All language subtitles for 2_thetrial_English

THE TRIAL

Court is in session. All rise!

Sit down, please.

THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SPECIAL COURT
COMRADE A. VYSHINSKY

The Special Assembly session

of the USSR Supreme Court

is now open.

The Court will hear the case

of counter-revolutionary organisation,

«Union of Engineering Organisations»,

the so called «Industrial Party».

The accused

Ramzin, Kalinnikov,

Larichev, Charnovsky, Fedotov,

Kupriyanov, Ochkin and Sitinin

are charged under article 58;

sections 3, 4, 6

of the RSFSR Penal Code.

The Special Jury is composed of:

the Chairman, comrade Vyshinsky Andrei;

members of the Court -

comrade Antonov-Saratovsky Vladimir,

comrade Lvov Vassily, and

the substitute member of the Court,

comrade Ivanov Pavel.

Any objections from the defendants?

No objections.

Defendant Ramzin.

Defendant Kalinnikov.

Defendant Larichev.

Defendant Charnovsky.

Defendant Fedotov.

Defendant Kupryanov.

Defendant Ochkin.

Defendant Sitnin.

Sit down, please.

The Special Court

will now hear the statement

of the Prosecution.

Prosecution statement in the case

of counter-revolutionary organisation,

«Union of Engineering Organisations»

the so called «Industrial Party»,

against comrades Ramzin, Kalinnikov,

Larichev, Charnovsky, Fedotov,

Kupriyanov, Ochkin, Sitnin

under article 58, sections 3, 4, 6

of the RSFSR Penal Code.

One after another,

in the whole range of industries,
OGPU (secret services)

uncovered during the past two years

a number of sabotage groups.

The Shakhty sabotage trial

was followed by the NKPS
(People's Commissariat of Railways) trial.

The disclosure of sabotage
in public transport

was followed by the revelations that
similar sabotage groups were active

in the military, textile and

ship building industries,

as well as in the chemical,
gold mining,

oil drilling and other industrial sectors.

The Soviet government informed
wide circles of workers

about the sabotage activities and

the measures taken to eliminate them.

Having studied the materials
of the above mentioned cases,

the prosecution came to the conclusion

that there existed one headquarters,

masterminding industrial sabotage.

Saboteurs were found

among senior management

of Soviet industries: in the VSNH
(The Supreme Soviet of National Economy)

and in GOSPLAN
(The State Planning Committee).

This was demonstrated by the

conclusive evidence of the Shakhty trial.

Defendant Ramzin,

Defendant Ramzin,

you've heard the statement
of the Prosecution.

Do you plead guilty to the charges

brought against you in this statement?

Yes, I do.

Defendant Kalinnikov,

do you plead guilty to the charges

brought against you in this statement?

I do.

- You wish to make a statement?
- Yes.

Take a seat.

Defendant Larichev,

do you plead guilty to the charges

brought against you in this statement?

Yes, I do.

- Wish to make a statement?
- Yes.

You'll do it later.

Sit down, please.

Defendant Charnovsky,

do you plead guilty to the charges

brought against you by the Prosecution?

Yes, I do.

- Do you wish to make a statement?
- Yes.

After questioning.

Sit down, please.

Defendant Fedotov,

you have now heard

the statement of the Prosecution.

Do you plead guilty to the charges

brought against you in this statement?

I do.

- Do you wish to make a statement?

- I wish to make a statement.

Please take your seat.

You'll be called after questioning.

Defendant Kupriyanov,

I put the same question to you:

do you plead guilty to the charges

brought against you in this statement?

Yes, I do.

- Wish to make a statement?
- Yes.

Please take your seat.

We'll call you later.

Defendant Ochkin,

How do you plead?

I plead guilty.

- You do? Wish to make a statement?
- Yes.

Very well. After questioning.

Sit down, please.

Defendant Sitnin,

The Court puts the question to you:

do you plead guilty to the crimes

you are charged with?

Yes, I do.

- Do you wish to make a statement?
- Yes.

Sit down, please.

According

to the law,

a defendant,

who refuses to have legal representation,

has the right to make a statement

in his own defence.

The defendants can choose

according to Article 304 of the Penal Code,

to opt for this right or

to refuse it.

Defendant Ramzin,

defendant Larichev,

defendant Kalinnikov,

defendant Charnovsky,

defendant Fedotov,

defendant Kupriyanov...

Kupriyanov is represented by legal counsel.

Defendant Ochkin.

THE ACCUSED

RAMZIN, LARICHEV, KALINNKOV,
CHARNOVSKY, FEDOTOV AND OCHKIN

REFUSED TO MAKE STATEMENTS
IN THEIR DEFENCE

LONG LIVE THE BOLSHEVIKS!
HURRAH!

DEATH TO SABOTEURS!
HURRAH!

DEATH TO THE ENEMIES
OF THE PROLETARIAN REVOLUTION!

STATEMENTS OF THE ACCUSED

RAMZIN -
MOSCOW HIGHER TECHNICAL COLLEGE PROFESSOR

DIRECTOR OF THE ALL-UNION INSTITUTE
OF THERMAL ENGINEERING;

MEMBER OF GOSPLAN
(THE STATE PLANNING COMMITTEE)

AND VSNH
(THE SUPREME SOVIET OF NATIONAL ECONOMY)

This is why,

having repented

fully and wholeheartedly,

having broken

all ties with the anti-Soviet circles,

both within the USSR and abroad,

having disarmed fully,

and having given up my struggle

having repented

in front of the Supreme Court,

the entire population of our Union,

as well as the international proletariat,

I wish to reveal the whole truth

in all its merciless clarity,

STATEMENT ABOUT THE "INDUSTRIAL PARTY"
ACTIVITIES WENT ON FOR TWO DAYS.

Summing up the activities
of the "Industrial party",

having admitted the severity of my crimes

and responsibility I carry for my actions,

I consider it my duty to declare,
honestly and straightforwardly,

that the activities of
the "Industrial party"

aimed at overthrowing the Soviet power

by means of intervention,

in collaboration with the French government

and the White émigrés circles,

weren't only an act of treason

against the Soviet government,

but also against our Motherland,

since in case of an intervention,

the whole country would have suffered

from the horrors of war,

would've had to sacrifice

the lives of its citizens

for the sake of the aggressors.

I also wish to declare that criminal
activities of the «Industrial party»,

carried out internally with the aim

of causing and deepening a crisis

in the transport industry,

and the "Farmers Labour party",

aimed at deepening the crisis

in the agricultural and food industries,

in the finance and cooperation sectors,

created significant economic difficulties

within the USSR and
intensified class struggle.

Having caused serious damage

to the country's economy.

Without these sabotage activities

and counter-revolutionary resistance,

our economic difficulties

wouldn't have been so evident,

and the pace of industrialisation

and stride towards socialism

would have been even faster.

