d. Evidence
_Prosecution Documents_
Doc. No. Pros. Ex. No. Description of Document Page NO-247 197 Letter from Koppe to Rudolf Brandt, 3 May 769 1942, concerning the killing of tubercular Poles. NO-244 201 Letter from Himmler (signed by Rudolf 770 Brandt) to Greiser, 27 June 1942, concerning the extermination of tubercular Poles. NO-250 203 Letter from Blome to Greiser, 18 November 771 1942, concerning the mass extermination of tubercular Poles. NO-441 205 Affidavit of defendant Rudolf Brandt, 24 775 October 1946, concerning the plan to exterminate tubercular Polish Nationals. NO-246 196 Letter from Greiser to Himmler, 1 May 776 1942, concerning the plan for mass extermination of tubercular Poles.
_Defense Documents_
Doc. No. Def. Ex. No. Description of Document Page Blome 14 Blome Ex. 6 Extracts from a report on the German 777 Tuberculosis Conference of 18 to 20 March 1937, at Wiesbaden. Blome 1 Blome Ex. 8 Extracts from the affidavit of Dr. Oskar 778 Gundermann, 28 December 1946, stating that Blome opposed the plan to exterminate tubercular Poles and that the plan was never carried out.
_Testimony_
Extract from the testimony of defendant Blome. 780
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NO-247 PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 197
LETTER FROM KOPPE TO RUDOLF BRANDT, 3 MAY 1942, CONCERNINGTHE KILLING OF TUBERCULAR POLES
The Higher SS and Police Leader on the Staff of the Reich Governor in Poznan,
In Military District XXI [Wehrkreis XXI], Journal No. 132/42 g
Poznan, 3 May 1942 Fritz-Reuter Street, 2a Tel: 6501-05
Secret
To the Reich Leader SS, Personal Staff, Attention: SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Brandt, Berlin SW 11, Prinz Albrecht Street 8. Subject: Poles afflicted with TB. Dear Comrade Brandt,
May I ask that you submit the following matter to the Reich Leader SS:
The Gauleiter will shortly ask the Reich Leader SS for permission to have Poles who have been shown to be afflicted with open TB admitted to the detachment Lange for special treatment. This request is motivated by the Gauleiter’s serious and understandable concern for the physical welfare of the German people here. For there are about 20-25,000 Poles in the Gau who, according to the doctors’ opinion, are afflicted with incurable TB and who will not be fit for assignment to work again. In view of the fact that these Poles live very closely crowded together, particularly in the cities, and that, on the other hand, they come in constant contact with the German population, they constitute a tremendous source of infection which must be checked as quickly as possible. If this is not done, the infection of large numbers of Germans and most serious damage to the health of the German population must be expected. Today already the number of cases of Germans, among them also members of the police force, becoming infected by Poles with TB is increasing.
Under these circumstances, I consider the solution desired by the Gauleiter as the only possible one and ask that you inform the Reich Leader SS accordingly.
With comradely greetings, Heil Hitler! Yours, [Signature] W. KOPPE
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NO-244 PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 201
LETTER FROM HIMMLER (SIGNED BY RUDOLF BRANDT) TO GREISER, 27 JUNE 1942, CONCERNING THE EXTERMINATION OF TUBERCULAR POLES
Top Secret
Reich Leader SS Journal No. 1247/42 Reference: Yours of 1 May 1942, P 802/42. Bra/V.
[Handwritten] XI 2/97 Fuehrer Headquarters, 27 June 1942
Secret
Reichsstatthalter SS Obergruppenfuehrer Greiser, Poznan 1. Dear Comrade Greiser!
I am sorry that I was not able until today to give a definite answer to your letter of 1 May 1942.
I have no objection to having protectorate people and stateless persons of Polish origin, who live within the territory of the Warthegau and are infected with tuberculosis, handed over for special treatment as you suggest; as long as their disease is incurable according to the diagnosis of an official physician. I would like to request, however, to discuss the individual measures in detail with the security police first, in order to assure inconspicuous accomplishment of the task.
Heil Hitler! Yours, [Signed] H. HIMMLER
2. SS Obergruppenfuehrer Koppe 3. Reich Security Main Office Copies for information. By order:
[Signature] BR. SS Obersturmbannfuehrer. [Initialed] M 25/6.
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NO-250 PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 203
LETTER FROM BLOME TO GREISER, 18 NOVEMBER 1942, CONCERNING THE MASS EXTERMINATION OF TUBERCULAR POLES
Dr. med. Kurt Blome Deputy Head NSDAP Main Office for Public Health
18 November 1942 Berlin, SW 68, Lindenstrasse 42
To the Reichsstatthalter and Gauleiter, Party Member Greiser, Poznan Reference: Tuberculosis action in the Warthegau.
Dear Party Member Greiser,
Today I return to our various conversations concerning the fight against tuberculosis in your Gau, and I will give you—as agreed on the 9th of this month in Munich—a detailed picture of the situation as it appears to me.
Conditions for quickly getting hold of all consumptives in your Gau exist. The total population of your Gau amounts to about 4.5 million people, of which about 835,000 are Germans. According to previous observations, the number of consumptives in the Warthegau is far greater than the average number in the old Reich. It was calculated that in 1939 there were among the Poles about 35,000 persons suffering from open tuberculosis, and besides this number about 120,000 other consumptives in need of treatment. In this connection it must be mentioned that, in spite of the evacuation of part of the Poles further to the east, the number of sick persons is at least as great as in 1939. As, in consequence of the war, living and food conditions have deteriorated steadily, one must expect an even higher number.
With the settlement of Germans in all parts of the Gau an enormous danger has arisen for them. A number of cases of infection of children and adults occur daily.
What goes for the Warthegau must to a certain degree also hold true for the other annexed territories, such as Danzig-West Prussia, the administrative districts of Zichenau and Katowice. There are cases of Germans settled in the Warthegau who refuse to have their families follow because of the danger of infection. If such behavior is imitated, and if our compatriots see that necessary measures for combating tuberculosis among the Poles are not carried out, it is to be expected that the necessary further immigration will come to a halt. In such a way the settlement program for the East might reach an undesired state.
Therefore, something basic must be done soon. One must decide the most efficient way in which this can be done. There are three ways to be taken into consideration:
1. Special treatment of the seriously ill persons.
2. Most rigorous isolation of the seriously ill persons.
3. Creation of a reservation for all TB patients.
For the planning, attention must be paid to different points of view of a practical, political, and psychological nature. Considering it most soberly, the simplest way would be the following: Aided by the X-ray battalion we could reach the entire population, German and Polish, of the Gau during the first half of 1943. As to the Germans, the treatment and isolation are to be prepared and carried out according to the regulations of tuberculosis relief. The approximately 35,000 Poles who are incurable and infectious will be “specially treated.” All other Polish consumptives will be subjected to an appropriate cure in order to save them for work and to avoid their causing contagion.
According to your request I made arrangements with the offices in question, in order to start and carry out this radical procedure within half a year. You told me that the competent office agreed with you as to this “special treatment” and promised support. Before we definitely start the program, I think it would be correct if you would make sure once more that the Fuehrer will really agree to such a solution.
I could imagine that the Fuehrer, having some time ago stopped the program in the insane asylums, might at this moment consider a “special treatment” of the incurably sick as unsuitable, and irresponsible from a political point of view. As regards the Euthanasia Program it was a question of people of German nationality afflicted with hereditary diseases. Now it is a question of infected sick people of a subjugated nation.
There can be no doubt that the intended program is the most simple and most radical solution. If absolute secrecy could be guaranteed, all scruples—regardless of what nature—could be overcome. But I consider maintaining secrecy impossible. Experience has taught that this assumption is true. Should these sick persons, having been brought, as planned, to the old Reich supposedly to be treated or healed, actually never return, the relatives of these sick persons in spite of the greatest secrecy would some day notice “that something was not quite right”. One must take into consideration that there are many Polish workers in the old Reich who will inquire as to the whereabouts of their relatives; that there are a certain number of Germans related to or allied by marriage with Poles who could in this way learn of the transports of the sick. Very soon more definite news of this program would leak out which would be taken up by enemy propaganda. The Euthanasia Program taught in which manner this was done and which methods were used. This new program could be used better politically, as it concerns persons of a subjugated nation. The Church will not remain silent either. Nor will people stop at discussing this program. Certain interested circles will spread the rumor among the people that similar methods are also to be used in the future for German consumptives—even, that one can count on more or less all incurably ill being done away with in the future. In connection with this I recall the recurring recent foreign broadcast in connection with the appointment of Professor Brandt as commissioner general spreading the news that he was ordered to attend as little as possible to the healing of the seriously sick, but all the more to healing the less sick. And there are more than enough people who listen to illegal broadcasts.
Furthermore, it is to be taken into consideration that the planned proceeding will provide excellent propaganda material for our enemies, not only as regards the Italian physicians and scientists, but also as regards all the Italian people in consequence of their strong Catholic ties. It is also beyond all doubt that the enemy will mobilize all the physicians of the world. And this will be all the more easy as the general age-old conception of medical duty practice is “to keep alive the poor and guiltless patient as long as possible and to allay his suffering.”
Therefore, I think it necessary to explain all these points of view to the Fuehrer before undertaking the program, as, in my opinion, he is the only one able to view the entire complex and to come to a decision.
Should the Fuehrer decline the radical solution, preparations for another way must be made. An exclusive settlement of all Polish consumptives, both incurable and curable, would be one possibility of assuring an isolation of the infected. One could settle with them their immediate relatives, if they so desire, so that nursing and livelihood would be assured. As regards labor commitment, besides agriculture and forestry certain branches of industry could be developed in such territories. I cannot judge whether you can conceive such a possibility within your Gau. I also could imagine the creation of a common area for the settlement of the consumptives not only of your Gau, but also of the districts of Danzig-West Prussia, of the administrative district of Zichenau and of the province of Upper Silesia. In order to avoid unnecessary overtaxing of public means of transport, the transfer could be accomplished by walking. This would be a solution that world propaganda could hardly use against us, and one, on the other hand, that would not arouse any of those stupid rumors in our own country.
Another solution to be taken into consideration would be a strict isolation of all the infectious and incurable consumptives, without exception, in nursing establishments. This solution would lead to the comparatively rapid death of the sick. With the necessary addition of Polish doctors and nursing personnel, the character of a pure death camp would be somewhat mitigated.
The following Polish accommodation possibilities are at present available in your Gau:
Nursing Home Walrode 400 beds Nursing Home “Grote Wiese” 300 beds Smaller establishments 200 beds Liebstadt barracks, district of Leslau as of 1 Jan 1943 1,000 beds ————— Total 1,900 beds
Should the radical solution, i. e., proposal No. 1, be out of question, the necessary conditions for proposals 2 or 3 must be created.
We must keep in mind the conditions of the war deprive us of the possibility of arranging for a fairly adequate treatment of the curable consumptives. To do so would require procuring at least 10,000 more beds. This figure, under the condition that the program is to be carried out within half a year, could not be met.
After a proper examination of all these considerations and circumstances, the creation of a reservation, such as the reservations for lepers, seems to be the most practicable solution. Such a reservation should be able to be created in the shortest time by means of the necessary settlement. Within the reservation one could easily set up conditions for the strict isolation of the strongly contagious.
Even the case of the German consumptives represents an extremely difficult problem for the Gau. But this cannot be overcome, unless the problem of the Polish consumptives is solved at the same time.
Heil Hitler! Yours, [Signed] DR. BLOME
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NO-441 PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 205
AFFIDAVIT OF DEFENDANT RUDOLF BRANDT, 24 OCTOBER 1946, CONCERNING THE PLAN TO EXTERMINATE TUBERCULAR POLISH NATIONALS
I, Rudolf Emil Hermann Brandt, being duly sworn, depose and state:
1. I am the same Rudolf Brandt who on 30 August 1946 swore an affidavit concerning certain low-pressure experiments which were also conducted with test subjects of the Dachau concentration camp without their consent.
