Please bear in mind: The purpose of this historical contribution is for studying purposes only, therefore, do not multiply it, as still Crown Copyrights being valid, partially!
Page initiated 16 December
Current status: 24 January 2025
Chapter 1 (since 18 December 2024)
Chapter 2 (since 20 December 2024)
Chapter 3 (since 31 December 2024)
Chapter 4 (since 3 January 2025)
Chapter 5 (since 10 January 2025)
Chapter 6 (since 20 January 2025)
Chapter 7 (since 24 January 2025)
Crown Copyright
KV 2/1947
Schaeffer
Frederick Eugene
PF 66360
KV 2/1947-1, page 4
Crown Copyright
Reference PF 66360
1.
23.1.44. Telegram from Madrid to Foreign Office (F.O.) re Schaeffer. 1a.
27.1.44. Telegram from Foreign Office to Madrid (likely British S.I.S.), in reply to 1a. 2a.
31.1.44. Telegram from Madrid to Foreign Office re Schaeffer. 3a.
10.2.44. Secret Cross-Reference for Schaeffer. 4a.
10.2.44. Intercepted letter from Schaeffer to Dr. Golding 5a.
6.
D.4.a.5. (Home Office?) (Capt. Cook).
This man has given a "B" endorsement in Madrid and will presumably be returning to this country at an early date. It is perhaps a little early to warn the ports about him, but I should be grateful if you would in due course instruct them that he should be served with an order to register with the police under the Arrival from British or Foreign Territory Order 1943.
It may be he is identical with the subject of the trace to at 4A. It is, however, absolutely impossible to check this; and I do not think that anything short of a full scale interrogation on his whole story will enable us to say whether or not Schaeffer is identical, then further steps will be necessary. In the meantime all that I think can be done as far as the ports are concerned is to warn them to pay special attention to him, to give him a strict search, and to interrogate him with care. It may be, of course, that something will emerge at the port which will warrant detention, but it is quite impossible to give the ports any useful pointer so far as the possible trace is concerned.
In any event it will be desirable to interrogate Schaeffer as soon as possible after he has arrived, and it should be glad if you would let me know, when this happens, what address he is proceeding to, as I shall want him to be interrogated without waiting for the usual S.C.O's report and before he has necessarily had time to register with the police under any Order which may be served upon him.
B.1.d./U.K. 13.2.1944 Sgd. A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-1, page 5
Crown Copyright
B.1.d/UK (M.I.5)
As spoken I am returning this file to you, as I feel that it will immeasurably assist the interrogation if they are informed as to the point to which their interrogation should be directed, e.g. is it desired to know whether Schaeffer was in Timbuctoo in 1934m or whether his favourite dish is tripe and onions; would it assist to have details of his parentage; is his escape route of of more than usual interest? Again, suppose some point could be definitely established would it be desirable
for S.C.O. to ask then and there for a detention order?
It appears that he is likely to travel via Lisbon (see 5a) so that S.C.O. Poole and Whitchurch could be instructed by Most Secret letter, and it would be necessary to broadcast a general circular.
Presumably S.I.S. could be asked to keep an eye on him, so that if he went to Gibraltar, we would be informed, and send out a circular if necessary.
D.4a(5) 15 Feb. 1944 Sgd. David? P. Kennedy
8.
D.4.a.?, Captain Kennedy.
Further enquiries which I have made of? B.1. have established that the trace of 4a is almost certainly not identical; and I am satisfied that the purpose of this case it may be ignored.
In the circumstances, I suggest that Schaeffer be treated as an ordinary escaped civilian from France, and that particular attention be paid to his activities, movements and contacts since the French collapse. A strict search, which in my view, can always be justified in cases of persons who have escaped from occupied territory, may be of assistance; but we are not, I think, justified in recommending detention merely on the grounds that this might render easier our subsequent investigations. My personal view is that detention should only be recommended in these cases where there are definite grounds for suspecting that the man might be a German agent, or where there are definite grounds for suspecting that the man might be a German agent, or where there is a reasonable expectation of the detention order leading ultimately to an application being made for permanent detention or restriction un D.R. 18b or 18a.
I do not think that any useful purpose would be served by asking S.I.S. in Madrid to keep an eye on him. results in the past have not been fruitful. Should Schaeffer go to Lisbon, Barrett can be relied upon to submit a report.
I am obtaining his passport papers with a view to getting some further particulars about him. I should be grateful if you would return the file to me.
B.1.d./UK. 18.2.1944. (Sgd.) A Sydney Albert.
20.2.44. L.U. and Summaries on Schaeffer Case. 9a.
KV 2/1947-1, page 6
Crown Copyright
23.2.44. From British Consulate, Lisbon, forwarding repatriation office security report on Schaeffer. 10z.
24.2.44. Extract re Schaeffer from Permit Index and Passport Files. 10a.
11.
D.4.a.5. Captain Kennedy.
You may care to see 9a and 10a which, however, add very little to our knowledge of Schaeffer. I do not think that the traces for Sunyer necessarily reflect upon him as they are clearly old-standing business friends.
You may care also to see the accompanying file for Clark PF 65936 (AOB: no longer available), Y.Box 3468 which contains a good deal of information about the insurance firm of B.W. Noble Ltd.
You may wish to instruct ports against Schaeffer's arrival. However, if you decide to wait until we receive further information as to his return, perhaps you could return the file to me pending this.
B.1.d/UK (sgd) A. Sydney Albert.
MMW
27.2.44
12.
29.2.44. B.1.d/UK note on Schaeffer Case. 12a.
2.3.44. To S.C.O. Whitchurch re expected arrival of Schaeffer. 13a.
2.3.44. To S.C.O. London re expected arrival of Schaeffer. 14a.
15.
B.1.d/UK . Mr. Albert.
As spoken I return the file pending Schaeffer's arrival. I have written to S.C.O.s at Lisbon traffic airports (see 13a and 14a).
If you get advice of Schaeffer's impending arrival, I should be grateful if you would return to me with all speed.
D.4.a.5. 2.3.44. (sgd) K.C. Cook.
KV 2/1947-1, page 7
Crown Copyright
2.3.44. From S.I.S., re report as at 10z, attaching summary of information given by Artist (code-name of Johann Jebsen a double-cross agent; once born extremely rich but apparently not so any longer during the war) (AOB: Please notice my rather extensive contribution on Jebsen and Popov British cover-name Tricycle: https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm ) re Schaeffer. 16a
2.3.44. Extract from S.I.S. (Artist) report re Schaefer. 17a.
18.
B.1.a. Mr. Marriot (M.I.5).
As requested I am passing this file on to you as I understand that you may be interested in Schaeffer. If not, I should be grateful if you would let me have any information which you may have obtained about him.
Whilst we have not much of a story to go on at the moment, I rather feel that he may be a case requiring unusually close attention.
The report at 17a has only just reached me and there may be some Look-Ups to do on it.
B.1.d/UK. 3.3.1944 (sgd) A. Sydney Albert.
5.3.44. B.1.a. (M.I.5) not re Schaeffer's connection with Artist. (= Johannes Jebsen) (https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm )
20.
B.1.d. (Mr. Albert)
You should see the information referred to in the first paragraph of S.I.S.'s letter of 2.3.44. 'Ian', referred to the attached extract, is Wilson' who is at present moment in Lisbon but who will be returning to England during the course of this week. If possible, therefore, I feel that we ought to get Wilson's view before expressing an opinion to S.I.S. Meanwhile, and subject to anything Wilson may say I do not think that Schaeffer should be further interrogated in Lisbon, bit I should be glad of your views. I understand that persons in his position are liable to come here pretty quickly.