CHARNOVSKY -
MOSCOW HIGHER TECHNICAL COLLEGE PROFESSOR;

CHAIRMAN OF THE VSNH
SCIENTIFIC COUNCIL ON METALLURGY

Defendant Charnovsky, please.

Let me admit my guilt once again.

I'm guilty of participating

in a counter-revolutionary organisation,

«Centre for Engineering»,

later known as the «Industrial Party».

I repent fully and wholeheartedly.

My guilt,

established by

the prosecution,

mainly consists of participating

in the leadership...

of being a member of the Central Committee

of the "Industrial Party",
participating in sabotage.

As regards to the nature of my
participation in this organisation,

I gave detailed evidence

during the investigation.

Here I'd like to repeat the digest

of the essential conclusions.

I'd like to take the liberty to state

my point of view on the "Industrial Party",

on its origins and its activities.

I was recruited into the sabotage group,

"Centre for Engineering", by Khrennikov

in 1927.

I don't remember the exact date,

but I can roughly recall that

this coincided with the creation of the

Central Scientific and
Technological Council

of the metal industry.

At the time, it worked under NTO
(Science and Technology Society).

The Central Council

was comprised of 3 sections:

ferrous metallurgy, nonferrous metallurgy

and metalworking industry.

I was appointed chairman of the council

of metalworking and machine
building industry.

Thus, I first came

into professional contact with Khrennikov,

who abused his position

and forced me

to participate in the activities

of the «Centre for Engineering».

In the same way, he recruited

three other members

of the Scientific and
Technological Council.

This is how the nucleus

of the metalworking branch
of the "Centre for Engineering"

was formed.

In the newly formed
"Centre for Engineering"...

In the beginning, Khrennikov concealed

the real purpose of this organisation.

Only later,

during our conversations,

I realised the real purpose

of the Centre.

It was to bring down
the power of the Soviets

by means of causing industrial crisis

and disruptions in the economy,

with the aid of foreign intervention.

KALINNIKOV -
MOSCOW HIGHER TECHNICAL COLLEGE PROFESSOR;

VICE-CHAIRMAN
OF THE INDUSTRIAL SECTION OF GOSPLAN

By the middle or, to be precise,

by the end of 1927...

by the time of the collapse

of the Shakhty sabotage group,

the methods of sabotage were revised,

the «Centre for Engineering» was formed.

It was solidified.

Soon, it had to take shape politically,

it devised its political agenda,

and turned into the "Industrial Party",

with its head,
the "Centre for Engineering",

becoming its Central Committee.

Detailed evidence was given already,

I'll only touch upon it briefly.

Prior to creation of the
"Centre for Engineering"

certain groups of engineers
worked in the interests

of former owners of factories,

where they remained employed.

The creation of the "Industrial Party"

meant that not only
individual entrepreneurs,

but the whole class of capitalists
was being represented by it.

KUPRIYANOV - TECHNICAL DIRECTOR
OF ORGTEXTILE DEPARTMENT OF VSNH

Defendant Kuprianov!

- Do you wish to make a statement?
- Yes, I do.

During the preliminary hearing...

Can you please speak louder.

In the Supreme Court.

I have pleaded guilty

During the preliminary hearing

I gave detailed and complete evidence

of my sabotage activities...

Order, please!

We can hardly hear what

the defendant is saying.

I confess that I committed sabotage,

but before I present a summary

of all... of my activities,

I consider it necessary

to make a clarification

to add to Ramzin's statement.

When Ramzin lists the members

of the «Centre for Engineering",

he names Fedotov and Kuprianov

for textile industry,

and in the branches he names

Lopatin, Nolde, Lebedev etc.

I think it's a slip of a tongue.

Anyone who knows these people,

wouldn't consider Lopatin
to be a branch member.

Without a doubt,
Lopatin was in the «Centre»,

he was the first one
to represent textile industry,

anyone who knows Lopatin's character,

won't have any

doubt about it.

By saying this, I don't want

to diminish my own responsibility.

I admit that I'm guilty, this fact

doesn't make me less responsible.

When Lopatin was in the "Centre",

I was merely a branch member.

I only dealt with industrial matters.

After Lopatin's death,

in April 1927,

the situation became somewhat different.

I'll get to it later and will explain.

The main goal of sabotage activities

was to preserve factories
in the same condition,

in which they were left by their ex-owners,

to prevent the removal of equipment

from one factory to another,

and to make sure

that the factories remained operational

and weren't shut down.

When the New Economic Policy started,

the hopes of former factory owners

turned to a different direction.

According to Lopatin,

the issue of repossession

of factories

by former owners

was going to be solved in the near future.

That's why all the necessary measures

had to be taken to ensure that

the factories remained
in working condition.

So, upon receiving a lease, former owners

could resume operations
without extra investments.

We were instructed

to repair factories and machinery.

By 1925,

the hopes of receiving

the factories back were dashed.

Lopatin, following

the instructions of "Torgprom",

set up a sabotage group.

Defendant Fedotov!

FEDOTOV -
PROFESSOR;

CHAIRMAN OF THE SCIENTIFIC
RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF TEXTILE INDUSTRY

A group of people

at the top of the
"Union of Engineering Organisations"

began to refer to themselves as

the "Central Committee" of the party.

This "Central Committee"

was comprised of:

the chairman, the former leader of the

"Union of Engineering Organisations",
Khrennikov...

and also - Ramzin, Larichev...

also I, Fedotov...

That's all.

I think that's all...

After Khrennikov's arrest

the number of group
members was reduced by one.

So, there remained five people.

Afterwards, after my arrest,

according to professor Ramzin's statement,

some more people joined the group,

but I was not aware of it.

Thus, the membership
of the "Industrial Party"

was expected to grow,

it was expected
that many more people

would join the organisation,

as the near collapse
of the Soviet government

was eagerly anticipated,
due to foreign intervention.

In anticipation of such a collapse,

the "Industrial Party"

and its Central Committee

began active preparations

for the intervention.

The only way
to prepare the intervention was,

as it was planned previously,

when the "Industrial Party" was preceded

by the "Union of
Engineering Organisations".

WE DEMAND EXECUTION BY SHOOTING!

LARICHEV -
ENGINEER; FUEL INDUSTRY EXPERT;

CHAIRMAN OF THE FUEL SECTION AND
MEMBER OF THE PRESIDING BOARD OF GOSPLAN

In my statement,

I considered it necessary

to focus mainly

on the sources

and channels,

which were used
to prepare the intervention,

which led to

the changes in the
working practices of the "Industrial Party"

and pushed it towards

the most criminal type of activity,

to espionage,

both military and industrial,

which is the gravest of crimes

committed by it.

This was an act of treason.

Treason against the state.

Even more shameful,

as its target was

the state,

being built by the

proletariat,

one of the first Socialist states

ever to exist in the world.

This aggravates even further

the nature of the crimes

committed by the members of the

"Industrial Party",

myself included.