2. I am entitled by the same reasons as already stated in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of my affidavit of 30 August 1946 to state as follows:
3. In the middle of 1942 the Reich Governor of the Warthegau, Herbert [Arthur(?)] Greiser, suggested to Himmler to annihilate Poles infected with incurable tuberculosis. In submitting this suggestion, Greiser gave as a reason that the Germans in Poland would be exposed to this epidemic. Dr. Kurt Blome, Deputy Chief of the Main Office for Public Health of the NSDAP, and radiologist Dr. Hohlfelder conferred with Greiser about this matter. Dr. Blome was from time to time with Himmler and supported Greiser’s suggestion.
4. The Higher SS and Police Leader, and Chief of the Warthegau, Koppe, further, Mueller of Office IV of the Reich Security Main Office (RSHA), and the Chief of the Reich Security Main Office, Heydrich, were involved in this operation. At the end of 1942 and the beginning of 1943 Greiser carried out the annihilation of the Jews in the Warthegau, and the rounding up of the tubercular Poles was finished at the same time as the rounding up of the Jews. As a result of the suggestions made by Blome and Greiser numerous Poles were exterminated. Many thousands of tubercular Poles were taken to isolation camps where they had to take care of themselves.
I have read the above affidavit in the German language, consisting of one page, and it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I was given the opportunity to make changes and corrections in the above affidavit. This affidavit was given by me freely and voluntarily without promise of reward, and I was subjected to no threat or duress of any kind.
Nuernberg, 24 October 1946 [Signature] R. BRANDT
TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NO-246 PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 196
LETTER FROM GREISER TO HIMMLER, 1 MAY 1942, CONCERNING THE PLAN FOR MASS EXTERMINATION OF TUBERCULAR POLES
Reich Governor of the Reichsgau Wartheland.
Poznan, Schlossfreiheit 13, 1 May 1942 Telephone No. 1823 24
[Handwritten note] P 802/42
Top Secret
Personal. To the Reich Leader SS Heinrich Himmler, Fuehrer Headquarters.
Reich Leader,
The special treatment [Sonderbehandlung] of about 100,000 Jews in the territory of my district [Gau], approved by you in agreement with the Chief of the Reich Security Main Office, SS Obergruppenfuehrer Heydrich, can be completed within the next 2-3 months. I ask you for permission to rescue the district immediately after the measures taken against the Jews, from a menace which is increasing week by week, and use the existing and efficient special commandos for that purpose.
There are about 230,000 people of Polish nationality in my district, who were diagnosed to suffer from tuberculosis. The number of persons infected with open tuberculosis is estimated at about 35,000. This fact has led in an increasingly frightening measure to the infection of Germans who came to the Warthegau perfectly healthy. In particular, reports are received with ever-increasing effect of German children in danger of infection. A considerable number of well-known leading men, especially of the police, have been infected lately and are not available for the war effort because of the necessary medical treatment. The ever-increasing risks were also recognized and appreciated by the deputy of the Reich Leader for Public Health [Reichsgesundheitsfuehrer], Comrade Professor Dr. Blome, as well as by the leader of your X-ray battalion, SS Standartenfuehrer Prof. Dr. Hohlfelder.
Though in Germany proper it is not possible to take appropriate draconic steps against this public plague, I think I could take responsibility for my suggestion to have cases of open tuberculosis exterminated among the Polish race here in the Warthegau. Of course only a Pole should be handed over to such an action who is not only suffering from open tuberculosis, but whose incurability is proved and certified by a public health officer.
Considering the urgency of this project I ask for your approval in principle as soon as possible. This would enable us to make the preparations with all necessary precautions now to get the action against the Poles suffering from open tuberculosis under way, while the action against the Jews is in its closing stages.
Heil Hitler! [Signature] GREISER
PARTIAL TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT BLOME 14 BLOME DEFENSE EXHIBIT 6
EXTRACTS FROM A REPORT ON THE GERMAN TUBERCULOSIS CONFERENCE OF 18 TO 20 MARCH 1937, AT WIESBADEN
(Published in Berlin, Publishers: Julius Springer, 1937)
Extract from the report by Dr. Erwin Dorn, chief physician of the Charlottenhoehe Sanatorium, chief physician of the Tuberculosis Welfare Center of the Oberamt Neuenbuerg, Calmbach (Wuerttemberg) concerning Task and Aims of the Method of Treatment and its Application in Consideration of the Awaited Special Laws for the Tubercular Patients
* * * * *
[Page 770]
In former years, particularly at the beginning of this century, every attempt at a labor treatment of tubercular patients was condemned as useless, as only a limited treatment was known. On the other hand, in countries such as Holland, England, and Switzerland, where treatment lasting many months is possible, labor treatment was firmly established. We all know that several months are frequently needed in order to effect a change by the conservative or radical treatment. Our surgical patients (plastics, plugging, bilateral pneumothorax, premicectory) also require a long time until the severe stage of tuberculosis has been alleviated, and until they themselves again reach full working capacity. In a similar manner to those treated conservatively, these patients frequently remain contagious for the rest of their lives. In the sanatorium they are superfluous, in every day life, useless. But they should not be regarded as wholly incapacitated for years.
The aim of the labor treatment for active tubercular people is to fill this gap between the remedial treatment and full working capacity. It should be carried out in a work-sanatorium or a settlement.
Various conditions are necessary to enable tubercular persons with only a limited working capacity to derive satisfaction from their work. The right type of work must be provided for them; the work periods must be graduated according to the amount of work they can handle, and it must be suited to their capabilities and to what they did in their former life.
The place of work and the tools should be satisfactory. _At a work-sanatorium, in favorable climatic surroundings, these requirements are best met if the patients are assigned to factory work._ * * *
* * * * *
[Page 772]
In my last year’s report on the forced treatment of tuberculosis patients, I showed that a patient suffering from open tuberculosis should remain in a work-sanatorium or settlement until the disease no longer presents a peril to himself and to his fellow men.
PARTIAL TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT BLOME 1 BLOME DEFENSE EXHIBIT 8
EXTRACTS FROM THE AFFIDAVIT OF DR. OSKAR GUNDERMANN, 28 DECEMBER 1946, STATING THAT BLOME OPPOSED THE PLAN TO EXTERMINATE TUBERCULAR POLES AND THAT THE PLAN WAS NEVER CARRIED OUT
* * * * *
From the summer of 1940 on I was chief medical officer in the department of the Reich Governor in Poznan.
The frequency of tuberculosis in the region of the Wartheland, at one time incorporated into the Reich, was, according to statistics recorded before 1939—at the time of the Polish Health Administration—considerably higher than in the German Reich. When the administration was taken over, no modern welfare service for tuberculosis for the whole region existed. Among other things, there were insufficient beds to effect a successful treatment and the isolation of tuberculosis patients. The estimates made from the statistical material of infectious tuberculosis cases amounted to a round figure of 20,000 to 25,000 people of the Polish population. To check this tuberculosis epidemic, the authorities immediately began building 40 health offices with modern welfare centers, as well as sanatoria and isolation homes with approximately 2,500 beds for Germans and Poles (the latter under Polish medical direction with Polish doctors and Polish nursing staff), and these were speedily finished. These measures by the office of the Reich Governor were supported by the superior Reich authority (Health Section of the Reich Ministry of the Interior).
Since the above institutions were able to check the spreading of the tuberculosis epidemic to a certain degree, but particularly owing to the increasing difficulties arising from the war, they were not able to get the urgently needed sanitary measures running effectively, all the medical officers of the Wartheland untiringly continued to warn their superiors and heads of departments urgently of the danger.
The whole affair took an unexpected turn in the autumn of 1942, because the Gauleiter and Reich Governor Greiser supposedly said that in case of necessity he would stop at nothing to check the tuberculosis epidemic effectively in the Wartheland in the interest of the entire population.
* * * * *
I thought it my duty to talk personally to the head of the Department of Health in the Reich Ministry of the Interior and the Reich Health Leader, Dr. Conti, in Berlin, about this matter and the entire tuberculosis problem.
* * * * *
As I was unable to get a clear answer from Dr. Conti and could not be satisfied with such information as I received, I immediately called on the Deputy Reich Health Leader, Dr. Blome. I knew that he dealt with special questions concerning tuberculosis in the Reich Health Leader’s office. From the beginning Blome showed a clearly negative attitude toward any possible solution contrary to humanity or medical ethics. He showed me the draft of a letter addressed to Greiser; I asked him to make a few additions and alterations.
We discussed the formulation of the letter in detail from the point of view of convincing Greiser that an intensive continuation of the health and welfare measures so far taken, and a further extension of the health program set up for the fight against tuberculosis could effectively avert the acute dangers. The suggestion for a large tuberculosis settlement was particularly discussed. This plan was based on smaller examples, and its final aim was the establishment of a widely spread, but nevertheless closed settlement for tuberculosis patients and their families. In this settlement, all modern examination, treatment, isolation, and welfare facilities should be provided for the patients and members of their families who might be in danger.
* * * * *
Dr. Blome and I having agreed on the tactics to be taken toward Greiser and on the contents of the said letter, Dr. Blome began, in my presence, to dictate the draft of a new letter.
* * * * *
I concluded that the letter from Dr. Blome to Gauleiter Greiser was successful, mainly from the development in the fight against tuberculosis in the Wartheland. The regulation about tuberculosis relief having become effective for the whole Reich territory on 1 April 1943, a similar regulation for protection against tuberculosis could be decreed in the Wartheland in favor of the Polish population. A central office for the fight against tuberculosis was established under the management of a specialist. This office gave the same treatment to German and to Polish cases.
* * * * *
During my period in office as chief medical officer in Poznan, until January 1945, no tuberculosis patients were “liquidated” in the Wartheland as far as I know. I never received an order for such a measure, much less brought one about either directly or indirectly. On the contrary, the office always tried to give all tuberculosis patients proper treatment.
* * * * *
EXTRACT FROM THE TESTIMONY OF DEFENDANT BLOME[91]
_DIRECT EXAMINATION_
* * * * *
DR. SAUTER: Now, Witness, I come to a different problem. It is the suggestion made at that time that Poles suffering from incurable contagious tuberculosis should be liquidated. You were interrogated in January 1946 at Oberursel concerning your participation in the plan for the extermination of tubercular Poles, and also on 9 and 22 October 1946 here in the prison. Were the statements you made at that time true?
DEFENDANT BLOME: Yes. But I must add that concerning this matter of the tubercular Poles, as far as I recall, I said it was in 1943, while in reality, as the files now show, it took place in 1942. I must also say that my letter to Greiser in November 1942 has been shown to me here. I was asked whether this was my letter, whether I had written this letter. I said “No.” I said that because it was not a photostatic copy of the original, but a photostatic copy of a copy. I objected to several things in the letter and did not acknowledge it at that time. They were external matters which occasioned me to make that statement. Later, however, in December, when you took over my case, you gave me this photostatic copy, and I had an opportunity to study it carefully and reconstruct the conditions which existed at the time and, therefore, I now acknowledge this letter as authentic.
Q. It is true, Dr. Blome, that the prosecution learned for the first time of this plan to exterminate the Poles through you? Dr. Blome, what can you say about that?
A. Yes. The prosecution learned from me for the first time of this plan. In 1942 I told my interrogator Captain Urbach at Oberursel about it, after he had described the details of the atrocities which I had not known up to that time.
Q. You just said 1942.
A. I meant 1945. I meant December 1945. I beg your pardon. I do not believe that the prosecution had any knowledge of this, at least not at Oberursel.
Q. Dr. Blome, this whole matter begins with a letter from the Reich Governor Greiser dated 1 May 1942. (_NO-246, Pros. Ex. 196._) Tell us briefly who Greiser was.
A. This was Arthur Greiser, Gauleiter of the Warthegau, the Reich Governor of the Wartheland, and the Reich Defense Commissioner of the Wartheland.
Q. This Gauleiter Greiser, who was a Gauleiter in a district which now belongs to Poland, sent a letter on May 1st to the Reich Leader SS suggesting that Poles suffering from tuberculosis in the Wartheland should be liquidated if the existence of open tuberculosis and the incurability of the patients were established by official doctors. In this connection Greiser writes and (this is what I want to ask you about) I quote, “The increasing dangers were also recognized and appreciated by Deputy Reich Leader of Public Health, Dr. Blome, as well as by the Leader of your X-ray unit, SS Standartenfuehrer, Dr. Hohlfelder.” That is the quotation. What can you tell us today about these apparently early discussions between you and Gauleiter Greiser?
