regarded with considerable caution. At any rate, his testimony has a
certain importance for Dr. Ruff inasmuch as Neff (_German Tr. p. 652_)
confirms that Dr. Ruff was in Dachau only on one single occasion during
the high-altitude experiments. Thus the truth of Dr. Ruff’s own
testimony has been established. Furthermore, the witness Neff, states in
his testimony of 17 December 1946 that “10 prisoners, designated as
permanent experimental subjects, were taken to the station and told that
nothing would happen to them; they were especially assured of this”.
(_German Tr. p. 711._) The witness Neff then told of the killing of the
16 Russians who were sentenced to death and who were murdered by Dr.
Rascher. However, according to Dr. Neff, this act was carried out by Dr.
Rascher together with the two members of the SS, while Dr. Romberg was
not even present on that day. (_German Tr. pp. 654, 656._) Special
importance must be attached to the witness Neff’s further assertion
regarding a Jewish tailor who worked in the sick bay. Neff called Dr.
Romberg’s attention to the fact that this man was not sentenced to
death, and Romberg thereupon immediately went to Rascher with Neff in
order “to set matters straight”. Upon intervention by Dr. Romberg,
Rascher then actually sent the tailor back; when the accompanying SS man
again threatened the Jew, Rascher again intervened and “immediately had
the man (the tailor) brought to safety in the bunker”. (_German Tr. p.
655._) Again, in the case of a second inmate, a Czech, who wrongly and
without his consent had been brought in for the experiments, Dr.
Romberg, according to Neff’s report, intervened on behalf of the
prisoner, with the result that Dr. Rascher entered a complaint against
the criminal SS man with the camp commander, Piorkowski. Thereupon, the
SS man was immediately transferred to Lublin. In that way the Czech was
saved from certain death by Dr. Romberg.
This testimony of the witness Neff plays an important part in answering
the question whether or not the experimental subjects used were
volunteers, and also, what Dr. Romberg, and therefore Dr. Ruff, knew
about them and what Dr. Romberg’s attitude was toward this question. In
this connection, Neff said: “Romberg, Ruff’s deputy, therefore, did not
want any dangerous experiments. He tolerated no murder and considered
only experiments with volunteers.”
However, the further assertions of the witness Neff suffer from the same
shortcomings as those of the witness Vieweg; for Neff also did not know
that only part of the high-altitude experiments in Dachau were carried
out with the approval of Dr. Ruff and Dr. Romberg; nor did Neff have any
knowledge of the agreements made by the participating physicians, and he
therefore treated all high-altitude experiments equally, without
distinguishing whether or not Dr. Ruff had agreed to them that there
“were 180 to 200 inmates who participated in high-altitude experiments”
(_German Tr. p. 656_) and that “during the altitude flight experiments,
70 to 80 people lost their lives.” These figures may be correct, but
they refer to the whole of the Dachau low-pressure chamber experiments;
that is, they also include the experiments which Dr. Rascher made on his
own authority, without the prior knowledge of Dr. Ruff, and in which
alone all the fatalities occurred; while in the legitimate
experiments—that is, those approved by Dr. Ruff—no fatality occurred
at all. Of course, Neff could not know all this. As he said himself it
was impossible for him to distinguish “from whom the order came for the
individual experiment, and in whose interest the experiment was made.”
(_German Tr. p. 715._)
The same shortcoming is demonstrated by Neff’s testimony with regard to
the nationality of the experimental subjects (_German Tr. pp. 656, 657_)
and the manner of their “selection”. However, Neff’s testimony does show
that the selection of the experimental subjects was carried out in two
different ways: For the “_dangerous experiments_” Rascher ordered the
subjects through the local headquarters, and they were produced by the
SS; they were therefore people condemned to death (_German Tr. p. 663_),
for the “_serial experiments_”. On the other hand, and “for most of the
other experiments which took place, the people were brought to the
experimental station from the blocks, that is, from the camp” (_German
Tr. p. 657_) by the block leaders. (_German Tr. p. 663._) These “serial
experiments” were obviously the experiments approved by Ruff, and Neff
expressly establishes that “_volunteers reported for these
experiments_”! (_German Tr. pp. 657, 712._) He even gives the reasons
why the prisoners volunteered: As Rascher, and Himmler too, had promised
various inmates that, “if they, participated in the experiments, they
would be given a better labor assignment”, and as Himmler promised that
they might even be released, volunteers reported to Rascher on their own
initiative as he went through the camp, without any special efforts
being necessary to find volunteers (_German Tr. p. 657_).
There can be no doubt that these volunteers, estimated by Neff to number
about 10, are identical with the 10 “official experimental subjects” or
“exhibition patients” mentioned already by the witness Vieweg, and it is
noteworthy that Dr. Ruff, too, in his testimony always spoke of 10 or
12, or at the most 15 persons from the very beginning (of course he did
not count them himself), who were regularly called in for the
high-altitude experiments, and whom he saw himself when he was once
present to observe and check the experiments in Dachau. This number Dr.
Ruff had mentioned at a time when Neff’s and Vieweg’s testimony was not
yet available. He therefore could not have anticipated that these
witnesses would confirm his figures as correct.
To be sure, the witness Neff testified in another place (_German Tr. p.
666_) that the first 10 experimental subjects were not volunteers. But
this statement is obviously in direct contradiction to his other
testimony which, in the last analysis implied—and could not be
interpreted otherwise—that the so-called “10 official experimental
subjects” were those prisoners who had voluntarily offered themselves,
who were given all possible privileges in return, who were promised
rewards for their service by Rascher as well as by Himmler, and who were
repeatedly reassured that nothing would happen to them during the
experiments. This whole presentation would be incomprehensible if one
were to assume that these 10 persons were involuntary subjects as well,
that they were simply ordered to take part in the experiments, forced to
participate, for them all this would not have been necessary at all,
since at that time nobody in a concentration camp would have thought of
troubling himself about these people, if they had been forced against
their will to take part in the experiments.
In a concentration camp, according to the opinion of Himmler and his
men, 1,000 people were of no consequence. Therefore, if efforts were
made to obtain these inmates for the experiments, and to get them
willingly, if even a Himmler found kind words to say to them and
promised them rewards, then as we know today, this can only be explained
by the assumption that even in concentration camps, for some reason, it
was desirable to obtain voluntary subjects for the experiments and to
induce them to go through the experiments voluntarily. This assumption
is not refuted by the contrary assertion of Neff (_German Tr. p. 666_).
For 1½ days, during his examination on 17 and 18 December 1947, Neff did
not know that these first 10 experimental subjects had not been
volunteers. For 1½ days he did not dare to make such an assertion here
in the witness box, and only during the cross-examination did he finally
go so far as to make this assertion, thereby completely overthrowing his
previous statements.
This allegation of the multiple murderer Neff now stands, however,
completely isolated. There can be no doubt that, if these statements by
Neff were true, it would have been easy for the office of the public
prosecutor to produce numerous other witnesses who, likewise, had been
inmates of the concentration camp at Dachau, who had perhaps experienced
these experiments themselves, or who had spoken to subjects of these
experiments or had even observed the experiments. However, not a single
outsider, not a single incontestable witness has been produced, although
half a year has elapsed since the days when, here in the courtroom, one
could not fail to realize to what an unreliable and untrustworthy class
persons of the caliber of Vieweg and Neff belong. This fact very
strongly indicates that obviously no other witnesses are available, or
could be made available, who could confirm that the experimental
subjects who were used in the Ruff-Romberg altitude tests were not
volunteers. Let the fact be mentioned here, for the sake of comparison,
that in the case of the Gebhardt sulfanilamide operations for example,
half a dozen incriminating witnesses were brought from Poland and Russia
and were interrogated here as witnesses. Why was not a single
trustworthy witness produced from among the Dachau experimental subjects
and placed in the witness box? Because no one could be found, who could
confirm the untrue allegations of a Vieweg and a Neff. On the other
hand, during the trial, a whole series of persons who deserve a great
deal more belief than Vieweg and Neff affirmed with certainty that all
the experimental subjects in the Ruff-Romberg experiments were
volunteers, and that from the very beginning the indispensable condition
which was demanded and assured was that the subjects would be voluntary.
