_DIRECT EXAMINATION_
* * * * *
DR. FLEMMING: I now turn to the gas gangrene experiments. When examining
the defendants Handloser, Rostock, Schroeder, Genzken, and the witness
Bernhard Schmidt, we heard to what extent gas gangrene became prevalent
at the front. I refer you to the Document NO-578, Prosecution Exhibit
284. I shall have it submitted to you. Would you please tell the
Tribunal whether, in connection with gas gangrene, there was an extreme
necessity in concentration camps and in the army to discover protective
means to combat this disease?
DEFENDANT MRUGOWSKY: It was pointed out frequently that no infection can
be taken so seriously in the surgical field as the infection by gas
gangrene, since the mortality cases of these injuries were very high. In
concentration camps, as Noeling told me, we often had cases of gas
gangrene. Therefore, the Asid Works suggested that vaccine should be
used in the same manner as in the case of diphtheria. This was done in
these works sometimes in cases of tetanus. Such vaccine against gas
gangrene was produced by the Behring Works and was tested on students at
Marburg University at first, about which a publication is available. I
received a small part of this gas gangrene toxin in order to protect
people in danger. This gas gangrene toxin I gave to Noeling and he used
it at Buchenwald. The chart is available concerning persons on whom this
vaccine was used. It becomes evident from that that there is even an
increase in temperature following that vaccination, and that we are here
concerned with a completely harmless project which has nothing at all to
do with an infection.
Q. Dr. Ding in an affidavit (_NO-257, Pros. Ex. 283_) stated that at the
Military Medical Academy a conference took place on the question of gas
gangrene serum. What do you know about that?
A. It is correct that such a conference actually took place. Whenever
gas gangrene occurred a large amount of gas gangrene serum had to be
used for treatment in order to insure success. It was not a mere ten or
fifteen cubic centimeters, but 400 to 800 cubic centimeters which was
given to the patient in the course of a few days. In Germany all serums
which are obtained from animals, mostly horses, are mixed with 0.5
percent of phenol and carbolic acid—in order to preserve them—i. e.,
to 400 cubic centimeters I added a concentration of two cubic
centimeters of phenol acid. This amount is, of course, far above the
tolerance of human beings. Carbolic acid is one of the strongest acids
we possess. When treating people with gas gangrene serums a number of
deaths occurred. We discussed whether we were dealing with cases of
serum death, resulting from the serum, or whether death was caused by
the phenol added. Ding and I participated in that conference with
others.
* * * * *
Q. Did you give Dr. Ding an assignment on the basis of this discussion
to test this phenol question?
A. Yes, I told him to study the literature and to make use of the
libraries of the pharmacological and forensic medicine institute in
Jena. He was in touch with those institutes.
Q. Did you give him the assignment to participate in euthanasia with
phenol?
A. No. I never heard anything about his having carried out such
euthanasia, or of such killings having been carried out. I could not,
therefore, have given him any such order.
Q. You are aware that in an affidavit of your codefendant Hoven it is
stated that Ding himself carried out killings in Buchenwald with phenol.
Had you given him instructions to that effect?
A. No. I did not give him any such instructions, and there was no
occasion to do so because death by phenol is well known in literature;
simply reading works on the subject would have sufficed.
DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, I submit Document Mrugowsky 28. I should
like to submit it as Mrugowsky Exhibit 46. It is an affidavit of
Professor Killian, who is a university professor at Halle/Saale. He
says:
“In 1941-1943 I was consulting surgeon with the 16th Army in the
East. We had experienced numerous cases of death and injury to
the circulatory system due to the effects of gas gangrene serum.
In my opinion, these bad effects cannot only be attributed to
the inoculation of great quantities of unrelated serums, but
also to the addition of one-half percent phenol, as is
prescribed by law. Since up to 150 cc. of gas gangrene
serum—sometimes even more than that—was given intravenously to
wounded in the field, in my opinion the total quantity of phenol
added then approached becoming a danger. This became obvious
after four of my collaborators had had themselves injected
intravenously with a phenol common salt solution of 0.5 percent
density. All of them showed typical signs of phenol poisoning to
a different degree. In a letter to the medical inspectorate I
called their attention to the disappointing effects of the gas
gangrene serum and to the detrimental effect of phenol, and made
proposals for a change. Consequently, I was officially ordered
to report during my stay in Berlin to Oberstarzt Professor
Schreiber, who was a specialist on this matter. Present at this
conference were Professor Mrugowsky and a junior physician whose
name I no longer remember. I did not know any of the three
gentlemen; I saw and spoke to them then for the first time.
Apart from a few general questions concerning bacteriology, we
discussed mainly the gas gangrene serum problem. I had to give
an exact report on what took place at the front and on the
symptoms of poisoning. The discussion then took two directions.
First, the question whether it was possible for industry to
substitute a harmless disinfectant for the dangerous phenol, and
which one of the many substances would be suitable for this
purpose.”
Number two is not important. And I can skip the next paragraph too. I
come to the last paragraph:
“I well remember the substance of the discussions and declare
that no mention was made of any experiments in a concentration
camp, or of effecting euthanasia by injecting phenol. Such
considerations never even came up for discussion, let alone an
order in my presence by one of the medical officers. This would
certainly have remained in my memory. I may add that a reason
for such experiments did not exist since the symptoms of phenol
poisoning are well known and may be found in any book on
pharmacology. Apart from this, the question had been
sufficiently settled by the above-mentioned experiments which
the physicians had carried out on themselves. I am convinced
that Dr. Ding’s statements are not true.” [Signed by Professor
Killian, and certified.]
On the basis of instructions that he was to inform himself from
literature about phenol poisoning—instructions which you gave to
him—what did Ding report? Was the question of gangrene serum, and the
deaths resulting from it, settled?
DEFENDANT MRUGOWSKY: Ding made a report. I waited for it for some time
and when it did not come I myself read up on this question. Then I was
no longer interested in his report.
Q. On page 20 of the Ding diary (_NO-265, Pros. Ex. 287_) it says that a
special experiment on four persons was carried out on behalf of
Gruppenfuehrer Nebe. What do you know about that?
A. I have already mentioned the case of Hauptscharfuehrer Koehler, who
was at the hospital at Weimar, who died from poisoning. Inaccurate
statements were given about his death and autopsy. It was said that they
occurred in the Buchenwald concentration camp—which is not true. At the
discussion of the autopsy findings in the Reich Criminal Police Office,
the opinion had been expressed that this death might have resulted from
pervitin together with a narcotic drug. I participated in this
discussion.
DR. FLEMMING: Mr. President, I have already submitted the affidavit by
Dr. Konrad Morgen. (_Mrugowsky 29, Mrugowsky Ex. 36._) When I submitted
it I read the first one and one-half pages. I should now like to read
the following portion:
“Professor Dr. Timm”—that is, the forensic medical expert from
Vienna who performed the autopsy on Koehler—“came to the
opinion that there were two possibilities: first, that a South
American poison had been used which was totally unknown to us
and which dissolves completely in the human body; second, that a
combination of drugs had been used. One drug had excited the
circulation to the point of exhaustion, the other drug had acted
as an antidote. Professor Dr. Timm spoke of the possibility that
pervitin had been used together with a soporific. The idea that
a South American poison had been used was rejected from a
criminological point of view. From a technical point of view the
second possibility would have been quite possible.
“I had to report the case to the Reich Security Main Office.
Subsequently, a conference took place in the Reich Security Main
Office at which quite a number of persons were present. The
chief of the Reich Security Main Office [sic], Gruppenfuehrer
Mueller, presided. Gruppenfuehrer Nebe of the Reich Criminal
Police was also present, as well as Professor Dr. Mrugowsky. At
the conference various persons, among others also Dr. Mrugowsky,
pointed out that pervitin was not a poison, that it could be
obtained without a prescription. One of the gentlemen present
pointed out that in America experiments were carried out where
up to 100 tablets of pervitin were administered and the effects
were not fatal. But no one present could answer the question of
whether a combination of pervitin and a soporific would be
harmless, or whether it would lead to an increased reaction to
any one direction. The latter appeared improbable to the
experts. In order to settle this question Gruppenfuehrer Mueller
ordered that an experiment be conducted. He ordered that Dr.
Ding, whom he knew, should conduct this experiment in
Buchenwald.
“It was ruled that in this experiment, which was to settle the
purely criminal side of the question, only minute quantities of
pervitin and soporific should be used, since it would be
impossible to give large quantities of pervitin and a soporific
unobtrusively to the prospective victim. Moreover, larger
quantities of these drugs would have been found in any case by
means of a chemical analysis. The scientific theoretical problem
concerning the harmfulness or even deadliness of maximum doses
did not interest anyone.
“I was present at the experiments at Buchenwald.
“Five persons were presented to us for testing, because
Gruppenfuehrer Mueller had ordered experiments to be conducted
on five persons. I checked the papers of the persons to be
experimented on prior to the experiment. They were Russians who
had deserted, or workers, who had formed a gang, stolen, and
plundered, and had even been charged with murder. They had all
been sentenced to death before a special court in Pomerania.
Gruppenfuehrer Mueller had already previously been given the
order for their execution.
“I had agreed with Dr. Ding that a preliminary experiment should
be made on three persons to see the kind of reaction this
combination had in the organism. Some of the condemned could
speak German. They were told that the experiments were neither
dangerous nor painful, and that by taking part they would at
least put off their execution. Thereupon they all volunteered.
Dr. Ding chose three of them. They were transferred to Block 46.
There they were given a dose of pervitin and a subcutaneous
injection of a soporific. Then they had to go to bed. They fell
asleep. Their sleep was very restless. One of them slept for 20
hours. The others awoke a little earlier * * *.”
Then he says that none of them showed the symptoms which Koehler had
shown, and that the experiment was considered completed. In the last
sentence of the next paragraph he says, “Therefore, I told Dr. Ding that
he should not make any more experiments, and I reported this to
Gruppenfuehrer Mueller.” I shall read the last paragraph in another
connection.
According to the affidavit of Dr. Morgen, Mueller ordered Ding to carry
out the experiment at Buchenwald. Did you receive a report on this
experiment?
A. No, I did not receive a report on it.
* * * * *
_CROSS-EXAMINATION_
MR. HARDY: Prior to the afternoon recess, Doctor, we were discussing the
phenol problem. Now, in this connection, did you at any time propose
experiments to be conducted at Buchenwald concerning the tolerance of
serum or sera containing phenol? That is, did you propose that in 1942
or 1943 at any time?
DEFENDANT MRUGOWSKY: No. No such suggestions were made and they were not
necessary, because in Germany every serum contains phenol. In the German
serum industry there is no serum produced without phenol. I am speaking
of the sera for therapeutic purposes, not vaccines.
Q. Then at no time did you even propose that experiments be conducted to
determine the tolerance of sera containing phenol; is that what you say?
A. No. I never suggested that.
Q. Are you sure, Doctor?
A. Yes.
MR. HARDY: At this time, your Honor, I offer Document NO-1198 as
Prosecution Exhibit 466, for identification. This is a letter dated
Berlin, 24 August 1944. Subject: Service of experiments. It has
reference-file indexes, addressed to the chief hygienist on the staff of
the Reich Physician SS and Police, Berlin-Zehlendorf:
“Dear Mrugowsky,
“I am able to inform you that the Reich Leader SS has approved
today the series of experiments proposed by you.
“1. Specific therapy with typhus.
“2. Tolerance of sera containing phenol.
“I agree that both series of experiments in the department for
typhus and virus research of the Hygienic Institute of the
Waffen SS in Weimar-Buchenwald should be carried out, and
request that I be informed of the course of the findings,
perhaps through intermediary reports.”
“By order of Grawitz.”
The signature is “NICOLAI”.
Q. Now this states that the Reich Leader SS has approved a series of
experiments proposed by you and the experiments may be carried out in
Buchenwald. You stated that you never proposed experiments to determine
the tolerance of sera containing phenol. Now do you maintain, Doctor,
that you never initiated any experimentation to determine the tolerance
of sera containing phenol?
A. Yes. The connection here is something quite different. I shall
discuss point two first.
I have already said that in Germany there were no sera without phenol.
In connection with this phenol question in German serum, I informed
Grawitz about the question which is being discussed here—Killian and
Schreiber were present—and I told him that industry should try to
produce sera without phenol, as the French serum industry had been doing
for some time. I knew that suggestions to that effect had been sent to
the industry, but that the German serum industry had refused, during the
war, to effect any such basic change in its production because it was
not in a position to obtain the necessary special apparatus, filters,
etc. I therefore told Grawitz that in serum therapy for ordinary
diseases—I was thinking primarily of diphtheria, where large quantities
of serum were used at the time in the therapy against diphtheria once it
had broken out, because the highly concentrated serum was no longer
available in necessary quantities—I told him that in the case of such
diseases one should watch to see whether injury from phenol might
result. I told him also that it would be desirable to know whether serum
without phenol would definitely prevent such shock. I also remember that
this point too had connection with the fact that we had negotiated with
the Behring Works for the production of serum frequently in small
quantities in order to use it, and to compare it with other serum. If I
remember correctly this involved diphtheria serum, that is the serum
which is used most in Germany. The comparison was to be made of symptoms
following the administration of the usual antidiphtheria serum
containing phenol on children, and it was to be noted whether the
symptoms would appear; and the symptoms following the administration of
serum free of phenol were also to be noted. This was what Grawitz meant
here, and he called that a series of experiments. I might point out that
this expressed series of experiments in this case cannot refer to
artificial infection, because it is not possible to have a human being
artificially infected with diphtheria serum.
Q. Doctor, after receiving this confirmation of your proposals to
perform experiments as outlined in this letter, you must have issued
orders in that regard. Now to whom did you issue those orders?
A. No. I did not issue any orders. In my opinion this concerns
activities of some civilian hospitals; for among the troops, and in
concentration camps, we did not have any diphtheria patients.
Q. Just a moment, Doctor. But it is said in this letter that Grawitz
agrees that these experiments can be carried out in the Department for
Typhus and Virus Research of the Hygiene Institute of the Waffen SS in
Weimar-Buchenwald. Did you or did you not carry out these experiments in
Weimar-Buchenwald?
A. No.
Q. Never issued any orders to carry out such experiments to Ding, for
instance?
A. I have already explained what this series of experiments means. It is
possible that I suggested, for example, that he was to vaccinate one
child with one kind of serum and another child with another serum. That
is possible; I don’t remember about that. But to try out serum
containing phenol on human beings, that I did not order. * * *
-----
[80] Complete testimony is recorded in mimeographed transcript, 27, 28,
31 Mar and 2, 3 Apr 1947, pp. 5000-5244, 5334-5464.