CONFESSIONS AND RETRACTIONS

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 171, 15 April 1933, Page 11

CONFESSIONS AND RETRACTIONS

Moscow Trial Marked by Dramatic Turns

and Conflicting Statements

OGPU’S WAYS IN SECURING EVIDENCE

’(British Official Wireless.) Rugby, April 13. The trial of six British employees of the Metropolitan Vickers Company accused of belonging to counter-revolutionary organisations and of engaging in espionage, sabotage, and bribery, opened noon in Moscow yesterday. The first dramatic incident was the confess! by one of the engineers, Mr. William MacDonald, that he had ta part in espionage, and Counter-revolutionary work. Then to-day tnis confession was retracted, although Mr. MacDonald admitted!ha had discussions with the Russian Guesev who confessed to being cot cerned in sabotage and espionage. The proceedings were y some tense moments and much conflict of evidence. Mr also denied the veracity of depositions taken from him while in prison

The accused Englishman are:— Messrs. Alan Monkhouse, Charles Thornton, William MacDonald, John Cushing, Charles Nordwall, and A. W. Gregory. The trial is being held in the Hall of the Trades Unions, and some four hundred people were present this morning. Mr. Robert Turner, the Vickers solicitor, sat with British Attaches. The nine other lawyers were seated elsewhere. Entering the court without greeting his comrades, MacDonald, bearded, hollow-eyed, and haggard, stood up in the clock, and pleaded guilty in the Russian phrase, “I recognise.” A Russian prisoner, Guesev, head o. ' the electrical station, secured the entire attention of the Court yesterday when he said “I started counter-revolu-tion work when I met the Metropoli-tan-Vickers employees. MacDonald suggested that I supply information regarding militarily valuable plant.” Mr. MacDonald, answering the Prosecutor (M.’ Vishinsky) admitted that he and Guesev were friends in 1930. He added that he had sought information in his own interest. Guilty Plea Retracted. This morning’s proceedings opened with the examination of Sokolov, another of the Russian accused, who produced a similar story and confession to Guesev’s. Mr. MacDonald, however, when questioned, denied giving Thornton instruc- ■ tlons for wrecking and aspionage, and on the defence pointing out that he had admitted doing so in his deposition.. made in prison, he replied: It was convenient to make that stat®" ment at the time.” He then retracted his plea of guilty which he made at the opening of the trial. • Mr. Thornton was then called, ana said that he made false admissions in prison, because he “lost his courage. After the President of the Court had endeavoured unsuccessfully to per- • ’ suade MacDonald to revert to his plea of guilty, the Court adjourned . ~ Changed Behaviour. This adjournment, during which Mr. MacDonald left the Court in the hands of his Ogpu guards, was followed by a change in his behaviour, which was remarked by all observers. On resumption be was again questioned as to whether he admitted espionage, and he replied in low tones in the affirmative He also stated that the collection' of information involved was suggested by Thornton, and that he presumed other Metro-Vickers engineers were Implicated. He also admitted giving instructions for machine-wreck-The prosecutor then examined Mr. Thornton in reference to Mr. MacDonald obtaining information regarding the production of, munitions. Mr. Thornton stated that this suggestion was an “absolute lie.” He also repu-. dinted any part of his previous depositions, admitting “any kind of espionage activities.”- Alternately the examination of Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Thornton continued . Mr. MacDonald was accepting almost all suggestions put him by the prosecutor, which were, however, strenuously denied by Mr. Thornton in his turn. At one stage a specific list of planned breakdowns was read to Mr. MacDonald from depositions made by him in prison and confirmed by him into the mouth of a microphone. Mr. Thornton again refused to confirm “the accusations which he had. read and signed before leaving the Ogpu prison, and ex- • plained that the confessions which he ■ made were given in different surroundings which frightened and influenced him into making statements which he wished to change. The president of the court observed: "You are sure that you are not getting this from somebody else.” ~ Monetary Transactions. Mr. Thornton and Mr, MacDonald were further questioned regarding their monetary transactions, and the former was able to produce documentary evidence that the large sum for which he bought roubles privately at a rate representing their greatly-depreciated value and lent Mr. MacDonald had been repaid by the latter. Mr. MacDonald, however, yielded to the prosecutor’s suggestion that this was not the only : sum Involved, and the prosecutor succeeded also in obtaining an admission that even Mr. Monkhouse might have been concerned in payments on account of his illegal activities, since if one member of the firm were so occupied perhaps the others were. At this stage, shortly before the court adjourned, Mr. MacDonald was giving his evidence almost in a state of collapse, and he had already answered, in reply to the prosecutor, that he made a certain petition jointly to the Ogpu and the prosecutor when In prison. He stated that he did not wish to state its contents to the court at the present moment. The Court then adjourned until evening. Russian Engineer’s Evidence. The proceedings yesterday continued until 10 o’clock last night. The morning session was devoted to moulding evidence in support of charges of espionage, wrecking and bribery at Zlatoust, and was occupied by the examination of Guesev, the chief of Zlatoust power station, one of the Russian accused, who made a complete confession. He gave a history of his life, explaining that he fought with the White Army and subsequently retained anti-Soviet views. In these views he said he met with the sympathy of MacDonald, who discussed with him, among other things, the deplorable living conditions in Russia. .After a lime Guesev said Mr. MacDonald asked him to supply information about the production of munitions, and also stated that he had, on Mr. MacDonald’s instructions, arranged breakdowns which he described at length, and that Mr. MacDonald paid him 3000 roubles for this work.

Mr. MacDonald was questioned on both points during Guesev’s evidence and maintained, in spite of a lead from the prosecutor, that the industrial and military information he asked Guesev

for was required for his own personal account. He admitted that he gave Guesev money received from his chief, Mr. Thornton. He denied another allegation by Guesev that he had taken any part in the making of a plan for the wrecking of Soviet munitions productloGuesev then brought Mr. Thornton into the story. The latter, he said, paid two visits to Zlatoust. . After Mr. MacDonald’s departure from Zlatoust Guesev continued to maintain, communication with him. The story when Guesev then told of numerous letters and parcels sent under different fictitious names and containing code phrases, such as “tinned food” for munitions of war. was supported by replies to questions then put by the prosecutor to Madame Kutuzova, secretary of Metropolitan Vickers in Moscow, who pleaded guilty. , Madame Kutuzovas Story. No documents or material evidence was produced in court in this morning’s session, and Madame Kutuzova, under cross-examination, later said she thought the parcels contained butter and other food. Guesev, continuing, said that in the. autumn of 1931 he visited Mr. MacDonald, at the latter’s invitation, at Zuevka, to discuss Guesev’s wrecking activities. - ' Mr. MacDonald was then questioned, and admitted that he invited Guesev, but he denied that he invited him to discuss wrecking. He confirmed that Guesev told him of various breakdowns, but Mr. MacDonald was then understood to say that he denied any participation in or knowledge of these particular wrecking activities of Guesev. Guesev alleged that Mr. Thornton knew what was taking place between him and Mr. MacDonald. Mr. Thornton admitted knowledge that the information was being obtained, but only in the interests of the firm, and it was not information of a spying nature. Mr. Thornton’s Denial. The prosecution then j>ut to Mr. Thornton his admissions as to spying on» confrontation with Guesev during his Imprisonment. Mr. Thornton said that he made these admissions because he was upset at the time and they were not true. Guesev declared that he was now telling all the truth, and added: “If my life is spared I shall work honestly for the Soviet Union in the future.” Guesev was cross-examined by Mr. MacDonald's counsel, who somewhat shook his statements regarding the money he received from Mr. Thornton. Guesev said that he received it to share with Vitvitski, whereupon counsel made him admit that'Mr. MacDonald did not know Vitviteki, and put to him the consequent improbability of Mr. MacDonald Intending money for the latter. Before the court adjourned, Mr. Thornton denied absolutely knowing anything of Vitvitski’s alleged wrecking work. LOST THEIR NERVE Testimony of Companions ' y HOW OGPU WORKED (By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright.) (Received April 14, 6.30 p.m.) Moscow, April 13. Mr. MacDonald’s evidence created a bad impression in the court on account of the discrepancies. Mr. Thornton when called said that he had admitted paying for secret information and bribing employees to overlook defects in Metro-Vickers machinery because he was afraid. Asked why he gave untrue testimony he replied: “Because I had lost my nerve while under arrest and the serious charges made a heavy impression upon me.” The Prosecutor: When did your nerve return? Mr. Thornton, emphatically: On April 4 at six o’clock when I was released from prison. Continuing, he denied that Mr. MacDonald gave him secret information concerning the military plants, aeroplane engines and gun-testing ground. During cross-examination Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Thornton revealed that the alleged testimony of each had been read to the other, Mr. MacDonald said: “I was affected by Thornton’s testimony in which he said he used me to collect information. I considered it useless for me to deny it.” Mr. Thornton said: “They read me the evidence of Monkhouse and MacDonald which affected me very much.” The question of whose evidence came first was not cleared up. SOVIET INDICTMENT Collection of Evidence TWO ACCUSED ISOLATED Official Wireless. Rugby, April 12. The Englishmen and twelve Russians, whose trial On charges Of espionage and sabotage began in Moscow to-day, all sat together, the two Englishmen on whom the prosecution sets the greatest store, Messrs. MacDonald and Thornton, being marshalled as far as possible from their four companions, Messrs. Monkhouse, Cushny, Gregory, and Nordwall, who occupied the back row. After the usual formalities the indictment was read to the court. The evidence which the prosecution advanced in this document in support of the charges consists almost exclusively of depositions of the Russian accused, and of the deposition of one of the English accused. Mr. MacDonald, who bos not been allowed out on nail, and lias , during the last, four weeks been in rhe I Ogpu prison without bping allowed to receive advice or to discuss his case | with anyone except the Prosecutor or

his own State-paid Soviet counsel. The evidence containing direct insinuations of the guilt of the accused, apart from that which has been secured from accused themselves, consists of some extracts from the findings of the Soviet State Commission, and of the testimony of two Russians. One of the latter gave part of his evidence in the Ogpu prison, while the evidence of the other consists of a statement to the effect that he had immediately handed to the Ogpu money he had received from Thornton. The indictment as a whole deals witn counter-revolutionary activity and an alleged wrecking group of workmen in electricity stations charged with: (1) Damaging plant in order to undermine Soviet industry and weaken the Soviet State. (2) Collecting and ultilising to the damage of the State secret Information of military and State importance. (3) Bribing of employees of State electricity stations in connection with the execution by them of counter-re-volutionary wrecking activities. After the reading of the indictment the accused were interrogated as to whether or not they pleaded guilty. All but one of the Russians pleaded guilty and MacDonald, who was interrogated first of the Englishmen—out of his order in the list of accused —alsd pleaded guilty. The other five Englishmen interrogated after him pleaded not guilty. SCENES IN COURT Moments of Sensation ; careworn McDonald By Telegraph-—Press Assn. —Copyright. (Received April 15, 7.35 p.m.) London, April 13. When the trial resumed to-day the court was half empty, as to-day is a full working day. Mr. MacDonald s careworn face again contrasted strongly with the confident appearance of the other Britons. . L . The first witness, Sokolov, assistant director of the Zlatoust plant, said that he started sabotage in 1927. He met MacDonald and Guesev in 1930, and became a member of the counter-revo-lutionary organisation. Mr. MacDonald interrupted: I did not tell Sokolov to commit sabotage. The Prosecutor: Why did you say so in the indictment? Mr. MacDonald replied: * I considered it convenient, in the circumstances, and no translation of my statement was made in my presence. I admitted I was guilty yesterday.” The Prosecutor: And do you say so to-day? Mr. MacDonald: No, I actually am not guilty. ... Mr. MacDonald’s denial of guilt caused a profound sensation, in the midst of which the microphones failed and the public was unable to understand what had happened. Standing straight, Mr. MacDonald, in cool,‘calculated terms, denounced the statements contained in the indictment written in his own hand. He denied paying Sokolov for information, but said he had paid Guesev and others 2500 roubles for overtime, partly from his own pocket. ' Cross-examined, Mr. MacDonald said he had admitted systematic wreckage and military espionage. He had obtained Information about guns and aeroplanes. The Prosecutor asked : *’« hy . The reply was: “I was merely personally interested.” This caused a stir and laughter. Mr MacDonald added that he understood that Thornton was head of the espionage group and Monkhouse and Cushny also spied. The Prosecutor interposed: why do you want to make yourseinook foolish 'in the eyes of the. public?” , Mr. MacDonald : I don t think I m foolish. , A further conflict of evidence occurred when Mr. Thornton declared that he did not know Mr. MacDonald was occupied in sabotage or spying, or he would have kicked him out. Mr. MacDonald interjected: Yes, he knew about the spying, and then limped out of the box in which he had been accommodated in a chair, owing to lameness and exhaustion. Mr. Thornton denied asking the engineers to supply secret information. He couldn’t remember whether he asked Guesev for it. Mr. MacDonald, intervening, admitted collecting information through Guesev and transmitting it to Thornton, who thereupon repeated his declaration that he received only information interesting to the company. Mr. Monkhouse corroborated, saying: “We collected political and economic information for the company.” Madame Kutusova contradicted Mr. Monkhouse’s evidence, giving 'numerous sources whence information . had allegedly been obtained. She declared that Monkhouse and Thornton had secret books and documents. 'AU our espionage • was performed . through Richards, myself, and Monkhouse,” said Madame Kutusova. “Under Richards’s instructions all the British personnel, totalling 28, were engaged in spying.” Mr. Thornton, in evidence, said he wanted to retract his deposition as untrue. It was written under moral pressure after long interrogation. He added that the Vickers employees were collecting only harmless information. M. Vyshinsky asked: “Have you any desire to commit sabotage?” Mr. Thornton: I always build up, never destroy. Mr. Monkhouse, in evidence, said: “I am not guilty of any crimes except giving Dolgov 3000 roubles which he regarded as a bribe to advance the firm’s interest, Dolgov being a member of the commission of experts.” He lidded: “I never wrote the document which I signed concerning the transaction.” The sitting was adjourned, the Britons returning to the British Embassy in a motor-car flying the Union Jack. WIDE' ALLEGATIONS Terms of Indictments "ORGANISE BREAKDOWNS" Moscow, April 12. A sample of the charges is that Guesev, head of the electricity station nt Zlatoust,, alleges that MacDonald gave him money to collect information dealing with military production at Zlatoust. The indictment quotes MacDonald's deposition as admitting that he did so under instructions from Thornton, including one more vaguely to “organise breakdowns.” MacDonald was under the impression that Thornton was acting in the interests of England. . ~ Guesev gives details of wrecking acts performed. MacDonald alleged that the instructions were for the purpose of lowering the production of shells and high quality steel. The indictment credits Thornton with admitting that he instructed MacDonald.