The witness Dr. Lutz for example, who was introduced by the office of
the public prosecutor and therefore recognized by it as a credible
witness, confirmed here on oath, “it was a tacit assumption that the
criminals would volunteer”; and he added that he could almost say that,
in a way, a favor was being conferred upon the criminals, because “they
were given a chance of pardon by participating in the experiments,” and
it is significant that this witness deposed further: “subsequently, we
were very much surprised when, probably during the later stages of the
experiments, as far as I recall now, no further mention was made of it,”
namely, of the fact that only volunteers were to be used for the
altitude experiments (_German Tr. p. 320_).
These depositions by the witness Dr. Lutz conform in every respect with
the general impression received from all the pertinent descriptions. At
first, only the altitude experiments approved by Dr. Ruff regarding the
problem of “rescue from high altitudes” were carried out. These
experiments were not dangerous as proved by their successful outcome;
the inmates volunteered for them. Gradually, however, Rascher misused
more and more the presence of the chamber in order to conduct his
arbitrary experiments on Himmler’s orders for entirely different
problems, namely, to conduct his notorious “difficult experiments” which
had numerous fatal results. These were Rascher’s more cruel, painful
experiments; naturally, no more volunteers reported for these because
word was passed quickly through the camp that the experiments which
Rascher himself conducted were dangerous, while the mere presence and
cooperation of Dr. Romberg gave assurance to the inmates that his
experiments were conscientiously conducted and were not dangerous.
Other witnesses also, not named by Dr. Ruff, have confirmed that the
experimental subjects for the Ruff-Romberg high-altitude experiments
were voluntary, namely, the witness Dr. Hielscher (_German Tr. pp.
6025-26, 6041, 6062_). Testimony on similar lines is given by the
codefendant Sievers (_German Tr. pp. 5471, 5881_); and Dr. Hippke
(_German Tr. p. 793_) “Prisoners who might volunteer”; (_German Tr. p.
795_) “these persons had to volunteer for the experiments.” Also the
witness Karl Wolff, (_Ruff 21, Ruff Ex. 20_) “volunteer concentration
camp inmates who were to be given compensatory privileges * * * the
inmates, about 10 in number, appeared quite relaxed and, in their turn,
willingly entered the low-pressure chamber which had been driven up * *
* the inmates reported to Himmler, in my presence, that in this manner
they could at least voluntarily * * * give a proof of their genuine good
will * * * I never learned through Himmler, nor, as far as I remember,
by any other means that later low-pressure chamber experiments * * *
took place on a nonvoluntary basis * * * I only knew about voluntarily
low-pressure chamber experiments and these were made, without doubt, on
a voluntary basis.” Finally, the witness Herbert Wilschewske (_Ruff 11,
Ruff Ex. 9_).
While the previous witness Wolff was only present for 1 day during the
experiments, the witness Wilschewske, during the 2 years he spent in the
concentration camp, spoke repeatedly to inmates who “had volunteered for
the medical experiments”, and who, by reason of his repeated
conversations with the prisoners, could give the following as reason for
the willingness to volunteer for experiments “they could earn thereby
their own liberty and rehabilitation as well as privileges for their
family.” The witness Wilschewske is certainly an absolutely reliable
witness with regard to his statements. He is a Polish Communist, served
2 years in Dachau concentration camp for this, and was proved to be only
a political prisoner.
If one considers all these statements by witnesses, which certify that
the experimental subjects in the Dachau high-altitude experiments of
Drs. Ruff and Romberg were volunteers, it cannot be doubted that the
concordant statements by Dr. Ruff, Dr. Romberg, and Dr. Weltz were
absolutely true. They are defendants, it is true; but from all sides
testimony is given of their irreproachable professional integrity.
Although they are now sitting in the dock, their precise and clear
statements deserve far more belief than the changing and contradictory
statements of a habitual criminal who has committed downright perjury in
this Court, or of a murderer who is actually more deserving of a place
in this dock than these defendants are.
The correctness of this conception is confirmed again on the one hand by
the fact—already mentioned in another connection—that Dr. Romberg, as
has been proved repeatedly, actively intervened and prevented the use of
experimental subjects for experiments by Rascher when he could see that
nonvoluntary experimental subjects were to be used, and on the other
hand, it was known that in the high-altitude experiments which Dr. Ruff
had carried out with Dr. Romberg only voluntary experimental subjects
could be used, and only with voluntary experimental subjects could the
experiments succeed. The whole idea of this type of high-altitude
experiment (the Ruff-Romberg method) was based on the theory that the
experimental subject, immediately on recovering from the state of
unconsciousness—the “high-altitude malady”—reaches up with his arm and
pulls down the handle of the parachute, which in practice reduces the
speed of the fall, insuring the flier of a smooth landing on the ground.
All this necessitated active cooperation on the part of the experimental
subject; one was absolutely dependent on his cooperation, otherwise each
of these experiments would have been useless right from the start.
Naturally, Dr. Ruff knew this, as did Dr. Romberg, and therefore for
them the first and most important condition for each experiment of this
type was that the experimental subject should be voluntary (_see Ruff’s
statement in German Tr. pp. 6638-40_). There are therefore also
important inherent reasons why the statements by Ruff and Romberg are
correct.
Actually the high-altitude experiments carried out in Dachau were
successful. They were of considerable help in clarifying the problem of
“rescue from great heights”, and this was only possible when the
experimental subjects themselves cooperated when they took part in the
experiments voluntarily and took an interest in them. This was, by the
way, also the reason why this type of high-altitude experiment could not
be made with animals as experimental subjects, a fact which, for
example, Ruff and Romberg pointed out in their summary report of 28 July
1942. (_NO-402, Pros. Ex. 66._)
I come, therefore, to the following conclusion: There can be no doubt
that the experimental subjects for the Dachau high-altitude experiments
were volunteers, at least as far as the experiments authorized by Ruff
are concerned. Whether volunteers reported for the special experiments
continued by Dr. Rascher or whether the prisoners were forced into the
experiments by Dr. Rascher does not need to be examined, because Ruff
and Romberg did not participate in those experiments in any way. But
even if any doubt as to their being volunteers were possible, it cannot
be denied that Ruff and Romberg were firmly convinced that all their
experimental subjects actually were volunteers. This was stipulated from
the very beginning, and in all the discussions of Dr. Ruff with Hippke,
Weltz, and the representative of the SS, Ruff was consequently convinced
that only volunteers were actually concerned.
Dr. Ruff’s conviction was strengthened through personal conversation
with various prisoners on that day on which he himself went to Dachau to
control the execution of the experiments and to ascertain that
everything was carried out in a completely orderly manner. And finally
in this connection it cannot be overlooked that Dr. Ruff, as he has
stated under oath and as is confirmed by numerous affidavits, had never
at any other time in his life worked with nonvoluntary experimental
subjects. Just because he considered it indispensable for the success of
the experiments that the experimental subjects were volunteers, that
they themselves cooperate, Dr. Ruff never thought that the Dachau
prisoners were not fully and completely in agreement with the
experiments.
