medical circles as well as all machinery to carry out his work in an orderly fashion.

The contention that both the planning and preparation of the experiments by Schroeder can stand any examination, that that planning was with full moral responsibility and with a true feeling of duty and humanity was reaffirmed, too, before this Tribunal by Professor Dr. Vollhardt, as well as by the American expert, Professor Ivy. It is simply unthinkable that instructions to one conducting experiments could be more correct from a medical point of view than those which Professor Schroeder worked out.

By this plea and the evidence, all charges against Professor Schroeder in the sea-water complex are refuted.

* * * * *

_EXTRACTS FROM THE CLOSING BRIEF FOR DEFENDANT BEIGLBOECK_

* * * * *

_The Persons Subjected to the Experiments_

As regards this subject [sea-water experiments] I want to put the defendant’s statements first (_Tr. pp. 8703-4_):

“DR. STEINBAUER: Did you have influence on the selection of the
experimental subjects?

“DEFENDANT BEIGLBOECK: No. I was told at the Medical
Inspectorate that arrangements had been made with the SS, and
the SS in accordance with these arrangements would supply the
experimental subjects. I did not have to worry about that.

“Q. Did you have orders to find out where the experimental
subjects came from and what the specified circumstances and
conditions were?

“A. No. That too was not a decision that I could have made, nor
could the Luftwaffe.

“Q. Did you know before that gypsies had been used?

“A. I only found out that gypsies were coming into Dachau from
the camp commandant. * * * I, therefore, do not feel that I am
responsible either for the selection of the place where the
experiments were carried out nor for the selection of those
persons who were used.”

Defendant Professor Dr. Schroeder states regarding this (_Tr.
pp. 3676-7_): [Transcriber Note: The text ends here. No further
statement printed in the original text.]

_CROSS-EXAMINATION_

“MR. MCHANEY: Did you say anything to Beiglboeck about the
experimental subjects?

“DEFENDANT SCHROEDER: No. We only spoke about the matter as
such. I am not quite sure whether the question ‘concentration
camp’ was already established at that time. Please, why don’t
you ask Beiglboeck himself? I don’t know if it was before or
after 1 June.

“Q. You didn’t say anything to Beiglboeck about making sure that
only German volunteers were used in the experiments?

“A. That was a matter of course. There was no discussion about
it. It was no subject of discussion. There wasn’t anything to be
discussed.

“Q. Well, you didn’t tell him that then?

“A. I don’t know. I can’t tell you that under oath. I know that
there were volunteers; and I certainly did not say that they had
to be German because I didn’t take any other possibility into
consideration at all and couldn’t have said it. These are all
reconstructions which came up later, but at that time weren’t
subjects of discussion at all.”

These were gypsies wearing the black badge of the asocials. The defendant states that the Sturmbannfuehrer in charge of the shipment told him that these persons were all asocials, who were interned on account of punishable offenses and not for social reasons. As we read in Kogon’s book “The SS State”[48] the black badge was in fact the designation of the asocials. We see from Document NO-179, Prosecution Exhibit 135, that SS Gruppenfuehrer Nebe suggested as persons to be used for the experiments asocial persons of mixed gypsy blood in Auschwitz concentration camp, who were in good health but at the same time unsuitable for labor. In the book on gypsies of the Royal Police Directorate Munich 1905, (_Beiglboeck 28, Beiglboeck Ex. 11_), we read:

“The greatest difficulty arises in securing a census of gypsies.
The majority of them make every effort to obscure their identity
through false statements or through a pretense of ignorance * *
*.”

Their asocial character led to a series of police regulations, of which the most important are the following, as far as Germany is concerned:

Decree of 16 May 1938, RMB1.i.V. (_Bulletin of the Reich
Ministry of the Interior_) pages 883-4, concerning measures
against the gypsy nuisance.

Decree of 8 December 1938, RMB1.i.V., page 2105, concerning
measures against the gypsy nuisance.

Decree of 10 November 1939, RMB1.i.V., page 2339, concerning
employment records for gypsies.

