SENSATIONS AT RUSSIAN TRIAL

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18064, 15 April 1933, Page 7

SENSATIONS AT RUSSIAN TRIAL

4 Pleas of Guilty Withdrawn CONFESSIONS MADE UNDER PRESSURE An Official British Statement CATEGORICAL DENIAL OF ALLEGATIONS. More Disclosures of Ogpu Methods. (Uritlsh Official Wireless.) Roe. 11 a.m. RUGBY, April 14. In view of the nature of the charges made against six British subjects at the Moscow trial, Sir John Simon made the following specific statements ill the House 01. Commons None of these men have ever been employed, directly or indirectly, in connection -with any branch of our intelligence service. None of them lias ever supplied any information to any such branch. None of them lias 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 tiny report to, or on behalf of our intelligence service. “All the above statements arc equally true of the Metropolitan-Vickers Company itself. The company has not, and never lias had, any connection with our intelligence service whatever. It follows that any suspicions entertained, or allegations made in any quarter, .to the contrary effect arc, in fact, without any foundation whatever. ’ ’ The outstanding feature at the resumption of the trial in Moscow' was the withdrawal by two of the accused, MacDonald and Thornton, of their former picas of guilty, which they maintained had been obtained under pressure while they were in prison. It appears that the judges decided, despite MacDonald’s later withdrawal, that his original pica of guilty still holds good.

“LOST HIS COURAGE” Yesterday morning, tho proceedings at the Moscow Court opened with the examination of Sokolov, another of the Russian accused, who produced a similar story and confession to Guisev’s. MacDonald, however, when questioned, denied giving Thornton instructions for wrecking and espionage, and on the defence pointing oat that ho had admitted doing so in his depositions made in prison, he replied that it was convenient to make that statement at the time, lie then retracted his plea of guilty which he made at the opening of the trial. Thornton was then called, and said he made false admissions in prison because he “lost his courage.” After the president of the court had endeavored, unsuccessfully, to persuade MacDonald to revert to his plea of guilty, the court adjourned. This adjournment, during which MacDonald left the court in the hands of his Ogpu guards, was followed by a change in his behavior which was remarked by all observers. On resumption, lie was again questioned as to whether lie admitted espionage, and replied in a low tone in the affirmative. Ho also stated that tho collective information involved was suggested by Thornton, and that he presumed other Mrtro-Vickers engineers were implicated. Ho also admitted giving instructions for machine wrecking. “AN ABSOLUTE LIE” The prosecutor then examined Thornton in reference to MacDonald obtaining inhumation regarding the production of munitions. Stating that this suggestion was an "absolute lie,” Thornton also repudiated any part of his previous de positions admitting “any kind of espion age activities.” Alternately, tho examination of Mac Donald and Thornton continued. MacDonald was accepting almost all the suggestions put to him by the prosecutor, which, however, were strenuously denied by Thornton in his turn. At one stage, a specific list of planned breakdowns was read to MacDonald from the depositions made by him in prison, and confirmed by him into the mouth of the microphone. Thornton again refused to confirm the “accusations which he had read and signed” before leaving the Ogpu prison, and explained 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?” Thornton and MacDonald were further questioned regarding monetary transactions, and the former was able to produce documentary evidence that a largo sum for which he bought roubles privately at a rate representing their greatly depreciated value, and lent to MacDonald, had been repaid by the latter. STATE OF COLLAPSE 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 Monkhouso might have been concerned in payments on account of his illegal activities, since, it one member of the firm was so occupied, perhaps the others were. At this stage, shortly before the court adjourned, MacDonald was giving his evidence almost in a. state of collapse, and had already answered in reply to the prosecutor that lie had made a certain petition jointly to the Ogpu and the prosecutor when in prison. He stated that lie did not wish to state its contents to the court at tho present moment.

that ho had, on MacDonald’s instructions, arranged breakdowns, which he described at length, and that MacDonald paid him 3000 roubles for this work. NO MATERIAL EVIDENCE MacDonald was questioned on both, points during Guisev’s evidence, and maintained, in spito of a lead from tho prosecutor, that the industrial and military information ho asked Guisev for, was required for his own personal account. Ho admitted that he gave Guisev money received from his chief, Thornton. He denied another allegation by Guisev that ho had any part in making a plan for wrecking Soviet munitions production. Guisev then brought Thornton into tho story. The latter, ho said, paid two visits to Zlatoust. After MacDonald’s departure from Zlatoust, Guisev continued to maintain communication with him. The story which Guisev then told ol numerous letters and parcels sent under different fictitious names and containing code phrases such as “tinned food” for munitions, was supported by replies to questions then put by the prosecutor to Mdlle. Kutuzova, secretary of Metro politan-Vickers in Moscow, who pleaded guilty. No documents or material evidence was produced in court in the morning’s session, and Mdlle. Kutuzova, under cross-examination, later said she thought tho parcels contained butter and other food. Guisev, continuing, said that in the autumn of 1931 ho visited MacDonald at tho latter’s invitation at Zuevka' to discuss Guisev’s wrecking activities. ADMISSIONS NOT TRUE MacDonald was then questioned, and admitted that he invited Guisev, but denied that he invited him to discuss wrecking. Ho confirmed that Guisev had told him of various breakdowns,' but MacDonald was then understood to say that he denied any participation in, or knowledge of, these particular wrecking activities of Guisev. Guisev alleged that Thornton knew what was taking place between him and MacDonald.

Thornton admitted knowledge that information was being obtained, but only in tho interests of tho firm, and not information of a spying nature. The prosecution then put to Thornton his admissions as to spying on confrontation with Guisev during his imprisonment. Thornton said he made these admissions because ho was upset at the time, and they were not true. Guisev declared that he was now telling all tho truth, and added: “If mv life is spared I shall work honestly for the Soviet Union in future.”