A. I talked to Gauleiter Greiser about three times, concerning the combating of tuberculosis in Wartheland, certainly once in the presence of Professor Hohlfelder. These discussions go back to the year 1941. I can recall Greiser once saying that the simplest thing would be to treat the incurable tubercular Poles exactly like the insane by means of euthanasia. I pointed out that the comparison was not valid. The Poles, I also said, were not German citizens. The plan which Greiser was considering was a radical solution but I could not agree to it. When sometime later I learned of the so-called Fuehrer order, according to which the euthanasia action was stopped and prohibited, I considered this matter and Greiser’s statement as settled. Then the year 1942 was filled with purely organizational preparation for the tuberculosis action. For example, all the population had to be registered in card index files, Germans as well as Poles; preparations had to be made for a series of X-ray examinations. Then these examinations had to be evaluated, and so on. The latter was a matter for the state health offices, that is the National Socialist welfare organization, and the X-ray unit which was to carry out the technical side of these examinations. From time to time I had a report from Professor Hohlfelder about the preparations. Only when all prerequisites were fulfilled, did I give my approval for such large scale action. The execution of this action was dependent upon my personal approval. I only took action in this tuberculosis question in the Warthegau when I received alarming reports about an alleged liquidation order from Himmler. I learned of it because at the beginning of November Sturmbannfuehrer Perwitschky came to my office in Berlin and reported to me that Greiser had an order from Himmler to the effect that incurably sick cases of tuberculosis found during the planned examinations in the Wartheland were to be liquidated. Perwitschky belonged to the X-ray unit and was business manager for the society combating tuberculosis. Then I immediately reached an agreement with Perwitschky that I would meet Professor Hohlfelder at Poznan to discuss the matter and to prevent Himmler’s and Greiser’s plans from being carried out. I went to Poznan and discussed the matter with Hohlfelder. We were both greatly astonished at this order from Himmler. We agreed that this order must not be carried out, and that we as German doctors could not lend our aid to such an action. We discussed the manner in which this Himmler-Greiser plan could be prevented. We decided that I should go to Greiser first of all. I telephoned Greiser from this conference and said that it was very important that I should speak to him. Then I talked to him on the same day, or on the next day. When I asked Greiser whether Himmler’s orders for liquidating were correct, he said “Yes.” He said he had the order in his hands. I said that I was willing to prevent this plan in any case and explained why. I said that in the first place as a doctor I could not participate in this and, in the second place, I pointed out the political danger connected with such a crime.
Then Greiser agreed that I should write a letter for him which he would pass on to Himmler for a decision. As for Greiser’s letter to Himmler of May 1942 (_NO-246, Pros. Ex. 196_) which you just mentioned, Dr. Sauter, I learned of it for the first time from files here, and Himmler’s opinion concerning my letter of November 1942 I learned of here for the first time too. Up to that time I did not know about Himmler’s letter to Greiser. In the letter of May 1942, from Greiser to Himmler, Greiser writes, I quote, “that Hohlfelder and Blome recognized the ever-increasing risks and appreciated them.” But he does not say that Hohlfelder and I approved liquidation. The letter does not say that. My basic opinion on the problem is the following: Let us suppose that we in Germany had a valid law for the liquidation of incurably sick persons. Assuming that such a law did exist, it would, of course, be out of the question to apply it to non-Germans. Application in this case would be a crime, especially during war. Germany had occupied foreign territory and, as an occupying power, had to observe international law in the treatment given to the occupied territories. As for the problem of tuberculosis, I had dealt with it for some time, especially since 1935 when I had incorporated the tuberculosis question into the post-graduate medical training. In 1937 Professor Janker, Bonn, a well-known X-ray specialist, called upon me for aid in developing a new procedure which, with a minimum of cost, would make it possible to examine large groups of the population. This was the so-called X-ray screen photography which was developed. I shall give you a brief explanation of this. Previously for an X-ray picture of the lungs, a film had been needed of 24 by 30 centimeters. This new procedure required a film of about only 4 by 4 centimeters. That is, the so-called Leica size. The pictures were taken with a Leica. The X-ray screen was photographed. The successful development of this procedure meant that for an X-ray photograph, in place of the price of from twelve to thirteen marks, which the social insurance had paid, it now could be produced for about ten pfennigs: that is, less than one percent.
The further value of the development of this process was that one would no longer need several minutes for an X-ray photograph, but this procedure was developed to such an extent that we could take two hundred to three hundred pictures per minute. I developed this screen picture process together with Janker until we reached the results which I have just described. At the X-ray Congress in May 1938 in Munich I made this process public and I stated that with its aid one could begin a large-scale fight against tuberculosis. Only a few people believed my words at the time, and some smiled pityingly. After this congress, Professor Hohlfelder, who was later commander of the X-ray unit, came to me, and working with X-ray science, the optical industry, the film industry, X-ray industry, screen industry, etc., we developed the process during the course of that same year to such an extent that in a short time we were able to X-ray practically every inhabitant in the whole province of Mecklenburg. The procedure was then gradually developed until we could easily have X-rayed ten million or more in Germany per year. Then, during the war, at my instigation, in 1939 and 1940, we X-rayed the population of the whole province of Westphalia; then in 1941, the whole province of Wuerttemberg, including Hohenzollern. Now there was the plan to X-ray the people of Wartheland. Gauleiter Greiser had approached me, because approval had to be obtained from me, and I gave such approval only if all prerequisites were given, so that the cases which were discovered could be given some medical and clinical attention. It had been our experience in these examinations that one percent new tuberculosis cases were discovered which had hitherto been completely undetected. For the Warthegau alone, with a Polish population of four and one-half millions, that would have meant forty-five thousand new cases of tuberculosis, not counting the ten thousand from among the one million German population. I had withheld my approval for such actions because at that time, with the development of this invention, a plan of irresponsible X-raying was being carried out by various Gauleiters and by large industries. Everyone wanted to take up the battle against tuberculosis but that would have been a disaster unless there had been some check. When whole groups of population were X-rayed, there had to be the necessary preparation of medical supplies from the beginning, otherwise there would have been a catastrophe. Through this action and through these many new cases of tuberculosis which were discovered, I consciously put the state in a difficult situation. I forced the state to issue a new law for the fight against tuberculosis. This law which was issued was the Tuberculosis Aid Law. This law formed the basis for the lung examination of the population of the Wartheland which was actually carried out in 1943-1944. This law, it can be proved, was not only of benefit to the German population in the Warthegau, but also to the Polish population, as is clearly seen from the affidavit of Regierungsdirektor Dr. Gundermann. (_Blome 1, Blome Ex. 8._) Dr. Gundermann was the chief medical officer of the Wartheland; that is, he had the main responsibility for the fight against tuberculosis in this Gau.
Q. Dr. Blome, before we go into the letter of 18 November 1942, I should like to return to the spring of 1942. (_NO-250, Pros. Ex. 203._) We just heard of a letter from Gauleiter Greiser dated May 1942, in which he suggests that Poles suffering from tuberculosis should be liquidated. He writes “that the ever-increasing risks were also recognized and appreciated by the Deputy of the Reich Leader for Public Health, Professor Dr. Blome.”
You said that Greiser does not mention that you approved the plan for the liquidation of the Poles. I would be interested to know what your attitude was at that time, in the spring of 1942, towards this plan. Did you approve of the plan to liquidate tubercular Poles? Did you reject it? What did you say about it?
A. In the spring of 1942 I expressed no opinion at all in respect to this plan. The discussions with Greiser, as I said, were in the year 1941, at the time when the euthanasia action was still in operation. In 1942 I did not talk to Greiser about such a plan at all. I did not know that Greiser intended to write this letter in May 1942 to Himmler, or that he did actually write it. I heard about it only here and after Greiser had made his statements in connection with the euthanasia action. But the euthanasia action had been stopped by Hitler’s order, and of course I assumed that such ideas on the part of Greiser were settled too. I did not approve of his ideas, as I said before.
Q. Then, if I understand you correctly, you did not deal with this matter in the fall of 1942 when this Perwitschky brought you alarming news?
A. Yes. That is right.
Q. Can you tell us why Gauleiter Greiser discussed this tuberculosis problem with you particularly?
A. The reason was, as I have already said, that the execution of such an action depended on my approval. If I had said the Warthegau was not to be X-rayed, then it would not have been X-rayed, no matter what the Gauleiter did.
Q. Dr. Blome, Gauleiter Greiser was not thinking apparently of X-raying but of liquidating. The letter of 1 May 1942, where he makes the suggestion, speaks only of liquidation. It says nothing about X-raying. I would like to find out how you became involved in this matter, and when you heard of Greiser’s plan for the first time, the plan to eliminate the tubercular Poles?
A. Of course Gauleiter Greiser was thinking of X-raying; that is essential for detecting incurable cases of tuberculosis.
Q. Then, Witness, on the 18th of November you wrote a letter. (_NO-250, Pros. Ex. 203._) This is the letter which the prosecution has described as a “masterpiece of murderous intention.” Did you discuss this letter beforehand with the Reich Physician Leader, Dr. Conti?
A. No. After I had talked to Greiser I saw Conti for a short time in Berlin, or I went to see Conti to report to him about the plan and about my talk with Greiser. Dr. Conti said, “What do you want? That’s an order from the Reich Leader, that is, Himmler!” Then I told Conti what I had agreed upon with Greiser, and that I would write a letter to that effect to be sent on to Himmler. This he agreed to and also to my writing this letter. But I did not discuss the contents with Dr. Conti. I did not see any point in doing so. This statement of Conti’s showed that he knew about this plan of liquidation.
Q. Witness, this letter which you wrote to Gauleiter Greiser, in which you opposed liquidation of the Poles, did you write it by yourself or did you discuss the draft of this letter with anyone?
A. First of all I wrote the letter by myself. After I had returned to Berlin from Poznan I had to go to Munich. When I came back from Munich I wrote this letter. I made various rough drafts. It was not easy. I had discussed the general tactics with Hohlfelder according to which we would start right at the beginning of the letter by appearing to agree to the ideas, but then in the second part of the letter we would list all the political factors which might induce Himmler and the others to give up such an action. It was not easy to write such a letter. I worried about this letter a great deal until I thought I finally had a right draft.
In my preliminary interrogation an interrogator asked me something to this effect: “Why did you not simply give up your office and resign when you heard about this plan?” My answer is as follows: It would, of course, have been the simplest thing for me to take advantage of this opportunity to give up my position. Then I would have had nothing more to do with the whole matter; at least 40,000 Poles would have been murdered, and I would not be under indictment today on this charge. Please excuse me for saying this, but I must say it, when such a charge is made against me. I will try to speak as dispassionately as possible. Dr. Sauter had just said that the prosecution considers my letter a “masterpiece of murderous intention”. I now state the following: Apart from this questionable affidavit of Rudolf Brandt, the prosecution has not produced a single document to prove the murder of tubercular Poles by me. On the contrary, the prosecution has submitted Himmler’s reply dated the end of November 1942, according to which Himmler, in answer to my letter, prohibited the liquidation of the tubercular Poles, and this letter expressly says that my suggestion was to be carried out and that this matter was to be used as propaganda. In spite of that, the prosecution makes such charges as these against me. I am accused of being a murderer 10,000 times for a crime which I did not commit but which I prevented, as I can prove. I should like to say something else. The press, of course, has taken up this charge. I cannot hold that against the press. The consequence of this news, however, was that my family, my wife and my little children, are subjected to unpleasantness and even threats. Through this assertion of the prosecution, the name of Blome has been defamed in a way which it does not deserve, especially if it can be proved that I prevented the crime with which I am charged.
MR. HARDY: If it please your Honor, I object to any further comment of this type from the witness.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: Objection overruled. Witness may continue.
DEFENDANT BLOME: I beg your pardon if I got rather excited. I should like to conclude my statement by saying that I hope that this case will be soon cleared up, and that then the press will be chivalrous enough to state that I not only did not commit this crime, but that I actually prevented it.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I should like to discuss with the witness the letter of 18 November 1942 in which the defendant prevented the murder of the Poles. It will take some time. I believe this would be a good time to take a recess.