Decree of 2 September 1939, Reich Law Gazette, I, page 1578.
Prohibition of wandering of gypsies in the frontier zone[49]
(_Sec. 4 of the ordinance concerning frontier protection_).

The witness Dorn states (_Tr. p. 8618_):

“As far as I know, the brown sign was done away with in
Buchenwald in 1940 and all gypsies arrested for racial reasons
were asocial. In other words, from 1940 on, there were no
gypsies in the camp who were not designated in the filing system
as asocial, as unwilling to work.”

The same witness states (_Tr. pp. 8661-2_):

“I can merely say that initially all gypsies were arrested for
racial reasons. Later on this was changed. Some of the gypsies
who were not declared asocial elements were removed from Dachau
to the Labor House in the Rebdorf Bavarian penitentiary.”[50]

The famous Swiss Psychiatrist E. Bleuler, Zuerich, writes in his Textbook on Psychiatry, Berlin, Springer, 1937 on pages 397-400 about:

_Constitutional ethnical deviations_

“* * * A large number of asocials show what type of character
they are while still young. Most of them are backward at school,
even if their intelligence is good, because they adjust
themselves too little and show too little industry and
attention. Extraordinary achievements in any single direction
are rare. Many of them are lazy, thieving, lying, cruel to
animals and people, exacting, often deliberately and negligently
damaging their own and others property, vain, unreliable, and
egotistical. They cannot submit to authority, run away if they
do not like anything; punishments are not respected, altogether
neither sugar plums nor the whip have any visible effects. When
carrying out mean tricks they develop cunning and energy, soon
learn from others what is bad, with difficulty or not at all
what is good, have an instinctive inclination for bad company.”

I have not made any special reference to asocial character to point out that we must be particularly careful when estimating their trustworthiness, on account of their tendency to mendacity and because of a certain psychotic cupidity concerning claims for compensation. This is not necessary where the judges are so experienced; I am referring to this fact for _legal_ reasons. It is well known that there is no legal definition of crimes against humanity. According to legal authors, such crimes can only be committed against persons who are persecuted for political, religious, and racial reasons.

To complete this chapter in its legal aspects, I would also like to mention the racial regulation of the gypsy question as far as it can be seen from German legislation. According to the 12th decree implementing the Reich Citizenship Law, dated 25 April 1943 (_Reich Law Gazette I, p. 268_), gypsies who are not yet German citizens cannot acquire citizenship. Section 4 of this decree reads:

“Jews and gypsies cannot become citizens. They cannot become
citizens either subject to revocation, or protected persons * *
*.”

According to the first decree implementing the Law for the Protection of German Blood and German Honor of 14 November 1935 (_Reich Law Gazette I, p. 1334_), marriage between gypsies and Germans is prohibited. Section 6 of this decree reads:

“A marriage shall furthermore not be contracted if the progeny
to be expected from it would endanger the purity of German
blood.”

In all fairness, however, one must admit in this connection that in the practice of the Third Reich no strict distinction seems to have been made when gypsies were put in a concentration camp, so that we should need the criminal record and family history of each person subjected to the experiments to be able to ascertain accurately the asocial character of each individual. It is a fact that in the gypsy book mentioned by me, 11 names of persons subjected to experiments are to be found, who must no doubt be characterized as asocial.

_Origin of the gypsies as to nationality_

As I have already mentioned, the gypsies themselves like to leave this point vague. Therefore no point of the evidence contains so many conflicting statements as this particular one. Beiglboeck himself cannot make any definite statements as to this matter, but as he used to speak to all of them, they must all have understood German. Among the names we also find plenty of Slav names, having a Polish, Ukrainian, or Southern Slav sound. In the old Austrian Monarchy, these people were jumbled together a good deal and in their wanderings they also entered German Reich territory. After the break-up of the Monarchy, some of the so-called Carpatho-Russians became citizens of Hungary or Slovakia. In the eastern provinces of the German Reich, there were many Poles or Germanized persons with Polish names. The mere name, therefore, admits of no conclusion as to nationality. The fact, however, that most of them could make themselves understood in the German language allows the conclusion that none of the persons subjected to experiments were imported from the _Allied_ countries.

* * * * *

The witness Fritz Pillwein states in his affidavit (_Beiglboeck 32, Beiglboeck Ex. 21_):

“The experimental subjects in most cases spoke their gypsy
dialect. Many of them were obviously of Slav origin. I did not
see identification papers, however, as this was quite impossible
in a concentration camp and as I did not ask them anything of
the kind, I cannot make any exact statement regarding the
_nationality_ of the individual gypsies. I did not ask them
because the gypsies were very primitive people, and some of them
did not even know their own birthdays.”

The witness Mettbach stated when questioned by Dr. Steinbauer (_Tr. p. 9729_):

“DR. STEINBAUER: What language did you speak among yourselves?

“WITNESS METTBACH: Mostly gypsy language.

“Q. What was the citizenship of the individual experimental
subjects?

“A. Mostly they were Germans. There were a lot of Austrians and
a lot of them came from East Prussia and Upper Silesia and the
Burgenland [Province bordering Austria-Hungary].”

When questioned by counsel for the prosecution the witness Mettbach stated (_Tr. pp. 9737-8_):

“MR. HARDY: Were there any foreign nationals—that is, men other
than Germans—used in these experiments?

“WITNESS METTBACH: Austrians and Burgenlaender and some from
Upper Silesia and East Prussia.

“Q. No Czechs?

“A. No.

“Q. No Russians?

“A. No.

“Q. No Poles?

“A. A couple of them talked Polish but I think they came from
Upper Silesia or East Prussia. That very often happens. Lots of
Upper Silesians can talk Polish.”

When questioned by counsel for the prosecution the witness Joseph Vorlicek stated (_Tr. p. 9388_):

“MR. HARDY: Do you know the nationality of the various subjects?

“WITNESS VORLICEK: For the most part I do.

“Q. Can you tell the Tribunal the nationality of the various
subjects, as near as you can recollect?

“A. There were Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, Austrians, and
Germans.”

During direct examination the witness Vorlicek stated (_Tr. p. 9388_):

“MR. HARDY: Well, did they ever volunteer for any special
detachment or some such thing?

“WITNESS VORLICEK: Well, this is how it happened. Since I know
the Slavonic language, and there were some Czechs among them, I
spoke to them.”

Therefore, the defendant’s statement, that the persons concerned were Slovaks from the Bratislava area (Bratislava is the capital of Slovakia) is not without foundation.

_The Rations of the Gypsies_

The defendant states that the persons subjected to the experiments got the Luftwaffe flight rations before the experiments, and the same rations after the experiments, and that there was a hitch only once due to the bombing of the provisions warehouse. During the experiments, the persons got shipwreck rations. The Englishman, Ladell also says that he gave his soldiers shipwreck rations during the experiments. On this point, see extract from Beiglboeck 20, Beiglboeck Exhibit 8:

“* * * In all the experiments the food given was the ‘shipwreck
diet’; this comprises 1 ounce each per day of biscuits;
sweetened condensed milk; butter, fat, or margarine; and
chocolate.”

That food was provided is evident from two documents. (_Beiglboeck 26, Beiglboeck Ex. 13_; _Beiglboeck 27, Beiglboeck Ex. 14_.)

The witness Massion states in his affidavit (_Beiglboeck 31, Beiglboeck Ex. 12_):

“Before beginning the experiment, the experimental subjects were
given the same food as that supplied to the flying personnel of
the Luftwaffe, that is to say, a very nutritious diet of
sardines, butter, cheese, milk, meat, etc. During the
experiment, 4 persons assigned to the thirst group received no
food whatsoever, the others received sea-emergency rations, with
chocolate, etc. I know that on one occasion difficulties arose
in the food supply which possibly were connected with an air
raid. I was sent to Frankfurt with the urgent order to obtain
sea-emergency rations there.”

* * * * *

_The Treatment of Gypsies_

Beiglboeck treated the experimental subjects in a humane manner. It is natural that he insisted the strict observance of the whole experiment was not to be a farce. The whole experiment was a constant struggle against the understandable attitude of the experimental subjects who wanted to save themselves by cheating the director of the experiment (by secretly drinking water and pouring away the urine), and by obtaining special favors, in particular cigarettes, which in 1944 were hard to get—and that not only in the concentration camps.

