FURRIER DENIES HE WAS A SOVIET AGENT

Press, Volume XC, Issue 27410, 24 July 1954, Page 7

FURRIER DENIES HE WAS A SOVIET AGENT

(Rec. 9 p.m.) MELBOURNE, July 23. A Melbourne furrier, who appeared before the Royal Commission into Espionage this morning, denied a suggestion that he had been an intelligence agent for Russia. The senior counsel assisting the commission, Mr W. J. V. Windeyer, said a man named Kosky was referred to in four Moscow letters delivered to Australian Security by Vladimir Petrov, a former Soviet Embassy oflicial in Canberra.

Kosky, in the witness box, said he engaged in no political activities, knew nothing about communism, and was a commercial* man not interested in politics. Mr Windeyer said the main suggestion was that Kosky was an M.V.D. agent. No adverse inference should be drawn merely because a person had travelled to Russia, had had social intercourse with Russians, or had been engaged in commerce with Russia. When the hearing resumed this morning, Mr W. J. V. Windeyer, Q.C., senior counsel assisting the commission, referred to Solomon Kosky, senior partner in a Melbourne furrier business, Kosky Bros. Pty., Ltd., Mr Eugene Gorman, Q.C., and Mr M. M. Gullity were granted permission to appear for Kosky. Mr Windeyer said that a man named Kosky was referred to in certain letters from Moscow. The letters from Moscow were among documents which Petrov brought with him from the embassy when he sought political asylum. Mr Windeyer said there was a company qf Kosky Bros. Pty., Ltd., furriers, in Melbourne. The senior member was Solomon Kosky. The questions which seemed to arise were— Who was the Kosky referred to in the Russian letters? Was he ever an agent of the And, if he was an agent, did he undertake any task at any time for the M.V.D.? Mr Windeyer said he believed that Petrov’s evidence would carry the matter little further than what appeared in the documents. Petrov appeared to have had no dealings with Kosky in respect of any matter which might be broadly described as an M.V.D. matter.

“No inference adverse to any person should, we feel, be drawn merely because he had either travelled to Russia, had social intercourse with Russians,, whether members of the embassy or not, or had been engaged in trade or bommeree with Russia,’’ Mr Windeyer said. “We feel it is quite the reverse. We put it purely as our personal view that only good can come from any such intercourse, whether commercial or otherwise, if it has no propaganda purpose, nor is partisan or political. The purpose of this aspect of the inquiry is to elucidate references to Kosky. No first name is given.’’ Vladimir Petrov, recalled to the witness box, said he first heard the name Kosky from Pakhomov (Tass representative and M.V.D. worker) when Pakhomov handed over his duties as M.V.D. resident to him. Pakhomov told him that Kosky was an M.V.D. agent, and that he was very sorry that no-one had been in touch with him, said Petrov.

Petrov said that Pakhomov gave him Kosky’s code name, told him that he lived in Melbourne, that he had a furrier’s business, and. that he had been several times to Leningrad for fur auctions. Pakhomov told nim that Kosky’s first name was Solomon. Petrov said that he received a letter from Moscow about Kovaliev (the commercial attache) coming to Australia. The letter said that Kovaliev should make contact with Kosky and study him. said he had received a letter from Moscow warning him that he might establish communication with Kosky only with the permission of M.V.D. headquarters, in Moscow. Kovaliev had seen Kosky only about three times.

Did you ever suggest to Kovaliev that Kosky was an agent?—No.

In his official position as commercial attache, would Kovaliev have proper reasons to see Kosky?—That’s right.

Mr Gorman said that Mcscow*s instruction that Kovaliev was not to be told that Kosky was an agent would be consistent with saying: “Don't tell Kovaliev that Kosky is your agent because Kosky is not your agent. Mr Justice Owen: That could be an interpretation. Petrov said it was his belief that Kosky was an agent because of what Pakhomov had said, and what Sakovnikov had written of Kosky’s code name.

Kosky’s Evidence Mr Windeyer then called Solomon Kosky to the witness box. Kosky said his name was Sol Kosky. He lived in Dandenong road, Armadale, Victoria. He was a fur importer. He was born in Russia on June 3, 1894, at Vitebsk, and left Russia in 1907 to join his eldest sister in the fur trade in London. He left London in 1912 for Australia. He did not see his parents after leaving Russia and, in 1918, received a letter from the Red Cross telling him his parents were dead.