I will end

where I began:

I fully admit my responsibility

and I plead guilty of crimes,

which I committed

together with

the leadership of the party,

which I've described here,

having given some additional evidence

I considered necessary to supply.

Defendant Larichev,
you may now take your seat.

SITNIN -
ENGINEER AT THE ALL-UNION TEXTILE SYNDICATE

Defendant Sitinin!

On my way back from America

in the first half of July,

I met with Konovalov.

He told me that he was bankrupt,

but remained a member of "Torgprom"

and, though not as
actively involved in it as before,

he was still aware
of everything which went on there.

He said that both émigré circles

and foreign governments

closely follow
the developments in the USSR.

Of course, every new
trend in the internal

policy of the USSR

provokes an even more aggressive reaction

from émigré circles and
foreign politicians.

The current direction chosen by the USSR,

according to Konovalov and to "Torgprom",

makes foreign
intervention inevitable,

since there remains
no other hope for them.

Also, he considered the circumstances,

in which USSR found itself at the time -

shortage of hard currency, anticipation

of poor harvest, the rumours of which

were circulating in the summer of 1928;

shortage of food supplies,
queues in shops -

all of which was known abroad;

internal power struggle within the party,

followed very closely by foreign observers.

All the above confirmed their hopes

that a favourable moment was approaching.

He informed me that

the so-called "leaders" of "Torgprom"

Ryabushinsky, Tretiakov -

were received by one of the most prominent

French politicians...

and he...

was very sympathetic...

Defendant Sitnin,

who was this French politician?

Poincaré.

I thought I shouldn't
mention any names now.

We said that during the
closed session we'll

reveal the pseudonyms of
persons, identified

during the hearing by their
initials, working for

foreign organisations
based on the Soviet territory.

So, they were received by Poincaré.

He assured them that

he sympathised with their cause

and he hoped for and was quite confident

that this idea would
receive support in France.

Based on this,

"Torgprom" considered

that the intervention
would happen in 1930 - 31.

I was astonished by Konovalov's statement

and even became suspicious of his words,

It seemed he exaggerated his position.

Upon my return to Moscow,
I told everything to Kupriyanov.

I wish to correct Kupriyanov's statement:

I came to him earlier than Fedotov did.

He told me Fedotov would soon be back,

and we'd receive confirmation

if it was true or not;

whether Konovalov was right or

whether he somewhat overdid it.

Upon Fedotov's return from Moscow...

I mean, from abroad...

he did tell us that he met Karpov in Berlin

and confirmed Konovalov's story.

He also told us
about the plans for sabotage

which had to be
carried out in the textile industry.

He has already given evidence about it,
so I won't go into detail.

I'll only mention that
the aims were to fail

the five-year-plan;

to cause a crisis in 1930

by hampering manufacturing and

by building factories in remote areas.

OCHKIN - SCIENTIFIC SECRETARY OF THE
ALL-UNION INSTITUTE OF THERMAL ENGINEERING

Now I move

on to particular items

of the prosecution statement.

Namely, to the links with foreigners.

I've already given evidence of the links

between the "Industrial
Party" and foreigners.

The Prosecutor already heard my statement,

but I'll repeat it again.

Professor Ramzin repeatedly told me

that he'd established
direct contacts abroad.

During a private trip back in 1927,

he received instructions

from the French government representative

that their contact
with the "Industrial Party"

in Moscow was Mr K.

In the end of 1929,

professor Ramzin told us

that the intervention had been postponed

until the end of 1930 or 1931.

It was clear that the "Industrial Party"

was not capable of acting on its own.

The leverage for the organisation

of a political revolt
had to be found abroad.

Archimedes formula springs to mind:

"Give me a lever, I'll move the world".

Central Committee's members went abroad

in order to find such a leverage.

But the results

were negligible

and their efforts

were fruitless.

Anticipation of a foreign intervention

was the main policy of
the "Industrial Party".

Acts of sabotage,

disruptions in the economy,

industrial crisis was no longer of interest

in the final stages of
the Party's existence.

Joint efforts with the French headquarters

were aimed at the intervention.

These have been the primary tactics

of the party recently.

French agents

and the agents of "Torgprom"

turned the "Industrial party"

into an amenable organ of intervention.

Counter-revolutionary engineers were

rapidly moving down this slippery slope.

The Soviet government
has managed to prevent this downfall.

MORE PLANES, TANKS AND
TECHNICAL EQUIPMENT FOR THE RED ARMY!

QUESTIONING OF THE ACCUSED

SITNIN

I wonder why you received the bribe

in golden coins,
and not in Soviet banknotes?

Do you understand my question?

Simply because, it seemed to me...

that this money will
remain in circulation...

This money was supposed to remain.

It could be saved for a rainy
day, so to say...

When you say for a "rainy day", it means

that you considered coins
to be hard currency.

No. It was just easier to save them.

One can save Soviet banknotes as well.

Is it possible to save Soviet money?

Yes, it is.

But you preferred to save golden coins.

If I'm not mistaken, at the time

the currency was plummeting...

Precisely! Soviet currency was plummeting,

so you wanted to keep hard currency.

Yes, this is correct.

And this hard currency was in gold!

This is correct.

So you preferred to keep gold!

You preferred Tsar minted golden coins
to the Soviet currency, didn't you?

Yes, I did.

So, did you agree these terms
with your private clients,

that your commission
had to be paid in golden coins?

No, no. It wasn't just me who did it.

The trade department did it.

They received the money and
converted it into gold.

Did you buy gold with
the money you received?

I didn't buy anything.

The stock exchange was free and

the currency was convertible then.

If you said it had
to be gold, it was paid in gold.

I see... So you had your network of agents,

who acquired gold for you.

I had no such thing.

Not you personally,
but your department.

Was there a special organisation

which dealt with
Soviet currency exchange?

No. There was no need for an organisation.

We simply had an agent, who could

legally convert the currency.

You mean an ordinary agent

of the textile department

would be routinely sent by you to the
exchange and convert the money, right?

I didn't send him.
It was done in Moscow.

So, it was done in Moscow, wasn't it?

Yes, and our head office was in Tver.

Oh, was your head office in Tver?

Does it mean that you sent the agent

from Tver to Moscow for this purpose?

No. The money was received in Moscow,

so the manager of the Moscow office did it.

So, are you saying that the manager

of the Moscow office was your associate?

Yes.

And it was him who did it, wasn't it?

Yes.

And did he then send the money to you?

Yes.

I see. Now it's clear.

- Do you have any further questions?

No, that's all for now.

Defendant Sitnin,

tell us please,

you've just confirmed to the Court

responding to the Prosecutor's question,

that you were a member of
the "Industrial Party".

- Did I understand you correctly?
- Yes.

But when charges were brought against you

by the Serious Crimes Investigator,
comrade Leventon,

you stated that you didn't know

about the existence of
the "Industrial Party".

Yes.

Does it mean that you gave false evidence?

At the time, I was first confronted

with the full account of this

organisation's activities.

This account astonished me
to such an extent,

that I said I was never
a member of such a party!

And now you are saying that you
were indeed a member of such a party.

Apparently, yes. I was.

Thus, in 1925 you became a member

of a sabotage group and
began your activities.

Yes.

Then you changed your position.

I never changed my position.

What happened after your trip abroad?

After my trip abroad I was convinced

that there exist certain real forces

who are capable of overthrowing

the Soviet power.

The rumours I heard

in our group,
in particular, from Lopatin,

weren't just empty talk and it seemed

the plans were beginning to materialise.

After your return from abroad,

did you consider overthrowing

of the Soviet power as your ultimate goal?

- Me personally?
- Yes

I realised we were after this goal,

but I personally felt very bad about it.

It was against my convictions.

So, would it be true to say
that after 1928 you worked for intervention

and in support of intervention?

I was a member of the group.

My share of work was

very small...

So, this has now been established.

It's also confirmed by
the statements of other defendants.

During the past 2 years the activities

of the "Centre for Engineering"

were aimed at
intervention and restoration

of capitalism by means
of foreign military invasion.

Were you aware of such an aim?

Yes, I was.

Did you carry out work

for facilitating the intervention?

Did you carry out
work in your textile group

for facilitating foreign intervention?

To a certain extent, I can say I did help.

It is obvious that one of the main goals

of the foreign intervention

would be to bring down
the Soviet power, right?

Yes. It's obvious.

Thus, this aim, this goal was clear.

Was it your own goal?

It was forced upon me.

- How do you mean "forced"?

I was drawn towards this goal.

Did you follow this goal
with a heavy heart?

Yes, absolutely!

We confirm the fact
that you agreed to follow this goal

with a heavy heart, right?

After much deliberation...

Is this true or not?

Defendant Sitinin.

I put to you this question.

Did you accept foreign intervention
as your goal or did you not?

KALINNIKOV

member of the presiding board
of Gosplan (State Planning Committee)

and chairman of... which section?

Of the industrial section of Gosplan.

The industrial section of Gosplan?

Yes.

Were you also member of a number

of scientific and technical councils?

Yes.

And editor-in-chief of
a scientific journal?

Yes.

Were you appointed to these posts

by special decrees of Sovnarkom
(Council of People's Commissars)?

I was appointed member
of the presiding board of Gosplan

and member of Gosplan

by decree of Sovnarkom.

And member of Standardisation Council

I was also a member
of State Procurement Board.

All these four positions were
held by Sovnarkom decrees.

By direct orders from Sovnarkom?

Yes.

Tell us please...

Did you consider these appointments to be

a result of change
in the government policies?

Or was it a proof of the trust

the government had in you?

Or was it a token of appreciation of your

scientific and technical competence?

In 1921, when I started work in Gosplan,

nobody knew who I was.

I think, when the New Economic Policy

began, new specialists were required

and, perhaps, somebody recommended me.

I don't have any other explanation,

why I was chosen for these positions.

What followed can be explained

as a proof of a certain trust

the Soviet government had in me.

A certain trust
the Soviet government had in you?

Yes.

What salary did you receive?

At Gosplan I started with

400 roubles,

then 500 roubles...

and from December 1927...

I mean from December 1929,

it was 600 roubles.

What was the total amount of your salary?

My total salary,

including writer's fees,

reached in the past 2 - 3 years

the amount of 1000 roubles a month.

- How much?
- 1000 roubles a month.

CHARNOVSKY

Tell us,

back in 1929,

did you decline taking part

in the professorship ballot?

The idea of the autonomy is that

you are either voted for or against.

Such an opportunity was given to you.

Professor shouldn't be
present during voting.

It has to take place in his absence.

I believe this is the correct procedure.

I don't consider it right

to have to recite from memory

all my career achievements
over the past 23 years.

I'm not interested.

So

When Kasso breaks the autonomy,
and you agree to it.

But under the Soviet rule you claim

that your autonomy is compromised

when you are invited
to participate in the ballot.

In 1929 you didn't turn up to the ballot.

- It wasn't a ballot.
- And what was it then?

You were asked to...

How was the re-election held in 1929?

The re-election took place later;

these were just preliminary hearings.

In 1929, you had to deliver a report

about your activities as a professor.

I did make a number of speeches

at various meetings of the engineers,

our graduates, who came to listen

to our explanations.

So why did you refuse to speak in 1929?

I refused to speak
at a huge students meeting,

where I had to give some explanations

about my scientific work.

Yes, you had to give
an account of your activities.

Yes, if you like,

you can put it like this.

I knew in advance that

the audience would be partial,

that I would be subjected

to some incompetent remarks.

Why did you think that you'd be criticised?

You told us you never
had conflicts with your students.

I personally didn't,

but my two colleagues suffered a lot.

Who were these colleagues?

Mathematician Polyakov and

chemical scientist Kovrenko.

But, of course, not every professor

was subjected to such troubles.

I thought that such discussions should be

held internally, within academic circles.

Do you mean in a closed
group of professors?

No. Half of them could've been students,

who would've participated on equal terms,

and who never complained
about the quality of my teaching.

That much is clear.

I move on to the second question.

You stated that you joined
the sabotage group in 1927.

Yes.

What was the main issue,

on which the "Centre for Engineering",

later known as the "Industrial Party",

focused at the time?

What was in the focus of their attention?

In 1927?

Yes. In the beginning of 1927.

Their aim was to hamper
development and construction

of various branches of industry.

And what about the intervention?

The idea of intervention
came at the end of 1927.

In the second half of the year.

Second half of the year?

What about 1926?

In 1926 I wasn't involved

in the "Centre for Engineering".

In my statement to the prosecution,

I've already pointed out that

I saw signs

of malfunctioning everywhere,

of which we learnt privately.

We weren't officially informed about it.

In 1926,

were you aware of the links

between the "Centre for Engineering"

and the intervention activists abroad?

No.

I didn't know anything.

Sit down.

Defendant Kalinnikov!

Defendant Kalinnikov,

you stated that acts

of sabotage and disruptions
in metal industry

can be explained in detail by Charnovsky.

But, as we heard now, Charnovsky

didn't give us any details.

Can you explain what you meant?

Do you remember?

Yes, I remember.

You said it the day before yesterday,

during the evening session.

Explain, please.

The Central Committee gave me a task

to plan minimal growth rates,

insufficient for the industry needs.

To create imbalance within

various branches of the industry,

as well as in
entire sectors of the economy.

Since I was involved

only in the general planning,

I could only oversee coordination

between different sectors of industry.

As far as the internal needs of individual

branches of industry are concerned,

this could have only been supervised

by managers of each particular branch,

in charge of industrial planning.

That's why I stated,

that the details

of sabotage in the metal industry

could be given either by Gartman,

who was in charge of this sector,

Or by the head of this branch of industry?

Yes.

As a member of the Central Committee,

did you consider this person solely

responsible for the duties,

which were entrusted to him?