B.1.a. 6.3.1944 Sgd. J.H. Marriott
7.3.44. Extract re Schaeffer from S.I.S. report on Artist and Tricycle. 20b.
KV 2/1947-1, page 9
Crown Copyright
12.3.44. L.U. on Information Index for Schaeffer Case. 25a.
13.3.44. S.C.O. Whitchurch Interrogation Report on Schaeffer. 26a.
13.3.44. S.C.O. Whichurch Report on Schaeffer. 27a.
13.3.44. RPS Interrogation Report on Schaeffer. 28a.
13.3.44. L.U. results on Schaeffer Case. 29a.
14.3.44. RPS Receipt for property of Schaeffer. 30a.
15.3.44. To the Governor, Brixton Prison, re collecting of Schaeffer's property. 31a.
15.3.44. L.U. on names found in property of Schaeffer. 32a.
15.3.44. Result of L.U.'s on Schaeffer Case. 33a.
KV 2/1947-1, page 10
Crown Copyright
16.3.44. Internal Memo from B.I. Information to B.1.d/UK re Moldenhauer. (AOB: an German agent originally of Ast Köln (Cologne) He himself was on his own authority at the Iberian Peninsula. He was ordered to return to his base in Köln which he refused to do. He lived finally in Lisbon, as the German legal grip was far less effective. He was was a friend of Johannes Jebsen in Portugal. Johann Jebsen (Artist) asked Moldenhauer to accompany him whereas Jebsen was asked to come to the Ast Office after business hours. Both men were abducted (kidnapped) and brought in big suitcases in a car to Biarritz on about 30 April 1944. From Bordeaux they were transported by aircraft to Berlin. Moldenhauer survived the war, whereas Jebsen (Artist) was ultimately held at a subsidiary of the Sachsenhausen Concentration Camp and the latter did not survived the war.) (https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm ) 34a.
17.3.44. RPS Note for File. 35a.
18.3.44. From Repatriation dept. British Consulate in Lisbon re Schaeffer. 35b.
19.3.44. First Interrogation Report on Schaeffer. (With results of L.U.s) 36a.
20.3.44. To B.1.a. from B.1.d/UK forwarding report as at 36a. 37a.
20.3.44. B.1.d/UK. Note for Schaeffer File. 38a.
20.3.44. B.1.d/UK. Note for Schaeffer File. 39a.
20.3.44. B.1.d/UK. Note for Schaeffer File. 40a.
20.3.44. B.1.d/UK. Note for Schaeffer File. 41a.
KV 2/1947-1, page 12
Crown Copyright
25.3.44. Second Interrogation Report on Schaeffer. (with results of L.U.s) 51a.
26.3.44. B.1.d/UK. Note for Schaeffer Case. 52a.
27.3.44. To B.1.a. forwarding Second Interrogation Report on Schaeffer as at 51a. 53a.
27.3.44. B.1.d/UK. Note for Schaeffer Case. 54a.
28.3.44. B.1.a. note to B.1.d/IK. re Schaeffer Case. 55a.
28.3.44. M.I. 19 forwarding report from Etousa PW & X Dept., re Schaeffer Case. 56a.
31.3.44. To Home Office, re suspension of Detention Order on Schaeffer. 58a.
31.3.44. Form for suspension of Detention Order on Schaeffer. (AOB: I admire the Legal standing of the Home Office! What might have occurred: is - that M.I.5 did apply for a certain detention order and which was agreed upon, but they later applied for a different order (condition) now British law came in force and the Home Office standing was that they did not accept these kinds of tricks under which once an application was made. An they rather formally ordered to set someone free for calling for his legal assistance. This was not what they wanted and it was better to accept suspension of an legal condition. 59a.
KV 2/1947-1, page 13
Crown Copyright
3.4.44. From Home Office, confirming release of Schaeffer from detention. 60a.
6.4.44. B.1.d. Information Section note re Schaeffer Case, to S.O.E. 61a.
10.4.44. Brixton Prison forwarding letter to Schaeffer. 62a.
17.4.44. Internal memo from B.I.a. to B.I.d/UK. 63a.
18.4.44. From S.O.E. in reply to 61a. 63b.
19.4.44. Request for Schaeffer's name for Security List. 64a.
19.4.44. To Schaeffer re letter he wrote to the Governor, Brixton Prison. 65a.
66.
B.1.a., Mr. Marriott.
With reference to 62a., I have replied as a 64a.
I think that after B.1.Inf. have seen this file it should be passed to Mr. Crauford, B.4.b. as it contains a good deal of information about Alfred William Clark (RPS/UK/182) in whom he is at present interested and who had connections with Schaeffer's insurance business in Paris.
B.1.d/UK 19.4.44. (sgd) A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-1, page 14
Crown Copyright
1.5.44. Extract re Schaefer from S.I.S. Artist report. (AOB: on 1st May Artist (AOB: kidnapped Johannes Jebsen reached Biarritz and might even had been transported to Bordeaux) 67a.
5.5.44. Extract re Schaeffer from S.I.S. report. 67b.
6.5.44. From S.I.S. forwarding report from Madrid representative re Schaeffer. 67c.
7.5.44. B.1.d/UK Note for Schaeffer File. 68a.
10.5.44. B.1.b. reply to B.1.d./UK. Note te Lester mentioned in Schaeffer report. 69a.
10.5.44. Censorship comment on letter from Schaeffer to M. George Prudent, Casablanca. 70a.
12.5.44. To Professor Briscoe, Scientific Section, re new ink used for S/W (Secret Writing) 71a.
12.5.44. B.1.d/UK. Note to D,4.b., re Lester mentioned in Schaeffer case. 73a.
12.5.44. B.1.a. Note re Schaeffer's connection with Artist on information obtained from S.I.S. 74a.
AOB: by this time Johannes Jebsen (Artist) might have been already in custody of the Gestapo at the R.S.H.A. Headquarters in Berlin; Prinz Albrechtstraße.
(2) (since 20 December 2024)
KV 2/1947-1, page 15
Crown Copyright
15.5.44. Internal memo from B.1.d. (M.I.5) Information to B.1.d/UK. 75a.
AOB: Minute number 76a, most likely a copy of a letter has been made invisible; as to prevent that others than the once addressees could take notice.
18.5.44. To S.I.S. re Lester mentioned in Schaeffer Case. 78a.
18.5.44. Forwarding censorship comment on intercepted letter from Schaeffer to Lisbon, requesting testing for S/W (secret writings) on original. (No evidence of S/W found 20.5.44) 79a.
(AOB: letters passing these kinds of checks, could often no longer be passed on, due to the intense use of various chemicals)
KV 2/1947-1, page 16
Crown Copyright
80.
B.1.a., Mr. Astor.
As promised, I am sending you this file, which I would be grateful if you would return as soon as possibly.
You will see that I am still making some inquiries about Schaeffer who, generally speaking, is not particularly desirable type of person, though I adhere to the opinion that he is not a German agent.
Incidentally, it may be worth putting it on record that a contact of Jone has known Schaeffer for a considerable number of years and was talking about him recently: it then appeared that Schaeffer had not told us that he served for one period in the German Army. Jones is obtaining further particulars about Schaeffer from his friend, who is a thoroughly reliable person, and if the result warrants it we may decide to have a further interview with Schaeffer.
