December 18, 1937 SOCIALIST APPEAL their plans.
time was of of Karl Radek, who allegedly communicated the Kjeller airport to Andreas Stoeylen, Trot conditions in Soviet industry, a long deposition with Trotsky through him.
sky attorney, confirming the above statement by Ivar Windfeld Hansen, the Danish engineer The Commission has a mass of cohesive evi published in Arbeiderbladet.
dence covering the movements of Trotsky from telegram from Konrad Knudsen to Pro saboteur, by the accused Hrasche in the trial of his departure from Turkey on July 19, 1933, to secutor Vyshinsky dated Jan. 29, 1937 (the trial January, 1937. From this deposition, which is Oct. of that year, which conclusively disproves ended in the morning of Jan. 30. Mr. Knudsen fully documented, three facts emerge: Romm testimony.
These documents show that Trotsky landed at verified on that day that in December, 1935, no tical of the processes in use in the Russian chemby his son and three friends, and motored with near Oslo: also that as Trotsky host he af ning constructio ustry and the methods of plan Cassis near Marseilles July 24, 1933, was met foreign or private plane landed at the airport ical fertilizer and research. He constantly them from the harbor of Marseilles across firms that no conversation can have taken place tried to persuade the officials to adopt more France to Royan, stopping one night en route. in Norway between Trotsky and Pyatakov.
He remained in On the basis of this evidence the Commission into account the nature of Soviet raw materials, ly thereafter until Oct. 9, when he left for the finds that Pyatakov did not fly from Berlin to and geographic and transportation conditions Pyrenees. His friends, in agreement with the Oslo as alleged. Moreover, it finds that since in making Sûreté Générale, Windfeld Hansen, in spite of his difarranged that his secret. others presumably hung upon the truth or falsi ferences with certain officials, was sympathetic In addition to the testmony of witnesses who ty of his Trotsky on his trip and later saw front Pyatestimony. Vushingky failure to con with the Soviet Union and eager to help in the with this telegram in court con building up of its fertilizer industry.
him at Royan, the Commission has documents stituted, in its opinion, criminal negligence. His criticism provoked a struggle in covering the arrangements for his removal to Indeed, it provides strong justification for the the Soviet chemical fertilizer industry over the France, the leasing of the villa, Trotsky mode widespread suspicion that the whole trial was a processes in use, the consequence of bad plan.
of life and his visitors there. Outstanding among frame up at which the Prosecutor himself con ning, extravagance, etc. which was reflected these is the deposition of Henri in critical articles in Soviet technical papers.
his opponent who cal symn Molinier, at that nived.
and now Mr. Windfeld Hansen declares that from the had complete charge of all time of his arrival in Russia in 1932 he warned Part Four the Soviet authorities that the chemical fertilarrangements concerning his sojourn in France, izer industry was headed toward disaster. Conrale. Mr. Molinier makes it clear that Trotsky CONCLUSIONS FROM OLD AND NEW cerning the confession of the accused Rataichak forbidden to live in Paris or any city with that he had sabotaged the Voskressensk fertilEVIDENCE ON: izer plant, Windfeld Hansen says: a large working class population; he states that the secret police were informed of all Trotsky 1. The Charge of Terrorism.
Such a complete mess was made of all details in movements, and declares that he himself superconnection with the designing, purchase of equipvised all those movements. He says that it The charge of individual terrorism against ment, and actual construction of the precipitation would have been impossible for Trotsky in his the leaders of the Communist Party and the plant that sabotage on the part of Rataichak or bad state of health (attested to by many other Soviet Union is the only charge against the ac any other administrative officers was wholly superfluous, indeed, one can say impossible.
who attended him) to have made a trip to Paris most important charges in the second trial. The Molinier, could not have remained in ignorance. contain a great deal of testimony concerning for the removal and criminal prosecution of the a present political adversary of Trotsky, owche a great deal of testimony to conversations about the testimony of Vera Lanis, wife the existence of terrorist groups in various parts accused Hrasche and Rataichak was as follows: Scapegoats had to be found for the catastrophic there when Trotsky and his wife terrorismithe defendants in either trial that of developments in the chemical industry. There is no arrived, and remained continuously at the villa: commissare si. Kirov on Dec. 1, 1934. Thus a indication that acts of sabotage were involved. cannot believe that my friend Hrasche could have committed acts of sabotage or espionage. knew August. She testifies that Trotsky remained in conspiracy widely ramifying, including large him too well for that.
the villa uninterruptedly during that period. numbers of people, and lasting for five years, The Commission attaches great importance resulted, according to the records themselves, The Commission took Trotsky testimony on to the fact that six separate efforts, two of them in only one assassination. Although the alleged the charge of sabotage, and has read his writby high French officials, made on its behalf to conspirators testified that they were very deter ings which he submitted to substantiate it. This obtain the police record of Trotsky move mined and that their activity was intense, the entire material indicates that Trotsky public ments at this period have been unavailing. In Commission finds that the general ineptitude criticism of Soviet industrialization and collecevery case, the answer was that the record is of the alleged attempts at assassination to which tivization has been animated by an in the keeping of the head of the Sûreté Nation various accused confessed is entirely out of sire to avert, rather records for determined and The Commission finds from the evidence in ons of state cannot be given out. This refusal. even heroic revolutionary action made by sev. its possession that the wrecks, delays, and damcoupled with the significant fact that the Soviet the dead beer Revolution and the Civil War. int trials are explicable in terms of haste, inefit cou could have finds that the prosecution made no attempt to ficiency and overreaching, and that the charges France, in the Commission opinion constitutes of the people delegated to carry out these alleg they implicate Leon Trotsky, stand not proved strong presumptive evidence that it does not ed attempts, which would have inevitably in and not credible.
bear out the testimony of Vladimir Romm.
volved the sacrifice of their own lives. It finds The Charge of Agreements with invalidates that of Karl Radek, twho explicitly tried, testified that they expected to come into Foreign Powers.
stated that it was through Romm that he estab power through the alleged conspiracy, no atlished contact with Trotsky.
was secure the the testimony of Leon In the first trial, two of the accused testified to connections with agents of the secret police 110 b) Pyatakov.
The Preliminary Commission took Trotof the Hitler government (Gestapo. even beand fore the period of the Gestapo organization.
In the January trial, the accused Pyatakov the Commission has examined this testimony Indeed, the defendant Olberg stated that this testified that in the first half of December, and the writings of Trotsky on this subject connection was the regular line of the TrotskyIt finds that Trotsky ists, in conformity with Trotsky instructions.
pelhof airdrome in Berlin to the airdrome in throughout his career has resolutely opposed in vigorously repudiated, not only by Trotsky and is Oslo, and from this airdrome motored half an dividual terrorism as incompatible with the Sedov, but by Eugene Bauer, one of the former hour to a country suburb, where he met and teachings of Marxism.
with Leon Trotsky. The Commission The Prosecutor cited only two of Trotsky since 1934 a political leaders the Trotskyist group in Germany but has evidence which proves that Trotsky lived, writings as allegedly substantiating this charge. states that the Trotskyi opponent of whe not one half hour, but at least two hours from The first was Trotsky Open Letter to the Ex had in Germany never connection with the Gestapo, a house between Dec. and Dec. 20, 1936, and eventive committee of the communist Party of had spa spared by the the Nazis in persecution of that no foreign airplane landed at the Oslo air countries and languages: Committee to fulfill Trotskyists now livssesses 12 depositi wer.
stany political after their In this letter Trotsky opponents rise to drome between Sept. 19, 1935, and May 1, 1936. called Commission by The most important documents in its possession Lenin advice to the in forced exile from bearing on this testimony of Pyatakov are the tament, remove Stalin from his party in his so called It also possesses handbills 1986 news sheet issued This phrase, remove Stalin, by the Trotskyist group in Danzig, containing ollowinn affidavit by Konrad Knudsen, member the Sessecutor a of the Norwegian Parliament and Trotsky Stalin out of the way. The Prosecutor also falsi. copies of the Danzig Nazi newspaper host during his stay in Norway, signed also by fied the meaning of an article by Trotsky from for December 9, 1936, and Vorposten. of the man and 12 Knudsen family met all of Trotsky visitors, revolutionary mass action advocated by TrotHjordis Knudsen. The affidavit states that the October, 1933, and in doing so, identified the trial of members of the 18t or rests and organization in and that no one could have visited him without sky with individual terrorism. The distinction them for seditions ently Danzig and attacks their knowledge. It states that Trotsky receiv is obvious and historical.
revolutionary activities.
ed no visitors during the month of December, Al!
the evidence at the disposal of the ComThe Commission therefore finds that, apart mission goes to show that, far from being friend1935.
from evidence which disproves the testimony ly, the relations between the Trotskyists and the translation of an article from Arbeiderbladet the charge of individual terrorism is incredible, between a revolutionary opposition and the Original and certified notarized English linking Trotsky with this alleged conspiracy, Nazis in Danzig are the characteristic relations (Oslo) Jan. 29, 1937, entitled Pyatakov on the basis of Trotsky attitude toward indi Hitler régime.
Strange Voyage to Kjeller. The article gives vidual terrorism throughout his career.
An account of an interview with Director GulIn the second trial the accused were charged lichsen of the Kjeller airdrome in which he The Charge of Sabotage.
with conducting espionage and diversive and stated that no foreign airplane landed there beterrorist activities on Trotsky direct instructions tween Sept. 19, 1935, and May 1, 1936. On the charge of sabotage the Commission Two letters from Director Gullichsen of cites, together with other expert testimony on for the purpose of undermining the military power deevident. government did not a presumably acy: 10 conversed tes. Germanimeographed and copies in upon