In regard to this point I refer to a document in which Professor Dr. Dennig writes (_Beiglboeck 29, Beiglboeck Ex. 15_):

“While the people are able for the first few days successfully
to fight their thirst with good grace, their strength of will is
insufficient during the later stage; they devise extremely
subtle means of obtaining water, e. g., the case of Juergensen.”

Witness Ernst Mettbach states in regard to this point when questioned by Dr. Steinbauer (_Tr. p 9722_):

“DR. STEINBAUER: The professor forbade your bringing them water.
Did you nevertheless bring them water? Now, be honest.

“WITNESS METTBACH: Several times I brought my relative,
Mettbach, water to drink.

“Q. Where did you give it to him?

“A. Sometimes I smuggled it in to the experimental station
myself. Sometimes I stuck it through the fly screen on the
window which was a little bit loose.”

Later we shall speak in detail about the secret drinking of water. At this point I just want to say in general that every drop of water which was consumed in secret not only diminished the scientific value of the experiments, but is also of greatest significance from the point of view of criminal law, because it decreased the feeling of thirst. As I said before, the treatment of the experimental subjects was a humane one. In regard to this point compare the statement of Dr. Lesse (_Bieglboeck 14, Bieglboeck Ex. 20_):

“Q. What was his attitude to the prisoners in general?

“A. Very humane and benevolent.”

Witness Massion states in his affidavit (_Beiglboeck 31, Beiglboeck Ex. 12_):

“Dr. Beiglboeck treated the prisoners as humanly as ordinary
patients. He was rough to them only when they obtained drinking
water contrary to orders. I know definitely that none of the
experimental subjects were turned over to the SS for punishment
because of any offenses.”

Witness Pillwein states in his affidavit (_Beiglboeck 32, Beiglboeck Ex. 21_):

“Q. How did Beiglboeck treat the inmates?

“A. Beiglboeck treated the patients well, which was a striking
contrast to the treatment which we inmates received from the SS.
Beiglboeck only became very angry when the gypsies lied to him
regarding the drinking of water, and when he found out about it
from the blood test.”

* * * * *

d. Evidence

_Prosecution Documents_
Pros.
Doc. No. Ex. No. Description of Document Page
NO-184 132 Letter from the Technical Office of the Reich 447
Minister of Aviation (Goering) to Himmler’s
office, 15 May 1944, concerning methods to
render sea-water potable.
NO-177 133 Minutes of conference at the Reich Ministry of 448
Aviation, 20 May 1944, concerning methods
for making sea-water potable.
NO-185 134 Letter from Schroeder to Himmler and Grawitz, 452
7 June 1944, requesting subjects for
sea-water experiments.
NO-183 136 Teletype from Rudolf Brandt to Grawitz, 453
undated, concerning experimental subjects.
NO-182 137 Letter from Sievers to Grawitz, 24 July 1944, 454
concerning experiments on the potability of
sea-water.

_Defense Documents_

Doc. No. Def. Ex. No. Description of Document
Becker-Freyseng Becker-Freyseng Affidavit of Dr. Ludwig 455
42 Ex. 29 Harriehausen, 9 January 1947,
regarding use of patients in
sea-water experiments.

_Testimony_

Extracts from the testimony of prosecution witness Karl 456 Hoellenrainer Extracts from the testimony of defendant Beiglboeck 468 Extracts from the testimony of defense expert witness Dr. Franz 474 Vollhardt

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NO-184
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 132

LETTER FROM THE TECHNICAL OFFICE OF THE REICH MINISTER OF AVIATION
(GOERING) TO HIMMLER’S OFFICE, 15 MAY 1944, CONCERNING METHODS TO RENDER
SEA WATER POTABLE

[Stamped] Secret

[Letterhead] Reich Minister of Aviation and Commander in Chief of the Luftwaffe Technical Office Ref. Nrs. 91a, 0016 GL/C-E (51V) _No: 26 773 secret_ (In your answer to the above reference, please give date and short summary.)