Guisev was cross-examined by MacDonald’s counsel, who somewhat shook his statements regarding the money he had received from Thornton. Guisev said he received it to share with Vitvitski, whereupon counsel made him admit that MacDonald did not know Vitvitski, and put to him the consequent improbability of MacDonald intending the money for tho latter. Before tho court adjourned, Thornton denied absolutely knowing anything of Vitvit,ski’s alleged wrecking work. SOVIET’S SOLVENCY Thornton was under cross-examina-tion for about four hours. The prosecution again put to him the allegation of systematic espionage through subordinates, which he firmly denied. Apart from interest in general informat ion, Thornton admitted his interest in information bearing on the Soviet Government's solvency m view of the large credits advanced to it by his firm. Tho prosecutor was understood to show surprise mid suggested that these admissions tallied with their accusations.

The court then adjourned until evening. t'he proceedings continued until 10 o’clock last night. The morning session was devoted to moulding evidence in support of the charges of espionage, wrecking, and bribery at Zlatoust, and was occupied by an examination of Guisev, chief of the Zlatoust power station, one of the Russian accused, who made a complete confession, lie gave the history of his life, explaining that he fought with the White Army and subsequently retained anti-Soviet views. In these views, he said, lie met with the sympathy of MacDonald, who discussed with him, among other things, the deplorable living conditions in Russia. After a time he said MacDonald asked him to supply information about the production of munitions, and also stated

Continuing, the prosecution obtained from Mdlle Kutuzova, secretary of the firm’s Moscow otlioe, and other Russians who pleaded guilty, general statements that Thornton was engaged in espionage, Mdllc Kutuzova also alleged that Monkhouse and Thor.’-

ton had not hesitated to discuss their plans for machine wrecking in her presence. Thornton then admitted that Richards, Motropolitan-Viokers’ London manager, also was interested in information regarding the Soviet Union.

, When the latter’» past as an intelligence officer in 1018 was mentioned, a murmur of interest ran through the court.

“MORAL PRESSURE” Tho prosecutor, being unable to secure the desired admission of espionage from Thornton, showed him a statement inculpating himself and others, and signed by him in the Ogpu prison. He denied all the incriminating passages, and pointed out that when he made it he was in such a state that he would have written anything. Ho wrote under moral pressure.

The prosecution then turned to tho question of money passed by Thornton to his English subordinates and to Russians.

Mdllo Kutuzova, questioned in this connection, continued all her depositions made in the prison regarding monetary transactions. The only transaction, however, admitted by tho defence, was explained by Monkhouso as a loan to Dolgov, subsequently written off.

Monkhouso repudiated the alleged deposition of his in which ho implied that the sum involved was a bribe.

The court decided to call Dolgov and adjourned. This morning’s session opened with the evidence of Dolgov, which was the first evidence taken in tho case, either documentary or otherwise, from any person other than those actually accused. PAYMENT OF MONEY

Led by the prosecutor, Dolgov de scribed in a confident manner the circumstances in which the alleged bribe was given by Thornton. Thornton and Monkhouse were then cross-examined on the subject. After Thornton had reaffirmed that thq sum of 300 paper roubles involved was a loan which was not subsequently re paid, the prosecutor summed up by saying : “'Dolgov confirms everything; Thornton denies everything." Monkhouse, on being questioned, supported Thornton’s explanation, stating that at first he did not regard the sum given as a present, since he had considered Dolgov an honest man. The evidence of another of the Russian accused who had pleaded guilty, Kotliarevski, was then called. He described bis acquaintance with MacDonald at Zuevka, and alleged that he had received various sums of money from MacDonald in return for providing him with building plans, and for undertaking wrecking work, which, he claimed, he carried out on MacDonald’s instructions. He was subsequently interrogated by Monkhouse, who pointed out that directly alter certain breakdowns, which Kotliarevski mentioned, had taken place, Metropolitan-Vickers’ Moscow oftice had telegraphed to London for spare parts. ALLEGED WRECKING Lobanov’s evidence was next called. He, like all the other Russian accused, who had pleaded guilty in this case, described his anti-Soviet views as being taken advantage of by one of Metro-poiitan'-Vickers’ employees, in this case, Nordwall, with whom he- worked at Iv'gres. He described at length the wrecking of works which he alleged he had undertaken on Nordwall's instructions, and for which he said he had received 5000 roubles from Nordwall, as well as a fur coat.

Nordwall completely denied everything that Lobanov had said, pointing out that he had, in fact, attempted to dissuade Lobanov from his anti-Soviet views. He explained the transaction involving the fur coat as taking place through a third party, to whom it belonged, an English fitter who was paid for it by Lobanov. He added : "1 think that any man would have done the same in my place.’’

The examination of Lobanov was then continued. It was led by the prosecution to a reaffirmation by him of Nord wall's supposed anti-Soviet views, and the alleged plan for machine wrecking

The rest of the morning session was occupied with the examination of Lebedev, another of the Russian accused who is claimed bv the prosecution to have participated with Lobanov m the wrecking organisation at Ivgres under Nord wall’s instructions. INTEREST IN LONDON EVERY WORD PUBLISHED LONDON, April 14. All tho newspapers feature the Moscow trial, publishing every word available. The Cabinet has arrangedTo meet during the Easter recess if the result of tho trial is found to require immediate action on the part of the Government. Thornton revealed that he was born in Russia and had lived there all his life except for hia wartime service in Britain. A London broadcast included prayers for those suffering, and for those passing through the valley of the shadow of death, but no direct reference was made to the Moscow trial. It is understood that the services will not further allude to the accused.