_EXAMINATION_
JUDGE SEBRING: Witness, when adult persons were selected for euthanasia
and sent by the transport to euthanasia stations for that purpose, by
what methods were the mercy deaths given?
DEFENDANT BRACK: The patients went to a euthanasia institution after the
written formalities were concluded—I need not repeat these formalities
here, they were physical examination, comparison of the files, etc. Then
the patients were led to a gas chamber and were there killed by the
doctors with carbon monoxide gas (CO).
Q. Where was that carbon monoxide obtained, by what process?
A. It was in a compressed gas container, like a steel oxygen container,
such as is used for welding—a hollow steel container.
Q. And these people were placed in this chamber in groups, I suppose,
and then the monoxide was turned into the chambers?
A. Perhaps I had better describe this in some detail. Bouhler’s basic
requirement was that the killing should not only be painless, but also
imperceptible. For this reason, the photographing of the patients, which
was only done for scientific reasons, took place before they entered the
chamber, and the patients were completely diverted thereby. Then they
were led into the gas chamber which they were told was a shower room.
They were then in groups of perhaps 20 or 30. They were gassed by the
doctor in charge.
Q. Have you ever been present when a mercy death was accorded to these
people by that process?
A. Yes. I had to be present because Bouhler wanted a report on whether
things were being done according to his orders, and in a dignified and
not a brutal fashion.
Q. And you found from your inspection and witnessing these ceremonies
that they were being done in accordance with Bouhler’s orders, in a
dignified and painless sort of way?
A. Yes. But let me say I was already convinced that the method was
painless. And I also saw that by this method the patient did not realize
that he was about to be killed. There were benches and chairs in the
chamber. A few minutes after the gas was let in, the patient became
sleepy and tired and died after a few minutes. They simply went to sleep
without even knowing that they were going to sleep, and that was one of
the most essential requirements.
Q. When was the first time that you witnessed one of these procedures?
A. The first time was on the occasion of an experiment with four such
patients. I think it must have been December 1939 or January 1940. I
know there was snow on the ground at the time. That is why I remember
these months. Bouhler, Conti, and I don’t know who else was there, there
were a few other doctors witnessing it for the first time. On the basis
of this experiment Hitler decided that only carbon monoxide was to be
used for killing the patients.
Q. Well now, before or after that time had you tried any other gases or
any other means of administering euthanasia to these people?
A. No, we—and by this I mean Bouhler’s organization—never used any
other gas or any other means.
Q. You found the carbon monoxide quite satisfactory, so you never had to
resort to any other means?
A. Yes. You can put it that way.
Q. Now, where was it that these four people were accorded the privilege
of a mercy death in December, 1939 or 1940?
A. That was in the first euthanasia station in Brandenburg.
Q. And who were the subjects that were used for that experiment?
A. They were four mentally incurable persons.
Q. Do you know what institution they came from?
A. No. That I don’t know.
Q. Were they men or women?
A. Men.
Q. All men. What were their ages, were they young men, middle-aged men,
or elderly men; how would you classify them?
A. I really don’t remember that.
Q. What can you say in regard to their nationality; do you know anything
about that?
A. They must have been Germans, they could not have been anything but
Germans, because according to regulations only German mentally defective
persons were used for euthanasia.
Q. And you say Hitler was there?
A. No. Hitler was not there, Bouhler was there.
Q. Bouhler?
A. Bouhler was there, Conti was there, and I believe Brandt.
Q. Karl Brandt?
A. Yes, Karl Brandt.
Q. Do you remember any of the other defendants who were there?
A. None of the defendants here was present except myself.
Q. Well, then you remember that you, Bouhler, Conti, and Karl Brandt
were there; now do you remember any of the other gentlemen there at the
time?
A. Yes. I said there were some more doctors there, but none of the
defendants here.
Q. Dr. Pfannmueller, perhaps?
A. No. Dr. Pfannmueller was certainly not there. They must have been
Berlin doctors.
Q. When after December of 1939 or January of 1940 was it that you again
witnessed a euthanasia procedure?
A. I should say that during 1940 in all the euthanasia institutions
existing at that time I personally assured myself once or twice that the
euthanasia was being correctly carried out. But I think I recollect that
the Hadamar Institute was only set up in 1941 and in that year I did not
witness euthanasia being carried out, so that this would eliminate the
Hadamar Institute.
Q. The Institute at Hadamar, I think you said there were five other
stations?
A. Yes. There were six altogether.
Q. So that during the year 1940, you assured yourself that each of the
five stations on perhaps one, two or perhaps more visits that the
procedure insisted upon by Bouhler was being carried out in a humane
manner, in a painless manner by carbon monoxide?
A. Completely imperceptible.
Q. And now who were the people—let me put it this way—the first time
at Brandenburg there were four people, all men?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, can you remember on your subsequent visits in 1940 to the other
euthanasia stations who the people were, men or women?
A. Both, sometimes men and sometimes women.
Q. And what can you say in regard to their nationality?
A. I can only say that they were only Germans, because I am perfectly
convinced that Bouhler’s regulations, which rested on an order from
Hitler, namely that no foreigners were to be given euthanasia, were
observed strictly by all the euthanasia institutions.
Q. Where were these stations located, Witness?
A. I don’t understand what you mean, where they were?
Q. In what part of Germany or in what part of Poland, or in what part of
Czechoslovakia, in what part of the Protectorate of Bohemia-Moravia, in
what part of Denmark, in what part of Holland, in what part of France,
and in what part of Europe were these stations located?
A. Now I understand you correctly. The first one was in Brandenburg on
the Havel in the neighborhood of Berlin about 70 or 80 kilometers away.
The next was the Grafeneck Institute, that was in Wuerttemberg. Another
institution was Sonnenstein and that is near Pirna near Dresden. There
was the Hartheim Institute which was near Linz on the Danube in Austria.
Then there was the Bernburg Institute on the Saale River near Dessau.
The Hadamar Institute is in Hesse.
Q. Were any of these stations located in that portion of Poland which
was occupied by the Germans in military occupation?
A. No.
Q. And the six stations you have just named were all the stations known
to you that existed; there were just six?
A. Those were the only ones, yes.
Q. Witness, can you approximate the population of Germany as it existed
in the year of 1939 or the year of 1940? Were there some fifty or sixty
million people?
A. No, roughly eighty to eighty-five million.
Q. Now by that, when you say eighty to eighty-five million, you include
the entire German Reich, including Austria, the Sudetenland, and the
occupied territory?
A. Austria and the Sudetenland, but not the occupied territory.
Q. And you estimate roughly there were eighty-five million people?
A. Yes.
Q. Of that eighty-five million, how many Jews would you say were living
in Germany at the time who were German nationals?
A. Maybe two or three million.
Q. You are talking now about the Greater German Reich, including Austria
and the Sudetenland?
A. Yes.
Q. You estimate there were between two or three million who were German
nationals?
A. Roughly, yes.
Q. Now with two or three million German Jews amalgamated into the German
population of eighty-five million people who were German nationals,
explain, if you will, to the Tribunal why it was that the German Jews
were excluded from the Euthanasia Program, if as you say it was a
salutary program according to people the privilege of a mercy death for
taking them out of their misery; why was it that the German Jews were
not included in that program?
A. I have already stated that. As Bouhler explained it, the blessing of
euthanasia should be granted only to Germans.
Q. I understand that, but I thought you said at that time there were
between two and three million Germans in Germany, German citizens who
were Jews?
A. Yes. That is so.
Q. Why were they not included in the program, if the privilege of the
program was going to be accorded to all Germans?
A. The reason possibly lies in the fact that the government did not want
to grant this philanthropic act to the Jews.
Q. They wanted to grant this philanthropic act to all Aryan Germans, but
did not want to grant it to German Jews, and they did not want to grant
this philanthropic act to German soldiers of the first war, who had
received mental injuries growing out of their war wounds. Is that
correct?
A. As I have already said, that was a great inconsistency in this
procedure and we often protested. However, it was determined by
considerations of a military and psychological nature.
Q. Thank you.
* * * * *
Q. Witness, I think you said yesterday afternoon that these six
euthanasia stations were located at Bernburg, Brandenburg, Hadamar,
Hartheim, Grafeneck, and Sonnenstein, is that correct?
A. Yes. That is correct.
Q. When were the gas chambers at these euthanasia stations built?
A. When the institutions were set up as euthanasia institutions.
Q. Can you remember the approximate dates?
A. No. I cannot remember the dates. I just know the years when the
institutions became euthanasia institutions—approximately. I know that
Grafeneck and Brandenburg were the first institutions to become
euthanasia institutions. It began at the end of 1939 at the earliest,
the beginning of 1940 at the latest. Sonnenstein and Hartheim were set
up in the early summer 1940. In the early summer or spring. The
institution at Bernburg was established in the fall or winter of 1940,
Hadamar, in the winter or spring of 1941. This is as accurate as I can
give it.
Q. You said the winter or spring of 1941. Do you mean the winter of 1940
or the spring of 1941? You said the winter or spring of 1941.
A. If I say winter ’41, I mean January ’41, but it might have been March
too, I don’t know.
Q. And you think that Hadamar was the last one that was set up?
A. I am quite certain that Hadamar was the last one.
Q. Now, of what materials were these gas chambers built? Were they
movable gas chambers, very much like the low-pressure chambers that
Professor Dr. Ruff talked about, or were they something that was built
permanently into the camp or installation?
A. No special gas chamber was built. A room suitable in the hospital was
used, a room of necessity attached to the reception ward and to the room
where the insane persons were kept. This room was made into a gas
chamber. It was sealed, given special doors and windows, and then a few
meters of gas piping were laid, or some kind of piping with holes in it.
Outside this room there was a container, a compressed gas container with
the necessary apparatus, that is a pressure gauge, etc.
Q. Now what department had the responsibility for constructing or
building these gas chambers, what department of the Party or of the
government?
A. No office of the Party. I don’t understand the question.
Q. Somebody had to build these chambers. Who gave the orders and who had
the responsibility of building them, was that your department?
A. I assume the orders were given by the head of the institution, but I
don’t know who actually did give the orders.
Q. In other words, were these chambers not built according to some
specifications, plans and specifications?
A. I can’t imagine that, every chamber was different. I saw several of
them.
Q. Do you know what department gave the order for having the chambers
built? Was that your department under Bouhler?
A. No. It was Bouhler himself.
Q. And he gave the order to the various heads of institutions to install
this chamber, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, how would the heads of each of these institutions know how to
install a gas chamber unless there were certain plans and specifications
given to them?
A. I never saw any such plan. I don’t know of any.
Q. Would you know how to go out and build a gas chamber unless some
engineer or planner had told you? Certainly I wouldn’t.
A. I don’t know whether I would either. Presumably he called in an
engineer.
Q. That’s what I’m trying to say. What engineer or group of engineers
was responsible for seeing that these gas chambers were built so that
they would do the job they were supposed to do?
A. There was certainly no group of engineers. I presume there was
somebody at the institutions who had enough technical ability to do it.
I don’t know.
Q. Then, so far as you know, someone at one of these institutions would
be told by Bouhler to construct a gas chamber and he would call—the
head of the institution then would call on someone, you don’t know whom,
to go out and build the chamber? Is that correct?
A. That is how I imagine it.
Q. Well, wouldn’t it make a considerable difference whether the chamber
was to be constructed for euthanasia by carbon monoxide or by some other
means? Wouldn’t there have to be some technical information available to
the head of the institution so that he could give directions to his
mechanic to build the thing to do the thing it was supposed to do?
A. I must say honestly I really don’t know anything about that. I can’t
judge.
Q. Do you know whether or not any department of the government, under
Bouhler, or under Brandt, or under anybody else, was responsible for
seeing that the gas apparatus was installed properly?
A. I don’t know, but I don’t believe so because I would probably have
heard of it.
Q. How large were these gas chambers?
A. They were of different sizes. It was simply an adjoining room. I
can’t remember whether they were 4 × 5 meters, or 5 × 6 meters. Simply
normal sized rooms, but I can’t tell you the exact size. It was too long
ago. I can’t remember.
Q. Were they as large as this courtroom?
A. No. They were just normal rooms.
Q. Well, a man of your intelligence must have some idea about the size
of these rooms. The assertion “normal size” doesn’t mean anything in
particular.
A. By that I mean the size of the normal room in a normal house. I
didn’t mean an assembly room or a cell either. I meant a room, but I
can’t tell you the exact size because I really don’t know it. It might
have been 4 × 5 meters, or 5 × 6 meters, or 3½ × 4½, but I really don’t
know. I didn’t pay much attention to it.
Q. Have you ever visited a concentration camp or a military camp of any
kind?
A. I visited a concentration camp, and I was once in a military camp as
a soldier.
Q. Have you ever seen a shower room or shower bath built into a camp of
that kind where the inmates of concentration camps, or where soldiers in
a military barracks, can take showers?
A. Yes, I have. In my own barracks.
Q. And would you say that this euthanasia room at the various
institutions was about that dimension?
A. I think it was much smaller.
Q. Well, perhaps we can get at it this way. I thought perhaps you knew
something about the mechanical construction that I supposed everybody
knew something about. This room of yours that you talk about, how many
people would it accommodate?
A. Yesterday I said that according to my estimate it might have been
twenty-five or thirty people.
Q. And that is still your estimate today? I remember yesterday that you
said that, and that is still your estimate today, it could comfortably
take care of twenty-five or thirty people?
A. Yes. That’s my estimate.
Q. Now, the carbon monoxide gas that was used for the purpose of
euthanasia, where did it come from? I know you said yesterday that it
came out of tubes very much like oxygen came in, but where did the tubes
come from? Do you know?
A. I don’t know. They were the normal steel containers which can be seen
everywhere.
Q. Do you know how they reached the camp?
A. That I don’t know.
Q. Do you know whether any department of the government was responsible
for furnishing the gas to the camp?
A. No. They were probably bought.
Q. You think then that perhaps the superintendent of the institution, if
he wanted some carbon monoxide gas, would just walk down-town and walk
into a store and buy a steel tube of it and put it under his arm and
carry it on back to the camp; pay for it out of his pocket?
A. No, not out of his own pocket but through the institution. The
institutions bought them, I mean.
Q. Do you know from what sources the institution bought it?
A. Yes. All the funds came from the Reich Ministry of the Interior. They
were advanced by the Party treasurer.
Q. Well, now, at that time, wasn’t virtually everything in Germany of a
critical nature on some sort of priority? Do you understand what I mean?
A. No.
Q. Would not the diversion of this carbon monoxide in tubes to the
various institutions have to be given a priority rating and approved by
someone or by some department in the government and thus be made
available to the hospitals? Don’t you understand what I mean?
A. Yes, I understand. I have no idea, but I don’t believe so. Why?
Q. What was done with the bodies of these people after mercy deaths were
given?
A. When the room had been cleared of gas again, stretchers were brought
in and the bodies were carried into an adjoining room. There the doctor
examined them to determine whether they were dead.
Q. Then what happened to the bodies?
A. When the doctor had determined death, he freed the bodies for
cremation and then they were cremated.
Q. After he had freed the bodies, had determined that they were dead,
they were then cremated? Is that correct?
A. Yes.
Q. There was a crematory built for every one of these institutions?
A. Yes. Crematoriums were built in the institutions.
Q. Do you know whether or not—what department or agency, either under
the government, that is, the Reich government, or under the
superintendent of the various institutions, was responsible for this
detail of cremation?
A. I don’t understand. Bouhler ordered the cremation. Bouhler ordered,
on principle, that the bodies were to be cremated after death. There was
no office for that.
Q. Was there any report made to anyone of the fact that certain people,
who had been selected for euthanasia had finally arrived at these
institutions, had actually been accorded the privilege of mercy deaths
and then had been cremated?
A. No. I know nothing about that.
Q. No records were kept at all?
A. Oh, I thought you said reports. Now you mean records?
Q. I don’t care what you call it. There must have been a report or
record of some kind kept of these people. Was there?
A. Yes, of course. Not only the case histories, but the personal data of
the individual patients were collected at the euthanasia institution and
there the death records were added and whatever else was available. In
my direct examination I pointed out that there were announcements to the
agencies concerned, for example, the guardianship court. All these files
were sent to Tiergartenstrasse 4.
Q. They were finally sent to Tiergartenstrasse 4?
A. Yes.
Q. Isn’t it true that only in that way could an accurate record or
report of this program be made?
A. I didn’t understand. Whether this fact created accurate records about
the people, or whether records were kept?
Q. Records were kept, were they not, of this entire transaction of each
individual from the time he was expertized?
A. Yes.
Q. Until finally he was cremated?
A. Yes.
Q. And those records were filed with T-4?
A. Yes. They were kept there.
Q. Now, I believe you said that these euthanasia chambers were built to
resemble shower rooms?
A. Yes. That’s how I remember it.
Q. And the only people that were accorded euthanasia were people who
were incurably insane, I think you said?
A. Yes.
Q. These were people who, as you put it, on ethical grounds did not have
the mental capacity either to consent or to resist the decision to grant
them euthanasia, and that consequently as you viewed it, it was a humane
procedure to accord them a mercy death; is that correct, did I
understand you correctly?
A. Yes.
Q. Now, were these people, the ones whom you saw, so insane as not to
understand where they were or what was going on around them?
A. I can only say that of course I am not a doctor and therefore not in
a position to judge the condition of such patients, but when I was at
such institutions I myself saw that the patients, in as far as they were
able to walk, went into these chambers or rooms where they were told to
go without any objection and sat down on the benches or lay down and
were quite quiet.
I don’t know to what extent they realized where they were. I do know,
however, that they were not in any way worried, but perfectly calm.
Bouhler had ordered that the doctors were to arrange things so that the
patients would not realize what was being done to them.
Q. And that was the reason that the gas chambers were constructed to
resemble shower rooms, I suppose?
A. Yes.
Q. And these people thought that they were going in to take a shower
bath?
A. If any of them had any power of reasoning, they no doubt thought
that.
Q. Well now, were they taken into the shower rooms with their clothes
on, or were they nude?
A. No. They were nude.
Q. In every case?
A. Whenever I saw them, yes.
Q. And you said, I believe, yesterday that you witnessed perhaps some 10
to 12, or 15, or 20 occasions when groups were accorded mercy deaths?
A. No. I said that I visited each of the institutions, with the
exception of Hadamar, at least once, perhaps twice.
Q. And on each occasion did you witness the according of a mercy death
to a group?
A. Yes.
Q. And I believe you said yesterday that some of these groups were
adults, that some groups were men, other groups were women, and that on
some occasions the groups were made up of both men and women, is that
correct?
A. No. Apparently I did not express myself clearly. They were either men
or women, but I saw both.
Q. And you think perhaps you saw as many as 20 to 30 comfortably
accommodated in the chamber?
A. Yes, quite comfortably. There was plenty of room.
* * * * *
_CROSS-EXAMINATION_
* * * * *
DR. HOCHWALD: You never cooperated in the program of extermination of
the Jews, is that correct?
DEFENDANT BRACK: No. I personally never did.
Q. Is the name Eichmann, Obersturmbannfuehrer Adolf Eichmann, familiar
to you?
A. Yes. I know the name now.
Q. You did not know him before? That is, during the war?
A. No, not to my knowledge.
Q. Did you know anything about his activities during the war from your
own knowledge, not what you heard now?
A. I cannot remember ever having heard the name Eichmann before.
Q. In order to keep the record straight I would like to offer Document
NO-2737. This is an excerpt from the judgment of the International
Military Tribunal about the activities of Eichmann, and I would like to
ask the Tribunal whether I should give an identification number to this
document or whether the Tribunal will take judicial notice of the
document.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: While the Tribunal will take judicial notice of
the document mentioned, it would be convenient to have an identification
number for the purpose of identification only.
DR. HOCHWALD: So it will be Prosecution Exhibit 505 for identification;
extract from the judgment of the International Military Tribunal:[116]
“In the summer of 1941, however, plans were made for the ‘final
solution’ of the Jewish question in Europe. This ‘final
solution’ meant the extermination of the Jews, which early in
1939 Hitler had threatened would be one of the consequences of
an outbreak of war, and a special section in the Gestapo under
Adolf Eichmann, as head of Section B-4 of the Gestapo, was
formed to carry out the policy * * *
* * * * *
“* * * Adolf Eichmann, who had been put in charge of this
program by Hitler, has estimated that the policy pursued
resulted in the killing of 6,000,000 Jews, of which 4,000,000
were killed in the extermination institutions.”
Did you ever have any conferences or discussions with Eichmann
concerning the extermination of the Jews and the solution of the Jewish
problem?
DEFENDANT BRACK: I already said that I did not remember having heard the
name Eichmann at all.
Q. I want to put to you NO-997, which is Prosecution Exhibit 506 for
identification, your Honors. This is a draft of a letter from the Reich
Minister for the Occupied Eastern Territories to the Reich Commissioner
for the East:
“Solution of the Jewish Problem.
“Reference: Your report of 4 October 1941, concerning the
solution of the Jewish problem.
“I have no objection against your suggestion for the solution of
the Jewish problem. Attached please find a memorandum concerning
the conversation between my expert consultant, Amtsgerichtsrat
Dr. Wetzel, Oberdienstleiter Brack of the Chancellery of the
Fuehrer, and Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, expert consultant to the
Reich Security Main Office. Please note the details of the
matter from this memo. Will you please take the necessary steps
at the Reich Security Main Office and with Oberdienstleiter
Brack from the Chancellery of the Fuehrer via your Higher SS and
Police Leader. Please keep me informed.
[Handwritten] F. d. H. M.
[For the Minister]
“2d Copy
“(_a_) Reich Security Main Office
“(_b_) Chancellery of the Fuehrer
Attention: Oberdienstleiter Brack,
Copy of (1), including enclosure for information.”
Did you receive a copy of this letter?
A. May I first ask you what the date of this letter is?
Q. Only 1941 is mentioned here. But that is the date I told you. Did you
receive a copy of this letter, Herr Brack?
A. I did not receive a copy of it nor did I even see a copy of that
letter, nor do I know this Amtsgerichtsrat Wetzel.
Q. Did you have a conference with Eichmann on this problem, on the
solution of the Jewish question?
A. I already said I cannot even remember the name Eichmann, nor can I
remember the name Wetzel.
Q. Do you know anything about the matters discussed at this conference
concerning the solution of the Jewish problem?
A. No. I know nothing.
Q. You have no idea. You never made any suggestions as to what kind of
treatment or what kind of gas chambers should be used for the solution
of the Jewish problem? You never did that?
A. I can remember nothing in this connection.
Q. You were questioned by the Tribunal last Friday as to whether plans
were made for the construction of the gas chambers in the euthanasia
stations or whether an engineer or specialist was ordered to assist the
directors of the stations in setting up such gas chambers, were you not?
A. Yes.
Q. You were not able to give any information to the Tribunal on that
fact, were you?