Kosky said he was not engaged in any political activities of any kind. He had no tendency toward any type of government. He was a commercial man interested in commerce, not politics. , He went to the fur sales in London frequently until the beginning of World War 11. He went back to rtusria for the first time in 1950 to attend the Leningrad fur sales. He spent 14 days examining the furs and five days at the sale.

Kosky said that he did not travel through Russia and did not speak, write, or understand Russian.

While in Russia, no person solicited him to advise them, or give political assistance to Russia.

Apart from trade, said Kosky, he had not had any private ‘correspondence with anybody in Russia. He was not a Communist and not a member of any political party. He was not an agent for Russia. Kosky said that the first time he met any member of the Soviet Embassy was in 1941, when he was associated with collecting sheep skins for Russia to make coats for the Army. That organisation had raised £52,000. but he had also subscribed generously to various Melbourne charities and public bodies. His meetings with members of the Russian Embassy were restricted to trade purposes. Mr Gorman: Were you conscious that any effort was being made by | Kovaliev to enlist your interests in anything outside business?—l was never conscious of the trade attache speaking of any other thing but trade. At any time in the 42 years that you have been in Australia has any person approached you to render any service to Russia other than in respect of conventional trade deals?—Never. Mr Windeyer: Can you suggest why your name should appear in the. M.V.D. correspondence?—The reason. I suggest, is that I was helpful in the “Sheep Skins for Russia” appeal and they probably thought I was friendly towards them. I also opened trade relations with Russia, which had not been done previously since the war. I see no other reason.

He had sold goods to the Soviet Government. acting as an agent for the seller, Kosky said. He received commission from the Soviet Government. He also had transactions in which the Soviet Government was the seller. In fur transactions, he sold by private treaty as well as by public auction. When he sold wool he was acting as an intermediary between the Russian

Government and the wool buyer in Kosky said he had not engaged in any transactions by which money had been sent to Russia or received from Russia. A credit was established in London and goods were sent to London.

“I have not had any transactions on behalf of the Communist Party and I have not given any information of a political character to any Russian,” he said.

Mr Gorman: Was there any Governmental reaction to your setting up trade with Russia —On the contrary, it was encouraged by all departments. Mr Gorman submitted that nothing had transpired to involve Kosky in the inquiry. He said the commissioners should make some statement that Kosky would carry a burden by his summons to appear and some statement was warranted. “No-one has said that a feather been knocked out of this gentleman.” he said. “If this was a jury, would we not be on our feet asking for a verdict?”

Mr Gorman said that Petrov had said that neither Petrov nor his predecessor had obtained any information from Kosky. “No Pronouncement Now"

Mr Justice Owen said that some day —perhaps a long time ahead—the commissioners would have to draw the threads of the inquiry together. He could not make any pronouncement

Mr Justice Owen said that, in his opening address, Mr Windeyer had said that the mere fact that a person was called as a witness did not reflect any discredit on that person. A great many names had been mentioned in the Russian documents and. as the commission had to inquire into matters of espionage, persons named in the documents had to be called in case they

Andrew Friedenbergs. a Latvian, of Harmsworth street, Collingwood, was permitted to recall Petrov into the witness box for cross-examination. Yesterday, Petrov told a secret session of the comniission that Friedenbergs,

whom Petrov alleged was a former M.V.D. agent, gave him the Australian addresses of a man and a woman wanted by the Russian secret police. Friedenbergs repeated his denials that he had ever met Petrov or that he was a former M.V.D. man.

Petrov from the witness box, told Friedenbergs that, on one occasion, he (Petroy) came to Melbourne with Platkais (attache at Embassy) and a driver by car. On other occasions he had flown to Melbourne. - < p ® trov sa *d that he had not come to Melbourne with the intention of meeting* Friedenbergs. ..Friedenbergs. recalled, handed Mr Windeyer two booklets of which he claimed he was the author. One book!et was about New Zealand and the other, America. Friedenbergs said the books were published and distributed under the auspices of the Y.M C.A. The commission then adjourned to August 9 at Sydney.