In the meantime, I feel very strongly - and Wilson will probably agree - that on no account should he be given any confidential job or information.
B.1.d/UK. 18.5.55. (Sgd.) A. Sydney Albert.
20.5.44. To General Register & Record Office of Shipping & Seaman re Lester. 81a.
2?.5.44. To B.3.a. (M.I.5) re Schaeffer's address as on letter at 76a. 82a.
83.
B.1.a., Mr. Marriott. (D.I.W. Is this really a matter for us? (no) If not the B.1.Registry should should be informed vide extract beneath
You may wish to see the attached Ministry of Labour papers (76b)/this slip.) applying for Government employment.
May I have your views on the case as soon as possible please?
C.3 (War Rooms?). 22.5.44. (sgd) D.L.R. Osborn.
25.5.44. From General Register & Record Office of Shipping & Seaman in reply. 83b. to 81a.
KV 2/1947-1, page 17
Crown Copyright
84.
RPS/B.1.d., Mr Albert (A. Sidney Albert).
This seems to be your matter. I have told the Registry to amend the statement that appears immediately below the L.U. slip.
B.1.a/24.5.44. (sgd) D.I. Wilson (M.I.5)
C.3. (War Room) (Mr. Osborn).
We are partly responsible, I am afraid, for Schaeffer applying to have his name on the Appointment Register.
Schaeffer was on arrival detained at Brixton and was interrogated by us. Subsequently, after his release, he wrote a letter to Mr. Jones through the Governor of Brixton saying that he was without a job and could we suggest something. I wrote in reply a formal letter suggesting that he should apply to the Appointments Department of the Ministry of Labour, Sardinia Street.
While we came to the conclusion that Schaeffer was not a |German agent, his recent activities in France did suggest to us that he was perfectly content to collaborate so long as it served his purpose, and I should not be easy if he were to obtain a confidential job of any kind, or in fact any government employment.
D.4.b. (War Room C1?)
I think that it is well worth following up the man mentioned bt the Registrar General of Shipping, provided this can be done without direct enquiry from the man himself; and I am wondering whether you can make further enquiries with a view to tracing the present whereabouts and if possible the movements this year of Mr. Harry Frederick Edward Lester, from the Mercantile Marine Office, Liverpool.
Perhaps in due course you can return these papers to me with the result of any inquiry which you may make through E.1.b. who could, if necessary, I understand, issue a "man wanted" card.
B.1.d/UK. 27.5.44 A. Sydney Albert
KV 2/1947-1, page 18
87.
Crown Copyright
E.1.b.
I think this inquiry about an individual suspect falls to be dealt with with your section.
Without your further opinion I do not feel inclined to ask S.C.O. Liverpool to approach the Pool there, since R.G.S.S. have already told us that neither Liverpool nor London know of his of his present whereabouts.
I presume B.1.d./UK do not wish to show their hand by making enquiries at the man's home address, but I should have thought that this could have been covered up by the R.S.L.O. and Police making an investigation into a lost identity document' or something of that sort.
D.4.b. 28.5.44. Sgd. Bertram H. Smith.
31.5.44. To General Register & Record Officer of Shiping & Seaman re Lester. 87b.
2.6.44. From S.I.S. in reply to 78a, re addressee of letter from Schaeffer. 88a.
3.6.44. To Ministry of Labour & National Service in reply to 76b, re employment application for Schaeffer. 89a.
7.6.44. From general register & Record Officer of Shipping & Seaman re Lester (AOB: is Schaeffer identical to Lester??) 90a.
9.6.44. From S.I.S. re Schaeffer. 91a.
92.
B.1.d/UK.
I fear we have arrived at a dead-end. If Lester has been in H.M.T. Otranto since December and is still in her, he cannot have been nearer to Lisbon than Gibraltar. She is a 20,000 ton Troopship.
E.1.b. 10.6.44. C.W. Foster.
KV 2/1947-1, page 19
Crown Copyright
12.6.44. B.1.d/UK Internal memo, re information at 91a. 92a.
??.6.44 To S.I.S. in reply to 91a. 94a.
12.6.44. To Miss Vera Ross, re interview arranged for June 15th at Devonshire House. 95a.
13.6.44. B.1.d/UK Note re information received from S.I.S. as at 91a. 96a.
4.7.44. To Schaeffer suggesting further interview at Devonshire House. 97a.
4.7.44. From General register & Records Office of Shipping & Seaman re Lester. 98a.
13.7.44. From Schaeffer forwarding letter received from M. Georges Prudent (summary of letter attached) 99a.
14.7.44. Third Interrogation Report on Schaeffer. 100a.
16.7.44. B.1.d/UK Note on Third Interrogation report on Schaeffer. 101a.
17.7.44. To Schaeffer in reply to 99a. 102a.
File Closed.
attorney (solicitor?)
KV 2/1947-1, page 21 (minute 102a)
Crown Copyright
17th July, 1944
Dear Sir,
I have to thank you for sending me the original letter dated 13 March, 1944, received by you from Mr. George Prudent.
I am returning the same to you herewith.
J.R. Jones.
Major
F. Schaeffer, Esq.,
c/o/ C.E. Golding and Co., Ltd. (AOB: Schaeffer's legal attorney or solicitor?)
Regina House,
5, Queen's Street
London E.C.4.
KV 2/1947-1, page 22 (minute 101a)
Crown Copyright
Note.
The third interrogation report at 100a adds little to our knowledge of Schaeffer and his activities and contacts beyond the fact that he did, at one time, serve in the German Army. He was to blame for concealing this, but his motive is understandable and in my view is not of itself suspicious.
Schaeffer has elaborated further the story of his escape from France and this, if anything, tends to confirm his original story which has now been to some extent checked from other sources.
He has also given further details about his contact with Moldenhauer in Madrid. →
(AOB: originally engaged at Ast Köln (Cologne), he remained on the Iberian Peninsula illegally and he was ordered to return to Ast Köln, but refused to obey to this order. He moved to Portugal and became friends with Johann Jebsen ( https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm ) Maybe they were friends from much earlier times. On about the end of April 1944 (about the 30th) he was invited to visit Leiter I K.O. Portugal Dr. Schreiber at their offices; but about 1900 hours when all personnel went home. For Jebsen's own safety he called on Moldenhauer to join (assist) him. Shortly after they were inside the office building, both Jebsen and Moldenhauer had been kidnapped drugged and packed in two big suitcases mounted on a car roof. They left Lisbon such that they crossed the Portuguese and Spanish border during night-time. They arrived at Biarritz the next day and were kept in captivity and they were brought to Bordeaux and conveyed to Berlin. Apparently Moldenhauer survived the war, but after Jebsen got prisoner of the R.S.H.A. and likely was handed over to the Gestapo. He ended up in a subsidiary camp of Sachsenhausen. Where he was picked up in February 1945 and since no exact information does exist, but he disappeared and since no-one has seen him again.
→ At first sight it seems that he has slightly shifted his ground so far as the financial transactions between Moldenhauer and himself (= Schaeffer) are concerned: originally he rather implied that Moldenhauer, in giving him money, was repaying an old debt; now he suggests that there was no question of a debt but that Moldenhauer was anxious, for reasons of his own, to advance a sum of money to him. Our own sources rather tend to confirm this reasoning of Schaeffer's and it seems very likely that Moldenhauer by sending money through intermediaries to Schaeffer in Lisbon, was able in doing so to convince his German masters that he had, in fact, recruited an agent to whom he had, in fact. paid money.