Berlin W 8, 15 May 1944
Leipziger Strasse 7
Cable address: Reichsluft Berlin
Phones: Local: 520024
218241
120047
Long distance: 218011
Extension: 4335

Re: Rendering sea-water potable. Reference: Letter of the Reich Leader SS No. 39/4/44 secret of 17 January 1944. To: Reich Leader SS and Chief of the German Police, Personal Staff. Berlin

With reference to the interoffice conference between Oberstingenieur Christensen and Haupsturmfuehrer Engineer Dohle regarding the above-mentioned matter, it is announced that two processes have been worked out by the office to render sea-water potable:

1. The I. G. method, using mainly silver nitrate. For this process quite a large plant needs to be set up, which would require about 200 tons of iron and cost about 250,000 RM. The amount of the product needed by the Luftwaffe and Navy requires 2.5 to 3 tons of pure silver a month. Besides, the water which is rendered potable by this preparation has to be sucked through a filter in order to avoid absorption of precipitated chemicals. These facts make the application of this process practically impossible.

2. The second process which was worked out is the so-called Berka method. According to this method, the salts present in the sea-water are not precipitated, but are so treated that they are not disagreeable to the taste. They pass through the body without oversaturating it with salts and without causing an undue thirst. No special plants are necessary for producing preparations needed for this process; nor do the preparations themselves consist of scarce materials.

It can be presumed that this method will be introduced in the Luftwaffe and the navy in a short time. Now that German technical science has actually succeeded in rendering sea-water potable for people in distress at sea, in accordance with the above, the knowledge as to how foreign countries intend to solve this problem is no longer of prime importance. Naturally the office is very much interested in ascertaining how, above all, the United States has solved this problem, and it is requested that this information be sought, without, however, compromising any person or any office too much.

Should the office there be interested in the Berka method, let us know. Samples can then be delivered.

The cube dispensed is not a preparation to render sea-water potable, but a milk cube such as is already familiar to the offices.

[Signature illegible]

Enclosure: [Notation: both crossed out]

1 Milk cube

TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NO-177
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 133

MINUTES OF CONFERENCE AT THE REICH MINISTRY OF AVIATION, 20 MAY 1944,
CONCERNING METHODS FOR MAKING SEA WATER POTABLE

Personal Staff RF-SS.
Filing Department, File No./220/5

Technical Office
GL/C-E 5 IV No. 26860/44 secret

Berlin, 23 May 1944
[Handwritten] W 29.6

[Handwritten]:

Just received
for reading given
to RF [Himmler]

[Signature] R. Br. [Rudolf Brandt]
Reichsarzt SS 4/July
Minutes of the conference on 20 May 1944 re methods for making sea-water
drinkable

Present:

* * * * *

10. Oberstingenieur Christensen German Air Ministry—
GL/C-E 5 IV 120047/28
11. Stabsingenieur Dr. Schickler dto. 120047/4335
12. Stabsingenieur Berka E-Tra Vienna
B 23566
13. Stabsarzt Dr. Becker-Freyseng Chief Medical 278313
Service
14. Unterarzt Dr. Schaefer Luftwaffe Medical
Research 27 83 13
Institute

I. On 19 May 1944 a preliminary discussion was held at the Reich Air Ministry—GL/C-E 5 IV. Present were the following persons:

GL/C-E 5 IV Obersting. Christensen dto. Stabsing. Dr. Schickler E-Tra. Stabsing. Berka L. In. 14 Major Jeworrek Chief of the Medical Service Stabsarzt Dr. Becker-Freyseng [Office] dto. Unterarzt Dr. Schaefer Herr Pahl.

At this meeting Captain (med.) Dr. Becker-Freyseng reported on the clinical experiments conducted by Colonel (med.) Dr. von Sirany and came to the final conclusion that he did not consider them as being unobjectionable and conclusive enough for a final decision. The Chief of the Medical Service is convinced that, if the Berka method is used, damage to health has to be expected not later than 6 days after taking Berkatit, which damage will result in permanent injuries to health and—according to the opinion of N. C. O. (med.) Dr. Schaefer—will finally result in death after not later than 12 days.