* * * * *
DR. SAUTER: Witness, during the morning session you explained to us among other things the new method of X-ray photography, the so-called screen photography; you stated that using this new method one could take 200 to 300 photographs per minute. Were you not wrong, didn’t you mean perhaps per hour and not per minute?
DEFENDANT BLOME: Yes, per hour.
Q. I just wanted to correct that so that it does not appear erroneously in the record. We shall continue, Witness, with the letter which we have repeatedly discussed, the letter of 18 November 1942, regarding the extermination of Poles. (_NO-250, Pros. Ex. 203._) It is a letter in which you define your attitude towards the proposal made by Greiser, namely to liquidate the tubercular Poles. Do you know the contents of this letter?
A. Yes.
Q. In this letter you made certain proposals. May I ask you to tell us what suggestions you actually made in that letter? Do you need the letter for that purpose?
A. Thank you, I have it. The most suitable suggestion I considered to be my suggestion to create an area in which one could put the tubercular Poles, and I recalled the leper colonies well known throughout the world. I must emphasize that there is a considerable difference between tuberculosis and leprosy.
As I made the last draft of my letter, the leading medical officer of Warthegau was suddenly announced. It was Dr. Gundermann, the highest state medical officer of Warthegau. He reported that he had just come from Dr. Conti, and that he had heard rumors from Warthegau that tubercular Poles were to be liquidated. Dr. Conti had maintained a very evasive attitude toward him, so he had left Dr. Conti without having achieved any results and thereupon he had decided to come to me. I told him that he had come at the most suitable moment, and I explained to him the position as it had developed in the meantime. I told him of my conversation with Hohlfelder and with Greiser, and of the letter which had been decided upon. He was very pleased about it and was also pleased that I shared his attitude of rejection. I showed him my draft letter and he made a few suggestions. The number of geographical details in the letter actually originated from Gundermann. In particular, he emphasized the importance of a special settlement for tubercular Poles and recognized this as the most suitable solution. I had already heard of such suggestions, especially those arising from the tuberculosis meeting in 1937. During that meeting two well-known German tuberculosis experts, Dr. Dorn and Dr. Hein, had lectured on tuberculosis settlements. Very useful experience had been obtained from such tuberculosis settlements, not only in Germany but also in England. When making my suggestion to Himmler I explained in detail how such a suggestion could be realized. In my letter I explained the tactics that were to be used, taking into consideration the mentality of people like Greiser and Himmler, and made it appear as though I wanted to agree with their liquidation program. Afterwards I cited all the political misgivings I had, naming individual examples. Then I said that in one experiment the people who were seriously ill and those who were contagious would be segregated, and that Polish physicians and Polish nursing personnel would be attached to these seriously ill patients in order to avoid the appearance of a death camp. Every physician knows, and it is also known in lay circles, that if one isolates seriously ill people, such an isolation soon comes to be considered as an isolation for death. That is why I said that the necessary Polish physicians and nursing personnel must be attached to these camps. My best suggestion I considered to be the creation of a colony for all tubercular Poles.
In particular I wished to point out the following in my letter, I said, and I quote: “I could imagine that as the Fuehrer stopped the program in the insane asylums sometime ago, he might at this moment consider ’special treatment’ of the incurably sick as unsuitable, and unwise from a political point of view.” I mentioned that because Greiser’s suggestion in the year 1941 pointed to a comparison with the euthanasia action. In order, however, to be quite sure that these political misgivings also reached Hitler and that the decision did not rest mainly in Himmler’s hands, I sent a copy of my letter direct to Martin Bormann.[92] I furthermore want to point out the following matter. I said: “I consider any secrecy completely impossible.” In this connection, I should like to refer to a letter concerning a different action, namely the letter from the Deputy Gauleiter of the Lower Danube, dated 1942, which suggests experiments on the sterilization of national groups such as gypsies. In this letter, contrary to my letter, completely different tactics are used. The Deputy Gauleiter of the Lower Danube stated that one must keep such an action very secret, because otherwise it would have serious consequences from the point of view of the state.
MR. HARDY: Is it the intention of the defendant to put the letter he is referring to in as evidence, or is he merely quoting from his own letter?
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: Can counsel for the defendant Blome advise the Tribunal on that point?
DR. SAUTER: This is a letter which has already been used by the prosecution and thus came to the knowledge of the defendant. Therefore he can quote it. It is certainly not necessary to submit this letter once more.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: Would counsel please identify the letter, the exhibit number, and where it may be found?
DR. SAUTER: One moment, please. Mr. President, this letter was submitted by the prosecution concerning sterilization experiments. It was submitted as Document NO-039—I repeat NO-039—Prosecution Exhibit 153. It is a letter from the Deputy Gauleiter of the Lower Danube district addressed to Reich Leader SS Himmler dated 24 August 1942. This letter was already submitted by the prosecution.
* * * * *
DR. SAUTER: Doctor, will you please finish your answer?
DEFENDANT BLOME: In this letter the Deputy Gauleiter of the Lower Danube district writes to Himmler, and I quote:
“We are quite clear about the fact that such examination must be considered as an absolute state secret.”
That is exactly contrary to the tactics which I used. I say “I think that any secrecy is quite impossible,” and I give detailed reasons for this. I will merely give you a short excerpt from my letter. I point out how many Polish workers there are in the German Reich, and that there would be questions from their relatives about their whereabouts. Then I indicate the number of Germans who are related to these Poles. I also mention that, in the case of the Poles, we are concerned with members of a conquered nation. I further point out that certain circles would spread rumors among the population to the effect that similar methods would be used in the case of German tubercular patients in the future. I further show that in connection with the appointment of Professor Brandt as Commissioner General, foreign broadcasts spread reports that Brandt was no longer concerned with the rehabilitation of seriously wounded people, but only with those people who had been slightly wounded. I refer to the reaction which would result in the case of such a crime on the part of the Italian physicians and scientists as well as the entire Italian population. I furthermore refer to the Church, and I then say and quote: “Therefore, I think it is necessary to explain all these points of view to the Fuehrer before undertaking the program.”
With reference to my suggestion for a kind of reservation, I say in the last paragraph of my letter, and I quote: “After a proper examination of all these considerations and circumstances, the creation of a reservation such as the lepers colonies seems to be the most practical solution.”
Before that I had suggested that these tubercular settlements should be arranged in such a manner that relations who were willing could also be settled there. In this way in addition to the necessary nursing personnel and the necessary Polish physicians, the necessary medical care would be safeguarded.
Q. Witness, you previously referred to your suggestions, and you spoke about a congress on tuberculosis questions in which you participated.
DR. SAUTER: Mr. President, I have an excerpt from the record of this tuberculosis congress. It is a report on the Third International Congress. It is a report on the proceedings of the German Tuberculosis Conference dated 18 to 20 March 1937, which took place at Wiesbaden. Two speeches are reproduced here in excerpt form.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: Counsel, this document is found in supplemental documents?
DR. SAUTER: Yes, in the supplemental volume. In this report a paper by two well-known German tuberculosis experts is mentioned, a Dr. Erwin Dorn, who was the chief physician of a sanatorium for chest diseases at Charlottenhoehe, and a certain Dr. Joachim Hein, who was the director of a sanatorium for chest diseases in Holstein. I am not going to read these papers in detail, but I beg the Tribunal to take judicial notice of them. I submitted these reports of the conference in order to show that the same suggestions which this defendant, Dr. Blome, made in 1942 when writing to Gauleiter Greiser, are also contained here in the year 1937, and were made during the German Tuberculosis Conference. These proposals did not concern foreign tubercular persons, but German tubercular persons.
PRESIDING JUDGE BEALS: Does counsel offer this document into evidence?
DR. SAUTER: It will become exhibit 6, Blome Exhibit 6. Witness, in this letter of 18 December 1942, about which we are speaking now, you really dealt with three proposals: (1) special treatment for the seriously ill persons; (2) most rigorous isolation of the seriously ill persons—that is to say, separation from the outside world; and (3) the creation of a reservation area for all tubercular patients in Poland. Now when reading your letter, one gains the impression—at least one might gain the impression—that you were speaking in favor of your first suggestion in the first part of your letter, namely, the “special treatment” of the seriously ill, which is to say their liquidation as was suggested and desired by Himmler and Greiser.
My question is: Why did you not simply state very frankly in your letter of 18 November 1942 that this liquidation of the incurably ill tubercular Poles, as suggested by Greiser and Himmler, was a crime; that it could under no circumstances be permitted, and that you, Dr. Blome, would have nothing to do with any such proposal? Why did you not write to Greiser on those lines at that time?
DEFENDANT BLOME: I think that I already defined my attitude towards that question very briefly this morning, and I state again, I would have preferred merely to have pointed out the criminal aspects of this proposal in my letter, but I knew the mentality of these men, and it was quite clear to me that the expression of any such point of view could only have had a negative result. In doing that I would not have saved myself, and much less 30,000 tubercular Poles—they would actually have then been liquidated. If I had not wanted to present my true point of view frankly, I would not have had to think for days about the letter; it would only have been a matter of five or ten minutes. I would just have had to dictate the letter and mail it. I had, however, realized, and it was also the opinion of Professor Hohlfelder, that I would have to make it appear as if I agreed to the plan if I wanted to have any success with my counterproposals. I was convinced that the mention of all the political aspects which might involve danger would be the only effective weapon. The success of my procedure quite clearly speaks for the correctness of my tactics. Yes, Himmler really wanted to carry out this proposal I had made and he wanted to exploit it as propaganda; that is clearly stated in Himmler’s letter to Greiser, dated the end of November 1942. The documentary value of my letter can be seen only in the following: It shows, firstly, that during that period of brutal thinking, men like Himmler had no time for any considerations of a humane nature; secondly, only by a clear and definite statement on my part could the crime of the murder of 10,000 Poles be prevented, and I was only concerned with that result.
Q. Witness, the suggestion which you made in your letter was that under No. 2: the most rigorous isolation of the seriously ill persons. With reference to this suggestion, the prosecution considers that during the meeting of 19 December you had the idea of sending these tubercular patients to institutions and I quote: “That opinion was voiced because then the comparatively quick death of these patients would ensue in these institutions.”
Was that really your intention, and did you think of any such possibility at that time, that is, when you made the suggestion?
A. On the contrary I cannot recognize the evidence of the prosecution regarding that point as being logical. Had it been my intention to let the patients die, I would not have demanded that they be given the necessary physicians and nursing personnel. In addition, I want to refer to my former testimony on this point.
Q. The other suggestion you made at that time and which is listed under No. 3 of your letter is the creation of a reservation for all tubercular patients. During the same meeting of 19 December the prosecution said with reference to that proposal, and I quote:
“With this plan, that is, to send all patients into a reservation and thereby isolate them from the rest of the population, you, Dr. Blome, wanted to cause these sick Poles to be left to their fate with very few doctors and scanty nursing personnel. The aim of liquidating these Poles was to be realized in this way.”
What do you have to say, Dr. Blome, to this motive which the prosecution imputes to you?
A. This motive is not correct. The contrary can clearly be seen from my letter. In that connection I may refer to my previous explanation regarding my letter. Furthermore, I refer to the affidavit of Dr. Gundermann. (_Blome 1, Blome Ex. 8._) My interest was exactly the contrary to what the prosecution tries to impute to me, for I was planning the very same thing for Germany after the war. If I had been able to carry through such an action, and had been able to show success in that action, it would have been easier for me later on to refer to the plans mentioned during the Tuberculosis Congress of 1937 by pointing out the success I had achieved in the Warthegau. Even today I realize that until we are able to bring about really effective medical treatment, or vaccination against the spread of tuberculosis, the only really practicable and effective solution is the creation of such settlement areas or reservations.
Q. Dr. Blome, from your book, entitled “Physician in Combat”, which has been submitted in evidence in its entirety as Blome Exhibit 1, it can be seen that for quite a long time you had waged war against tuberculosis. Can you tell us on the basis of your experiences whether these proposals which you made in your letter of 18 December 1942—that is, either housing the sick in tuberculosis institutions, or placing the consumptives in a reservation area—whether these suggestions were completely different from the manner of combating tuberculosis as practiced in various foreign countries up to that time, or, if not tuberculosis, other infectious diseases of the same importance as tuberculosis?
A. Naturally the plan to set up a tuberculosis settlement on a large scale does not represent anything absolutely new, because, as can be seen from the documents submitted regarding the Tuberculosis Congress, such tuberculosis settlements had existed in England and Holland in addition to Germany, with good results; but, on the other hand, the realization of this settlement idea would make an enormous difference to fight against tuberculosis generally. The war difficulties that existed in 1942 and 1943 did not permit this plan to be realized as suggested by me for the Warthegau. The fight against tuberculosis continued, however, in the usual way, as far as it was possible during the war, and as it was dealt with throughout the Reich for Germans as well.
In other countries, other experiments were made. For instance in the year 1935 certain well-known people in the city of Detroit, in America, made a large-scale experiment for the combat of tuberculosis. After preparations were made the entire population of Detroit was asked, by means of enormous propaganda by press and radio, to submit to an examination for tuberculosis, in order to find out the source of the infection. The city of Detroit had made the necessary facilities available for carrying out the examination and a certain success was obtained. In particular, nearly the whole of the colored population of Detroit reported for these examinations, whereas the American press, on the other hand, complained that this was not fully the case with the white population.
This action started in 1936 and was continued in 1937. I could not hear anything about the ultimate results because the war had started. All actions such as that action in Detroit, and small settlements in the form of little villages for consumptives, will not solve the entire problem unless done on a large scale. There is no doubt that the problem of tuberculosis has not been tackled on a large scale in the world today. The sole reason for that is that tuberculosis cannot be compared with any other contagious disease such as diphtheria, cholera, typhoid. These epidemics have a shorter course and quickly claim their victims. If that had been the case with tuberculosis the fight against it would have progressed much farther throughout the world. The tragic thing in that problem is the manner of the disease itself, the slow tricky course. That is why, in my opinion, there are nowhere in the world laws which definitely secure the isolation of infectious tubercular subjects, although such plans are being considered at all congresses dealing with tuberculosis all over the world. As far as I know nobody has made a decisive step, and I think the sole reason lies in the slow tricky course of tuberculosis, in spite of the fact that tuberculosis is regarded as having the second highest mortality of all diseases.
Q. In addition to that letter of 18 December 1942 about which we are speaking now, did you take any more steps to frustrate the plan of Greiser, namely, to liquidate all tubercular Poles, and in particular did you turn to Hitler or Himmler personally in that matter?
A. No. I did not speak to Hitler at all throughout the entire war.
Q. How about Himmler?
A. I spoke to Himmler on various occasions, but that was about one year later. At that time I had as yet no official relations with Himmler, and I did not know him. Had this happened one year later, when I already had official contact with Himmler, and had I known him better, I would not have written a letter; I would have approached Himmler personally and would have been able to frustrate the action without having to write a letter. Having written this letter I received a report through Greiser very shortly afterwards to the effect that Himmler had withdrawn his order, and that settled the affair as far as I was concerned. I was only informed that everything was handled in an orderly and legal manner in the Warthegau as regards the examination and the registration of tubercular persons.
Q. Who told you that this plan had been withdrawn on the basis of your suggestion?
A. I heard it from Hohlfelder as well as from Perwitschky.
Q. These were the two men—
A. Hohlfelder was the commanding officer of the X-ray unit, and Perwitschky was the business manager of the association for combating tuberculosis.
Q. Did you find out how the rejection of this plan really came about, and, in particular, do you know that when Greiser’s letter was shown to him Himmler said that Hitler himself had to decide, and that Hitler himself actually did decide that this plan was to be rejected for the reasons which you, Dr. Blome, stated in your letter to Greiser? Did you hear about that later?
A. At that time I only learned from Professor Hohlfelder and Perwitschky that the reasons stated in my letter had moved Hitler to withdraw his order. I only heard of Himmler’s letter here in this courtroom, through the documents, and I am, therefore, very grateful to the prosecution for not having withheld this letter from me.
Q. Witness, when you say that this plan of Greiser’s was frustrated because of you, I must remind you of what the prosecution said here on 9 December in this courtroom. The prosecution said at that time, “We shall introduce evidence to show that the program was in fact carried out at the end of 1942 and the beginning of 1943 * * *.” And by that, the program for the liquidation of the tubercular Poles was meant. Further, “that as a result of the suggestions made by Blome and Greiser, many Poles were ruthlessly exterminated and that others were taken to isolated camps, utterly lacking in medical facilities where thousands of them died.” These were statements made by prosecution. I must again ask you very definitely, did you at any time later hear that on the basis of these proposals tubercular Poles were, in effect, exterminated?
A. No. The assertions of the prosecution are not true. Nothing happened to one Pole within the framework of this tubercular action in the Warthegau. On the contrary they received decent medical treatment.
* * * * *
[89] Trial of the Major War Criminals, vol. I, pp. 247-253, Nuremberg, 1947.
[90] Final plea is recorded in mimeographed transcript, 16 July 47, pp. 10972-10994.
[91] Complete testimony is recorded in mimeographed transcript, 13, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 March 1947, pp. 4450-4812.
[92] Defendant (in absentia) before International Military Tribunal. See Trial of the Major War Criminals, Vols. I-XLII, Nuremberg, 1947.
D. Euthanasia
a. Introduction
The defendants Karl Brandt, Blome, Brack, and Hoven were charged with participation in and responsibility for the execution of the so-called “Euthanasia Program” in the course of which hundreds of thousands of human beings, including nationals of German occupied countries, were murdered (pars. 9 and 14 of the indictment). On this charge the defendants Karl Brandt, Brack, and Hoven were convicted, and the defendant Blome was acquitted.
The prosecution’s summation of the evidence on euthanasia is contained in its closing briefs against the defendants Karl Brandt and Brack. Extracts from these briefs are set forth below on pages 795 to 813. A corresponding summation of the evidence by the defense on this program has been selected from the closing brief for the defendant Karl Brandt and from the final plea for the defendant Brack. It appears below on pages 813 to 839. This argumentation is followed by selections from the evidence on pages 842 to 896.
b. Selections from the Argumentation of the Prosecution
_EXTRACTS FROM THE CLOSING BRIEF AGAINST THE DEFENDANT KARL BRANDT_
* * * * *
_The Euthanasia Program_
A. _Procedure_
On 1 September 1939 Hitler charged the defendant Karl Brandt and Reichsleiter Bouhler with the execution of the Euthanasia Program. The letter of appointment stated:
“Reichsleiter Bouhler and Dr. Brandt, M. D., are charged with the responsibility of enlarging the authority of certain physicians to be designated by name in such a manner that persons who, according to human judgment, are incurable can, upon a most careful diagnosis of their condition of sickness, be accorded a mercy death.” (_630-PS, Pros. Ex. 330._)
This document in no way limited the application of euthanasia to insane persons but included anyone who might be designated as “incurable.”
The witness Mennecke testified that the program was carried out in the following way:
Every German mental institution received questionnaires from the Reich Ministry of the Interior which were to be completed for each inmate of the institution and to be sent back to the Reich Ministry of the Interior. Experts then had to examine the questionnaires after they had been photostated; they had to express their medical opinion on them, and had to return them, with their opinion, to the Reichsarbeitsgemeinschaft (Reich Labor Association). (_Tr. pp. 1872, 1873._)
This Reichsarbeitsgemeinschaft cooperated with the “Stiftung” (Charitable Foundation for Institutional Care), and the Patients Transport Corporation. The “Stiftung” was in charge of the financial side of the program, while the Patients Transport Corporation was used when patients were moved from one institution to another in order to bring them closer to the euthanasia institutions and finally into the euthanasia institutions themselves. These three organizations, Reichsarbeitsgemeinschaft, “Stiftung,” and Patients Transport Corporation, were in fact camouflaged names for the operation of the Euthanasia Program and were under the supervision of one management. They did not work independently but together. (_Tr. p. 1874._)
As to the questionnaires, three experts received photostated copies, and, independently of each other, they expressed their opinion on individual cases. Then so-called top experts expressed their opinion. A list was made up of the patients who were judged subject to euthanasia, and the patients were removed from the institution to so-called collecting points, and from there were transferred to euthanasia institutes. (_Tr. pp. 1877, 1878._) Non-German nationals and Jews were subjected to euthanasia as well as Germans. (_Tr. p. 1881._)
The activities of the experts were extended in the early summer of 1940 to inmates of concentration camps. A doctors commission, which consisted of doctors and officials from the Euthanasia Program, filled out the questionnaires on inmates from among those who had been preliminarily selected by the camp doctors. Numerous concentration camps were visited, some of them twice, in the period between 1940 and the end of 1941. (_Tr. pp. 1882, 1883._) Dr. Mennecke, who visited a number of concentration camps to select inmates, received the orders for these activities from the top experts in the Euthanasia Program and from the defendant Brack. (_Tr. p. 1882._) Announcements about these trips were made from the Berlin agency of the program to the individual concentration camps. (_Tr. p. 1885._) Non-German Nationals and Jews who were inmates of concentration camps were subjected to the Euthanasia Program in extensive numbers. (_Tr. p. 1887._)
Another function of the Euthanasia Program was the killing of mentally and bodily deficient children. The witness Walter Schmidt testified that the agency which handled this part of the program was called the Reich Committee for Research on Hereditary and Constitutional Severe Diseases [Reichsausschuss zur wissenschaftlichen Erfassung von erb- und anlagebedingten schweren Leiden]. The questionnaires were filled out by the health departments, the chief of children’s clinics, physicians, doctors, midwives, hospitals, etc., and reports were made to Dr. Linden’s office in Berlin. Linden was a member of the Ministry of the Interior. There a committee of chief experts, on the strength of these reports, decreed euthanasia through so-called authorizing orders in the form of a photostatic copy of the report, which had been approved in writing. These activities continued until 1944. (_Tr. pp. 1833, 1834._) Schmidt himself was in charge of a special department for the killing of such deformed children. (_Tr. p. 1833._)
Workers from the occupied eastern territories who had become unfit for labor were executed pursuant to the Euthanasia Program. Busses belonging to the Patients Transport Corporation, which were operated by the personnel of the Patients Transport Corporation, took these victims to the extermination center of Hadamar, where they were killed. (_Tr. pp. 1842-1845_; _NO-1116, Pros. Ex. 415_.)
This evidence on the method of carrying out the program is corroborated by the affidavit of the defendant Brack (_NO-426, Pros. Ex. 160_), the affidavit of Pauline Kneissler (_NO-470, Pros. Ex. 332_), the chart drawn by Brack (_NO-253, Pros. Ex. 331_), as well as numerous other documents in the record.
The evidence concerning the activities of the top experts and experts of the Euthanasia Program in the various concentration camps is corroborated by the affidavit of the camp doctor of the Dachau concentration camp, Dr. Muthig (_NO-2799, Pros. Ex. 497_), who states that in the fall of 1941, Professor Heyde, as leader of a commission of four psychiatrists, came to the Dachau concentration camp. This doctors commission selected inmates, unable to work, for extermination by gas. Heyde was the first top expert of the Euthanasia Program. (_Tr. p. 2495._) The affidavit of Dr. Gorgass reveals that he and Dr. Schumann, both of whom were active in the Euthanasia Program, visited the Buchenwald concentration camp in June 1941. Gorgass states explicitly that the purpose of this trip was to acquaint himself with the assignment of concentration camp inmates to euthanasia institutions. This visit was made on the order of Brandt, and was transmitted by the defendant Brack. (_NO-3010, Pros. Ex. 503._)
B. _Non-German Nationals and Jews_
Non-German nationals and Jews, who were inmates of the concentration camps, were victims of the Euthanasia Program which operated in these camps under the code name “14 f 13.” (_NO-429, Pros. Ex. 281._)
A few documents submitted by the prosecution on one “14 f 13” action in Gross-Rosen show how the Euthanasia Program operated in concentration camps. The list of concentration camp inmates of the Gross-Rosen concentration camp, who were sent to the Bernburg euthanasia station for extermination, contains many names of non-German nationals and non-German Jews. (_NO-158, Pros. Ex. 410._) Jews in protective custody, Poles in protective custody, Jews who were habitual criminals, Jews who were “shirkers,” Jews who “defiled the race,” Czech “shirkers,” and Czechs in protective custody were among the inmates selected by the camp physicians for “examination” by the experts. (_1151-PS, Pros. Ex. 411._)
By comparing the names on the lists contained on Documents NO-158 and 1151-PS, it is proved that, of the 240 names listed for extermination in the Bernburg euthanasia station, at least 51 were of Polish or Czech nationality. How many of the Jews listed were of non-German nationality cannot be ascertained from these documents, but a substantial number of them were born in countries other than Germany, as the list contained in Document NO-158 shows, and it is therefore apparent that a further substantial number of the inmates selected for extermination were of non-German nationality. (_NO-158, Pros. Ex. 410_; _1151-PS, Pros. Ex. 411_.)