I adhere to the opinion which I originally expressed that in fact Schaffer was never recruited by Moldenhauer (AOB: Moldenhauer was illegally staying on the Iberian Peninsula, and he did not possess a title to act as a legal agent! Factually - Moldenhauer stayed entirely illegally in Madrid and after an urgent order to return to Ast Köln Moldenhauer was forced to act hidden as he was considered being "most wanted" by the German authorities staying in Portugal and I think that it is very likely that whatever Schaeffer suspected, he did not in fact know that Moldenhauer was working for the German I.S. (Intelligent Service; but engaged at Ast Köln!)
In my view Schaeffer is not a German agent. At the same time my opinion of his general untrustworthiness and undesirability has been enhanced by the omission of Schaeffer to tell us originally that he served in the German Army. My view that he should not be given any confidential post is to that extent reinforced.
B.1.d/U.K. 16.7.44 A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-1, page 23a
Crown Copyright
Reference M.I.6.
Secret.
PF 66360 - Y. Box. Devonshire House 12.7.1944.
Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene.
Nationality: British subject (due to his birth in England)
Born: 6.12.1899 at Dulwich.
Occupation: Insurance Broker.
Third Report.
1. At his first interrogation Schaefer said that he and his parents lived at the Hague (Den Haag in NL) until 1918 when the family moded to Stuttgart, and that he himself went to school at Stuttgart wuntil 1920 when the family moved to Vienna. These dates he now admits are not correct and had been devised so as to omit any mention of Schaeffer's service with the German army. The facts are that the family moved from The Hague to Stuttgart in 1917. In August of that year Schaeffer was called up for service with the 120th Infantry Regiment at Stuttgart, but through his father's intervention he was transferred in December 1917 to the 13th Artillery Regiment at Canstatt. In May 1918 he was transferred to Ammunition Column No. 384 (or 385) at Ravensburg owing to the fact that his mother was British, and the policy of the Germans was not to allow soldiers of mixed parentage in the front line. He served with the Ammunition Column in Belgium and the neighbourhood of Valenciennes until the Armistice in 1918 (11.11.1918) when he retired with his regiment to Liege and Köln (Cologne) and attended a commercial school at Stuttgart.
KV 2/1947-1, page 23b
Crown Copyright
GoogleEarth
Bietigheim
PF 66360.
Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene.
2. In 1920 he was placed by his father with a wood merchant Faber at Bietigheim ↑to acquire the rudiments of business. Later in the same year he served for a time with Werner & Pfleiderer of Cannstatt in a machine factory. Owing to his mother's illness the family moved to Austria at the end of 1920 or early 1921 and he followed the family at the end of 1921. Schaeffer explained that he deliberately omitted to refer to his military service because he felt uncomfortable about the matter especially as he found himself on arrival in this country at Brixton (Prison), and that though he realised that his service with the German army was compulsory he felt that the least said about it the better. He now realises that this non-disclosure might effect the reliability of the rest of his story but he emphasises that he has nothing else to hide which would cause him embarrassment to disclose.
3. Schaeffer met members of the underground organisation at St. Etienne at the house of Mr.? and Mme. Sillon in the middle of November 1943. Since his arrival in England Schaffer had visisted Mme. Sillon's father Leonard Scarth whose address used to be:-
9 Bow Churchyard
London, E.C.4.
but he has now moved to another office in the city. He was surprised that his daughter had married Zavier Sillon. Schaeffer had heard nothing of Mme Sillon's attempted escape to Switzerland and he had not been aware that she had been in trouble with either the French or German authorities. He had met Mme. Sillon at the golf club at Aix-les-Bains in 1942 and again in August 1943. Both she and her husband were prominent members of the club. As to the persons who where present at the conference he added the following comments:-
1. Pere Pinson. Except that Pinson appeared very egotistic he could could add no further information. He had not thought that Mme. Sillon was under his influence, nor had he considered that
Pinson was in any way untrustworthy.
. . .
. . .
KV 2/1947-1, page 29c
Crown Copyright
Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene.
Conclusion.
12. Apart from Schaeffer's own disclosure of his military service, which owing to circumstances may be understandable, and although lacking a candour Schaeffer's story seems on the whole to be straightforward. He was quite definitely on his guard with Moldenhauer, which friendship in the circumstances he did not wish to enlarge upon, his main concern being to get out of Spain without complications. Moreover Schaeffer is not himself the type who would communicate his plans to any irresponsible and unformed personality.
13. Please read this section yourself.
AOB: what is completely kept in the dark was, that the Amt IV in Madrid hunted upon Moldenhauer, as he was on the Iberian Peninsula "un-authorised" thus from the German point of view illegally.
Moldenhauer escaped to Portugal where he also neglected orders to return to Ast Köln (Cologne). This was a reason why he joined (searched) contact with Johannes Jebsen in Estoril (Portugal).
(3) (since 31 December 2024)
KV 2/1947-1, page 30 (minute 99a)
Crown Copyright
F. Schaeffer c/o
C.E. Golding & Co. Ltd.
Regina House
5, Queen Street
London E.C.4.
13th July 1944.
Major J.R. Jones
War Office,
Flat 514, Room 50,
Devonshire House,
Mayfair Street,
London W.1.
Dear Sir,
Following our conversation of yesterday, I enclose herewith original of the letter, dated 13th March 1944, I received from Mr. Georges Prudent.
Sgd.?
Schaeffering?
KV 2/1947-1, page 31 (minute 99a)
Crown Copyright
Summary of a letter dated 13th March, 1944 from Georges Prudent, Casa Militaire, Casablanca. to Frederick Eugene Schaeffer.
- - - -
Prudent refers to his arrival in Spain of 16th January, 1944, his internment in a concentration camp from the 25th January, and his release to Madrid on 20th February.
There he asked the British Consul for Schaeffer and was referred to Schaeffer's hotel, but found that Schaeffer had already departed five days previously. The next day Prudent was sent to Gibraltar where he took a boat to Casablanca.
He asked Schaeffer to look for Lt. parachutiste Basset (or Lt. Mary) de la Mission Armada, and to give news of Prudent to the B.C.R.A., London (Bureau Militaire Francais). He asked Schaeffer to request Lt. Basset to do all in his power to get Prudent into the service.
KV 2/1947-1, page 32
Crown Copyright
4th July, 1944
Confidential.
Dear Forster,
With further reference to your letter (E.1.b./Gen/1024/9) of the 31st May, I am now informed that Harry Frederick Edward Lester, Dis.A.No. 194135 was discharged from the "Ontranto" O.N. 146025, on the 3rd June, 1944 with instructions to report to the Merchant Navy Reserve Pool at Tilbury on the 14th June, 1944.
His address was then stated to be 40, Raphael Avenue, Tilbury, Essex.
Yours sincerely,
??
C.W. Forster, Esq.,
Box No. 500 (War Room?) (E.1.b?)
Parliament Street B.O.,
London, S.W. 1
(E.1.b.B1d/UK)
KV 2/1947-1, page 35
Crown Copyright
B.1.d/UK. - Mr. A. Sidney Albert.
The information given at (minute) 91a, most probably came from the source that I mentioned to you two or three weeks ago who had known Schaeffer and his sister at Stuttgart and who had seen Schaeffer after his release from Brixton. It was he who told me about Schaeffer's compulsory service in the German Army about 1918. He gave it as his opinion, however, that from a security point of view he would not consider him suspect. At the same time he is obviously not a man who should be entrusted with any work of a confidential nature.
As a matter of principle, if not on any other ground, Schaeffer might be interrogated again on the point of his military service and in the hope of obtaining further information.
13.6.44 J.R. Jones (Major)
KV 2/1947-1, page 37 (minute 94a)
Crown Copyright
PF 66360/B1d?UK (M.I.5 or War Room) 12th June 1944.
Dear (name deleted no someone at S.I.S. = M.I.6)
I (= Mr. A. Sidney Albert) was interested to get your CX (concerns always S.I.S./M.I.6. secret file reference) (=) CX/12650 (= group serial number)/9470 (= particularly pointing at Schaeffer)/V.c. = short designation of the handling case officer) of 9.6.44 about Frederick Eugene Schaeffer.
We too learnt about Schaeffer's in the German army (foregoing war 1918) - a fact which he did not disclose during his interrogation at Brixton - and we had intended to arrange a further interview at Devonshire House with a view to clarifying this. (leally wasting their time).
Schaeffer was under a good deal of suspicion when he arrived in this country, and you may have seen the correspondence which I have had with (S.I.S.) Section V (= S.I.S. section espionage) about him. I feel fairly satisfied, however, that despite his contact with Moldenhauer, and the latter's claim to have recruited him, he is not a German agent. At the same time I agree with you that his general background and character make him a most unsuitable candidate for any confidential post.
Yours sincerely,
Mr. A. Sidney Albert
S.I.S.
ASA (= Mr. A. Sidney Albert)/WHS (=?)
KV 2/1947--1, page 42 (minute 90a)
Crown Copyright
G.R.4 (b) BP.
General Register and Record Office
of Shipping and Seaman,
Llantrisant Road,
Cardiff.
7th June, 1944.
Your ref. EIB/Gen/1024/9.
Confidential.
Dear Mr. Forster,
I have arranged for you to be advised of the next movement of Harry Frederick Edward Lester, R. 194135 (AOB: it becomes clear to me - that the imagine Mr. Lester is equal to our Mr. Schaeffer. The cover-name Lester was chosen for the case that Mr. Schaeffer would have become an British agent) as requested in your letter of the 31st May.
I must draw your attention to a point which escaped me when writing you on the 24th May. I did not mention his last ship as I assumed that, having called at the Mercantile Marine Office, Liverpool (for a clothing book) he must have been discharged and a report of the discharge had not yet reached us.
I find now, however, that the ship in question, the "Otranto" 146025, put in at Liverpool about the 23rd March and stayed there until at least the 27th March, so that Lester's presence in Liverpool is explained. So far we are aware he was in the "Otranto"when she left Liverpool and. according to our records, still is.
It may be that, as a result of these further facts, you no longer have any interest in this particular Lester. Details of his recent movements are as follows:-
.W. Forster, Esq.,
Box No. 500, (War Room)
Parliament Street B.O.
London S.W.1.
KV 2/1947-1, page 43b
Crown Copyright
27th July, 1943 - Granted leave of absence from Tilbury Pool on health grounds.
5th August " - Joined "Empire Audrey" at Tilbury as Greaser.
17th August " - Discharged Tilbury V.G.V.G.
19th September " - Joined "Orion" 164493 at Glasgow as Oiler.
10th November " - Discharged Tilbury sick (Medical Certificate produced)
2nd December " - Joined "Otranto" 146025 at Liverpool as Oiler and appears to be still serving.
Yours sincerely,
J.B. Rushworth.
Please digest yourself:
It is believed ...
KV 2/1947-1, page 44 (minute 89a)
Crown Copyright
3 June 1944.
C.3./DLRO/PF 66360
Dear Roddam,
Frederick Eugene Schaeffer.
With reference to your enquiry of 16th May (minute 76b), Schaeffer recently returned to this country from France and, while we are fairly satisfied that he is not engaged on any subversive activity, we think it would be inadvisable to employ him in a position entailing access to secret information.
I should be grateful if you would inform me in the event of Schaeffer obtaining Government employment.
Yours sincerely,
Sgd.
D.L.R. Osborn
KV 2/1947-1, page 45
Crown Copyright
CX/12650/3646/V.D.4. (AOB: concerns Frederick Eugene Schaeffer. V.D.4 is the one handling the case inside S.I.S. / M.I.6)
Dear Albert (Mr. Albert Sidney Albert L.R.C.)
With reference to your letter P.F.66360/B1d/UK of the 18th of May 1944, the address 53 Rua do Alecrim, Lisbon, must have been put on the I.B. List a very long time ago and in connection with Jose Carlos Veiga, we have no other name listed at this address.
We have no trace of no. 13 Rua do Alecrim being listed.
From the listing of address there does not appear to be any adverse reflection of Schaeffer.
Yours sincerely,
for H.A.P. Philby
A. Sydney Albert, Esq.,
M.I.5.
(AOB: Philby (nickname Kim) whom was for some time before the war and the rest of his life spying on behalf of Russia, and is considered belonging to one of the "Cambridge Five" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Five )
(3)
KV 2/1947-1, page 47 (minute 83b)
Crown Copyright
G.R.4 (b).
24th May 1944.
Our Ref. E.1.b.(War room?)/Gen/550/9.
Dear Mr. Forster,
In reply to your letter dated 20th (minute 81a) May, the only active Merchant Seaman named Lester, who has for one of the Christian names Frederick, is Harry Frederick Edward Lester, born 2nd May 1922, Dis. A. No. R. 1941355, resident at Raphael Avenue, Tilbury.
Whilst it is possibly for this man to have been at Lisbon on the 18th April, it seems unlikely as, on the 24th March, he was at Liverpool Mercantile Marine Office. This is the last report we have regarding him and neither the Liverpool pool nor the Tilbury Pool know his present whereabouts.
Yours sincerely,
J.B. Rushworth
C.W. Forster, Esq.,
Box No. 500. (War Rooms)
Parliament Street B.O.,
London. S.W.1.
KV 2/1947-1, page 48 (minute 82a)
Crown Copyright
B.3.a. (Mrs. Hicks) (M.I.5)
I spoke to you recently about this letter which was submitted as the writer had been placed on the C.S.L. by me.
On having a look-up I learned that the addressee's address had been placed on the I.B. List by S.I.S. casts any reflection on the writer. It seems likely that the address in question is a block of offices and that its placement on the I.B. List has no bearing upon the writer of the letter which I have had tested for S/W (Secret ink writing) without result.
You may now wish to resubmit this letter to S.I.S. in which case I shall be grateful if you will quote my letter to them of the 18th May 1944 (S.I.S' secret reference number) CX/12650/3646/V.D.4).
B.1.d/UK. (War Rooms) 22.5.1944 A. Sidney Albert.
(4) (since 3 January 2025)
KV 2/1947-1, page 51 (minute 78a)
Crown Copyright
P.E.C, 11.5.1944
Postal & Telegraph Censorship
United Kingdom
Type of Mail Submission No :
Terminal/Surface Date: Lon/58870/44
From: To:
F. Schaeffer R. De Figueirido Pancada
c/o/ C.E. Golding & Co Ltd Continental de Ressegenros
Regina House 53, Rua do Alecrim
5, Queen Street Lisbon
London. E.C.4 Portugal
Date of letter Language :
(or Postmark) 27.4.44 French
Original Letter: Submitted To:
Submitted. Original to M.I.5.
