Archive/File: people/i/irving.david/libel.suit/transcripts/day015.07
Last-Modified: 2000/07/20

   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Can I, before you re-examine, Mr Irving, just
        ask one question?
                  Looking at what you know Mr Irving did, do you
        take the view that he did break an agreement?  You used
        the term "borrow", in inverted commas, but do you take the
        position that he was breaking an agreement with the
        Russians?
   A.   No agreement that we made specifically touched on the
        terms of whether or not the plates should be taken out of
        the archive.  It may have been and it could have been
        understood, certainly, that they were not to be taken out,
        but there was no formal agreement.
   Q.   Could have been understood?
   A.   It could have been understood, yes.
   Q.   Thank you.  Mr Irving, you have a right to re-examine.

                  (Re-examined by MR IRVING)

   Q.   By the use by Mr Rampton of the word "nicked", do you
        understand "stolen"?
   A.   Yes.  I understood he was using it in inverted commas
and
        I used the same verbal inverted commas around them on
the
        way back.
   Q.   And do you understood by the word "stolen" the
permanent
        depriving of somebody else of their rightful property?

.          P-56



   A.   Yes.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  I am bound to say, Mr Irving, I did not
        really understand Mr Rampton's use of the word
"nicked" to
        mean that, but perhaps he would clarify that.
   MR IRVING:  Well, your Lordship moves in different circles
from
        myself.
   MR RAMPTON:  No, no, not only did I put the word "nicked"
in
        inverted commas, but I actually said to the
witness,"And,
        of course, I do not mean stolen because they were
taken
        back", and I knew it.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That was my understanding.
   MR IRVING:  His final words were that "Mr Irving nicked
these
        plates", and the circles that I move in the word
"nicked"
        certainly means permanently depriving somebody of
their
        rightful property which is stealing.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  That is why I invited him to clarify and
he
        has now done so.
   MR IRVING:  We have now clarified.  Thank you very much.
        (To the witness):  So there can no doubt on two
matters,
        Mr Millar, at no time have I permanently deprived the
        Russian archives of their property?
   A.   Not to my knowledge.
   Q.   Not to your knowledge.  You inadvertently stated that,
         "the plates on the waste ground were left there
        overnight, in my view".  Is it not true that, in fact,
the
        plates were removed from the archives for a couple of

.          P-57



        hours, left in the cardboard protecting container
there
        behind the wall on the waste ground until the close of
the
        archives and then handed to the photographer so they
were
        not ----
   A.   That is correct, indeed true.  The intention was to
        present them to Andrew Neil the next morning, and, as
I
        recall, we went back to the archive, you should me
where
        they were.  I expressed horror and at that stage we
said,
         "Let us take these now the archive is closed".  I
asked
        if we should take them back immediately, but the
archive
        was then closed, so, I said, "Right, we will take them
to
        show to the editor and, hopefully, they can be
replaced
        first thing in the morning without anyone noticing
they
        have ever been gone".
   Q.   Precisely, and this, of course, had been the subject
of a
        formal admission by myself.  Once more, Mr Millar, did
you
        or I or the Sunday Times at any time by our actions
        endanger these plates?
   A.   With the exception of having left them for those few
hours
        on the piece of waste ground, no.
   Q.   Thank you very much.  No further questions.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Can I ask you one further question,
        Mr Millar?  Did the Sunday Times pay Mr Irving the
agreed
        fee?
   A.   That I think you will find is the subject of a
separate
        legal action.  There was ----

.          P-58



   Q.   It does not stop you answering the question.
   A.   No, there was certainly a fee agreed, but at some
stage a
        technical argument arose (to which I am not fully
privy)
        about whether or not Mr Irving was in breach of that
        contract, and a lengthy, certainly a legal case was
begun
        (and eventually settled) as to whether or not he
should be
        paid any or all of the sums owing to him.
   Q.   Yes, well, I will not pursue that.  Thank you very.
You
        are free to go.
   A.   Thank you.
                  < (The witness stood down)
                    < MR DAVID IRVING, recalled.
                  < Cross-Examined by MR RAMPTON, QC,
continued.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Do you want a break, Mr Irving?
   A.   No, sir, I will go straight on -- unless your Lordship
        wishes a five-minutes adjournment or Mr Rampton?
   MR RAMPTON:  Mr Irving, I am going to abbreviate this as
far as
        I sensibly can.
   A.   We are on Moscow now, right?
   Q.   Yes, I am only on Moscow and then I finish.  Mr
Irving,
        you had heard of the existence of these microfiches at
        Moscow, I do not know when, but some time early in
'92,
        was it?
   A.   Around about May 6th 1992.
   Q.   You thought you had a deal with Macmillan to publish
them
        if you could, as it were, get your hands on them?

.          P-59



   A.   No.
   Q.   You did not?
   A.   No.
   Q.   Well, what is the truth?
   A.   I was writing a biography on Dr Joseph Goebbels which
was
        under contract with Macmillan Limited at that time.
   Q.   And what happened to that contract with Macmillan?
   A.   In September 1992 I wrote them a letter asking if I
could
        buy the rights back from them because I was not happy
with
        them as a publisher.
   Q.   Well, I am sorry.  You are going to have to be a
little
        bit more, what shall we say, less opaque about this in
a
        minute.  We will use the file, if we may.  Can you
turn to
        page A1?  It is not the first page.  It is about the
tenth
        page.  A1 in the first section of that file?
   A.   Is this the one called "Background Information"?
   Q.   It should be a facsimile from you to the Editor of the
        Sunday Times dated 26th May 1992 marked
"confidential",
        eight pages in.
   A.   Eight pages in?
   Q.   The numbers to look for, though they sometimes look
like
        4s, are called A1, etc., in a black circle at the
bottom
        right-hand corner of the page.  I am sorry, as with
all
        the other documents, there is even one called 007
which is
        interesting in the context.
   A.   I have my A01 begins "Background Information", is that