On 17 March 1942, 70 inmates were transferred to Bernburg for extermination. (_NO-1873, Pros. Ex. 556._) Of these, 27 of the non-Jewish prisoners on the transport list were of Czech or Polish nationality. Compare transport list with list of inmates originally selected in Gross-Rosen. (_1151-PS, Pros. Ex. 411._) On 19 March 1942 an additional 57 inmates arrived at Bernburg from Gross-Rosen. (_NO-158, Pros. Ex. 410._) Of these, 15 of the non-Jewish prisoners of the transport list were of Czech or Polish nationality. Thus, of the total of 127 inmates proved to have been sent to Bernburg in March 1942, at least 42, or one-third of the total, were non-German citizens forcibly detained in an enemy country. That all of these inmates were exterminated in Bernburg is conclusively proved by the laconic report from Gross-Rosen to the Economic and Administrative Main Office that “special treatment of 127 prisoners was concluded on 2 April 1942.” (_1234-PS, Pros. Ex. 555._)
This evidence as to Action 14 f 13 is amplified by the testimony of the witnesses Neff (_Tr. pp. 600-605_), Kogon (_Tr. pp. 1210-13_), Roemhild (_Tr. pp. 1634-37, 1641_), and Holl (_Tr. p. 1060_).
Non-German nationals and Jews other than those in concentration camps were not exempt from the program, and many of them were killed. Besides the evidence cited under A above, there is ample proof that non-German nationals were subjected to extermination from the beginning of 1940 through the war. (_NO-1135, Pros. Ex. 334_; _NO-818, Pros. Ex. 373_.) Jews of German and Polish nationality and stateless Jews were also subjected to the program. (_NO-1310, Pros. Ex. 337._) Polish and Russian nationals and other non-German nationals were subjected to the program. (_NO-720, Pros. Ex. 366._)
The questionnaires had a space provided for “race”, being defined: German or similar blood (of German blood), Jew, Jewish mixed breed Grades 1 or 2, Negro (mixed breed). (_1696-PS, Pros. Ex. 357._) This question would have been completely unnecessary if non-Germans were exempted from the program. Questionnaires had to be filled out about all patients who were not of German nationality or German related blood, indicating their race and nationality. (_NO-825, Pros. Ex. 358._) These questionnaires had to be processed by the experts. (_Tr. p. 1881._) Those who were active in euthanasia never received an order that non-German nationals were to be excluded from the program. (_NO-817, Pros. Ex. 368._) The witnesses Mennecke (_Tr. pp. 1877, 1922_) and Schmidt (_Tr. pp. 1860-1_) also testified to this effect. Hugo Suchomel, LL. D., the highest official after the Minister in the Austrian Federal Ministry of Justice, says in his affidavit that when Brack, as representative of the defendant Brandt, gave a lecture on euthanasia in the Ministry of Justice in 1942, he enumerated, as the classes of persons who were exempted from the program, the war-wounded and persons who had become insane as a result of air attacks. Foreigners and Jews were not mentioned among the groups of persons who were excluded. (_NO-2253, Pros. Ex. 557._) Brack admits having held the lecture. (_Tr. p. 7589._)
As early as 1939 inmates of insane asylums in occupied Poland were killed. (_3816-PS, Pros. Ex. 370._) In the autumn of 1940, funds for the evacuation of 1,558 inmates of mental institutions of East Prussia and approximately 250 to 300 insane Poles were made available by the defendant Brack, who was the administrative executive of the Euthanasia Program. As these transfers were carried out by a special detachment (Sonderkommando) of the infamous SD, which was used for special tasks, there is no doubt that these insane Poles were killed. (_NO-2909, Pros. Ex. 500_; _NO-2911, Pros. Ex. 501_.) In September 1941, an order was issued that the inmates of the insane asylums in Russia, in the occupation zone of the German Army Group “Nord,” were to be killed. (_NO-1758, Pros. Ex. 444._)
Eastern workers were also dealt with. (_NO-1430, Pros. Ex. 429_; _NO-1436, Pros. Ex. 430_.) Eastern workers, who had been forcibly brought into Germany, who were no longer able to work, and who were considered a burden on the mental institutions of Germany, were brought together in a collecting institution and, unless they could be discharged in a matter of six weeks, they were exterminated under the Euthanasia Program. (_NO-891, Pros. Ex. 414_; _NO-1116, Pros. Ex. 415_.) Half-Jewish healthy children (_NO-1427, Pros. Ex. 431_) and adult gypsies (_3882-PS, Pros. Ex. 371_) were also killed.
C. _Inadequate Examination and Lack of Supervision_
The selection and examination of the persons who were subjected to euthanasia were criminally negligent and inadequate.
The defendant Karl Brandt testified that the doctors in the Euthanasia Program were given enormous responsibility. (_Tr. p. 2425._) He, together with Bouhler, had authority over the physicians who were participating in the program. (_Tr. p. 2408._) He admitted, however, that he did not make observation in, or visits to, insane asylums. He was only once in the Bethel insane asylum and visited a special clinic in Kassel. He admitted having no expert knowledge in the field of psychiatry. (_Tr. p. 2470._) He, the doctor of the two persons who were charged by Hitler with the execution of euthanasia (Bouhler was not a doctor), authorized the doctors to administer euthanasia. He did not make investigations as to the medical abilities of these men. (_Tr. p. 2476._) He does not know one single name of the total of ten to fifteen doctors who, according to his testimony, were charged with the execution of euthanasia. (_Tr. pp. 2478-9._) Brandt testified that he only visited one of the extermination stations, Grafeneck, in 1940, one time (_Tr. p. 2480_), and never went to an observation station. (_Tr. p. 2481._) In winter 1939-1940, however, he visited, together with the defendant Brack, Bouhler, and Conti, the euthanasia station of Brandenburg, where the first gas chamber was set up. The purpose of this visit was to observe a test experiment in which four insane persons were gassed. (_Tr. pp. 7645-6._)
Victims of euthanasia were condemned to death by so-called top experts who had never so much as seen the patient. The victims were only superficially examined on the basis of questionnaires. (_NO-470, Pros. Ex. 332._) Pfannmueller, an expert, received no less than 159 shipments of questionnaires, averaging between 200 and 300 questionnaires each, prior to 15 April 1941, for judgment as to life and death. (_NO-1129, Pros. Ex. 354_; _NO-1130, Pros. Ex. 355_.) Since his main occupation was that of manager of an insane asylum, his judgment of the questionnaires was only a secondary activity. In a period of 18 days, this same expert passed judgment on no less than 2,058 questionnaires. (_NO-1129, Pros. Ex. 354_; _Tr. p. 7384_.)
Questionnaires on patients who were in an asylum for as short a time as one month were filled out and formed the basis for judgment as to whether the particular inmate should be killed. (_NO-825, Pros. Ex. 358._) Many of these questionnaires were inadequately completed so that it was impossible in any event to form a clear medical opinion. Experts were also exposed to pressure to induce them to give positive opinions. (_Tr. p. 1881._) Unanimous opinion of the experts was not necessary to bring about a positive judgment which would condemn the patient to be killed. The dissenting opinion of one expert did not suffice to save the life of the patient. (_Tr. pp. 1907-8._)
In a concentration camp 105 Aryans were “examined” by the expert Mennecke in an afternoon. The “examination” of 1,200 Jews, which consisted in the transcription of the reason for their arrest from the files to the reports, took only a few days. In a letter to his wife, Mennecke himself put the word “examination” in quotation marks. It is impossible that any kind of mental examination of the patients was carried out. (_Tr. p. 1892_; _NO-907, Pros. Ex. 412_.) In fact, these Jews were mentally and physically healthy. (_Tr. p. 1893._) It was impossible for Dr. Heyde and his doctors commission, which was active in the Dachau concentration camp, to examine the great number of inmates selected in the short time they spent there. The examination consisted solely in the cursory study of personal records in the presence of the inmate. (_NO-2799, Pros. Ex. 497._) Doctors Schumann and Gorgass screened approximately 100 concentration camp inmates during a one day’s visit in the Buchenwald concentration camp. (_NO-3010, Pros. Ex. 503._)
It was not the degree of insanity which was the decisive factor in the decision as to whether or not the inmates should be killed, but rather their usefulness for work. The manner of employment, the value of work, if possible compared with the average performance of healthy persons, had to be carefully filled out in the questionnaires. (_1696-PS, Pros. Ex. 357._) Valuable workers were not sent to euthanasia stations. (_3865-PS, Pros. Ex. 365._)
Patients who had arteriosclerosis, tuberculosis, cancer, and other disabling illnesses were included in the program. (_3896-PS, Pros. Ex. 372._) “Useless eaters” were starved to death. (_3816-PS, Pros. Ex. 370_; _NO-823, Pros. Ex. 399_.) Persons who no longer had any value to the state were considered “useless eaters.” It was pointed out that during the war healthy people had to give up their lives while these severely ill people continued to live, and would continue to live unless euthanasia was carried out. In addition, it was stated the lack of food and nursing personnel justified the elimination of these people. (_Tr. p. 1906._) Concentration camp inmates were examined as to their capacity for work and their political reliability and were selected accordingly for euthanasia. (_NO-2799, Pros. Ex. 497._) Questionnaires were completed on concentration camp inmates who were not insane. (_NO-3010, Pros. Ex. 503._) Prior to 27 April 1943, Action 14 f 13 encompassed the execution not only of insane persons, but persons suffering from tuberculosis, bedridden individuals, and others unfit for manual work. (_NO-1007, Pros. Ex. 413._) Only inmates who were no longer fit for work were to be brought before the examining commission. (_1151-PS, Pros. Ex. 411._)
In the case of killing of children, a previous consultation with the parents or relatives did not take place. (_3864-PS, Pros. Ex. 367._) The defense witness Pfannmueller testified that, after having received authorization to kill the individual child, he invited the relatives to visit the child because it was sick. However, he never notified the parents or guardians that he was going to kill the child, as this was a top secret matter. (_Tr. p. 7394._) From the documents submitted by the defendant Brack, it is clear that the parents were deceived about the purpose of the transfer of the children to institutions where they were to be killed. It was the business of the medical officers to induce the parents to send their children to such institutions. To accomplish this, the parents were told that in the case of individual diseases there was a possibility of achieving certain successes with treatment. (_Brack 52, Brack Ex. 43_; _Tr. p. 7717_.) The parents were told that the best care would be taken of the child in such institutions and everything possible in the way of modern therapy would be carried out. (_Brack 51, Brack Ex. 42._) From these documents it is clear that the parents and relatives were not only not asked for their consent in the case of killing of children, but were deceived in order to make the transfer to a euthanasia institution possible. A letter from the Reich Committee for Research on Hereditary and Constitutional Severe Diseases to the Eichberg Sanatorium shows on its face that, in the case of euthanasia of children, the consent of the parents was not sought. (_NO-890, Pros. Ex. 443._) This evidence is corroborated by the affidavit of Dr. Suchomel. (_NO-2253, Pros. Ex. 557._) The defendant Brack testified that the consent of the parents to the killing of children was an absolute prerequisite. The medical officers who made the arrangements for the transfer of the children to the killing stations were allegedly charged with the task of informing the parents and requesting their consent. This statement is in contradiction to Brack’s own documents, which clearly show what the parents really were told, as well as the top secret character of the program. The proof has further shown that Pfannmueller himself was one of the doctors who had, according to the decree of the Minister of the Interior of 18 August 1939, to report deformed and deficient children. (_NO-3355, Pros. Ex. 553._) He himself testified that he never informed the parents about the fate their children had to expect. Brandt admitted that in the case of the killing of insane adults, the consent of the relatives was not requested and their opinion not heard. (_Tr. pp. 2427-8._)
There is abundant proof that the German public was horrified by euthanasia and the manner of its execution. A police report stated:
“The wildest scenes imaginable are reported to have taken place, as some of these people did not board the bus voluntarily and were therefore forced to do so by the accompanying personnel. There were people who were imbeciles and feeble-minded, and were said to have other epileptic illnesses as well, and whose upkeep the state and other public bodies up till now had to provide for completely, or at least for the greater part. People went so far as to formulate and disseminate more or less the following assertion: ‘The state must be in a bad way now or it could not happen that these poor people should simply be sent to their death solely in order that the means, which until now have been used for the upkeep of these people, are made available for the prosecution of the war.’” (_D-906, Pros. Ex. 376._)