Seen by: Naval Adviser Air Adviser M.I.12
Operating Unit Section Examiner D.A.C. Date
BOX/TRA T.3. VI 1304 for E.W.C. 371 10.5.44.
Writer Sec/List.
Writer excuses his silence since his departure from Lisbon but found much work awaiting his return. He asks to be remembered to a number of persons and thanks for the kindness shown to him while in Portugal.
The remainder of the letter deals with Insurance matters.
F.J.A.C. 628
KV 2/1947-1, page 53 (minute 79a)
Crown Copyright
Look-Up Form
In Connection with
Name Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene
Nationality British No PF 66360
No. Name and Particulars
1. R. De Figueir Pancada, of Portugal.
Director of Continental de Ressegeros,
insurance brokers in Lisbon.
2. 53, Rua do Alecrim, Lisbon
Business address of (1).
No. L.U. Required in C.R.
B.1.d./U.K. (War Rooms?)
17.5.44
KV 2/1947-1 page 56 (minute 78a)
Crown Copyright
PF 66360/B.1.d/U.K. (War Rooms?) 18th May 1944.
Dear Philby (AOB: one of the Russian spies with S.I.S and M.I.5.; known as one of the Cambridge Five: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Five ),
Further to my letter of the 12th May 1944 about Frederick Lester and his possible connection with Frederick Schaeffer, the Censorship have intercepted a letter written by Schaeffer addressed to R. De Figueiro Pancada, Continental de Ressegeros, 53 Rua do Alecrim, Lisbon, Portugal.
The letter appears to have been written by Schaeffer to one of his insurance contacts in Lisbon. He did not mention the addressee by name during his interrogation, but he did tell us about his contact with the company, with which, we know from independent evidence, he was doing business before the war. The letter looks quite harmless, but I find that the address 13 Rua do Alecrim, was placed at your request on the I.B. List for reasons with which I am unfamiliar.
I should be very grateful if you could let me know why the address was placed on the I.B. List and whether the fact that it was is likely to reflect in any way on Schaeffer. It seems very likely that the address is in reality a block of offices, in which case your reason for placing the address on the Black List may have no bearing upon Schaefer.
In the meantime, I am having the letter tested for secret (ink) writing.
Yours sincerely,
A. Sydney Albert.
H.A.R. Philby, Esq.,
S.I.S.
ASA/JE
KV 2/1947-1, page 59 (minute 77a)
Crown Copyright
D.4.b. (War Room C?) (Mr. Schmith).
I have received some information from (S.I.S.) Section V (= S.I.S. Espionage) that a known member of the German I.S. (= Intelligence Serivce) in Madrid has recently recruited a man named Frederick Lester (AOB: Decarded 11 Nov 1954 removed from suspected list) who, he has stated, was waiting in Lisbon for a boat to England. The report which we received was sent on 18th April last, and one can assume, I think, that Lester was in Lisbon on or shortly before that date.
Section V. have supplied the information with all the reserve as it is well known that the German I.S. man who has made the claim is a notorious exaggerator, and they feel that it is more than likely that the claim which he has made to have recruited Lester is a figment of his imagination - a view with which B.1.b. (M.I.5) are inclined to agree.
At the same time we should, I think, make efforts to see whether anybody named Lester has arrived in this country from Lisbon, from say the beginning of April, and I should be grateful if you could check this for me so far as seamen are concerned. The fact that the report states that Lester was waiting for a boat to England suggests that, if he exists at all, he might be a seaman, as otherwise he would presumably have come over by sea fro Gibraltar or have flown from Lisbon. Moreover, D.4.a5. have no record of any likely Lester who has arrived from Lisbon within the period.
B.1.d./U.K. (War Room) 12.5.44 (Sgd) A. Sydney Albert (War Room. C.?)
KV 2/1947-1, page 62a (minute 74a)
Crown Copyright
B.1.d. Mr. A. Sydney Albert. (M.I.5 / War Room)
In view of our conversation this afternoon you may be interested in the following extract from an S.I.S. (M.I.6) Lisbon report on a meeting with Artist (AOB: real Johann Jebsen, once incredible rich, but apparently due to the Mondial state of affairs, after the war started on the 4th of September 1939) ( https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm ). which took place on 28.4.44 and which has just come to hand:- (AOB: this happening took place a day before Jebsen and Moldenhauer had been kidnapped by Dr. Schreiber in the offices of the K.O.Portugal; just after 1900 when the offices were empty thus without personnel; their final destination was Berlin)
"C.E.
Moldenhauer. (AOB: factually he was a real deserter. He managed to come to the Iberian Peninsula, and was committed in tricky business. At as certain point he was directed to return to Ast Köln (Cologne), which order he disobeyed. In Spain he could not remain, because the German Police acted there on Germany's behalf. He therefore chose Portugal and found some refuge under Jebsen's being. But Moldenhauer was caught together with Jebsen, in Dr. Alois' office)
Moldenhauer is in Lisbon, stayed with Artist. (AOB: the author likely did not know the true situation. Johannes Jebsen lived in Estoril about 80 km from Lisbon near the beach) He has been sent here to contact Schaeffer, and was disappointed to find that the latter had already left. He is in a quandary as to whether to tell Cologne this. If he pretends that he has seen Schaeffer and has given him an ink and final instructions, he will be in the happy position of having an agent in England, which would keep him out of the Army at least - even though the present postal restrictions would make it impossible for the agent to sent in reports. On the other hand, Köln (Cologne) might find out that Schaeffer had gone to England before he arrived in Lisbon. Artist (Johann Jebsen) will advise him to tell the truth, and to blame Köln (Cologne) for sending him on a goose chase.
The Abwehr has refunded the money paid by Moldenhauer via Artist to Schaffer (2,000 escudos).
The ink to be given to Schaeffer was known as "Philip" but apparently it was finally intended to give him a higher grade one. As an unpaid agent acting out of friendship, Schaeffer would be given the best possible.
I asked Artist (AOB: when did he?) if he knew the name of Moldenhauer's Swiss girl friend from the International Red Cross in San Sebastian, who was shortly to travel to the U.K. Artist (Johannes Jebsen) was intrigued that I should have heard the story, and commented that - must have good sources in San Sebastian; Moldenhauer had mentioned the girl, but not her name. He has not approached her tp work in anyway and was not intending to do so.
(Note: If a woman answering to the above description applies for a visa or air priority I will let you know by telegram)"
Sgd. D.I. Wilson (M.I.5)
B.1.a. (M.I.5) 12.5.44
KV 2/1947-1, page 66a + KV 2/1947-1, page 67b (minute 72a)
Crown Copyright
12th May 1944.
Dear Philby,
Thank you for your letter of the 6th May 1944m under (S.I.S.) CX/12650/3646/V.D.4. about Frederick Lester.
We too have no trace of this man, but I am making further enquiries in case he may conceivably be something more than a figment of Moldenhauer's imagination.
I am not quite clear why you think the name Schaeffer might come out in the form of Frederick Lester (being decarded on 11 Nov 1954). It seems to me conceivable, however, that Lester should read Sylvester, the name in Most Secret Sources which you will remember we thought referred to Schaeffer.
The difficulty I find in linking up the subject of the report with Schaefer is that the latter arrived in this country on 11.3.44, by air. Lester was apparently waiting for a boat to England at what appears to have been a date later then the time when Schaeffer left.
The most likely explanation, as you say, is that Lester does not exist except in Moldenhauer's imagination.
Yours sincerely,
A. Sidney Albert.
H.A.R. Philby, Esq.
S.I.S.
ASA/WES
AOB: please bear always in mind: that the KV 2/xxxx series do run in a reversed succession. The only matter which actually is in succession of the page numberings are the actual Minutes sheet page num
KV 2/1947-1, page 72 (minute 68a)
Crown Copyright
Note for File.
Name Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene R.P.S. PF 66360
I spoke to Capt. Cook. He had no trace of anyone named Lester, who had arrived from Lisbon during this year, with the exception of one Marc Lester (French), an accredited agent of S.I.S. who arrived by direct operation.
I spoke to Major Mott (S.O.E.), who knew of no one of this name employed at S.O.E.
KV 2/1947-1, page 73 (minute 67c)
Crown Copyright
S.I.S.
CX/12650/3646/V.D.4. of 6th May 1944
Dear Albert,
We have received the attached report from our Madrid representative which may possibly tie up with the Schaeffer case.
Our source who is a good one writes under date April 18th.
We have no likely trace of anyone called Frederick Lester (Decarded 11 Nov 1954). but the name Schaeffer might quite possibly come out in that form.
The report of course would not incriminate Schaeffer, who might still be a purely notional source. The destination of the ink, one feels, would more probably prove to be a Madrid lavatory!
Yours sincerely, RCC? for Graham Greene
For H.A.R. Philby.
Sydney Albert, Esq., M.I.5.
(5) (since 10 January 2025)
KV 2/1947-1, page 92 (minute 60a)
Crown Copyright
G.2 Division,
Home Office,
Whitehall,
S.W.1.
882,272.
3rd. April, 1944.
Dear Baxter, (Lieut-Colonel LRC , War Rooms division C),
Thank you for your letter of 31st March (ref: RPS/PR/B1d/UK) confirming your telephone communication of the same date to the effect that your enquiries in regard to Frederick Eugene Schaeffer were completed, and that from the security point of view there was no need for his detention to be maintained. Authority was accordingly given for Schaeffer's immediate release.
Yours sincerely,
?? Stuart.
Lieut-Colonel H.J. Baxter.
AOB: I mostly admire the Home Office legal point of view, which were sometimes in conflict with opinions inside M.I.5. But they (H.O.) were ruling the waves and not the Secret Services. The reasons were mainly: that the Home Office had the final word in bringing some in to England and also they provided the necessary documents for someone's detention in England. They therefore were legally entitled to recall or change these documents. And without them someone wasn't even be entitled to be - or remain - in England. And therewith ended the legal status of someone's detention and the legal power of the British Secret Services. A most beautiful (sparkling) example is given in: https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-1722-1724-hellmuth.htm Please enjoy reading the disaster which M.I.5 had provoked themselves - in their eager to catch someone but lacking someone possessing a superior brain: https://www.cdvandt.org/KV-2-1722-1724-Hellmut-Argentina-V2.pdf pages 74, 75 and 76. Their only way out was, to let the question 'bleeding dead', and not pushing further; though living in an incorrect and illegal status until Hellmuth had to be released (about August 1945) and his possessions had to be returned, though which the British Government had sold some in the meantime.
KV 2/1947-1, page 98 (minute 55a)
Crown Copyright
B1d/Mr. A. Sydney Albert.
Many thanks for sending me a copy of the further interrogation of Schaeffer, I have made an extract for my file of the references to Moldenhauer and return the papers herewith.
In view of the second interrogation I agree that we have not sufficient ground to persuade the Home Office to make a detention order against Schaeffer, and unless any further evidence should come to light I think we must regard hi a cleared.
D.I. Wilson
B.1.a. (M.I.5) 28.3.44
AOB: you might now have got an impression about the essential 'key function' the British Home Office possessed.
AOB: please always remember: that the KV 2/xxxx page successions are, with progressing PDF page numbers, you are running backwards in time!
KV 2/1947-1, page 100a + 101b (minute 53a)
Crown Copyright
B.1.a. (Mr. Wilson) (M.I.5).
You may care to see a copy of the further interrogation report on Schaeffer. I also send a copy of the first report in case you wish to refer to it.
With reference to paragraph a of the second report, Schaeffer's contact, is a man who is, according to L.R.C. (War Rooms) records, pro-German and supposed to be in touch with the Allied Intelligence, possibly playing a double game. It may be that you know him. I am awaiting the result of a look-up in B.1 (= M.I.5) and S.I.S. (AOB: Secret Intelligence Service, operating outside England and part of M.I.6) have some - not, I think, important information, which I have still to receive. In my case Schaeffer's association with these two men seems to have been quite casual.
With regard to paragraphs 2 and 3 of the second report, in my view Schaeffer has now given a satisfactory account of the receipt of the money sent at Moldenhauer's request by Artist's (= Johannes Jebsen) intermediary. The fact that Schaeffer mentioned mentioned, of his own accord, the personal debt due to him from Moldenhauer and outstanding since 1939 is, I think, a point in his favour; and if the circumstances surrounding this debt can - and I feel that they should - be accepted, then the method of its discharge by Moldenhauer is also satisfactorily accounted for, and moreover does not conflict with the information given by Artist. ( https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm )
Schaeffer has also, in my opinion, now given a circumstantial and likely account of al the circumstances surrounding his contact with Moldenhauer in Madrid, His description of Moldenhauer's character conforms with the information which we have about it, and the terms of their former relationship suggest that Moldenhauer would have been very reluctant to approach Schaeffer to work for the German I.S. (Intelligence Service) unless he were very sure of his grounds.
In the light of what Schaeffer has now said, I find it difficult to believe that he was in fact approached to to work as an agent by Moldenhauer, or that he knew that Moldenhauer himself was so working. This view is, I think, still consistent with the possibility that Moldenhauer has claimed Schaefer as a recruit so far as his employers (actually AST Köln (Cologne) in Brussels are concerned, and has recouped himself out of the Abwehr funds so far as payment of his dept to Schaeffer is concerned.
AOB: factually Moldenhauer was a "deserter" who resisted and disobeyed orders to return instantly to Ast Köln, which he openly ignored and because the German Gestapo had legal power in Madrid, he slept-away to Lisbon and might also have stayed in Estoril where Johannes Jebsen (Artist) lived.
I should like to have your views on the case in view of the latest interrogation report. At the moment I can see no good reason for maintaining the detention order against Schaeffer, nor do I think that it would be easy to persuade the Home Office to do so in view of the fact that an 18b order would be necessary. A case might be made for some sort of restriction order under 18a, but there is really wvry little material to justify this once the grounds on which out suspicions were originally based - contacts with Moldenhauer - are considered to be no longer valid.
I spoke again today to Mr. Graham Green of Section V (= section espionage), who was still not received the Madrid report or any information from the other side.
B.1.d/U.K. (War Room?) 27.3.44 A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-1, page 103a (minute 51a)
Crown Copyright
Distribution: File
Ref.
M.I.6
RPS/RR/331 Brixton Prison 25.3.44.
Schaeffer Frederick Eugene.
Nationality: British subject by birth
Born: 6.12.1899 at Dulwich
Occupation: Insurance Broker.
Second Report.