.          P-60



        correct?
   Q.   No, that is 01.  I am sorry.  It is a complete muddle.
If
        you could find A1 without the O?
   A.   How could I be so stupid?  Right, now I have it.
   Q.   In strictest confidence to Andrew Neil.  "Dear Mr
Neil" --
        this is your document, is it not?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   "I have just had an important deal collapse under my
feet,
        thanks to the prissiness of my New York publishers who
        felt it was unethical".  Now, is that a reference to
your
        Macmillan deal?
   A.   No.
   Q.   What is it a reference to?
   A.   On May 6th -- I will be very brief -- or approximately
May
        6th, I was informed in Munich by a personal friend of
the
        existence of the glass plates in the Moscow archives.
   Q.   Yes.
   A.   This friend suggested that I should go to Moscow and
if
        I took 10 or $20,000 in cash I could buy these glass
        plates from the archivists.  I contacted the American
        publishers of my Goebbels biography and asked if they
        would increase the advance on the book to provide the
        dollars necessary for this adventure.  For four or
five
        days the American publishers were very excited.
        I arranged the trip to Moscow, or I began arranging
it,
        and when I was far advanced, suddenly the American

.          P-61



        publishers decided that the idea of buying glass
plates
        from the Moscow archives looked unethical and they
were
        not prepared to get involved with it.
   Q.   Right, and you say that those American publishers were
not
        called Macmillan?
   A.   That Goebbels book went through so many hands, I would
        have remind myself.
   Q.   Yes.
   A.   When you said Macmillan, of course, I am assuming that
you
        are referring to the English Macmillan publisher who
did
        have the rights in the book.
   Q.   Well, I am sorry.  I did not know they were different.
        I am awfully sorry.  I am sure that they are related -
-
        they would have to be, would they not?
   A.   They were not related.  They spell themselves
differently
        too.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  They were not, oddly enough, no.  I think
        that is right.
   MR RAMPTON:  Were not?  Oh, well, that is my ignorance.  I
am
        sorry.  Let us turn ----
   A.   I know the Editor concerned was Don Fehr, but he also
        meant from -- that is F-E-H-R -----
   Q.   That is a perfectly natural confusion on your part
brought
        about by my ignorance.  Can we turn to your diaries,
        please, your diary entries, section B of this file?
   A.   Yes.

.          P-62



   Q.   On page B2 is your entry for 26th May.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Now ----
   A.   "Macmillan Incorporated", that is correct, yes.
   Q.   "Rose 6.45 a.m., ran round Mayfair 97 per cent hot."
        Never mind the next bit.  "A hectic day from which
Telecom
        much profited with calls to and from Moscow, New
        York, ... (reading to the words) ... Frohlich.  Susie
        Terplar was the person that actually typed the
entries.
   A.   She was my assistant, yes.
   Q.   "The fuss was engendered first by attempts to get the
        Moscow invitation needed, then tickets, then visas.
        Finally, at 5 p.m. came a totally unexpected fax from
        Macmillan Inc".  So you were, sort of, preparing to go
on
        behalf of Macmillan at this stage if I have understood
--
        Macmillan Inc?
   A.   On behalf of myself as the author, but I was obviously
        raising the funds by hook or by crook.
   Q.   Well, plainly.  "Refusing [to] put up the funds after
all,
        as they could not be party to a 'bribe'!"
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   That was their position?
   A.   Well, you have seen all the correspondence in
discovery.
        Their message said, "It looks like we are trying to
bribe
        a Russian official" ----
   Q.   Yes.

.          P-63



   A.   --- "and this looks unethical to us".
   Q.   Yes, whereas -- I am not taking any point on this --
your
        position was that you might need to pay for the right
to
        use them?
   A.   In two lines:  The Soviet Union had collapsed.  The
        archive system was in total disarray.  They could not
even
        afford to pay their own wages.  We were doing the
        archivist a favour by bringing him $20,000 in cash.
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, I do not think any criticism is
being
        made or could be made.
   A.   Yes, well, having been publicly flogged for the last
three
        or four days, I always assumed that was going to be --
--
   MR JUSTICE GRAY:  Yes, but you are not being at the moment.
        That is the point I am trying to make.
   MR RAMPTON:  I deliberately read that so that everybody
should
        know that you put the word "bribe" in quotes and then
put
        an exclamation mark after it.
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Whatever your publishers might have thought, it was
not
        something you agreed with?
   A.   No.  It was not.  The Hoover Library, the Stamford
        University, very many major American institutions had
        already bought large parts of the Russian archives
over
        the previous weeks.  There was a major sale going on.
   Q.   As I say, I really do want to rattle through the
periphery
        of this as quickly as I can.  I know you suspect me
and

.          P-64



        I understand why, but you must not always be
suspicious.
        Is it right that you were also concerned, and again I
say
        quite properly concerned, as an historian and an
author
        that the people in Munich might get there first?
   A.   Oh, yes.
   Q.   And spoil your coup, your scoop, whatever you would
like
        to call it?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Do historians take perfectly natural pride in being
the
        first there?
   A.   Yes.
   Q.   Now I want to whiz on, if I may?  Did you eventually
enter
        into a contract with the Sunday Times?
   A.   After -- it was a contract in two stages.  There was a
        letter of agreement that they would fund the first
        exploratory trip which I made with Mr Millar to Moscow in
        mid June 1992 ----

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor