dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
SIR DAVID MAXWELIYYFE: Well, now, take another experiment. It must have been the same in your Air Force as in ours, that one of the greatest difficulties,, or one of the things that one wanted to deal with, was those who came down, in our parlance, who came down into the sea; that is, what could be done and for what time they would survive. Do you say that you did not know about the cold test? According to this affidavit to which I have referred, Dr. Rascher conducted this cold test. That was for the Luftwaffe also. That was to see the resistance of the human body to immersion in water. Do you say that you knew nothing about that experiment also?
GOERING: I knew neither Dr. Rascher nor any of his experiments. The symptoms of cold experienced when the men fell into the water were known. Against freezing there existed an excellent powder, or some such stuff. Moreover, I knew that everything had been done to construct life belts in such a way that they would permit breathing in spite of breakers, and so on, and we also observed and studied the precautionary measures, the clothing, and the rescue methods of our opponents. I remember that I once held a pamphlet of that type in my hand, but that is all. Apart from that, people have been falling into the water for years, and have always done the most suitable thing under the circumstances: they have moved about, they have taken alcohol, and so on, to get warm again.
SIR DAVID MAXWFLIFYFE: Well now ...
GOERING: I beg your pardon, but there is one thing to which I attach very great importance, and it is this: The experiments with women, and so on, which were described here, are so utterly in contradiction to my views as regards women, that I would have resented such experiments most deeply, not just afterwards, but at the time. SIR DAVID MAXW'ELIFYFE: Well, now, just one other experiment, then I will. pass to the question of knowledge of these experiments at that time. Did you or did you not know that the Sanit5tswesen of the Luftwaffe were, in May 1944, working on experiments to render sea 'water drinkable, in which concentration camp inmates were used?
GOERING: No, that I did not know. But I would like to explain how it may have happened. Not even the Medical Inspectorate need have known of it. A task was set by the inspectorate, and even assuming that I had done so, it does not at all follow that experiments were carried out on human beings, which endangered their lives. If a medical officer of the Luftwaffe Reserve had any sort of connection, let us say, with Himmler or his Research Institute, for instance as a member of the SS, which was quite possible, then these were cross-connections of which the Luftwaffe Medical Inspectorate need not have known anything whatever. Not all methods of procedure were reported to superior authorities. SIR DAVID MAXWELTYYPE. The first letter that I put to you was dated 26 May 1942. You say that the facts which Field Marshal Milch was concerned with-I want to get it as exact as possible were merely formal methods of conveying the facts of that date? Do you remember that on 28 July 1942 Hitler issued a Fuehrer Decree, countersigned by the Defendant Keitel and by the witness Lammers, establishing a Co-ordination Staff for the Armed Forces to deal with health? That is on 28 July 1942. It was to co-ordinate the coming tasks in the field of health for the Armed Forces, the Waffen-SS, and subordinate organizations. And, if I may remind you so that you may fit it in your memory, "for the purpose of a comprehensive treatment of these offices, a sanitary officer of the Navy and a sanitary officer of the Air Force will be assigned to work under him"-that is the Sanitary Inspector of the Army. Now listen to this: the latter, that is, the medical officer of the Air Force, in a capacity as a Chief of Staff; that is the time when Field Marshal Milch was writing to Wolff about these experiments. Two months later there was a Fuehrer Decree, and one of your officers was to be Chief of Staff of this Co-ordination Staff.' Are you telling the Tribunal that you did not know about the Fuehrer Decree and that your officer was so appointed?
GOERING: Before giving my answer, may I have a look at the decree?
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Would you like ... ?
GOERING: Yes, I should like to see it.,
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-PYFE: I have only the English copy. [ document was handed to the witness]
GOERING: Yes, that is just what I wanted to find out. This decree has nothing whatsoever to do with experiments. It begins with the following-I shall translate it freely, I do not know the language so well. 	t "A planned co-ordination is necessary for the personnel and material in the field of health and in the whole Medical Inspectorate. I therefore decree as follows..." The decree created the post of the chief of the medical department-I no longer know the exact designation-in order to solve the shortage of medical officers and of medical supplies-that is especially emphasized here-and, of course, if necessary, to carry out joint research work. What we did in the field of research, especially during the war, is of course quite clear. Since the Army was providing the bulk of the medical officers and was receiving the largest amount of medicines and material, the Sanitary Inspector was put at the head of the department. Since the Air Force was the second largest branch of the Wehrmacht, the Chief of Staff was chosen from the ranks of the Luftwaffe. That is quite understandable.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: The point that I am putting to you, and I think you have gathered it, is that on 28 July 1942 there was this additional interest in medical matters and research which made Hitler assemble this co-ordinating staff. Now, I want you just to remember how that interest in medical matters was shown in your service. A month later, on 31 August 1942, your second man Milch was writing to Himmler. My Lord, this is Document Number 343-PS, the Exhibit USA-463. "Dear Herr Himmler: I thank you very much for your letter of 25 August. I have read with great interest the reports of Dr. Rascher and Dr. Romberg. I am informed about the current experiments. I shall ask the two gentlemen to give a lecture combined with the showing of motion pictures to my men in the near future." Now, assume that Milch is telling the truth for the purpose of this question, and that that letter was put in front of him by the head of your medical department for his signature; assume that, if you like. There is no reason to suppose that the head of your medical department was telling lies in the letter he put before Milch; no reason to assume that that letter is untrue, and if, in your service, lectures were given on these experiments with motion pictures to the men, are you still telling the Tribunal that you, as the head of the service, knew nothing about these experiments for your service that were going on?
GOERING: I am telling the Tribunal only the truth. First, this letter need not by any means have been submitted to Milch by the Sanitary Inspectorate just because it was a direct letter between Himmler and Milch. Secondly, while he was in the witness stand here, Milch ...
SIR DAVID MAXWELIFYFE: Excuse me for interrupting you. I am only quoting Milch's evidence. I was asking you to assume for the moment that Milch's evidence is true. It was suggested to Milch that his evidence wasn't true, and the truth was that you said it was his own letter. I am asking you to assume that Milch is telling the truth; this is the letter put before him by the sanitary department. That is why I put it that way. Now, continue your answer.
GOERING: I am afraid I did not understand you quite clearly. Did you read me a letter from Field Marshal Milch or did you read the testimony which Milch gave here? The translation did not make that quite clear.
SIR DAVID MAXWELIFYFE: I read to you a quotation from a letter of Field Marshal Milch to Himmler. And I informed you, in case you didn't remember, that Field Marshal Milch-that that letter was put in front of him by your medical department and that he signed it blindly. That was Milch's evidence. I asked you to assume that Milch was telling the truth. I don't mean that for the moment. I am asking you, as head of your service, if, these experiments were the subject of lectures and motion pictures shown to your own men serving under your command? Are you still telling the Tribunal that you knew nothing about them? ,
GOERING: I already said quite clearly and plainly that I myself knew nothing about them. I did not say that Meld Marshal Milch had made an untruthful statement. After all he must know whether the letter was submitted to him by the inspectorate or not; as far as I recall his testimony here on the witness stand, he cleared up this matter completely and emphasized that he made no report whatever to me about the details of these experiments. But, Sir David, may I once more direct your attention to this decree. I have meanwhile glanced through the whole of it. It has nothing at all to do with these experiments but, as I said earlier, Part I deals with the medical departments of the three Wehrmacht branches, and Part 2 deals with the relation of the army and civil medical health services from a purely organizational and administrative point of view.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: Witness, I just passed the decree, you know. I want your answer. Do you say that you did not know that lectures and motion pictures were shown to the men under your command, dealing with these experiments? I just want your answer quite clearly yes or no. Did you or did you not know?
GOERING: No, I knew nothing about that. May I ask you once more to take into consideration that the Ministry was an administration of its own, whereas I, at headquarters, dealt rather with strategic and tactical matters. I would certainly have objected to such experiments; even though the Russian Prosecution, I believe, at one time distorted this, I maintain this. In 1934 1 strictly forbade experiments and tortures to be carried out on living animals; kindly do not expect me to have permitted them to be carried out on human beings.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: It is not for me to comment. Plenty of people have standards with regard to animals which they do not apply to fellow-men. But this is a matter of comment and I do not wish to pursue it. Now, in November 1942-you referred to it in giving your evidence-Dr. Rascher was transferred soon after that from the Air Force to the SS. Before he was transferred, Himmler wrote to Milch on that subject after describing the experiments on the behavior of the human organism at great -heights, in prolonged cooling, and similar problems. I quote Himmler's words, which are of vital importance to the Air Force in particular: "These researches which deal with the behavior of the human organism at great heights, as well as with manifestations caused by prolonged cooling of the human body in cold water, and similar problems which are of vital importance to the Air Force in particular..." Then he says: "Unfortunately you had no time recently when Dr. Rascher wanted to report on the experiments at the Ministry for Air. I had put great hopes in that report because I believe that in this way the difficulties, based mainly on religious objections, which obstructed Dr. Rascher's experiments for which I have assumed responsibility, could be eliminated. The difficulties now are still the same as before.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: In these Christian medical circles the standpoint is being taken that it goes without saying that a young German aviator should be allowed to risk his life, but that the life of a criminal who is not drafted into military service is too sacred for this purpose and one should not burden oneself with this guilt." Then Himmler goes on to say that in view of the importance to the Air Force and also to the Waffen-SS, "however, in this connection, I suggest that in view of the liaison between you and Wolff," that is, Milch and Wolff, "a non-Christian physician should be in charge who would, at the same time, be informed of the results." Are you saying, Defendant, that you never heard, although Hitler had heard, that Christian medical circles were protesting against these experiments?
GOERING: I think you mean Himmler, not Hitler.
SIR DAVID M - AXWELL-FYFE: Himmler, I am sorry. Although Himmler knew, you say you did not know that Christian medical circles were apparently, according to this letter, publicly and insistently protesting against these experiments? Did you not know that?
GOERING: No, and they did not protest publicly. But I am very grateful to you for having brought up this letter which I no longer remembered among the many documents which have been submitted to me. It underlines clearly and unmistakably what I said before and I am happy that by the Christian medical officers who are mentioned here, the inspectorate of my Luftwaffe is apparently meant, because only the inspectorate could raise protests. And that is also the reason why this Rascher had apparently to leave the Air Force as his co-operation with the inspectorate no longer satisfied Herr Himmler; and therefore he transferred him to the SS. That emphasizes exactly what I said.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: I want you-again, I want you to apply your mind to this. You and Himmler were still on good -terms in 1942, weren't you?
GOERING: Until the end, Himmler always adopted a very polite attitude towards me, as befitted him.
SIR DAVID MAXWELL-FYFE: You were more than that. Within a few days of this letter you sent him an attaché-case of crocodile leather, a box of cigars, and a notebook for Christmas. This means that you were on good terms with Himmler at this time. Do you mean to say that you never heard, that Himmler never said to you, that Milch never told you, that your medical officer never said to you, that these experiments were being carried on and were causing protest in Christian medical circles? Did everyone conspire, Defendant, to keep you in ignorance of every matter that might be embarrassing to you? Now, is that the answer?
GOERING: The experiments and knowledge of them have nothing to do with the crocodile attach6-case and the notebook. These were Christmas presents in return for a present which Himmler always gave me for Christmas on behalf of the SS, and I always wanted to respond to this gesture. Secondly, no attempts were made to hide anything from me intentionally, but the various spheres, of activity were divided; there were important matters, very important matters, and routine matters which were treated by certain departments. The Medical Inspectorate was one of them. It was impossible to bring everything to my knowledge. Apart from that, I wish to emphasize again that I never heard of a public protest by Christian circles or doctors in Germany against such experiments during the war; such a protest would not, in fact, have been possible.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you any question to put, Dr. Stahmer?
DR. STAHMER: I have no further questions.
THE PRESIDENT: The Defendant can return to the dock. Dr. Gawlik.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Lordship, may I first of all apologize for my failure to be ready for the submission of my documents yesterday. I regret that this resulted in a delay of the proceedings, but defense counsel for the Organizations were informed that the sequence for the submission of documents would be different from that of the examination of witnesses, and the sequence of which we were informed was the following: Political Leaders, Gestapo, SS, and SD. I therefore assumed that I would follow the SS with the submission of documents. I ask the Tribunal to take into consideration that I am at present preparing my final speech and that I am therefore not able to participate in 411 the sessions.
THE PRESIDENT: Are you saying that you are not able now to participate in the session?
DR. GAWLIK: Now I am ready, Your Lordship.
THE PRESIDENT: I do not know how any such misunderstanding as you indicate can have occurred, because no order was given by the Tribunal that there would be any alteration of the order, and counsel for the defendants and the defendant organizations must understand that they must be here when~ their case is called on, and the Tribunal can't be kept waiting as it was yesterday. This is the first occasion on which it has happened, and the Tribunal hopes it will not happen again.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Lordship, it is a notice dated I August which is posted on the blackboard in counsel's room.
THE PRESIDENT: Just what does it say?
DR. GAWLIK: It says that for the examination of witnesses, the sequence was altered and the SD witnesses were heard before the SS witnesses, but that for the submission of documents and the final speeches, the old sequence will be followed, and then the sequence is quoted: Political Leaders, Gestapo, SS, and SD.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will inquire into that matter.
DR. GAWLIK: First of all, may I submit the records with regard to the witnesses I have examined. I shall now begin with the submission of affidavits. On account of the pressure of work in- the Translation Division, only some of the affidavits have so far been translated. I request that those affidavits ...
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Gawlik, as you weren't present the other day, perhaps I had better tell you what the Tribunal's wishes were and are with reference to these 'affidavits. A large number of these affidavits, if not all, have been summarized and the summaries set out in the transcript before the Commissioners, and therefore for you to give a summary again of these affidavits merely creates on the transcript of the Tribunal a repetition of the summary which is already in the transcript before the Commissioners. The Tribunal does not desire that. Therefore, if you will confine yourself to commenting on or summarizing the affidavits which have not been summarized before the Commissioners, that is all that is necessary, subject of course to offering them in evidence. Is that clear? I wasn't suggesting that you should bring before us affidavits which haven't been brought before the Commissioners, but I was merely telling you that we don't want to have a repetition of summaries which were put before the Commissioners and which are set out in the transcript before the Commissioners.
DR. GAWLIK: That was not my intention, Your Lordship. I have only asked for some of these affidavits to be translated, and I was going to submit only those completely translated; but of those which I wanted to submit I have received only a part fully translated. Therefore I cannot at this moment submit the translation of all the affidavits I propose to use, and so I request that I may submit some of them later.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Before you begin, this will be a convenient time to break off.
DR. GAWLIK: Very well. [A recess was taken.]
DR. GAWLIK: I shall present my affidavits in the order of the points of the Indictment, as they appear in the trial brief against the Gestapo and SD; that, I believe, would be of aid to the Tribunal. This order will not agree with the sequence of the numbers, but I believe that can be put up with, because this method will enable the Tribunal to see that I have endeavored not to present cumulative evidence. First, I come to the point of conspiracy, to the tasks, aims, and activities of the SD from its foundation to the establishment of the RSHA. On this, point I submitted Affidavit SD-27 by Dr. Albert; a summary appears in the transcript of 23 July 1946. The next affidavit refers to the assertion of the Prosecution that it was a task of the SD to obtain secret information on actual and possible opponents of the Nazis. The reference is the trial brief against the Gestapo and SD, Statement of Evidence III b, Page 17 of the English version. In this connection I submitted Affidavit Number SD-28 by Dr. Albert; the summary of the contents is also shown in the records of the Commission on 23 July 1946. Then on this point also I now submit Affidavit Number SD-1, by Ferdinand Sackmann.
THE PRESIDENT: Go on.
DR. GAWLIK: The next affidavit will prove that the reports of the SD to the Party Chancellery were not made for the purpose of supporting a conspiracy. On this topic I have submitted Affidavit Number SD-27. The short summary appears in the transcript of 3 August 1946. The next affidavit was submitted to prove the aims, tasks and activities of Group III-D of the RSHA and in connection with the fact that Group III-D did not support a conspiracy. For this point, I have submitted Affidavit SD-40, by Ohlendorf. The summary appears in the transcript of 23 July 1946. My next affidavits refer to the aims, tasks, and activities of the branch offices and the confidential agents, and to the fact that the tasks, aims*, and activities of the branch offices and confidential agents were not to support a conspiracy. In this connection, I submit Affidavit SD-65, by Professor Ritter. I asked for the complete translation of this affidavit, but I have not yet received it since the Translation Division is overburdened with work. I particularly call the attention of the Court to this affidavit. It was deposed by one of the best-known German historians, and I should like to quote the following from it: "Question One: 'Please give details of your profession.' Answer: 'Since 1925 1 have been Professor of Modern History at the University of Freiburg."' I omit one sentence. "Second question: 'Were you a member of the NSDAP or any of its branches?' Answer: 'No.' "Third question: 'Were you a member of a resistance group against the Hitler regime and were you persecuted by it Answer: 'Yes. I belonged to the circle of friends of Dr. Goerdeler who selected me as Minister of Education in his new Cabinet. In November 1944 1 was arrested in connection with the events of the 20th of July and was _placed before the People's Court in Berlin. On the 25th of April 1945, 1 was liberated by the Russian Army."'
THE PRESIDENT: The translation came through to us as "November 1934." Was it 1944?
DR. GAVVTLIK: Yes, November 1944.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. GAWLIK: "Fourth question: 'Do you know the activities of the SD Arbeitsgemeinschaft and where did you obtain your knowledge" Answer: 'Yes. My knowledge originates from my activity as Chairman of the Purification Committee of the University at Freiburg.' "Fifth question: 'What were the tasks of the SD Arbeitsgemeinschaft Answer: 'First, to keep the supreme SD command-I do not know the exact term-informed of feelings among the population and the criticism expressed on Party measures.' " To save time, I should like to omit the rest of this answer; I also omit the next question and come to Question Number 7: "'What were the aims, tasks and activities of the confidential agents (Vertrauensmdnner)?' Answer: 'The aims and tasks were essentially the same as in the case of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft to which the confidential agents belonged; but while the other members of the Arbeitsgemeinschaften were asked for information and requested to attend conferences with the SD only occasionally, the confidential agents were in constant contact with the SD.' "Eighth question: 'Was it the task of the confidential agents to collect and pass on remarks hostile to the State and to watch persons hostile to the State?' Answer: 'I do not know of a task of this sort.' "Ninth question: 'What was the purpose and what was the aim of the SD reports within Germany?' Answer: 'In contrast to the frequently "rosy" official Party reports, the SD reports were to give a picture corresponding to the actual conditions and feelings of the people. In the field of cultural policy, in addition, inadequacies and deficiencies were to be pointed out.' "Tenth question: 'Did the SD in Germany watch and report on your lectures and addresses?' Answer: 'Yes. I know that in the branch of the SD in Karlsruhe or in Strasbourg a number of reports and stenographic notes on my lectures and addresses were found. I can also say that several scientists and high officials corresponded with me on the SD's activity..."'