After an attack on Trotsky, he took the court at length through the history of Zinoviev’s and Kamenev’s various recantations and promises. He then gave great prominence to the Kirov murder:
These mad dogs of capitalism tried to tear limb from limb the best of the best of our Soviet land. They killed one of the men of the revolution who was most dear to us, that admirable and wonderful man, bright and joyous as the smile on his lips was always bright and joyous, as our new life is bright and joyous. They killed our Kirov; they wounded us close to our very heart. They thought they could sow confusion and consternation in our ranks.146
Vyshinsky took some time to deal with Smirnov’s “wrigglings” (and, in passing, condemned Holtzman for having “adopted the same position as Smirnov”); Smirnov had “stubbornly denied that he took any part in the terroristic activities of the Trotskyite-Zinovievite centre.”147 His guilt was, however, established by the other confessions. One awkward point was dealt with thus:
I know that in his defence Smirnov will argue that he had left the centre. Smirnov will say: ‘I did not do anything, I was in prison.’ A naive assertion! Smirnov was in prison from 1 January 1933, but we know that while in prison Smirnov organized contacts with his Trotskyites, for a code was discovered by means of which Smirnov, while in prison, communicated with his companions outside. This proves that communication existed and Smirnov cannot deny this.148
In fact, no evidence of any sort on this point had been, or ever was to be, produced.
Vyshinsky, in passing, dealt with an unfortunate idea which had evidently gained popularity:
The comparison with the period of the Narodnaya Volya [People’s Will] terrorism is shameless. Filled with respect for the memory of those who in the times of the Narodnaya Volya sincerely and honestly, although employing, it is true, their own special, but always irreproachable, methods, fought against the tsarist autocracy for liberty—I emphatically reject this sacrilegious parallel.149
He concluded with the appeal, “I demand that these dogs gone mad should be shot—every one of them!”
The evening session of 22 August and the two sessions of 23 August saw the last pleas of the accused.
They spoke in the same order as they had given their evidence. Mrachkovsky started by telling of his background, a worker, son and grandson of workers, a revolutionary, son and grandson of revolutionaries, who had suffered his first arrest when thirteen years old.
“And here,” he went on in a bitter and ironic tone, “I stand before you as a counter-revolutionary!” The judges and Prosecutor looked apprehensive, but all was well. For a moment Mrachkovsky was overcome. He struck his hand on the bar of the dock and regained his self-contro1,150 going on to explain that he had only mentioned his past so that everyone should “remember that not only a general, not only a prince or nobleman can become a counter-revolutionary; workers or those who spring from the working class, like myself, can also become counter-revolutionaries.”151 He ended by saying that he was a traitor who should be shot.
Most of the other pleas were simple self-condemnations; the accused described themselves as “dregs” undeserving of mercy. But an occasional wrong note was struck, as when Evdokimov said—surely not without meaning—“Who will believe a single word of ours?”152
When Kamenev had finished his plea, and had already sat down, he rose again and said that he would like to say something to his two children, whom he had no other means of addressing. One was an Air Force pilot; the other, a boy. Kamenev said that he wanted to tell them, “No matter what my sentence will be, I in advance consider it just. Don’t look back. Go forward. Together with Soviet people, follow Stalin.” He then sat down again and rested his face in his hands. Others present were shaken, and even the judges are said to have lost their stony expressions for an instant.153
Zinoviev made a satisfactory definition of the whole inadmissibility of opposition to Stalin: “My defective Bolshevism became transformed into anti-Bolshevism, and through Trotskyism I arrived at Fascism. Trotskyism is a variety of Fascism, and Zinovievism is a variety of Trotskyism….”154 But he ended that worse than any punishment was the idea that “my name will be associated with the names of those who stood beside me. On my right hand Olberg, on my left-Nathan Lurye….”155 And this remark is, in an important sense, incompatible with the idea of the triaclass="underline" for on the face of the evidence, how was Zinoviev better than the two he named?
