Much controversy surrounds a letter written on the same date as the ‘mock execution’, 30 October. The full text of the letter, which is contained in the OGPU file on Reilly, is as follows:
To the Chairman of the OGPU
F.E. Dzerzhinsky
After the discussions that have taken place with V.A. Styrne, I express my agreement to co-operate in sincerely providing full evidence and information answering the questions of interest to the OGPU relating to the organisation and personnel of the British intelligence service and as far as it is known to me what information I have relating to the American intelligence and likewise about those persons in the Russian émigré organisations with whom I had dealings.
Again, there have been suggestions that this too was an ‘OGPU fabrication’. Gordon Brook Shepherd, for example, asserts that:
…it is inconceivable that Reilly, who had throughout displayed defiance, would have failed to mention [in the diary] such a volte-face. It seems all the more probable therefore that the document was produced by the OGPU’s diligent factory of lies and forgery to make things look neat and pretty in their files.17
Edward Gazur, the FBI counter-intelligence officer who debriefed Alexander Orlov after his defection to the US, was even more emphatic: ‘there is no doubt in my mind that Orlov did not know of the existence of such a letter when he died in 1973 as he would have certainly addressed the matter with me’.18 He is firmly of the view that ‘the letter was a fabrication conceived and floated by the KGB [sic]’.19 Gazur takes his argument further by reasoning that ‘had Reilly confessed, he would have likewise been placed on trial if only for the Soviets to reap an extraordinarily bountiful harvest of propaganda’.20
This scenario is a most unlikely one, however. There is no evidence that the Bolsheviks ever had any intention of subjecting Reilly to a show trail. Not only had he already been tried in absentia in 1918, and been sentenced to death, they had already announced his death via the Moscow Trust Council meeting within days of his arrest. Clearly, they would have found it a little difficult to then bring him back to life in order to place him on trial. Furthermore, Reilly’s letter can in no way be described as a ‘confession’. It is purely a statement of intention that he is prepared to co-operate. Savinkov, on the other hand, certainly did ‘confess’ in every sense of the word, and the statement he made was a clear recanting of his opposition to the Bolsheviks:
I unconditionally recognise your right to govern Russia. I do not ask your mercy. I ask only to let your revolutionary conscience judge a man who has never sought anything for himself and who has devoted his whole life to the cause of the Russian people.21
Reilly, on the other hand, no doubt hoped that the letter would save his life or at least buy him time. In fact, his own handwritten notes testify to the fact that during the following five days he did exactly what he said he would do in the Dzerzhinsky letter. It is also clear, however, that what he told them was generally low-grade information, much of which they already knew. The one thing they were keen to learn more about, the identity of SIS agents currently working in Russia, he was unable to tell them, as he had had no connection with SIS for over four years.
Saturday 31 October 1925
Next morning called at 11. Spend day in Room 176 with Sergei Ivanovich and Dr Kushner.22 Apparently Styrne much impressed with his report – increased attention. At 8 p.m. drive dressed in GPU uniform. Walk in country at night. – Arrival Moscow apartment. Great spread. Tea. Ibrahim. Then conversation alone with Styrne – that protocole [sic] expressing my agreement. Ignorance of any agents here – object my trip. Appraisal of Winston Churchill and Spears. My unexpected decision in Wyborg. Styrne went with protocol to Dzerzhinsky, returned half an hour later. Informed sentence stopped and agreed in principle my plan. Return to cell slept, four solid hours, after Veronal.23 – Unfortunately my turn get up early. – Called at 11. Uniform, precautions that I not be seen. Devised programme with Styrne – 1) 1918, 2) SIS, 3) Political spheres England, 4) American Secret Service, 5) Politics and banks USA, 6) Russian émigré Source for information regarding 1918 – Main object German identification, scene at American Consulate24 – Cut off supplies untruth25 – Accused of provocation – 2a) Savinkov’s changed attitude, distrust, my conviction proven. My intentions if Savinkov returned. Rest. Ask whether knew Stark,26 Kurtz.27 Story of Operput,28 Yakushev.29 Then began on Number 2 – SIS. Only introduction. – finished 5 p.m. Retired to room 176. Rest, dinner. At 7 p.m. dictated Numbers 4 and 5. Then cell. Veronal did not act.
Sunday 1 November 1925
During interrogation tremendous stress laid whether Hodgson30 has any agents and whether any inside agents anywhere in Comintern. – Questions regards Dukes,31 Kurtz, Lifland, Peshkov.32 – Questions regarding Litseintsy.33 Told story of Gniloryboff34 and other case attempted escape. Asked whether any agents are in Petrograd. Lots of talk about my wife – offers any money or position – Sergei Ivanovich Kheidulin.35 Feduleev36 and guard with glasses was with me in cell. No work. Drive in afternoon. Corrected American report.
Monday 2 November 1925
Called 10 a.m. SIS continued – general organisational details.37 Repeatedly asked regarding agents here38 Burberry, Norwegian Ebsen,39 Hudson40 in Denmark and others. Explained why agents here impossible – none since Dukes.41 Returned to my mission in 1918. Kemp,42 misunderstanding with Lockhart.43 Conversation with Artur Khristianovich Artuzov.44 Zinoviev’s letter.45 Doctor dissatisfied with my state. Styrne hopes to finish Wednesday – doubt it. Slept very badly this night. Reading till 3 a.m. Getting very weak.
Tuesday 3 November 1925
Hungry all day. Frunze’s funeral.46 Called about 9 in the evening. Styrne’s letter and message through Feduleev. Six questions, the German’s work, our collaboration: what kind of materials we have concerning USSR and Comintern. China. Duke’s agents. My conversation with Feduleev. Short letter to Styrne. Veronal. Slept well.
Wednesday 4 November 1925
Very weak. Called at 11 a.m. – Apology from Styrne – Friendliness. Work to 5 – later dinner. Later drive, walk. Work to 2 a.m. Slept without Veronal. Styrne gave previous protocol to sign. Began about Scotland Yard – Childs,47 Carter48 – Executive work. Basil Thompson.49 Boris Seid.50 Thoughts on Krasin.51 Law regarding foreigners. Paris. Bunakov travelled to Paris. Long conversation about his trip. Protocol – My thoughts about Amtorg52 and Arcos.53 Wise.54 Broker, Urquhart.55 Possibility of agreement/terms – Russian bondholders. Divide and rule.56 My idea concerning an agreement with England Churchill, Baldwin, Birkenhead, Chamberlain, McKenna. Petroleum groups, Balfour, Marconi, financing of debts in USA – English unrest.57 Questions – again Hudson, Zhitkov, Ferson, Abaza.58 Questions about Persia. – Military attachés, Faymonville,59 China, makes use of young English agent as an envoy in Russia. Very attentive about Berens. Existence of agents in Arcos and mixed companies. Feel at ease about my death. I see great developments ahead.