D. _General Extermination of the Jews_
Personnel active in the Euthanasia Program also took part in the extermination of the Jews in the East from about 1941 until the liberation of the eastern territories. Some time in the second half of 1941 part of the personnel, who were until then executing the Euthanasia Program in Germany, was sent to Lublin and put at the disposal of SS Brigadefuehrer Globocnik in order to assist in the mass extermination of the Jews, which was then common knowledge in the higher circles of the NSDAP. Among the doctors who assisted in the extermination of the Jews were Drs. Eberle and Schumann, both of whom had been previously active in the Euthanasia Program in Germany. All of this Brack admitted in his pretrial affidavit:
“The order to send these men to the East could only have been given by Himmler to Brandt, possibly through Bouhler.” (_NO-426, Pros. Ex. 160._)
The connection between the “Stiftung” (Charitable Foundation for Institutional Care) and the extermination camps in Lublin was also known to the lower employees of the euthanasia stations. (_NO-470, Pros. Ex. 332._) The witness Gorgass stated in his affidavit that Police Captain Wirth told him, late in the summer of 1941, that he had been transferred by the Foundation for Institutional Care (which was one of the code names under which the Euthanasia Program operated) to a euthanasia institute in the Lublin area. (_NO-3010, Pros. Ex. 503._) The SS judge, Dr. Morgen, who investigated the Jewish extermination program in Lublin, testified before the International Military Tribunal that Wirth, having previously carried out the task of removing the incurably insane, was a specialist in mass destruction of human beings. The office from which Wirth obtained his orders was Berlin, Tiergartenstrasse, and among the people who were connected with this operation was Blankenburg. (_NO-2614, Pros. Ex. 504._) Brack admitted that Wirth was an official of the Brandenburg euthanasia station. (_Tr. p. 7733._) Brandt visited Brandenburg in the winter of 1939-40. (_Tr. pp. 7645-6._) The central office for the Euthanasia Program was set up in Tiergartenstrasse 4, and Blankenburg was Brack’s deputy in the Euthanasia Program. (_Tr. pp. 7563 and 7707._)
The defendant Brack reported to Himmler about these activities on 23 June 1942, as follows:
“On the instructions of Reich Leader Bouhler I placed some of my men—already some time ago—at the disposal of Brigadefuehrer Globocnik to execute his special mission. On his renewed request I have now transferred additional personnel. On this occasion Brigadefuehrer Globocnik stated his opinion that the whole Jew action should be completed as quickly as possible, so that one would not get caught in the middle of it one day if some difficulties should make a stoppage of the action necessary. You yourself, Reich Leader, have already expressed your view that work should progress quickly for reasons of camouflage alone * * *.” (_NO-205, Pros. Ex. 163._)
The affidavit of Kurt Gerstein, which also mentions Wirth, gives a vivid description of the terrible way in which the victims were killed by the thousands by order of Globocnik. (_1553-PS, Pros. Ex. 428._)
In October 1941, Brack, the administrative head of the Euthanasia Program, forwarded plans whereby Jews who were unable to work should be exterminated by gas. He declared his readiness to send some of his assistants and especially his chemist, Kallmeyer, to the East, where the necessary gassing apparatus could be easily manufactured. Eichmann, whom Hitler had charged with the extermination of the Jews, was in agreement with these plans. Consequently, there were “no objections to doing away with those Jews who are unable to work, by means of the Brack remedy”. (_NO-365, Pros. Ex. 507._)
Kallmeyer, who was charged with the manufacture of the gassing apparatus and equipment, had been trained for this task in the Euthanasia Program. Previously he had been responsible for the proper operation of the gas chambers of the different euthanasia institutions. (_Tr. p. 7743._) According to Eichmann’s own estimate, four million Jews were killed in extermination institutions. (_NO-2737, Pros. Ex. 505._)
E. _Legality_
The evidence outlined above makes it clear that the Euthanasia Program can only be described as mass murder. This Tribunal is not called upon to define with juridical nicety what a state may lawfully legislate with respect to euthanasia. The prosecution asks only that this Tribunal find, as other tribunals have already held, that there was no valid law in the Third Reich permitting euthanasia, and that the execution of persons under the guise of euthanasia, with the connivance and assistance of certain defendants in this dock, constituted the crime of murder—a war crime and a crime against humanity.
The first and foremost authority on the legality of euthanasia as practiced under the Nazis is in the judgment of the International Military Tribunal.[93]
These findings draw no distinction between German nationals executed under the program and non-German nationals. These executions are described with the word “murders” and constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Charter and Control Council Law No. 10. This was one of the principal crimes which led to the judgment of guilty and the sentence of death against Frick.[94]
The Review of the Deputy Theater Judge Advocate in the case of the U. S. _vs._ Klein, Wahlman, et al., held at Weisbaden, Germany, from 8 October through 15 October 1945 is a clear precedent that the execution of non-German nationals pursuant to the Euthanasia Program was a crime. (_NO-1116, Pros. Ex. 415._)
The defendants were there charged with the execution of some 400 persons of Polish and Russian nationality, alleged to be suffering from incurable tuberculosis, at the Hadamar euthanasia station between July 1944 and April 1945. They were not charged with murdering German nationals and that issue was not considered. After taking judicial notice of the fact that foreign laborers were pressed for service in Germany, the reviewing authority held that the killings in issue were a violation of the international laws of war and of Article 46 of The Hague Convention. Three of the seven defendants were sentenced to death.
According to German law, euthanasia was nothing other than murder. Paragraph 211 of the German Criminal Code, in its old form reads:
“Whoever kills a person willfully will be punished by death for murder if the killing was premeditated.”
In the new form, which was in effect from 4 September 1941 on, the section stated:
“The murderer will be punished by death.
“A murderer is one who kills a person out of sheer desire to murder, for the satisfaction of the sexual instincts, for covetousness or other vile motives; one who kills another maliciously or cruelly, or by publicly dangerous means, or to create the preconditions for another punishable action, or to conceal such an action.
“Certain exceptional cases where capital punishment is not appropriate will be punished by life sentence.” (_NO-705._[95])
For expert commentaries on the legality of euthanasia, see NO-708 and NO-706.[96]
The defense witness Hans Lammers, a German legal expert, testified that the Hitler letter to Bouhler and Brandt was not a law, and that official legislation was necessary to legalize euthanasia. (_Tr. pp. 2672-2679._) The Reich Minister of Justice, Guertner, on 24 July 1940, wrote a letter to Lammers informing him that, as the Fuehrer had refused to issue a law it was necessary to discontinue immediately the secret extermination of insane persons. (_NO-832, Pros. Ex. 393._) A copy of this letter was sent to Bouhler on 27 July 1940. (_NO-833, Pros. Ex. 394._)
During Brack’s lecture in the Ministry of Justice, referred to in B above, the legal authorities present were completely misinformed about the extent of the program. From the remarks of the speaker, the impression was obtained that only a very limited circle of persons, at the utmost several hundred, throughout Germany, Austria, and the Protectorate Bohemia and Moravia, would be affected. The opinion created was that only very dangerous patients and delirious maniacs who might injure themselves would be subjected to the program. (_NO-2253, Pros. Ex. 557._) This obviously was done to quiet the misgivings of the persons present. Brack, when questioned as to whether, during the lecture, he gave an approximate number of persons who would be subjected to euthanasia, could or would not give any answer. Contrary to the impression created during the conference in the Ministry of Justice, the defendants Brandt and Brack now admit that about 50,000 to 60,000 people were killed in the Euthanasia Program in Germany and Austria alone. (_Tr. p. 2465_; _Tr. p. 7610_.)
Since the end of the war, German and Austrian courts have repeatedly held that the killing of persons of any nationality under the guise of euthanasia was in violation of the German Criminal Code and punishable as murder. The witnesses Schmidt and Mennecke who testified before this Tribunal had themselves been convicted by a German court for participation in the Euthanasia Program and sentenced to life imprisonment and death, respectively.
* * * * *
The Court of Assizes in Berlin, at the session on 25 March 1946, found the defendants Hilde Wernicke and Helene Wieczorek guilty of murder and sentenced them to death.
* * * * *
The Court of Appeals in the same case rejected the appeals of both, defendants. The following quotation from the findings may be of interest:
* * * * *
“_It cannot be mistaken that the defendants Wernicke and Wieczorek are only the last links of a long chain, and that they are preceded by persons whose guilt is still greater._” [Emphasis added.] (_NO. 447_[97]).
Thus it is established that euthanasia was murder according to German law.
In connection with this question, it is again pointed out that the whole program was kept completely secret. Hitler’s letter of 1 September 1939 (_Tr. p. 1516_) marked “Top Secret” was never published, and the Minister of Justice received a copy of it only one year after its issuance. (_630-PS, Pros. Ex. 330._) Transfers of inmates of insane asylums to euthanasia stations were allegedly carried out by the order of the Reich Defense Commissioner. (_NO-1133, Pros. Ex. 335._) The officials active in the program had to sign a written oath of secrecy. (_NO-1312, Pros. Ex. 338_; _NO-1311, Pros. Ex. 339_.) The doctors who performed euthanasia were warned that they would be severely punished if they sabotaged the work. (_Tr. p. 1894._) The whole program of euthanasia was to be kept secret, as they were told from the beginning that it was a top secret matter. The reason given was to avoid unrest among the population. Breach of secrecy was considered sabotage. (_Tr. p. 1923._) Others had to sign a written oath binding them to secrecy. It was known that the result of breach of this oath was confinement in a concentration camp. (_Tr. p. 1826._)
F. _Personal Responsibility of Karl Brandt_
Brandt was put in charge of the program, together with Bouhler, by the above-quoted letter of Hitler of 1 September 1939. His position as highest authority in the Euthanasia Program is outlined in the affidavit of Dr. Boehm, one of the oldest members of the NSDAP. When, in November 1940, Boehm approached Martin Bormann[98] with the request to obtain an audience with Hitler to complain about the execution of the Euthanasia Program, Bormann referred him to Brandt as the responsible authority for the execution of euthanasia. As a result, Boehm had a discussion with Brandt and when he complained, among other things, that the Euthanasia Program was not regulated by law and should not be carried out in a secret manner, Brandt admitted that the Minister of Justice, Guertner, had also urged legislation. From his conversation with Bormann and Brandt, Boehm was sure that Brandt was the leading personality in the program. (_NO-3059, Pros. Ex. 558._) Brandt admitted that it was necessary to set up a special organization to carry out euthanasia. (_Tr. p. 2407._)
He, together with Bouhler, had authority over the physicians who were participating in this program, and furthermore he had to keep Hitler informed from the medical point of view (_English translation is garbled, therefore reference is made to German Tr. p. 2420_) and had to maintain contact with Bouhler. (_Tr. p. 2408._) He further admitted that authorizations for the killing of children were submitted to him and Bouhler. (_Tr. p. 2544._)
He stated that he resigned his job some time in 1942. (_Tr. p. 2433._) While this is of no material significance, it is established that he held his position as the leading figure in the program until 1944. Dr. Ludwig Sprauer, in his affidavit, stated:
“I heard the name of Professor Dr. Karl Brandt for the first time at a conference in Berlin in the middle of 1941. At this conference I learned that Karl Brandt and Philipp Bouhler were the leading figures in the Euthanasia Program. The conference was called by Dr. Linden on behalf of the Department of the Interior, and problems of institutions and asylums were submitted. Dr. Linden directed the proceedings.