Smirnov again denied any direct implication in any terrorist activity. However, he denounced Trotsky, though in comparatively mild terms, as an enemy “on the other side of the barricade.”
When Fritz David had finished, the court withdrew to consider the verdict. Yagoda had it ready for them in the Council Chamber. But a decent interval was allowed to pass, and at 2:30 the following morning the court reassembled and found all concerned guilty on all counts. They were all sentenced to death.
As Ulrikh finished reading the verdict, one of the Luryes shrieked hysterically, “Long live the cause of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin!” Then the prisoners were taken out, to the police wagons that were to return them to the Lubyanka.
TO THE EXECUTION CELLARS
As soon as the trial was over, the defect in the bargain Zinoviev and Kamenev had struck with Stalin became apparent. Having carried out their side of it, they no longer possessed any sanction to make him do the same with his.
Under the new law, seventy-two hours’ grace was allowed for the accused to put in their petitions for pardon. Some of these may have been put in and rejected, though Smirnov, at least, seems not to have made an appeal. In any case, the announcement of their execution was made only twenty-four hours after the verdict.
Various accounts of the actual execution have filtered out. They are of course based on unconfirmable NKVD reports.
Zinoviev was unwell and feverish. He was told he was to be transferred to another cell. But when he saw the guards, he at once understood. All accounts agree that he collapsed, yelling in a high-pitched voice a desperate appeal to Stalin to keep his word. He gave the impression of hysteria, but this is probably not fair, as his voice was always very piercing when he was excited, and he was perhaps trying to make a last speech. He was, in addition, still suffering from heart and liver trouble, so that some sort of collapse is understandable. It is said that the NKVD lieutenant in charge, fearing the effect of this scene if prolonged along the corridor and down into the cellar, hustled him into a nearby cell and shot him there and then, later receiving an award for his presence of mind.156
When Kamenev was called from his cell to execution, he made no complaint and appeared stunned. He was not killed by the first shot, and the NKVD lieutenant in charge became hysterical and kicked the executioner with a cry of “finish him off.” Smirnov was calm and courageous. He is reported as saying, “We deserve this for our unworthy attitude at the trial.”157
Recent Soviet publications tell us of the fate of some others incriminated in the trial. Gaven, the main link to Trotsky, apparently gave evidence against Smirnov,158 and so may be presumed to have confessed. His nonappearance at the trial may have been due to illness. He was carried out to be shot on a stretcher on 4 October.159 The leading Zinovievite, G. F. Fedorov, brought from the Chelyabinsk isolator on 4 September, was shot on 5 October, the day after Gaven. And this may indicate a broader secret trial—though others implicated survived a little longer.160
We can trace the fate of a few of the relatives of the accused, apart from Smirnov’s, with whom we have already dealt. Evdokimov’s son was shot.161 Kamenev’s wife had been arrested on 19 March 1935 and sentenced to exile by the Special Board. She was retried in January 1938 and shot in the autumn of 1941. As for the sons Kamenev had tried to save, the elder, Alexander, was arrested in August 1936, sentenced in May 1937, and shot in July 1939; the younger was sent to an NKVD children’s home, and his name was changed to Glebov.162 Zinoviev’s sister, F. A. Radomislskaya, a doctor, is reported in the Vorkuta camps and was shot there later. Three other sisters were sent to labor camp, together with two nephews, a niece, a brother-in-law, and a cousin. Three brothers and another nephew were shot. Zinoviev’s son Stefan, for whom he had made a special appeal to Stalin, was also shot in 1937, as were Bakayev’s wife and TerVaganyan’s brother.163 Dreitzer’s wife, Sonia, was also sent to Vorkuta, and is also reported shot there.164 Olberg’s wife, Betty, was sent to labor camp. In prison, very ill and thin, she had made an attempt to commit suicide by throwing herself over some banisters. She was sent back to Germany with the Communists handed over to the Gestapo by Stalin in 1940.165