* * * * *
It is obvious that the voluntary character of these experimental
subjects, whether an actual fact or whether Dr. Ruff deluded himself
into believing that this was the case, does not in itself relieve him of
all responsibility. On the contrary, Dr. Ruff himself is of the opinion
that, besides voluntariness, several other conditions would have to be
fulfilled before the experiments and the way in which they were
performed could be considered lawful:
1. The experiment would have to be _necessary_, particularly necessary
in the interests of aviation and thus essential to the fatherland’s war
effort. This condition is obviously fulfilled. This is confirmed above
all by the statement of the witness Dr. Hippke who stated that it was
Dr. Ruff’s duty to work on the research tasks assigned to him by the
Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe and to submit reports on them to
the Medical Inspectorate.
The experiments carried out by Ruff were necessary, for “high-altitude
experiments in particular have been undertaken intensively in America,
too, because the question of pressure drop [Drucksturz] and the cabin
development is of particular importance.” (_Ruff 23, Ruff Ex. 22._) Dr.
Hippke developed this point of view not only during the trial but stated
it very clearly in his letter to Himmler, dated as early as 8 October
1942 (_NO-289, Pros. Ex. 72_), where he writes: “These-experiments
represent a very valuable and important supplement. The fact that such
an extreme deficiency of oxygen can be endured at all for some time is
very encouraging for further research.” Dr. Hippke’s opinion about the
necessity of the high-altitude experiments is therefore extremely
important because Hippke was the highest official expert in that field
in Germany at that time.
But most of all, the absolute necessity of Ruff’s experiments is
acknowledged by all experts who testified in this trial in connection
with these problems. I recall, for example, the statements of the
witness Dr. Scheiber that “at a later judgment of Dr. Ruff’s scientific
work, his name will be remembered together with the names of all of
those well-known scientific research workers who, by personal, devoted,
and heroic effort, rendered immeasurable service to the advance of
science and therewith to the welfare of humanity.” Professor Dr.
Strughold expresses himself in a similar way in his affidavit. He was
chief of a German institute for aviation medicine for several years and
writes concerning Dr. Ruff that “he (Ruff) can be considered as a man
who surpasses by far many academically proficient and recognized
scientists as far as scientific experience and scientific success is
concerned.” Of particular importance, however, seems to be the opinion
of Dr. Grauer, who is at present in America as a research worker and
experimenter in matters of aviation medicine.
* * * * *
According to the opinion of the Air Force General, Adolf Galland, and
the statements of all the other experts, it is an established fact that
the Dachau experiments of Dr. Ruff and Dr. Romberg were absolutely
necessary.
This necessity does not cease to exist because the people concerned
realized that with this first series of experiments, carried out in
Dachau in the spring of 1942, the problem in question (rescue from high
altitudes) was not yet entirely solved. Ruff and Romberg pointed out in
their final report of 28 July 1942, that the “danger of freezing has to
be considered.” On the basis of this final report the medical inspector,
Dr. Hippke, later pointed out in his letter to Himmler of 10 October
1942 (_NO-289, Pros. Ex. 72_) that in the Dachau high-altitude
experiments of Ruff and Romberg of spring 1942, “a very important factor
was not yet taken into consideration, namely freezing.” He remarked,
however, at the same time that “the necessary supplementary work was
started meanwhile.” Hippke did not leave any doubt that this fact would
not impair the value and the importance of the Dachau high-altitude
experiments, which he stressed; for it is in the nature of such
experiments that both parts of the problem, high altitude and freezing
temperatures, cannot be dealt with simultaneously, but that at first
only one part must be considered, then the other. This was Ruff’s plan
from the very beginning, and the special experiments with regard to the
influence of freezing temperatures on descent from high altitudes were
carried out according to plan in the Berlin institute of Dr. Ruff in the
summer and fall of 1942. (Compare this with Dr. Grauer’s affidavit of 28
January 1947.)
Another prerequisite for the justification of the high-altitude
experiments undertaken by Ruff and Romberg lies in the requirement that
the experiments should not be extended any further than is necessary for
the solution of the problems presented. This requirement, too, was
fulfilled by Dr. Ruff. It is confirmed by his own testimony (_German Tr.
p. 6704_), as well as by the testimony of Dr. Romberg (_German Tr. pp.
6879-80_), that Dr. Romberg was sent by Dr. Ruff to Dachau with a
definite program which carefully outlined the kind as well as the extent
of the experiments to be carried out. Only the problem of “rescue from
high altitude” was to be investigated. Only experiments for this purpose
were ordered by Dr. Ruff. Dr. Romberg was not allowed to undertake
experiments for any other purposes, and the experiments were to be
carried on only until either the problem was solved or its solution
found impossible. Had Dr. Romberg not adhered to this program, which had
been strictly outlined, had he carried out further experiments behind
Dr. Ruff’s back, the latter could in no case have been responsible for
them. Since he was not told of such further experiments by Dr. Romberg,
he could not stop them. However, it must be stated expressly that Dr.
Romberg adhered to Dr. Ruff’s orders; he did not carry out more
extensive experiments than he had been permitted and had been ordered;
this was done alone and solely by Dr. Rascher. The latter, however, was
in no way subordinated to Dr. Ruff, nor to Dr. Romberg; moreover, he
would certainly not have taken any orders from either of them. _The
final report Ruff-Romberg-Rascher of 28 July 1942_ (_NO-402, Pros. Ex.
66_) furnishes clear proof of the fact that Dr. Ruff and Dr. Romberg
were at all times conscious of their duty to restrict experiments to the
extent which seemed absolutely necessary in order to explore a problem
which was all-important at the time and to carry out no experiments
which could not be considered especially important and of great
consequence.
Even the introduction to this report of 28 July 1942 is significant for
the delineation of the tasks set for these experiments. It reads:
“Considering the urgency of finding a practical solution to this
important problem [the rescue of airplane crews from high altitude],
particularly in view of the prevailing experimental conditions, it was
necessary to forego for the time being a detailed clarification of the
purely scientific problems involved.” Here the basic tendency of all the
experiments finds its clear expression. Only such practical requirements
of aviation which could not be postponed during time of war should be
solved, while investigations of purely scientific nature, without great
practical significance, were to be excluded. This restriction of
solutions sought demonstrates that the scientists in question (Ruff and
Romberg) were not subject to the unbridled desire for experimentation
which may be found in people of Rascher’s type.
* * * * *
Were the Ruff-Romberg high-altitude experiments in Dachau dangerous to
life? If it is demanded that experiments on humans are carried out as
humanely as possible, pain avoided wherever possible, and damage to
health eliminated, it is obvious that deaths must be prevented in every
way possible. The conscientious research worker will always start from
the standpoint that experiments can only then be carried out when,
according to human estimation and the experience of science, death can
in no way be expected. According to German Law (Article 216 of the
German Penal Code) the intentional killing of a person would not be
legalized through his agreement, not even at his expressed desire.
To this question the presentation of evidence has shown the following:
1. In the Summary Report Ruff-Romberg-Rascher of 28 July 1942, it is
“expressly stated that in the whole series of experiments no death and
likewise no permanent oxygen deficiency damage occurred.” (_NO-402,
Pros. Ex. 66._) In direct contradiction to this appears to be, at least
at first glance, the intermediary report which Dr. Rascher alone made on
his experiments on 5 April 1942 to the Reich Leader SS Himmler
(_1971-A-PS, Pros. Ex. 49_) and also the following secret report, which
likewise Dr. Rascher alone sent to Himmler on 11 May 1942. (_NO-220,
Pros. Ex. 61._) These two special reports by Dr. Rascher prove that in
the experiments described by Rascher alone several deaths occurred.
The explanation of the apparent contradiction is shown clearly by the
presentation of evidence: In the experiments authorized by Dr. Ruff and
carried out with his approval not a single death occurred. Only the
arbitrary experiments which Rascher carried out without the approval of
Dr. Ruff and against his will, and which were ordered by Himmler, were
deadly.