After Khrennikov's arrest, Charnovsky

took charge of the metal industry.

So, after Khrennikov's arrest,

Charnovsky became the person,

responsible for sabotage in the military

sector of the metal industry, didn't he?

That's what I testified.

I had to report on the situation

in the chemical industry,

Charnovsky had to report on the situation

in the metal industry, its military branch.

Did he do this job?

He did this job,

I received his report.

I wish to add...

This isn't accurate...

the Defence industry isn't managed

by military officials,

I only dealt with the sectors,
which had factory units,

and were managed by civil branches.

OCHKIN

When the October Revolution took place,

I worked with Ramzin.

I told him:

"You do what you like,

but I have to work".

I state this categorically.

Were these conversations back in 1928?

In 1928.

Nothing in 1927?

He didn't speak with me in 1927.

When do you think you were finally

let in on all the secrets?

In 1928.

And at that moment your pro-Soviet

convictions evaporated, didn't they?

Yes.

Instantly?

- Instantly?
- Yes.

Just like that?

I lost my pro-Soviet convictions.

But why? Why did it happen?

I was under the influence.

But in order for such an influence to have

an effect,
to destroy one's pro-Soviet beliefs,

one needs some preparation,
an incubation period, doesn't one?

There were many reasons...

due to the political climate...

Ramzin used all these
factors to his benefit.

Maybe, in 1928

you actually joined the party;

but the ideological
preparation had begun earlier.

No. I didn't give up until 1928.

- What?
- I didn't give up before then.

But in 1928

you were already
entrusted with very serious tasks.

You're aware of
the nature of these tasks, aren't you?

Yes.

The degree of your responsibility

was very high...

Eh?

AFTER ALL THE ACCUSED
WERE QUESTIONED,

RAMZIN WISHED TO MAKE
AN ADDITIONAL STATEMENT

Defendant Ramzin.

During my previous testimony,

which was lengthy,

I became somewhat tired,

I forgot to mention two key points,

which I now wish to add.

I already mentioned it,

but I consider it of great interest,

so I find it necessary

to draw the Court's attention to it now.

The first issue concerns my meeting

with the representative of "Torgprom",

which took place in the summer of 1930.

During my trip to Berlin,

in the summer of 1930.

I expected to meet

one of the senior
representatives of "Torgprom"

and got a proposal to meet Denisov.

However, I was not able

to meet him during my stay in Berlin.

Another board member

of the "Industrial Party",

professor Osadchy,

was also in Berlin,
and was due to stay there longer than me.

I asked him

to meet Denisov

and to receive all
the instructions and information.

I don't know whether professor Osadchy

had met Denisov;

soon after his return,

I was arrested,

and I never saw professor Osadchy again.

Professor Osadchy

can testify

whether he had met Denisov.

If such a meeting did take place,

professor Osadchy can be in possession

of the most up-to-date and relevant

information about the
activities of "Torgprom",

concerning the preparations
for intervention.

THE SAME DAY,
PROFESSOR OSADCHY

WAS CALLED AS A WITNESS
TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN COURT

Citizen Osadchy.

You stand here as a witness

in the case of
the counter-revolutionary organisation,

the "Union of Engineering Organisations",
also known as the "Industrial Party".

I have to remind you that

according to Article 274

of the RSFSR Penal Code,

it is your duty as a witness

to say nothing but the truth.

By law, I have to warn you about it.

He had grey hair,

grey coat and,

it seems, grey hat.

I think his eyes were also grey.

This is the description of a person,

who was introduced to me.

I told him I was at his disposal.

Yasinsky

led us along Friedrichstrasse

and we ended up in a second-rate café,

rather dirty and cheap.

I cannot recall the name of the café,

but I remember distinctly

that it was on the right
side of the street,

in the direction away from the station,

not very close,

approximately 2 or 3
blocks away from the station.

We chose a table at the back of the café.

The place was almost empty.

Denisov

addressed me,

while Yasinsky

sat aside and kept silent.

It seemed that his task was

to introduce me to Denisov

and then let Denisov handle me.

Denisov began

by expressing his disappointment

that instead of Ramzin,

whom he expected to see,

he had to meet

and discuss

very sensitive and confidential issues,

it seemed he was briefed by Yasinsky.

He knew he could talk to me,

as I was recommended by Ramzin.

Then he asked me

to explain the reasons

why our Party wasn't ready to act.

There, at the Committee, I learnt,

though I'd heard about it earlier,

about considerable sums of money

received from France.

I had the impression that the money

came from several different sources.

From "Torgprom",

the General Headquarters,

and from other intervention supporters.

The money was donated to prepare

the intervention within the country.

In March the total sum amounted

to approximately 1 million roubles.

It transpired during this meeting that,

even though the external intervention

could've been started
in the summer of 1930,

the Party, having received
the financing, failed

to prepare the intervention from within.

It only carried out a small amount of work.

The general picture was clear to me.

Certain success was achieved in the area

of electricity supply...

Since this area is well known to me,

I remember all the details.

Certain slowing down of growth

was achieved in this field,

and there was a number of sabotage units

whose task was to gain control

of electricity supply and to ensure

the ability to cut electric power at

a required moment,
either partially or entirely,

and to manage it according
to the needs of the intervention.

Though certain progress
was achieved in this area:

slowing down
the electrification of Donbass;

decrease in the rate of power supply

in the central industrial region of Moscow;

slowing down the
electrification of Leningrad.

So, certain results were achieved.

This wasn't enough

to acknowledge that the Party

carried out systematic work

to prepare the country's
technical facilities

in order to carry out the intervention.

This was the situation in which

the Central Committee of the Party

found itself during its last,

decisive meeting.

When they saw that...

the work from within wasn't done,

their activities failed
to achieve any results.

They seemed disorientated and lost.

One million was spent for nothing.

The results of their efforts were dismal.

The political climate changed.

Class struggle went on,

but it quieted down.

THE TESTIMONY
OF WITNESS OSADCHY

TURNED INTO A CLOSING STATEMENT
OF DEFENDANT OSADCHY

Allow me to state and to promise

that for the rest of my life,

if my life is to be spared

and I am granted a chance to work,

will be dedicated to serving,

honestly and faithfully,

the needs of the proletariat

and the Soviet government,

in order to redeem the burden

of crimes, which is upon me.

Comrade Commandant,

you can take the witness away.

All rise! Court is in session!

STATE PROSECUTOR'S SPEECH

I'll analyse Ramzin's statement later

to establish what he
knew and what he didn't.

He himself says he didn't know

about irrigation work and sabotage.

I'm not in a position
to trust citizen Ramzin

and others,
and to take their words for granted,

in spite of their claims of feeling

genuine remorse for what they have done.

I'll analyse logically
their statements about

the degree of their
involvement in the crime,

and their feelings of remorse.

This will come later.