External symptoms are to be expected such as drainage, diarrhea, convulsions, hallucinations, and finally death. As a result of the preliminary discussion it was agreed to arrange a new series of experiments of short duration. A commission was to be set up for the arrangement of these series of experiments. This commission should be set up together with the High Command of the Navy at the conference on 20 May 1944.

The series of experiments should include the following:

1. _a._ Persons to be given sea-water processed with Berka method.
_b._ Persons to be given ordinary drinking [Shorthand notation]:
water.
One copy to be submitted
to the ministry.
_c._ Persons without any drinking water at all.
_d._ Persons given water treated according to the present method. (0.7
liters of drinking water for 4 persons and 4 days.)

For the duration of the experiments all persons will receive only an emergency sea diet such as is provided for persons in distress at sea.

_Duration of experiments_: Maximum 6 days

In addition to these experiments a further experiment should be conducted as follows:

2. Persons nourished with sea-water and Berkatit, and as diet also the emergency sea rations.

_Duration of experiments_: 12 days

Since in the opinion of the Chief of the Medical Service permanent injuries to health—that is, the death of the experimental subjects—have to be expected, as experimental subjects such persons should be used as will be put at the disposal by the Reichsfuehrer SS.

Herr Pahl reports that due to the latest improvements in the I. G. Farben method, smaller quantities of iron are needed for the construction of the manufacturing equipment than were originally provided for and estimated by I. G. Herr Pahl reports further that if the Wofatit equipment which has to be constructed could not be used later for the manufacturing of the sea-water preparation another use would be quite possible. As to the silver problem GL/C-E 5 IV will check whether the necessary quantities of silver are available.

With GL/C-B 5 it is to be determined whether the same quantities of the preparations will be required as heretofore.

II. At the main conference on 20 May 1944, Stabsingenieur Dr. Schickler will report on work done since the last conference, especially re the results of the preliminary discussion described in part I.

The navy emphasizes that it is considered to be of great importance to obtain a method which under the given conditions could be introduced at once without undue delay. In the opinion of the navy the results obtained at the clinical experiments are sufficient, since they are mainly interested in being able to nourish their men 3 to 5 days with the preparation. A longer nourishing period up to 12 days would probably only be necessary in very few cases. But in spite of this the High Command of the Navy agrees that the series of experiments, as proposed by the Chief of the Medical Service in paragraph 1, should still be carried out.

These series of experiments should be finished and reported on not later than the end of June. During this period all preparations are to be made for the commencement of production according to the Berka method at a date not later than July 1st 1944, and also, if the I. G. method should be introduced, for the start of the construction of the necessary manufacturing equipment by the I. G.

The commission which has to determine the conditions for the series of experiments still to be conducted is composed as follows:

Professor Eppinger, Vienna, Representative of the Chief of the
Medical Service of the Air Force

Representative of the German Air Ministry GL/C

Representative of the High Command of the Navy

Stabsarzt Dr. Becker-Freyseng is being contemplated as representative of the Chief of the Medical Service. Stabsingenieur Dr. Schickler and Stabsingenieur Berka as representatives of GL; and Professor Orzichowski as representative of the High Command of the Navy.

It was decided that Berlin, Reich Air Ministry GL/C-E 5 IV should be the meeting place of the commission. (The originally proposed meeting place was changed from Munich to Berlin after a telephone call from Dr. Becker-Freyseng); and that the meeting should be on 25 May 1944 at 10:00 a. m.

It was decided that Dachau was to be the place where the experiments should be conducted.

Stabsarzt Dr. Becker-Freyseng would invite Professor Eppinger and would get in touch with the Reich Leader SS. The High Command of the Navy would invite Professor Orzichowski.

_Distribution_:

High Command of the Navy—Medical Department

High Command of the Navy, Department for Research, Inventions and Patents

Research Operation of the Reich Ministry for Aviation and High Command of the Luftwaffe

For information of:

Medical Experimentation and Instruction Division of the Air Force Jueterbog

E-Office Rechlin (E med)

Institute for Aviation Medicine,