“To the best of my knowledge and belief, Philipp Bouhler as well as Professor Dr. Karl Brandt were the leading figures in this so-called Euthanasia Program from 1941 to the collapse of Germany.
“The connection between the Department of the Interior and Professor Karl Brandt, in the framework of the Euthanasia Program, was that Karl Brandt gave orders to Conti and Linden, which were passed on by these persons on behalf of the Department of the Interior. Brandt was the dominating figure without doubt.” (_NO-818, Pros. Ex. 373._)
The witness Wesse said in his affidavit that Brandt was in charge of the Euthanasia Program at least until March 1944. (_NO-1428, Pros. Ex. 432._)
The witness Mennecke testified that he learned in the beginning of 1941 that the defendant Brandt was active in the Euthanasia Program. (_Tr. p. 1874._) He further testified:
“When, in 1944, I was treated as a patient in the army hospital at St. Blasien, I found out through conversations with officers that Professor Brandt had an essential part in the collection of insane persons in the area of Lublin, Poland.” (_Tr. p. 1903._)
He further testified, in connection with this Lublin action, that it must have continued up to 1944 and that it was said that insane persons and Jews were collected in Lublin in large numbers. (_Tr. p. 1904._)
The witness Schmidt testified that Professor Brandt had the medical direction of the program, and only in 1944 was he told that Brandt had left the program. (_Tr. p. 1825._) He also knew that Brandt played the leading part in the task which had to be accomplished (Euthanasia Program), that he (Brandt) was to accomplish this task. (_Tr. p. 1847._)
Both witnesses, Schmidt and Mennecke, also testified that the chart (_NO-253, Pros. Ex. 331_), which shows Brandt in the center of the program, is correct. (_Tr. pp. 1833, 1876._)
The evidence shows further that Brandt gave orders in the Euthanasia Program as late as July 1943. In a letter from the Patients Transport Corporation, dated 20 July 1943, to the Mental Institution Hadamar—which was, as documents and testimony show, an extermination station—the following sentences are found:
“I order transfer of insane persons to your institution also, by order of Professor Brandt, the Commissioner General of the Fuehrer for Medical and Health Service. You will get, on 26 July 1943, 150 insane women from the Mental Institution Warstein if the Reichsbahn will furnish the necessary cars as requested.” (_NO-892, Pros. Ex. 442._)
Brandt was the person who had to be approached if one were to save a child from euthanasia. In a letter from the Reich Committee for Research on Hereditary and Constitutional Severe Diseases, dated 16 November 1943, to Dr. Schmidt’s sanatorium, Eichberg (as the evidence shows, a killing station for deficient children), we find the sentence:
“On the basis of a letter directed to Professor Dr. Brandt concerning the above mentioned, I request an elaborated diagnosis about the mentioned Anna Gasse who is reported to be in your institution at present.”
And further:
“If from a medical point of view such a release is warranted, one could take into consideration whether one should not perhaps comply with such a request in the interest of the good reputation of the institution.” (_NO-890, Pros. Ex. 443._)
That the defendant Karl Brandt was in a position to issue instructions and assign tasks to insane asylums in Germany is further corroborated by the affidavit of the defendant Rose, who said that in 1943 Brandt put an insane asylum in Thuringia at his disposal and made arrangements that this institution would not be converted into a general hospital; and further, that in 1944 Brandt made arrangements for the better feeding of inmates of this asylum in order to enable Rose to proceed with his malaria therapy. (_Tr. p. 1717._) If this statement in itself has nothing to do with euthanasia, it shows the scope of influence and power Brandt still commanded over insane asylums in 1943 and 1944. (_NO-872, Pros. Ex. 408._)
According to his own testimony, Brandt was in charge of euthanasia until 1942. (_Tr. p. 2433_; _Tr. p. 2532_.) There is no proof, other than his own statement, that he resigned his commission at that time. On the contrary, the proof has shown that he was active in this field until some time in 1944. In any event, the program was criminal in its inception. The murder of concentration camp inmates pursuant to euthanasia began as early as 1940. Non-German nationals were included in substantial numbers. Healthy Jews were exterminated without examination. Trained killers from euthanasia stations were sent to the East as early as 1941 to aid in the mass murder of Jews. Persons whose only crime was physical inability to work were subjected to euthanasia from the very beginning. Indeed, the elimination of “useless eaters” was the principal rationale of the whole program.
Brandt stated that an order existed which exempted non-German nationals, but he was unable to give any explanation as to how this order operated, who received it, and why, if such an order existed, questionnaires for foreign nationals were filled out at all. (_Tr. pp. 2499-2503._) The evidence has shown that non-German nationals were never exempted and were killed in large numbers. There is nothing to be said in mitigation for Brandt.
* * * * *
_EXTRACTS FROM THE CLOSING BRIEF AGAINST DEFENDANT BRACK_
* * * * *
_Moral and Humanitarian Justification_
In the brief against Karl Brandt the prosecution has summarized the overwhelming proof that euthanasia, far from being “an act of grace”, was a measure to eliminate “useless eaters” and other “undesirable” persons. Brack himself, when questioned by the Tribunal, was unable to explain why war veterans of the First World War (1914-18) were exempted from this “act of grace.” (_Tr. pp. 7650, 7664._) Contrariwise, he could not explain why this grace was extended to insane criminals, irrespective of the length of time they had spent in an insane asylum. (_NO-825, Pros. Ex. 358._)
Brack personally reprimanded Mennecke, who was an expert in the Euthanasia Program, on the ground that his expert opinions were far too soft and did not recommend euthanasia as often as he desired. (_Tr. pp. 1881, 1907._) The so-called “observation stations” where the patients, according to Brack’s statement, were examined for several weeks by expert doctors were nothing but collecting points for the victims. (_Tr. pp. 1822, 1878, 1879._)
Brack admitted that the work of Binding and Hoche is considered the standard work on euthanasia. (_Tr. p. 7633._) This work leaves no doubt that the will to live, of even those who are most seriously ill, suffer most gravely, and are of least use, should be fully respected, and that any authority for the annihilation of life is excluded in cases where the will to live must be broken. (_NO-2893, Pros. Ex. 496._) Brack himself admitted that euthanasia is inadmissible in cases where the patient has the will to live. (_Tr. p. 7701._) The witness Schmidt testified that the victims, who obviously knew or suspected their fate, had to be _forced_ to enter the busses which took them to the extermination stations. (_Tr. pp. 1856, 1861._) This evidence is corroborated by documentary proof. (_D-906, Pros. Ex. 376._) While many of those victims may have been insane, they certainly did not lack the will to live. Moreover, Brack himself admitted, when questioned by the Tribunal, that Bouhler ordered that the arrangements for the killing had to be made in such a way that the patients would not realize what was being done to them. (_Tr. p. 7660._) The gas chambers where the victims were annihilated resembled shower rooms. (_Tr. p. 7659._) The patients were deceived into thinking that they were to take a shower bath and, therefore, had to undress. (_Tr. pp. 7644, 7660._) Such precautions would certainly not have been necessary if the victims had desired the “privilege of a mercy death.”
_Action 14 f 13_[99]
* * * * *
If the testimony of Brack and Brandt as to the number of doctors who were active in the Euthanasia Program is correct, it is clear from the record that all doctors active in this program collaborated in Action 14 f 13. Brandt estimated the number of doctors who were charged with the execution of the Euthanasia Program as 10 to 15 (_Tr. p. 2478_), Brack, as 12 to 15. (_Tr. p. 7573._) Mennecke testified that about 15 doctors from the Euthanasia Program were commissioned to carry out the “examinations” in the concentration camps. (_Tr. p. 1891._)
Brack was unable to explain how it came about that concentration camps inmates selected in Action 14 f 13 were killed in euthanasia stations. (_Tr. p. 7541._)
* * * * *
_Legality_
* * * * *
Even Brack’s own documents reveal that he misinformed the legal authorities about the legal situation in respect to the Euthanasia Program. The ministerial director in the Reich Ministry of Justice, Karl Engert, states in his affidavit (which, according to the defense counsel of Brack, is “of great interest because it shows the opinion of the influential jurists on this question”): “Brack’s statements reassured me because, according to them, it was to be definitely assumed that a Reich law would then be enacted in the customary form, i. e., by publication in the Reich Law Gazette. I saw no reason why any difficulties should arise.” (_Brack 37, Brack Ex. 37._) Needless to say, Brack did not mention that Hitler had refused to issue such a law until after the war.
That Brack was well aware of the fact that the Euthanasia Program was a criminal one is proved by his attempt to destroy evidence prior to the occupation of Germany by the Allies. The affidavit of Claussen proves that he sent the following teletype to the commandant of the concentration camp at Mauthausen (_NO-2429, Pros. Ex. 498_):
“To the Concentration Camp Mauthausen, SS Standartenfuehrer Ziereiss.
“Hartheim must be destroyed immediately. Execution must be reported by order of the Fuehrer.
[Signed] OBERFUEHRER BRACK”
Brack admitted that Hartheim was a euthanasia station where the victims of the Euthanasia Program were killed. (_Tr. p. 7714._)
_General Extermination of the Jews_
* * * * *
That the defense of Brack is fabricated is proved by other evidence in the record. SS judge, Dr. Morgen, who investigated the criminal case of Wirth, testified before the International Military Tribunal that when Wirth took over the mass extermination of the Jews, he was already a specialist in the extermination of human beings. He had previously carried out the task of annihilating the insane. He had received this assignment from the Chancellery of the Fuehrer, Bouhler’s office. A system which Wirth had devised in his activities in the Euthanasia Program made it possible to exterminate large numbers of people with the help of only a few assistants. The same system, with a few improvements, was employed for the extermination of the Jews. Wirth’s assignment for the extermination of the Jews came from Bouhler’s office, from the very office where Brack was active. Morgen investigated Wirth’s mail and found out that the courier who brought this mail came from the Fuehrer’s Chancellery, Tiergartenstrasse, the place where the office of the Euthanasia Program was located. Among the people connected with this extermination program, Morgen remembers Blankenburg, Brack’s deputy. (_NO-2614, Pros. Ex. 504._) Brack admitted that Wirth was active in the Euthanasia Program. (_Tr. p. 7733._) It may well be that Morgen started his investigations in July 1943[100] but by the affidavit of Gorgass, it is proved that Wirth received his assignment from the “Foundation”, one of the camouflaged societies of the Euthanasia Program, as early as the summer of 1941. (_NO-3010, Pros. Ex. 503._)
This evidence is fully corroborated by the affidavit of Gerstein. Globocnik was in charge of the extermination camps near Lublin, and Wirth collaborated with him in the extermination of the Jews. The gas chambers were camouflaged as “bath and inhalation” rooms and called “Foundation” Heckenholt. Doctors’ commissions toured the towns and villages of Poland and Czechoslovakia in order to select persons for extermination. (_1553-PS, Pros. Ex. 428._) Brack when questioned by the Tribunal, admitted that the gas chambers of the euthanasia stations where the victims of the Euthanasia Program were killed were camouflaged as “shower rooms”. (_Tr. p. 7659._) “Foundation” was one of the code names under which the Euthanasia Program operated. (_NO-3010, Pros. Ex. 503._) The similarity between the extermination arrangement in the euthanasia stations and that used by Globocnik and Wirth is not coincidental.
The proof has shown that Brack himself advanced plans for the mass extermination of the Jews. In the beginning of October 1941 Brack had a conference with Eichmann from the Reich Security Main Office of the SS and Wetzel of the Reich Ministry for the Occupied Territories on the “solution of the Jewish question”. (_NO-997, Pros. Ex. 506._) Brack declared himself ready to collaborate in the manufacture of the necessary gas chambers and gassing apparatus for the extermination of all Jews who were unfit to work. Since the manufacture of this apparatus was easier to accomplish in the East, Brack agreed to send some of his collaborators, and especially his chemist, Kallmeyer, there for this purpose. Brack proposed outright extermination of all Jews who were unable to work. Since Eichmann, whom Hitler had charged with the solution of the Jewish question, was in agreement with Brack’s proposals, no objection was voiced against the extermination of those Jews who were unable to work with the “Brack remedy”. (_NO-365, Pros. Ex. 507._) Kallmeyer was the technical expert on operation of the gas chambers in the euthanasia station. (_Tr. p. 7743._)
* * * * *