but denying that he received military or secret information. The charge against Monkhouse reads: “Between 1927 and 1932, when working' in Russia as Vickers s chief representative he belonged to “ counter-revolutionary group and collected. through subordinate Englisa and Russian engineers and tecnnicinns secret information of military and State importance; participated in the counter-revolutionary . group s wrecking and djversional activities, systematically paid money for espion age; systematically bribed and abetted a Russian engineer to conmi defects in equipment erected by Vickers.”. The charges against the others vary in detail, but are similar in principle. NO OFFICIAL CONTACT With Intelligence Service A SPECIFIC STATEMENT Official Wireless. Rugby April 13. In view of the nature of the charges made against the six British subjects at the Moscow trial, Sir John cimon (Foreign Secretary) made the follow'ing specific statement in the House of Commons: — “None of these men have ever been employed, directly or indirectly, in connection with any branch of our Intelligence Service. None of them has ever supplied any information to any such branch. None of them has ever been paid or promised any reward for such information, or has been supplied with any money to obtain it. None of them has ever made any report to or on behalf of our Intelligence Service. “AU the above statements are equally true of the Metropolitan-Vickers Company itself. The company has not, and never has, had any connection with our Intelligence Service whatever. It follows that any suspicions entertained or allegations made in any quarter to the contrary effect are in fact 'without any foundation whatever.” CABINET’S PLAN Ready to Take Action London, April 14. All newspapers feature the Moscow trial, publishing every word available. Cabinet has arranged to meet during the Easter recess if the result of the trial is found to require immediate action on the part of the Government. LONDON BROADCAST Prayers for Sufferers London, April 14. London’s broadcast to-day included prayers for the suffering of those “passing through the Valley of the Shadow.” but no direct reference was made to 'the Moscow trial. It is understood the services will not further allude to accused. THREATS DEPRECATED Labour Member’s Wish London, April 12. The members of the last Labour Cabinet, excepting present Nationalists, have asked the Prime Minister to extend the Russian Trade Agreement for three months to permit a better atmosphere for the renewal of friendship with Russia, which would possibly serve the Vickers prisoners better than threats. It would not prejudge the trial, and would preserve the basis of the employment of a thousand British workmen. MOSCOW SCOFFINGS Official Press Vituperation Moscow, April 12. The official newspaper “Izvestia” says: “These barbarians, destroyers of machinery, enemies of technical development, will be tried without fear of threats. The verdict will be enforced despite protests and baitings.” The paper describes British Conservative newspaper protests as: “The voice of a naive soft-hearted old lady squealing about the fate of her little , saboteurs and spies.”