at Moscow is proceeding along classic lines and precedents set in earlier cases are being closely followed. AN the accused have pleaded their guilt of the crimes charged against them. It is true that Krestinski at first denied his guilt, but, between the adjournment on the first day and the reassembly of the court on the second, he experienced that change of heart which was one of the noted features of the trial of the British engineers some years ago. In that case one of the defendants denied the admissions which he was alleged to have made during the preliminary investigation of the case. In the present trial Krestinski did the same thing, and with over-night facility reversed his plea. Why? No one outside the officials concerned with dealing with these men knows how it is done, but there is every reason to believe that the suasion which secured the original admissions of guilt were intensified, and Krestinski was obliged to "come clean." Whatever the effect of this turgid farce on public opinion in Russia may be, these trials in the past have carried with them no conviction in ihe eyes of foreign observers, and cannot be expected to have any better result on this occasion. In addition to unanimity of plea the miserable accused are busy implicating each other with an eagerness which is truly remarkable. Rakovsky admits his own offences and then earnestly strives to drive Krestinski deeper into the mire. For what purpose? The fate of these men seems to be sealed, though, perhaps, a few of them may escape with imprisonment. Nevertheless they persist in assisting their own punishment by a form of abasement which seems hardly credible. Doomed to suffer as they must know themselves tobe, there must be some reason for the peculiarity of their conduct and it is more than possible that all this is done in an attempt to save others from a similar fate, generally their relatives or others dependent upon them for safety.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.