For now I'll state the fact: the process

of creation of this sabotage organisation

goes precisely along the
lines of the historical

trend of development of such organisations,

and with the actual state of affairs,

as it was rather difficult
for the leadership

to know personally each member or, indeed,

to be aware of each
singular act of sabotage,

which was being committed.

Here we see the same principle

at work from the beginning to the end.

This principle couldn't have come
from political masterminding.

Life itself created such a structure,

as the saboteurs had at their disposal

such an efficient hierarchical
system of subordination.

This established system of management,

the hierarchical ladder became in itself

a network of links, which the saboteurs

used for their purposes.

This is why, as we have

already established earlier,

whilst individual streams of sabotage acts

were flowing together
towards larger estuaries,

joining into one knot of sabotage,

and it was only a matter
of leadership and management.

But Ramzin, Larichev, Charnovsky

and Kalinnikov - professors,

representatives of the class of academics,

crème de la crème of
scientific intelligentsia,

the people who in the past

had no links with the capitalist world

as was the case with
Kupriyanov and Fedotov,

though they didn't have direct access

to the practical field work,

they still took up leading positions

in the headquarters of
the sabotage network.

It was them, and not former

industrialists or merchants,

as it was the case with

other sabotage organisations,

it was them who masterminded

the sabotage activities.

I'm now talking about
the personalities within

the enemy group,
who we see in front of us.

The nature of their sabotage
has undergone a long and massive evolution.

Having started as attempts to preserve
factories for the use of their former owners,

it developed into
sabotage of a technical nature,

in the industry,

and ended up as planned sabotage.

If our country had been invaded and if,

as a result of an intervention,

the invaders would have usurped power,

it would have been very stupid
and politically naive to expect

that the groups, which provided financial
backing in support of intervention,

former Russian capitalists, leaders

of foreign bourgeoisie,

the remnants of the old Russian
aristocracy and landowners' class,

former army generals

Lukomsky, Miller

I could list many names...

would have wanted to appoint

to the leading posts in the new government

such people as Ramzin or Fedotov or,

better still, Charnovsky -

I said it during the hearing -

one has to be very politically naive

or hypocritical to believe in this.

It's hypocritical, because it's

a priori wrong and irrational.

This idea, which has nothing to do

with the real balance of power,

was being circulated and spread,

it was used as a bait, as a fishing rod,

for catching politically naïve and

ideologically ignorant fools.

And still, we hear from citizen Ramzin

a proud confession that he himself

was convinced and considered it,

to a certain extent, realistic,

that such situation could be possible.

Other defendants, when I put
the same question to them,

gave a more honest answer -
they said it would have been

wrong and politically
naïve to think like that.

But I don't wish to label these

defendants as "politically naïve".

When million strong
masses of the proletariat

are sending their greetings

to the organisation, which succeeded

in uncovering the crimes of this group,

to the watch guard of the revolution - the
OGPU (Joint State Political Directorate);

when they display their will to defend

the USSR with their own lives,

to pay with their blood and suffering

for the right to build
their Socialist state,

the way they want and can do it;

to build it for the sake of the idea

of rousing the entire world proletariat
and starting the world revolution;

when the masses of proletariat
worldwide are looking up to the USSR

as their leader and their guiding light

in their struggle for
liberation of mankind;

when in this struggle

the forces of old bourgeoisie

are raising their heads and consolidating,

and - fearing that their end is near -

set their concrete target
as the destruction of the USSR;

at this very moment, when the waves
of our new struggle are rising high,

when we can anticipate
that the inevitable battle

between the two opposing worlds is near,

it's our duty to destroy and wipe out
all the forces inside the USSR,

which could be supporting the opposition,

once and for all!

The State Prosecution demands that

the Supreme Court passes a verdict of
death by firing squad for all the accused!

The session is now closed.

CLOSING STATEMENTS OF THE ACCUSED

RAMZIN

Honourable members of the Court,

I do realise clearly that

this is my final statement,

and, indeed, this is my last chance

to address such a wide audience.

During the past 15 - 20 years of my life,

I had many occasions

to give speeches or lectures.

Today, in my closing statement,

in my final address

to the judges and public,

I'd like to add,
without a shred of hypocrisy,

a few supplementary remarks and notes,

concerning the case in question.

Now, only a few hours before the end,

no one can lie or pretend.

I shan't defend myself.

I only wish to give one brief explanation.

The activities of the "Industrial Party",

that took hold of my life in recent years,

were so complex, so varied

and so multi-faceted,

that even a 6-hour-long statement and

and an 11-day-long hearing aren't enough

to reveal all the details and all the

aspects of the Party's activities.

Also, it seems impossible because

I myself wasn't aware of some details,

especially related to
its earlier activities.

In any case, it seems to me

that we have managed to present
all the most important facts,

which would help our Republic

to fight against sabotage and intervention.

It seems we had enough time to tell it.

What are the conclusions,
the insights I made

during such a difficult
and shameful journey?

From the end of 1929,

I consider 1930 to be a crucial year,

a year of the experiment.

I began to feel very excited

and full of anticipation,

similar to the one I experienced awaiting

the results of a scientific experiment,

waiting to see whether my theory

was right or wrong.

I waited for 1930 in the same manner.

I tell you now, openly and directly,

that the experience we had in 1930

completely destroyed our previous

misconceptions, our attitudes and ideas,

because this year,

the turning point of the five-year-plan,

revealed the gravity of our

mistakes and our wrongdoings,

The ideas of various

experts and politicians.

In spite of all the activities of

the "Industrial Party",
in spite of sabotage

and counter-revolutionary efforts,

instead of the collapse of the economy

and catastrophic failure of the industry,

we have observed

unprecedented and colossal success

in the building of Socialism!

And now, when this decisive and

crucial year is behind us,

I'm convinced

we have to admit

that the political intuition

and the revolutionary consciousness
of the proletariat and its leaders

succeeded in finding more reasonable and

more adequate ways of managing the economy,

than an entire bunch of scientists,

whose advice we were supposed to follow

and in whose ranks we also belonged.

The past two most difficult and most

demanding years of Socialist building,

revealed within it some new energy,

new potential and colossal opportunities.

SITNIN

It does not make sense to look for excuses,

when my crime has now been exposed.

I give myself

into the hands of the
Court of the Proletariat.

Let it do to me what
it considers necessary.

Apparently, I've deserved it.

I only wish to say,
honourable Judges, that if

you consider it possible

to spare my life,

I give you my word

that for the rest of my life

I'll dedicate all my efforts, my energy,

all my technical knowledge

to the cause

of redeeming my crimes.

That's it.

Defendant Kupriyanov!

May I?

My defence lawyer spoke yesterday about
my involvement and my emotional turmoil.

I don't wish to repeat myself,
so my closing statement will be brief.

I've already stated to the
Supreme Court that I plead guilty,

and I've already given a detailed testimony to
the investigation and to the Supreme Court.

I confessed everything, I told everything

I knew about the work of the "Centre for
Engineering" and the "Industrial Party".

I have nothing to hide from the
Court of the Proletariat.

OCHKIN

I ended up in prison.

I had a long period of reflection and

I wish you knew, honourable Judges,
how I craved for work!

I dreamt to be back at a turbine
or, maybe, even on a steam engine!

I had an urge to work, to participate
in the fulfilment of a five-year-plan!

I refused to defend myself.

There is no point in defence,
because the crimes I've committed...

I cannot even think of defence,
as my crimes

against the working class are so grave.

I confessed all my crimes,

and my only defence now,

the only defence I have

is the Court of the Proletariat.

I wish... I don't know if it's possible...

if I can ever hope that this Court will

become a prologue of
my new and honest life.

I sincerely regret any wrongdoing

and I ask the Soviet government for mercy.

I ask for a chance to redeem my crimes.

I promise that through my honest work

as a highly qualified combustion engineer,

through my enthusiastic participation

in the fulfilment of the five-year-plan,

I'll prove my devotion to the working class

and, ultimately, I'll be able to
get rid of the emotional stain,

which has tinted my reputation.

I'm finished.

KALINNIKOV

if the Soviet government and you,

honourable Judges,
accept my sincere remorse,

If you give me a chance
to prove it at work,

I promise to dedicate all my energy...

and all my knowledge

in order to repair the damage to the USSR,

which was caused by my criminal actions.

I'm finished.

CHARNOVSKY

Ideologically speaking, there's
no return to the past for me.

I cannot be apolitical and empty-headed, as
it was correctly pointed out in this Court.

It's in my blood now.

If I get a chance to leave the prison
and begin new work,

I'll be a new man with a new mentality.

I've suffered so much. I've been through
an emotional and intellectual turmoil.

The utopian beliefs and false ideological
persuasions are dead.

I can see the true meaning of life
very clearly now.

LARICHEV

Engineers have to become
a part of the working class:

only the working class environment will
protect them from the negative influence

of bosses of technology and such people
as Rabinovich, Palchinsky and others

whose shameful and criminal activities
we've supported up until now.

Only the working class environment
can safeguard such a person as myself

from their evil and damaging influence.

Another lesson can be drawn

from our unfortunate experience:

there's no such thing as "loyal" engineers.

This so called "loyalty",
even if it's based

on political ignorance, can only be seen

as the first step down a slippery slope.

This is why, when the Communist party

challenged us, engineers, with a slogan:

"With us or against us!",

every honest engineer has to face

this question and choose his path:
either with the proletariat, or against it.

FEDOTOV

The Soviet government's attitude
towards science and research

is so drastically different
from the capitalist approach,

it's so open-minded and positive,

that this in itself is a sign

that the current situation
in the Soviet Union

is much more favourable
than one might think

without studying the issue in details.

I plead guilty. I'm guilty of being a member
of the Central Committee of the Party;

board member of a branch organisation;

I'm guilty of planning, discussing and...

masterminding acts of sabotage,

which put our industry in jeopardy.

I also consider myself responsible -

and this has been particularly hard for me,

though this does not appear
on the prosecution record,

I consider myself guilty of failing

to grasp the situation and to prevent it.

If an ordinary engineer in our country

does not usually deal with economic issues,

and may, to a certain extent, be considered
ill equipped to deal with such issues,

I cannot use
this argument in my defence.

I don't have such an excuse.

I was a professor of ecomonics
of the textile industry,

and though my course is a practical one,

of course, I wouldn't have become professor

without studying political economy, if

I hadn't known Marxist
theory and read Lenin.

Therefore, I knew and understood the issue,

and it was my duty to sever all the links,

and to shake off the psychological dogma,
break free from peer pressure.

To which I succumbed and which forced me ...to
realise a shameful act of state treason.

I found myself in a situation,

in which...

In which...

I admit my guilt and I believe

that any punishment,

which will be imposed on me by the Court,

will be a deserved one.

It'll be a necessary
step towards redemption.

If it's still possible to
hope to return to work,

I promise to dedicate all my energy

to the industrialisation as a way
of redeeming my crimes.

If it's not possible,
I'll accept the verdict

in the knowledge that it is well deserved.

Sit down.

The session of the Supreme Court
is now closed.

WE DEMAND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
FOR THE IMPERIALIST AGENTS!

DEATH TO REVIVERS OF CAPITALISM!

VERDICT

The Special Session of the
Supreme Court is now resumed.

The verdict in the case of the
"Industrial Party" will now be read.

In the name of the Union of the Soviet
Socialist Republics,

the Special Session of the Supreme
Court of the USSR, composed of:

The Chairman, comrade Vyshynsky A.,

Court members: comrades
Antonov-Saratovsky V. and Lvov V.,

Court secretaries: comrades Yakovlev A,
Ivanenko G. and Sharutine P.,

State Prosecutors: RSFSR Chief Prosecutor,
comrade Krylenko,

the Assistant Prosecutor,
comrade Fridberg V.,

members of the Moscow District Association

of Defence Barristers,
comrades Braude I. and Otsep M.,

having heard during
open and closed sessions

between November 25 and
December 7, 1930,

Case No 38 against
counter-revolutionary organisation,

the "Union of Engineering Organisations",
also known as the "Industrial Party",

whereas the charges were
brought against the defendants:

(1) Ramzin Leonid Konstantinovich,
43 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former professor of Moscow Higher College
of Mechanical Machine Building

and former director of the
Institute of Thermal Engineering;

(2) Kalinnikov Ivan Andreyevich,
56 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former vice chairman of the
Industrial department of Gosplan,

former professor of the Air Force Academy and
other higher educational establishments;

(3) Larichev Victor Alekseyevich,
43 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former chairman of the Fuel department,
member of the Presiding board of Gosplan;

(4) Charnovsky Nikolay Frantzevich,
62 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former vice chairman of Scientific and
Technological Council for Machine Building

of the Machine department of VSNH
(The Supreme Soviet of National Economy),

former professor of various
higher educational establishments;

(5) Fedotov Alexander Alexandrovich,
66 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former chairman of the Scientific Research
Institute of Textile Industry,

former professor of various
higher educational establishments;

(6) Kurpiyanov Sergei Viktorovich,
59 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former Director of Orgtextile
department of VSNH;

All the 6 defendants are charged
with crimes as stipulated in the articles:

58 (paragraph 3), 58 (paragraph 4) and
58 (paragraph 6) of the RSFSR Penal Code;

(7) Ochkin Vladimir Ivanovich,
39 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former Academic Secretary of the
Institute of Thermal Engineering,

former head of department of the
research sector of VSNH;

charged with crimes,
stipulated in the articles:

58 (paragraph 3) and 58 (paragraph 6)
of the RSFSR Penal Code;

(8) Sitnin Ksenofont Vasilyevich,
52 years of age, citizen of the USSR,

former engineer at the
All Union Textile syndicate;

charged with crimes
stipulated in the articles:

58 (paragraph 3) and 58 (paragraph 4)
of the RSFSR Penal Code.

The Court finds that:

The final and decisive victory,
achieved by the Red Army in 1920,

over the army of White Guard generals,
who were led by the imperialist states

in their attempt to bring down
the Soviet power and to restore

the power of landowners and capitalists,

paved the way for the working people
of the USSR towards peaceful

economic construction, based
on the principles of Socialism.

The Technical intelligentsia, convinced that,
as a result of the New Economic policy,

at the end of the rehabilitation period,
capitalist foundations in the policies

of the Soviet government would be
revived and strengthened,

met the beginning of new reconstruction
period, based on Socialist principles,

with a highly negative reaction.

Their hopes that the New Economic Policy

would continue during the reconstruction
period did not come true.

They began searching for
new ways and means of resistance

to the Soviet authorities and
gradually moved towards preparation

of a military intervention
with the aim of overthrowing

the Soviet power by means of
internal and external counter-revolution.

The "Industrial Party",
cut off from the working masses,

lacking support from the proletariat,
was bound to realise that its plans

for preparing a coup d'état from
within the country were hopeless.

Since that moment the "Industrial Party'
turned its attention to preparation

of foreign military intervention
against the USSR,

for which it entered into a union
with counter-revolutionary organisations

both inside the USSR - social-democrat

and kulak groups of Kondratiev-Chayanov,

Menshevik group of Sukhanov-Gromov -
and abroad - "Torgprom",

Milyukov's group, counter-revolutionary
circles in Paris.

Under the leadership of its
Central Committee,

supported by a wide-spread network,
the "Industrial Party" led a whole range

of counter-revolutionary activities aimed
at preparing intervention in 1930.

The Supreme Court of the USSR sentences:

(1) Kupriyanov Sergei Viktorovich, according
to articles 58.3, 58.4, 58.6, 58.11,

to 10 years of prison in solitary
confinement, with deprivation of rights,

according to article 31 of the Penal Code,
sections a, b, c, d and e,

and confiscation of property.

(2) Sitnin Ksenofont Vasilyevich, according
to articles 58.3, 58.4, 58.6, 58.11,

to 10 years of prison in solitary
confinement, with deprivation of rights,

according to article 31 of the Penal Code,
sections a, b, c, d and e,

for 5 years...

the same applies to Kupriyanov...

and confiscation of all property.

Ochkin Vladimir Ivanovich, according
to articles 58.3, 58.6, 58.11,

to 10 years of prison in solitary
confinement, with deprivation of rights,

according to article 31 of the Penal Code,
sections a, b, c, d and e, for 5 years,

and confiscation of all property.

Kalinnikov Ivan Andreyevich, according
to articles 58.3, 58.4, 58.6, 58.11,

as the supreme measure
of social protection,

to death by firing squad,
with confiscation of property.

(5) Charnovsky Nikolay Frantzevich, according
to the articles 58.3, 58.4, 58.6, 58.11,

as the supreme measure
of social protection,

to death by firing squad,
with confiscation of all property.

(6) Larichev Viktor Alekseyevich, according
to articles 58.3, 58.4, 58.6, 58.11,

as the supreme measure
of social protection,

to death by firing squad,
with confiscation of all property.

Fedotov Alexander Alexandrovich,

according to articles
58.3, 58.4, 58.6, 58.11,

as the supreme measure
of social protection,

to death by firing squad,
with confiscation of property.

Ramzin Leonid Konstantinovich, according
to articles 58.3, 58.4, 58.6, 58.11,

as the supreme measure
of social protection,

to death by firing squad,
with confiscation of property.

For all those sentenced to imprisonment,
the time spent in incarceration

during preliminary investigation and hearing,
counts towards the total term of sentencing.

This verdict is final and
is not subject to appeal.

NO SUCH ORGANISATION AS
"THE INDUSTRIAL PARTY" EVER EXISTED.

THE ENTIRE CRIMINAL CASE
WAS FABRICATED BY OGPU

(STATE POLITICAL DIRECTORATE)
ON STALIN'S ORDERS.

RAMZIN I. DEATH SENTENCE WAS SUBSTITUTED
WITH A 10-YEAR IMPRISONMENT.

DURING IMPRISONMENT WORKED
AT A SECRET OGPU LAB.

PARDONED IN 1936. IN 1942,
WAS AWARDED THE STATE STALIN'S PRIZE.

DIED IN 1946.

KALINNIKOV I. DEATH SENTENCE WAS
SUBSTITUTED WITH A 10-YEAR IMPRISONMENT.

DURING IMPRISONMENT WORKED
AT A SECRET OGPU LAB.

EXECUTED BY FIRING SQUAD IN 1937.

LARICHEV V. DEATH SENTENCE WAS SUBSTITUTED
WITH A 10-YEAR IMPRISONMENT.

DURING IMPRISONMENT WORKED
AT A SECRET OGPU LAB.

PARDONED IN 1936.
DIED IN 1948.

CHARNOVSKY N. DEATH SENTENCE WAS
SUBSTITUTED WITH A 10-YEAR IMPRISONMENT.

DURING IMPRISONMENT WORKED
AT A SECRET OGPU LAB.

EXECUTED BY FIRING SQUAD IN 1938.

FEDOTOV A. DEATH SENTENCE WAS SUBSTITUTED
WITH A 10-YEAR IMPRISONMENT.

RELEASED FROM PRISON IN 1939.
DIED HALF A YEAR LATER.

KUPRIYANOV ♪. FATE REMAINS UNKNOWN.

OCHKIN V. DURING IMPRISONMENT
WORKED AT A SECRET OGPU LAB.

PARDONED IN 1936. FURTHER FATE
REMAINS UNKNOWN.

SITNIN K. FATE REMAINS UNKNOWN.

KRYLENKO N. IN 1931 - 1936 - MINISTER
OF JUSTICE OF THE RSFSR, THEN USSR.

ARRESTED IN JANUARY 1938.
EXECUTED BY FIRING SQUAD IN JULY 1938.

THE MILITARY COUNCIL OF
THE USSR SUPREME COURT

FOUND HIM GUILTY OF BEING A MEMBER OF THE

"FASCIST TERRORIST ORGANISATION
OF MOUNTAINEERS AND TOURISTS".

VYSHINSKY A.

IN 1931 - 1939 - PROSECUTOR GENERAL
OF RSFSR, THEN USSR.

IN 1949 - 1953 - USSR MINISTER OF
FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

AFTER STALIN'S DEATH IN MARCH 1953,
REMOVED FROM THE MINISTERIAL POST

AND APPOINTED PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE USSR TO THE UNITED NATIONS.

DIED OF HEART ATTACK
ON 22/11/1954 IN NEW YORK.

ACCORDING TO THE OFFICE
OF THE RF PROSECUTOR GENERAL,

VYSHINSKY COMMITTED SUICIDE.