This can be seen from Rascher’s intermediary report of 5 April 1942.
(_1971-A-PS, Pros. Ex. 49._) It falls into two parts.
In the first part Dr. Rascher describes the experiments carried out with
Dr. Ruff’s approval. He states expressly, “the experiments conducted by
myself and Dr. Romberg,” and he confirms that even “in a total of 15
extreme experiments, none of the experimental subjects died. Severe
high-altitude sickness with unconsciousness occurred; however, the
subject was always fully capable of action when approximately 7 km. was
attained in the descent.”
In the second part, Rascher then describes his arbitrary experiments of
which Ruff knew nothing, and was permitted to know nothing. This second
part of the report is much more extensive and detailed than the first.
That can be explained without difficulty because the experiments
mentioned in this second part were carried out by Rascher himself; here
he could describe the “merit” of the results he apparently gained all by
himself. From this second part he obviously also hoped for complete new
results for science, which he emphasized in the accompanying letter to
Himmler of 5 April 1942, and he was obviously very proud that following
his suggestions (as he emphasized) such “interesting standard
experiments” were carried out. All this referred exclusively to the
arbitrary experiments mentioned in the second part of the report, which
Rascher carried out alone without the assistance of Dr. Romberg and
without the authorization and previous knowledge of Dr. Ruff.
(_1971-A-PS, Pros. Ex. 49._)
Rascher himself made this distinction in his report (_1971-A-PS, Pros.
Ex. 49_): He contrasts in the second part of his report the “extremely
dangerous experiments” with the “experiments carried out by myself
(Rascher) and Romberg,” while he specially asked for an “SS doctor from
the camp as witness” for the arbitrary experiments of the second part of
his report, as “I carried out these experiments by myself.” But surely
Dr. Rascher had his reasons for specially requesting “a camp doctor as a
witness” for these experiments (which are described in the second part
of his report), but intentionally kept Dr. Romberg away. Dr. Rascher
indicates these reasons in his accompanying letter of 5 April 1942,
talking about difficulties which the Luftwaffe created for him up to
that time, whose removal he hopes for by the intervention of SS Fuehrer
Sievers. These difficulties which hindered the research work of Rascher
were discussed in various other documents which concerned the use of the
low-pressure chamber and its return to Dachau, which the SS tried to
arrange but never succeeded.
If Dr. Rascher in his intermediary report (_1971-A-PS, Pros. Ex. 49_)
emphasized that “only continuous experiments are fatal at heights above
10.5 km.”, this plainly confirms, in Dr. Rascher’s own words, what Ruff
and Romberg stated from the very beginning, that two kinds of
high-altitude experiments were carried out in Dachau with the
low-pressure chamber. The one kind, which Dr. Romberg took part in and
Dr. Ruff knew about, was carried out completely humanely and without any
pain, and nothing happened; and the other kind, which Rascher carried
out alone by order of Himmler, without Romberg and without the previous
knowledge of Dr. Ruff, to which at one time an SS doctor was even asked
to attend as a witness and which caused several fatalities.
This result is confirmed by the second report, which Rascher again alone
(without the participation of Dr. Ruff and Dr. Romberg) submitted to
Himmler, dated 11 May 1942, as a secret report (_NO-220, Pros. Ex. 61_).
He describes here the experiments which he carried out jointly with Dr.
Romberg and again states: “On the average, the experimental subjects
were in complete accord of their actions at 12-13 km.; no disturbances
of any kind in the general condition occurred in any of these
experiments,” and even less, of course, a fatality. Only among the
experiments described under figures 6 and 7 of this secret report of
Rascher’s did fatalities occur, and that “during a continued
high-altitude experiment, for example after half an hour in an altitude
of 12 km.” But these experiments (according to figures 6 and 7) were the
arbitrary experiments in which Rascher had other aims in mind, which had
nothing to do with Ruff’s problem of “saving from high altitudes,” and
which were carried out by Rascher alone.
It is also interesting that Rascher still mentions the partial
assistance of Dr. Romberg in his first report (of 5 April 1942)
(_1971-A-PS, Pros. Ex. 49_) but does not say anything more in the final
second report (of 11 May 1942), (_NO-220, Pros. Ex. 61_) where he
described the affair as though he alone had carried, out the
experiments. Compare page 81, line 21: “Experiments carried out by
myself”; or page 79, lines 15-16: “_My_ heart experiments * * * that a
very big sphere of work opened up for _me_,” etc. By that Rascher has
clearly expressed that he did not have any assistance from Dr. Romberg
in the experiments he thought particularly valuable, when he explains as
particularly valuable his heart experiments and his observations
concerning air embolism. Those were all experiments in which Ruff and
Romberg had not the least interest, in which they never participated,
and for which they would never have risked the health and the life of an
experimental subject.
Even specialists like Dr. Ruff and Dr. Romberg could never understand
the scientific or other aim which Rascher had in mind in the case of
those arbitrary experiments with fatal endings. Even the layman can
easily recognize the basic difference between the two categories of
experiments. The legal experiments which had been authorized by Dr. Ruff
were always restricted to a very short period of a few moments; but the
fatal experiments of Dr. Rascher were, as he emphasized himself,
continuous experiments without oxygen, therefore experiments lasting
over 30 minutes. It is easily understandable that experiments of such a
length without the administration of oxygen may be fatal. To prove this
it would not have been necessary to sacrifice even one single human life
in these experiments. Serious research workers like Dr. Ruff and Dr.
Romberg had therefore never carried out and never authorized such
experiments. That was also well known to Rascher, and this explains the
fact as stated by Neff (_German Tr. pp. 668, 670, 671_) that Rascher
kept Dr. Romberg intentionally away from his arbitrary experiments;
furthermore that he even carried out his experiments at night to keep
them secret from Dr. Romberg, and that he also did not ask Romberg to
sign his intermediary report of 5 April 1942, nor his summarizing secret
report of 11 May 1942, which Romberg would surely have refused to do.
* * * * *
It would therefore be quite wrong to attribute to Dr. Ruff and Dr.
Romberg the intention of wanting to suppress something in their final
report of 28 July 1942. (_NO-402, Pros. Ex. 66._) For it is a proven
fact that not only Himmler was informed by Rascher of the cases of death
which had occurred, but that Dr. Ruff had also reported the cases of
death for which Dr. Rascher was guilty, to his supreme superior, the
Inspector of the Medical Service [of the air force], Dr. Hippke. For
this same reason he had caused the low-pressure chamber to be removed
from Dachau and had asked the witness, Dr. Hippke, to consent to this.
These proven facts show that Dr. Ruff did not conceal anything and had
nothing to conceal. The fact that the cases of death were not mentioned
in the final report of 28 July 1942 has therefore nothing to do with any
concealment but is only due to the fact that those experiments which had
fatal results had nothing whatsoever to do with the experiments of Dr.
Ruff and Dr. Romberg and their problem.
For the same reasons it is not surprising at all that Dr. Ruff did not
inform Dr. Weltz of the fatal accidents during the special experiments
of Rascher. Weltz was neither Ruff’s superior nor his subordinate, and
at the time when Dr. Ruff learned of the deaths which had occurred
during Rascher’s experiments, Dr. Rascher had already been transferred
from the Weltz Institute.
* * * * *
The defense, therefore, arrives at the following conclusion:
Dr. Ruff only did what his superiors ordered him to do. If they have
failed, they should be taken to account.
Dr. Ruff had no doubts concerning the orders of his superiors for his
assignment was urgently necessary in the interest of his country,
engaged in the most difficult war, and of its aviation. If Dr. Ruff at
the time had been able to read all the international literature about
medical experiments on human beings he would have learned that
experiments much more exacting and much more dangerous than those with
which he was familiar—which he knew and planned—were being conducted
everywhere, also on prisoners; and perhaps they are still being
conducted without the competent authorities or medical societies
declaring them impermissible and intervening against them. Over many
years, Dr. Ruff proved himself to be a particularly conscientious and
considerate man of research who devoted his entire activity primarily to
save endangered human lives. Neither can he be blamed for having
collaborated for a short time with Dr. Rascher. He (Rascher) had been
assigned to him as associate by his highest superiors; he had to rely
upon that. If they ordered him to work together with a man who, later
on, turned out to be a criminal, no liability can be charged to Dr.
Ruff. When Dr. Ruff saw through his colleague who was forced upon him
and realized his criminal activities, he immediately cut off all
relations to him on his own initiative, avoided any further
collaboration with him, and thus probably prevented much further
disaster.
Field Marshal Milch was acquitted as far as the Dachau altitude tests
are concerned.[21] Medical Inspector Dr. Hippke was not indicted at all.
Under these circumstances justice demands that Dr. Ruff be acquitted.
* * * * *
_EXTRACT FROM THE CLOSING BRIEF FOR DEFENDANT SIEVERS_
* * * * *
_Low-Pressure Experiments_
Low-pressure experiments (high-altitude experiments) were carried out in
the Dachau concentration camp from 22 February to the end of May 1942.
The first plans to carry out experiments “for rescue from high
altitudes” were discussed already in 1941. The experiments were an
affair of the Luftwaffe. (_1581-A-PS, Pros. Ex. 48._)
The carrying out of experiments for “rescue from high altitudes” was
agreed upon, as far as the Dachau concentration camp was concerned, by
the Reich Minister for Aviation (represented by State Secretary and
Field Marshal Milch) and the Reich Leader SS Himmler. (_German Tr. p.
274. Also judgment of Military Tribunal II, Nuernberg in case of Field
Marshal Milch. See Vol. II._) The witness Neff gave the exact date of
the start of the experiments. The experiments were started on 22
February 1942. The witness could remember this date so well because it
was his birthday. (_German Tr. p. 606._) After a few interruptions the
experiments ended in the second half of May. (_German Tr. p. 6779._)
When answering the question whether the experiments could inflict
torture and death on the experimental subjects, one has to distinguish
between the experiments which according to the detailed instructions of
Dr. Ruff were carried out by Dr. Rascher and Dr. Romberg in the Dachau
concentration camp, and the experiments which Rascher carried out either
with the knowledge and permission of Himmler, or without his permission
on his own responsibility.
With regard to the first experiments it has to be said that they caused
the experimental subjects some discomfort through high-altitude
sickness, but that on no account did they mean torture and death for the
experimental subjects. (Evidence of Dr. Ruff in direct examination.)
On the other hand the experiments which Rascher conducted on his
responsibility have, according to Prosecution Document 1971-A-PS (_Pros.
Ex. 49_), apparently to be judged in a different manner.
Sievers came in contact with the low-pressure experiments only; in the
second half of March 1942. By letter of 21 March 1942 Rudolf Brandt
replied to an inquiry of the Reich business manager of the Ahnenerbe of
9 March 1942 concerning Rascher, and informed him that low-pressure
experiments were carried out in the Dachau camp: “The Reich Leader SS
gave his permission on condition that Dr. Rascher would participate.”
(_1581-A-PS, Pros. Ex. 48._)
The cause of Sievers’ letter of 9 March 1942 was the statement of Dr.
Rascher to the curator Wuest, according to which certain research work
which he carried out for the Luftwaffe in Dachau, and of which he could
give no details, was to be supported by the administration of the
“Ahnenerbe”. (_German Tr. p. 5671._) Following this, Sievers went to
Dachau in late March or on 1 April 1942. (_German Tr. p. 5672._)
Thus this date was the earliest on which Sievers could possibly have
gained knowledge about the carrying out of high-altitude experiments in
Dachau. It is important that at this time the experiments had already
been under way for over a month.
The cunning Rascher took the first visit of Sievers as an opportunity to
invite Sievers to have a look at the experiments directed by him, in
spite of the fact that Sievers had nothing at all to do with the
carrying out of the experiments. Sievers watched two experiments. He
took the opportunity to speak to the two persons who were subjected to
the experiments on that day. Both told Sievers that they had volunteered
for the experiment. A few minutes after the experiment both experimental
subjects did not show any after-effects and finished the experiment
without suffering any bodily or physical damage. (_German Tr. p. 5741._)
The following proceeding shows the special care which was taken in the
carrying out of these experiments: It was agreed with the experimental
persons that in case of earache they were to point with the hand to the
ear. When one of the experimental subjects did this, Dr. Romberg
immediately altered the pressure conditions, and the behavior of the
experimental subject showed that he had no more discomfort. (_German Tr.
pp. 5743 and 6845._)
Since the question of the voluntary status of the human experimental
subjects may be of significance in the case of all experiments, a
comprehensive presentation of the most important depositions on this
subject is given here.
Himmler stated at the Easter conference in 1942, in answer to the
scruples of Sievers, that only volunteers were to be allowed to be drawn
upon for the experiments, and if the experiments were fraught with
danger to life then only major criminals under sentence of death and no
political prisoners would be taken. (_German Tr. p. 5677._) The witness
Neff testified that volunteers presented themselves for the experiments.
(_German Tr. p. 614._)
Dr. Craemer of the Mountain Institute for Psychology of the Army
Mountain Medical School [Gebirgspsychologisches, Institut der
Heeres-Gebirgs-Sanitaets-Schule] has, in an affidavit, reported a
conversation with Dr. Rascher in the course of which the latter said:
“Human experimental subjects. It is a question of major
criminals under valid sentence of death who come forward
voluntarily for the experiments in Dachau in order to have life
and liberty given to them if they survive an experiment.”
(_Handloser 37, Handloser Ex. 18._)
The witness Meine declared:
“* * * since, furthermore, I knew from the series of experiments
in Oranienburg that the prisoners had come forward voluntarily
in crowds * * * my suspicion was not aroused during these
years.” (_German Tr. p. 4864._)
Dr. Mrugowsky deposed the following in his direct examination regarding
yellow-fever experiments:
“Only volunteers were used, and Dr. Ding states in his
declaration (_NO-257, Pros. Ex. 283_) that he knew of a list,
and that for these kinds of cases always hundreds of volunteers
offered themselves because they would not need to work for 4
weeks and were better fed.” (_German Tr. p. 5195._)
Further, I refer to the affidavit of Dr. Morgen, which was submitted by
Dr. Mrugowsky’s defense counsel, Mrugowsky 32 (_Mrugowsky Exhibit 26_):
“At the conference with Dr. Ding I learned that the human
experimental subjects came forward voluntarily for these
experiments. * * * In the case of the prisoner whose treatment I
chanced to watch with others, I had the definite impression that
he was a volunteer.” (_German Tr. p. 5228._)
In connection with the high-altitude experiments in Dachau, I quote the
following from Dr. Ruff’s deposition:
“Professor Dr. Weltz told me that these human experimental
subjects were professional criminals who were allowed to
volunteer for the experiments.” (_German Tr. p. 6532._)
“Hippke told me also in this conversation that it was a question
of major criminals who could offer themselves voluntarily for
the experiments and who, following the experiments, were then to
receive in some form a mitigation of their punishment, either
reduction or remission.” (_German Tr. p. 6534._)
The chief of Himmler’s personal staff, SS General Karl Wolff, gave an
affidavit in London on 21 November 1946, which is of special importance
because Wolff himself watched experiments in Dachau together with
Himmler, and also reported to Hitler concerning the experiments:
“They (namely, the human experimental subjects) protested to
Himmler in my presence that—after their request to be sent to
the front had been turned down—they wanted to render a modest
voluntary service to Germany and thereby give proof of the good
will they really possessed. * * * That later low-pressure
experiments are said to have taken place on prisoners on a
nonvoluntary basis—of that I received no knowledge either from
Himmler nor in any other way.” (_German Tr. pp. 6757-58._)
Dr. Romberg declared in direct examination:
“In the course of time, not exactly on the first day, but as
time went on, I spoke of course with all of them more often and
in greater detail; then they told me gradually what previous
sentences they had had, what prisons and penitentiaries they had
already been at before coming to the camp. They told me also the
reasons why they had come forward and had placed themselves
voluntarily at the disposal of the experiments.”
To the question: “Do you mean by that, that all the human experimental
subjects who were used for the altitude experiments were voluntarily
human experimental subjects?” Dr. Romberg answered with a clear, “Yes.”
(_German Tr. pp. 6787-88._)
The following is quoted from Dr. Weltz’ deposition:
“When I first heard anything from Kottenhoff concerning
Rascher’s proposals, Kottenhoff spoke already of volunteers.
Later, after this conversation with Hippke I spoke again with
Rascher. Rascher also spoke of volunteers. We then had Rascher
at our joint consultation with Ruff and Romberg in my institute.
There, too, he spoke of volunteers. In the observations that he
made at the Nuernberg conference in connection with
Holzloehner’s lecture, he spoke of volunteers. He spoke further
of volunteers, on the return journey from the Nuernberg
conference, with Dr. Craemer from St. Johann. * * * Thus I never
heard Rascher speak otherwise than of volunteers, and, as I said
already, that was the reason why we did not speak for a long
time at all concerning compulsory experiments with Hippke.”
(_German Tr. p. 7064._)
The affidavit of the Polish Communist Wilschewske, an inmate of Dachau
concentration camp, which was read on 28 April 1947, deposes as to the
voluntary status of the human experimental subjects:
“Prisoners who came forward for these experiments did so, as far
as I know, voluntarily, because they could thereby gain their
own freedom and rehabilitation, and also favorable treatment for
their relatives.” (_German Tr. p. 6555._)
Dr. Becker-Freyseng deposed the following in his direct examination:
“Rascher spoke unequivocally of prisoners or criminal characters
who were available because of special sanctions * * * by Hitler
and Himmler, and through volunteering.” (_German Tr. pp.
7850-51._)
The witness Dorn, a former prisoner in Buchenwald, deposed in answer to
the following question: Were these people now forced into these
experiments or was there a possibility of volunteering?
“I should like to give you an answer to that. Imagine the
position of a prisoner who perhaps for years had not had enough
to eat to satisfy him, and who perhaps learns from a camp
conversation that if he were to offer himself for this or that
experiment he would receive a double or triple amount of food.
You can imagine that hundreds or more presented themselves
merely from the purely human urge to eat their fill once again.”
(_German Tr. p. 8620._)
Dr. Beiglboeck likewise makes assertions in his direct examination
concerning the voluntary status of the human experimental subjects, and
declares in conclusion:
“I had at that time absolutely no reason to doubt that this
information was correct. Superiors, officers of the SS, and the
human experimental subjects themselves admitted this to me. And
I do not know what more I could have done in order to assure
myself still further.” (_German Tr. p. 8701._)
The voluntary status of the prisoners is likewise confirmed in his
affidavit by the witness Dr. Lesse, who worked as a doctor with Dr.
Beiglboeck in Dachau. (_Beiglboeck 14, Beiglboeck Ex. 20._)
The witness Mettbach has also confirmed the voluntary status of the
human experimental subjects in connection with the sea-water
experiments.
Finally reference is made to the deposition of the witness Nales, who
was examined by the prosecution on 30 June 1947 in the second half of
the forenoon session, and who testified to the voluntary status of the
human experimental subjects used in the Lost gas experiments.
The evidence produced has not given the slightest grounds for believing
that Sievers had any knowledge at all that nonvoluntary human
experimental subjects were compelled to undergo experiments, or that the
experiments would be painful or fraught with danger to life.
As a precaution let us also examine the question as to what further
activity Sievers developed in connection with the low-pressure
experiments. From the document book presented by the prosecution it
appears that Sievers passed on letters which came to his office. Sievers
is mentioned in some documents. The following separate letters are at
hand:
In connection with the altitude experiments, the prosecution’s document
book contains the following documents in which the Reich Business
Manager of the Ahnenerbe is mentioned in one way or another. (_NO-263,
Pros. Ex. 47._) Letter from Frau Rascher to the Reich Leadership SS
dated 24 February 1942:
“Rascher requests SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Schnitzler to acquaint
the Reich Leader with the events and to say at the same time
that Rascher, as a member of the Ahnenerbe, definitely wishes to
participate scientifically in the experiments.”
From this it is seen how very keen even Frau Rascher was that her
husband should participate in the experiments in Dachau. This was at a
time when Sievers had as yet no knowledge at all of the altitude
experiments.
Letter from the Reich Business Manager of the Ahnenerbe to Dr. Brandt,
dated 26 August 1942 (_NO-221, Pros. Ex. 68_). This letter contains a
copy of a letter from Rascher which had as its subject a report by
Rascher and Romberg to Field Marshal Milch. The second part of the
letter contains the report and the assent to the publication of the
scientific results. Here the date of the letter must be pointed out, 26
August 1942, which was many weeks after the altitude experiments had
come to an end, in May 1942.
Dr. Brandt’s reply to Sievers, dated 29 August 1942 (_NO-222, Pros. Ex.
69_):
“The letter of the Reich Leader SS, with which he has forwarded
the report to Field Marshal Milch, was only signed and sent off
a few days ago. Copy of the letter of the Reich Leader SS dated
25 August 1942 is enclosed for your information.”
Here it is to be observed that this letter likewise was written long
after the conclusion of the altitude experiments and, like the preceding
one, contains nothing at all concerning the experiments. It cannot be
inferred from the letter dated 29 August 1942 that a copy of the report
sent to Field Marshal Milch was also sent to the Ahnenerbe.
Brandt sends Sievers a copy of his letter to Dr. Rascher dated 6
September 1942 (_NO-223, Pros. Ex. 71_). It contains the information
that Field Marshal Milch will ask Dr. Rascher and Dr. Romberg to meet
shortly and report.
Letter from Rascher to Himmler, dated 9 October 1942 (_1610-PS, Pros.
Ex. 73_). Sievers is mentioned in connection with the unsuccessful
report to Milch. It is worth noting that Rascher asks that the
low-pressure chamber may still be left at his disposal for further
experiments.
Letter from the Reich Business Manager of the “Ahnenerbe” to the
personal staff, for the attention of Dr. Brandt, dated 21 October 1942
(_NO-226, Pros. Ex. 75_ (_Pros. Ex. 110 in Milch case_); _1617-PS, Pros.
Ex. 111 in Milch case_). This letter contains the information that the
freezing experiments are finished and that the altitude experiments
desired by the Reich Leader SS can now be continued. For this purpose
the low-pressure chamber will be needed again, and the Reich Leader SS
is to write personally to Field Marshal Milch. The rough draft of a
letter of the Reich Leader SS to Field Marshal Milch was enclosed with
this letter. This rough draft is submitted by the prosecution as NO-226,
Prosecution Exhibit 75. This draft was submitted by Sievers because of
an assignment given to him by Himmler. The rough draft was drawn up in
accordance with Rascher’s suggestions. (_German Tr. p. 5682._)
This letter, dated 13 December 1942, contains several research
commissions given personally by Himmler to Rascher (_1612-PS, Pros. Ex.
79_). Number 5 reads:
“The procuring of the apparatus necessary for all experiments is
to be discussed separately with the offices of the Reich
Physician SS of the SS Economic and Administrative Main Office,
and with the Ahnenerbe Registered Association.”
A copy went to the Ahnenerbe.
This is a letter from the Vorstand [Board of Directors] of the
Siemens-Schuckert-Werke, Berlin, and concerns the ordering of an
electrocardiograph (_NO-3675, Pros. Ex. 548_). This apparatus was never
delivered because the “SS priority grade” was not certified. Let it be
remarked here, for the sake of understanding, that the designation “SS
priority grade” was in general use and had nothing to do with the “SS”,
the so-called “Schutzstaffeln” of the NSDAP.
Letter from Sievers to the Rector of the University of Munich concerning
the loan of different pieces of apparatus (_NO-3674, Pros. Ex. 549._)
Dr. Wuest was, as repeatedly pointed out, office chief of the Ahnenerbe.
As such he had exact information concerning the research commissions of
the Institute for Military Scientific Research. A simple way to obtain
the apparatus would have been an agreement made over the telephone. If
Sievers chose to do it by letter it was only because of the delaying
tactics practiced by him. This is seen clearly from the postscript
intended for Rascher, telling him not to participate. It is also worthy
of note that the apparatus was to be used in Munich and not in Dachau.
Sievers had no right to issue orders or instructions in connection with
the low-pressure experiments, as is seen from part III of the closing
brief. Sievers had not the slightest influence on the carrying out of
the experiments.
Sievers could have had no knowledge that the experiments might be
inhuman, because he, or the Ahnenerbe, was only brought in when the
experiments had already been in progress for over a month.
The question still to be examined is whether and when Sievers received
knowledge of Rascher’s reports concerning his experiments. To this the
following details are pointed out: On 5 April 1942 Rascher sent an
interim report on his low-pressure experiments direct to Himmler. He
asked that the report should be treated as secret. (_1971-A-PS, Pros.
Ex. 49._)
The acknowledgment of the receipt did not go through the Ahnenerbe but
went directly from Rudolf Brandt to Rascher. (_1971-C-PS, Pros. Ex.
50._) It is nowhere mentioned that a copy went to the Ahnenerbe. From
the distribution of the order issued by Himmler thereon (_1971-B-PS,
Pros. Ex. 51_), it is clearly seen that the Ahnenerbe received no copy
of the order.
On 11 May 1942 Rascher sent a further secret report direct to Himmler,
so that Sievers here too had no possibility of acquiring any knowledge
of this report. (_NO-220, Pros. Ex. 61._)
On 22 September 1942 the German Experimental Station for Aviation sent
copies of Nos. 2, 3, and 4 of the report “Experiments on Rescue from
High Altitudes” as “top secret” matter to the Reich Leader SS “to be
filed there”. (_NO-402, Pros. Ex. 66._) Even if the first page of the
report bears the note, “The investigations were conducted in conjunction
with the Research and Instruction Association the Ahnenerbe”, no kind of
proof is thereby furnished that a copy of the report reached the
Ahnenerbe. It is true that Sievers does not exclude the possibility that
such a report came to the Ahnenerbe, but he denies that he read such a
report, because it did not concern him, and it also did not interest him
as it dealt with medical matters. If he did read any of it, it was at
the most the short summary to be found at the end. (_German Tr. p.
5681._)
It must also be pointed out that there is nothing in this report which
could lead to the conclusion that the experiments had fatal results. The
prosecution’s expert Professor Ivy also confirmed this in answer to the
Court’s question: “Is there anything mentioned in the
Ruff-Romberg-Rascher report about experiments concerning which it can be
asserted with absolute certainty that fatalities, permanent injury, or
great pain have resulted in the case of human experimental subjects?”
The expert’s answer was “No.” (_German Tr. p. 9217._) In addition this
report was sent to Himmler on 22 September 1942, thus, long after the
close of the experiments. Sievers cannot then have gained any insight
into Rascher’s criminal activity from Rascher’s reports.
Sievers had not the power or the opportunity of preventing Rascher’s
criminal experiments or of bringing them to a standstill. It is true
that at the Easter conference in 1942 he tried to move Himmler to
discontinue all experiments in the concentration camps, or at least to
bring about the suppression of the research of Rascher and Professor Dr.
Hirt, which were not in harmony with the character of the Ahnenerbe.
Both his suggestions were refuted by Himmler’s declaration that “all
that” was no concern of Sievers and that he (Himmler) bore the sole
responsibility. (_German Tr. p. 5714._)
In spite of Himmler’s declaration, Sievers endeavored to halt further
low-pressure experiments, when the low-pressure chamber had been removed
from Dachau at the beginning of June 1942.
Already on 27 November 1942, the chief of the personal staff of the
Reich Leader SS, SS General Wolff, had applied to Field Marshal Milch in
order to make possible Rascher’s further experiments in Dachau. In the
closing sentence of this letter the loan of the low-pressure chamber is
once again requested. (_NO-269, Pros. Ex. 78_ (_Pros. Ex. 118 in the
Milch Case_).)
That General Wolff by Himmler’s orders laid great stress on making
further experiments possible is seen from the fact that a copy of the
letter went also to SS Oberfuehrer Dr. Wuest, who was office chief of
the Ahnenerbe. Thereby the special importance of the affair was to be
shown also to the Ahnenerbe, on which the obligation rested to procure
the requisite apparatus in accordance with figure three of Himmler’s
order of 7 July 1942 (_NO-422, Pros. Ex. 33_) and repeated later under
figure five of Himmler’s order of 13 December 1942 (_1612-PS, Pros. Ex.
79_).
When the Luftwaffe did not make the low-pressure chamber available
again, Sievers was commissioned to buy a special portable low-pressure
chamber for the SS. (_German Tr. p. 5800._) And then Sievers did
something unheard of and rang up Dr. Romberg of the German Experimental
Station for Aviation. Romberg was very much surprised at this telephone
call. (_German Tr. pp. 6839-40._)
Through his communication that he had been commissioned by Himmler to
procure a low-pressure chamber for Rascher, who at that time was still a
member of the Luftwaffe, he aroused the attention of the Luftwaffe. For
Dr. Romberg communicated this news to his superior Dr. Ruff, who, on his
side, informed Dr. Becker-Freyseng of the Medical Inspectorate of the
Luftwaffe. (_German Tr. pp. 6607-08, 7878_; _Becker-Freyseng 24,
Becker-Freyseng Ex. 11_.) This was what Sievers counted upon. The
consent of the Luftwaffe would have been necessary for the purpose of
sanctioning the requisite priority grade for a low-pressure chamber. The
Luftwaffe denied this necessity and thus the low-pressure chamber under
consideration for Rascher was not procured.
When Himmler in the year 1943—probably at Rascher’s urging—ordered
Sievers again to procure a low-pressure chamber, Sievers was able once
more to prevent one from being procured. This time he pointed out that
the research management of the Luftwaffe did not consider it necessary
to continue with altitude experiments. Sievers advanced this statement
at random, profiting by the fact that Rascher, though probably known to
the Medical Inspectorate of the Luftwaffe, was not known to the research
management of the Luftwaffe. (_German Tr. p. 5801._)
_Summary_
Criminal action on the part of Sievers cannot be proved in connection
with the low-pressure experiments. The carrying out of the experiments
was neither ordered nor arranged for by him. He did not come into
contact with the experiments until they had been in progress for over a
month. What Sievers saw, heard, and read about the experiments could not
in any way give him the knowledge that inadmissible experiments were
being made. Sievers had no knowledge of Rascher’s criminal experiments
while the experiments were in progress, because Rascher kept these
experiments completely secret. Sievers’ activity was of a completely
subordinate nature. Apart from that, however, Sievers helped to prevent
Rascher (whom Sievers could not bear, for he was a pompous fellow and a
protégé of Himmler) from being put again in a position to carry on
further low-pressure experiments.
There is no criminal guilt then on the part of Sievers, as far as
Sievers’ contact with the low-pressure experiments is concerned.
d. Evidence
_Prosecution Documents_
Pros.
Doc. No. Ex. No. Description of Document Page
1602-PS 44 Letter from Rascher to Himmler, 15 May 1941, 141
concerning high-altitude experiments on
human beings.
1582-PS 45 Letter from Rudolf Brandt to Rascher, undated, 143
nforming him that prisoners would be made
available for high-altitude research.
1581-A-PS 48 Letter from Rudolf Brandt to Sievers, 21 March 144
1942, concerning Rascher’s participation in
high-altitude experiments.
1971-A-PS 49 Letter from Rascher to Himmler, 5 April 1942, 144
and report, undated, on high-altitude
experiments.
1971-C-PS 50 Letter from Rudolf Brandt to Rascher, 13 April 147
1942, regarding his success with
high-altitude experiments.
1971-B-PS 51 Letter from Himmler to Rascher, 13 April 1942, 148
requesting a repetition of high-altitude
experiments on prisoners condemned to death.
1971-D-PS 52 Teletype from Rascher to Rudolf Brandt, 20 149
October 1942, requesting clarification on
the pardon granted by Himmler.
1971-E-PS 53 Teletype from Rudolf Brandt to Schnitzler, 21 149
October 1942, concerning the pardon granted
by Himmler.
NO-218 56 Letter from Rascher to Himmler, 16 April 1942, 150
reporting on high-altitude experiments with
fatal results and on experiments conducted
together with Romberg.
NO-264 60 File note for SS Obersturmfuehrer Schnitzler, 151
28 April 1942.
NO-220 61 Letter from Rascher to Himmler, 11 May 1942, 152
and secret report concerning high-altitude
experiments.
NO-402 66 Letter, 29 September 1942, and report, 28 July 155
1942, from Romberg and Ruff to Himmler
concerning experiments on rescue from high
altitudes.
343-A-PS 62 Letter from Milch to Wolff, 20 May 1942, 172
regarding continuation of experiments.
343-B-PS 70 Letter from Milch to Himmler, 31 August 1942, 172
acknowledging receipt of reports by Rascher
and Romberg on high-altitude experiments.
NO-289 72 Letter from Hippke to Himmler, 8 October 1942, 173
thanking the latter for his assistance in
high-altitude experiments in Dachau.
NO-224 76 Note by Romberg on showing of film in office 174
of State Secretary Milch and proposed report
to Milch, 11 September 1942.
1612-PS 79 Letter from Rudolf Brandt to Rascher, 13 176
December 1942, and Himmler’s order assigning
Rascher to high-altitude experiments.
NO-610 41 Inmates of the Dachau concentration camp in 898
different stages of simulated altitude in
the low-pressure chamber; postmortem
dissections of experimental subjects who
died from the effects of high-altitude
experiments. (_See Selections from
Photographic Evidence of the Prosecution._)
_Testimony_
Extracts from the testimony of tribunal witness Walter Neff 177
Extracts from the testimony of defendant Rudolf Brandt 183
Extracts from the testimony of defendant Romberg 186
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 1602-PS
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 44
LETTER FROM RASCHER TO HIMMLER, 15 MAY 1941, CONCERNING HIGH-ALTITUDE
EXPERIMENTS ON HUMAN BEINGS
[Stamp]
Sigmund Rascher, M. D.
Personal Staff Reich Leader SS
Archives File No. Secret/58
Munich, Trogerstrasse 56, 15 May 1941
Highly esteemed Reich Leader,
My most sincere thanks for your cordial wishes and flowers on the birth
of my second son. This time, too, it is a strong boy, though he arrived
3 weeks too early. I shall take the liberty and send you a small picture
of both children some time.
Since I want a third child very soon, I feel very grateful to you that
with your help, highly esteemed Reich Leader, the wedding is made
possible. Today I was informed by SS Standartenfuehrer Sollmann on the
telephone that the 165 marks as required for a wedding will be charged
to the account “R” and will be transmitted by the Ahnenerbe. I thank you
heartily! I only need a short certificate concerning Aryan descent for
the Luftwaffe, where the permit was already submitted. Tomorrow, prior
to my departure, I shall dictate a rough text to Nini D; she will then
forward the note to you, highly esteemed Reich Leader.
I also thank you very cordially for the generous regular allowance of
fruit; this is at present extremely important for mother and children.
For the time being, have been assigned to the Luftgau Kommando VII,
Munich, for a medical selection course. During this course, where
research on high-altitude flying plays a prominent part, determined by
the somewhat higher ceiling of the English fighter planes, considerable
regret was expressed that no experiments on human beings have so far
been possible for us because such experiments are very dangerous and
nobody is volunteering. I therefore put the serious question: is there
any possibility that two or three professional criminals can be made
available for these experiments? The experiments are being performed at
the Ground Station for High-Altitude Experiments of the Luftwaffe
[Bodenstaendige Pruefstelle fuer Hoehenforschung der Luftwaffe] at
Munich. The experiments, in which the experimental subject of course may
die, would take place with my collaboration. They are absolutely
essential for the research on high-altitude flying and cannot, as it has
been tried until now, be carried out on monkeys, because monkeys offer
entirely different test conditions. I had an absolutely confidential
talk with the representative of the Luftwaffe physician who is
conducting these experiments. He also is of the opinion that the
problems in question can only be solved by experiments on human beings.
(Feeble-minded individuals also could be used as experimental material.)
For the time being, SS men and some SS officers as well are detailed to
the antiaircraft school IV, for studying the range-finding technique.
The material is excellent. Nevertheless, I suggest that selection of
range-finding men among SS troops should be carried out according to the
methods of examination as used by the Luftwaffe. A still better
selection would thus be the result. I am able to judge because I am the
specialist for medical selection with the Luftwaffe range-finding unit,
and all those detailed to these courses once more have to pass my
examination. I therefore take the liberty to send to you from Schongau
the method of selection as drafted by me. For this, I received the War
Merit Cross, 2d Class, with Swords. It will not be a note for
instruction but a draft for a lecture. I prefer to have it forwarded the
direct way rather than that any SS officer should put it down in a
mutilated way during my lectures. A similar instructional note was
submitted to the Reich Ministry for Aviation.
Thanks to your generosity, the cancer research is progressing well, in
spite of the war.
I do hope that you, highly esteemed Reich Leader, are in perfect health,
in spite of your tremendous amount of work!
With my most hearty wishes, I am with
Heil Hitler!
[handwritten] Yours, gratefully devoted,
[Signed] S. RASCHER
[Handwritten] RUSH
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT 1582-PS
PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 45
LETTER FROM RUDOLF BRANDT TO RASCHER, UNDATED, INFORMING HIM THAT
PRISONERS WOULD BE MADE AVAILABLE FOR HIGH-ALTITUDE RESEARCH
AK/104a/LO Bra/V
[Stamp unintelligible May 2 (?) 1941]
SS Untersturmfuehrer Sigmund Rascher M. D.
Munich
Trogerstr. 56
Dear Dr. Rascher:
Shortly before flying to Oslo, the Reich Leader SS gave me your letter
of 15 May 1941, for partial reply.
I can inform you that prisoners will, of course, be gladly made
available for the high-flight researches. I have informed the Chief of
the Security Police of this agreement of the Reich Leader SS, and
requested that the competent official be instructed to get in touch with
you.
I want to use the opportunity to extend my cordial wishes to you on the
birth of your son.