A. No. I said I didn’t concern myself with these matters.
Q. Is the name Kallmeyer, K-a-l-l-m-e-y-e-r, familiar to you?
A. Yes. But I can’t remember in which connection.
Q. His wife executed an affidavit for you here. (_Brack 39, Brack Ex.
23._) Do you remember him now?
A. Yes. Yes, I remember him now.
Q. Was Kallmeyer the engineer, or was he a chemist, who made these plans
for gas chambers and assisted the directors in euthanasia stations in
setting up these gas chambers?
A. No. Kallmeyer had to check that the gas chambers were operating
properly, but I don’t believe he made any plans for that purpose.
Q. Kallmeyer was the man who supervised these gas chambers, was he not?
A. I believe so, yes, but not for long, only for a short time.
Q. All right. And does the name Kallmeyer refresh your memory as to
eventual plans you made together with Eichmann about the solution of the
Jewish problem, Herr Brack?
A. No.
Q. I want to put to you Document NO-365, which will be Prosecution
Exhibit 507 for identification, your Honors. This is a draft from the
Reich Ministry for the Occupied Territories dated Berlin, 25 October
1941.
“Referent AGR. Dr. Wetzel
“Re: Solution of the Jewish Question
“1. To the Reich Commissioner for the East
“Re: Your Report of 4 October 1941 Concerning Solution of the
Jewish question
“Referring to my letter of 18 October 1941, you are informed
that Oberdienstleiter Brack of the Chancellery of the Fuehrer
has declared himself ready to collaborate in the manufacture of
the necessary shelters, as well as the gassing apparatus. At the
present time the apparatus in question are not on hand in the
Reich in sufficient number; they will first have to be
manufactured. Since in Brack’s opinion the manufacture of the
apparatus in the Reich will cause more difficulty than if
manufactured on the spot, Brack deems it most expedient to send
his people direct to Riga, especially his chemist Dr. Kallmeyer,
who will have everything further done there. Oberdienstleiter
Brack points out that the process in question is not without
danger, so that special protective measures are necessary. Under
these circumstances I beg you to turn to Oberdienstleiter Brack,
in the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, through your Higher SS and
Police Leader and to request the dispatch of the chemist Dr.
Kallmeyer as well as of further aides. I draw attention to the
fact that Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, the referent for Jewish
questions in the RSHA, is in agreement with this process. On
information from Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, camps for Jews are
to be set up in Riga and Minsk to which Jews from the old Reich
territory may possibly be sent. At the present time, Jews being
deported from the old Reich are to be sent to Litzmannstadt,
[Lodz] but also to other camps, to be later used as labor in the
East so far as they are able to work.
“As affairs now stand, there are no objections against doing
away with those Jews who are unable to work with the Brack
remedy. In this way occurrences would no longer be possible such
as those which, according to a report presently before me, took
place at the shooting of Jews in Vilna and which, considering
that the shootings were public, were hardly excusable. Those
able to work, on the other hand, will be transported to the East
for labor service. It is self-understood that among the Jews
capable of work, men and women are to be kept separate.
“I beg you to advise me regarding your further steps.”
Herr Brack, are you still going to maintain what you said here in direct
examination, namely, that you tried to protect the Jews and to save the
Jews from their terrible fate and that you were never a champion of the
extermination program?
A. I should even like to maintain that misuse, terrible misuse, was made
of my name. I see from this letter and from the date of this letter that
all these negotiations were carried out at a time when I was far away
from Berlin, when I was on sick leave. If I have the possibility I hope
I shall be able to bring witnesses who will testify to that effect. I
must frankly admit that at this period something was going on which
entirely contradicted my opinion, but this could only have been done
under misuse of my name and my agency. I was not willing to participate
in these things.
Q. Can you tell me, Herr Brack, where Riga and Minsk are located?
A. Riga is on the Baltic in Latvia, and Minsk is in Russia.
Q. These two places were outside Germany, were they not?
A. Yes.
Q. Prosecution has no further questions at this time.