1. In further elucidation of his story of his escape to Spain, Schaeffer gave the following information:
a. Ghislaine Connichie of Elderly Road, Market Drayton, is the sister of the men nicknamed "Gross' by Schaeffer and Chevraux.
b. Schaeffer found it difficult to judge Pinson's age because of his beard, but thought it was between 25 and 30. He was impressed by him as a coming man, very keen to establish new contacts and begged Schaeffer to give him a letter of instruction to M. Bollaert, former Prefect of Lyons.
c. M. & Mme Sillon. Schaeffer had met both at the Golf Club at Aix-les-Bains, but it was to Mme. Sillon, as an Englishwoman, that he wrote for chocolates. He wrote English. Sillon and his wife, in their capacity as sales agents for Pupier, travelled extensively and used to visit Paris on business. Schaeffer also met Pupier, who had a house at St. Etienne.
d. The guide who brought Prudent to Pau was called "Michel" and used to visit the Bidault home regularly.
e. Beck. Schaeffer said his name was von Beck. He was about 35 years of age and a Czechoslovak and came from a well-known family in Wien (Vienna), where Schaeffer's mother knew the Baroness von Beck. Schaeffer's sister was at school at Wien (Vienna) with von Beck's wife, who came (also) from a very good Austrian family. Schaeffer had never met von Beck before, but he had met his wife at Wien (Vienna) before her marriage. He first met Beck when he was introduced to him at Cascais, near Lisbon, →
KV 2/1947-1, page 104b
Crown Copyright
RPS/PR/331.
Schaeffer Frederick Eugene.
where von Beck had a house. Schaeffer was taken there to dinner o the 5th floor of a building in the rua do Comercio (Portugal). Schaeffer called on him as von Beck was anxious to discuss insurance. He was engaged in an import and export business, but was doing very little business, but was very well business at that time. Schaeffer saw his visiting card, with words refering to a Cia Suizza and interfered that he was doing trade with Switzerland.
f. Petzold, a German of about 50/55, married to an English woman. who is now living at Burton Wirral. Schaeffer had known him for about 10 years and had met him in Paris and Wien (Vienna). As he had the entire control of the foreign business of the Kölnische Rück (Versicherung?), he travelled extensively and Schaeffer was not surprised to see him on terms. Petzold had been in England a long time associated with the London, Liverpool and Globe Co.
2. Schaeffer gave a convincing account of his financial position. After leaving refused the suggestions of Laptow that he should go to Paris where he could do well, as he did not want to place himself in a compromising position. When he left Laptow's employment he drew 20,000 frs, and drew a further 6,000 at Lyons. When he crossed the frontier into Spain he was taken by "Gros" direct to San Sebastian and Madrid without meeting any Spanish officials. He had with him at the time 3,000 frs. together with 400 pesetas, given to him bu "Gros", of which 200 pesetas to Chevaux, which was not repaid as Chevaux let Madrid within a week after arrival. The British embassy paid Schaeffer's hotel expenses and gave him once some pocket money. In Portugal his hotel expenses were paid by the British authorities and he received 100 escudos. He had an opportunity to draw considerably more money from Sunyer, but he took only 1,400 pesetas which were enough for the needs. Sunyer's family lived at Estoril, which Sunyer visited about once a month. Before Schaeffer left Madrid, Sunyer went to Portugal and cabled to Dr. C.E. Golding to approach B.W. Noble, Ltd. to deposit the money for his fare to England.
3. When asked to amplify his previous information about Moldenhauer →
KV 2/1947-1, page 105c
Crown Copyright
RPS/PR/331.
Schaeffer Frederick Eugene.
Schaeffer said that he could give some account of his past history. When he went with Moldenhauer to Japan, he found that Moldenhauer had been in Japan previously for two or three years with an export and import firm at Kobe and he spoke Japanese. Owing to his father's insurance connections, he then obtained employment, where in time he would have prospect of advancement, which Messrs. Jauch & Hubener of Hamburg and Berlin. Schaeffer had met him first at the Berlin office, which he visited from Paris. In 1937 and 1938 Laptow and Hubener were impressed by the fact that many Japanese were coming to France to enquire about insurance contacts and they decided in 1939 to finance a small mission to Japan. Laptow sent Schaeffer, owing to his fathers connections, and Hubener sent Moldenhauer who, throughout the tour, was under Schaeffer's orders, as he was about ten years younger than Schaeffer. Schaeffer found that Moldenhauer, who had been in Japan in his early twenties, had no Japanese business connections and although he was naturally much in his company, he found that he was somewhat gay irresponsible charachter, somewhat of a swaggerer, very keen to impress and not too careful about his expenditure.
Schaeffer was instructed by he S.I.R. to come back and returned to Genoa on 20th August 1939, Moldenhauer, who was working for Jauch & Hubener stayed in Japan, then went to America and returned via Japan and Russia to Germany before Russia came into the war (22 June 1941). Schaeffer had not seen Moldenhauer since the end of July, 1939, but he gathered that he had left Jauch & Hubener, as they would not give him the kind of position that he wanted. Schaeffer referred to some remarks he made during his previous interrogation that when he parted with Moldenhauer in Japan, Moldenhauer had mixed up some shirts and collars and various purchases made in Japan with his own luggage and that Schaeffer himself had one or two articles belonging to Moldenhauer, retained by mistake.
Schaeffer had no idea that Moldenhauer was in Spain and met him quite by accident. He was not surprised that he was not in the Army, because he knew - when he was in Japan - that Moldenhauer had something the matter with his shoulder and was unfit. Moldenhauer's first explanation of his business in Spain was that he was representing 'Meinl', the Austrian cafe firm.
At this stage I told Schaeffer that we had reason to believe→
KV 2/1947-1, page 106d
Crown Copyright
Schaeffer Frederick Eugene.
that Moldenhauer was a German agent (Ast Köln) (Ast Cologne) and that it was essential that we should give all the information about Moldenhauer and about Schaeffer's contacts with him in Madrid. Schaeffer was evidently surprised at this news of Moldenhauer and said that he was anxious to give all information that he had, but wished to emphasize that he had avoided more than a minimum amount of association with Moldenhauer in Madrid, because he knew that Moldenhauer was somewhat irresponsible and Schaeffer was very anxious of the fact that he himself had just escaped from France and did not wish to be seen too much with a German in Madrid. He met him by chance in a café close to the large café opposite the Hotel Roma. Moldenhauer used to go there every day about 1700 hours, so much that Schaeffer, in order to avoid him, used to go to another café. He refused Moldenhauer's invitation to dinner and he did not offer Moldenhauer any entertainment.
Moldenhauer spoke Spanish well and had a girl friend who was staying in the country. He had just acquired a car and invited Schaeffer to go with him for a weekend. Schaeffer refused. The only occasion on which Schaeffer was in the company of Moldenhauer more than half an hour, was when he accompanied Moldenhauer and a Spanish girl and a French girl to a café for dancing. He added that Moldenhauer was not a man that interested him, his character was not yet formed and he was not a business-man. Schaeffer knew he lived at a Pension, but never saw his office or knew where it was. At one of the meetings Moldenhauer said that he was trying to sell a fur-coat and was willing to give a commission to one of his girl friends on the sale. He talked in rather swaggering way of the business which he hoped to establish in the future. He mentioned his telephone address as Trans---, which Schaeffer believed to be the name of his business.
Moldenhauer told him that he had been to Berlin for Christmas and that he had been worried about his old mother and father, but that they had moved from Berlin recently. Moldenhauer never gave any hint to Schaeffer that he was not genuinely in business on his own account or conveyed the impression in any way that he was acting a a German agent. Schaeffer did not gather that he had any connection or contact in Portugal. He knew of Schaeffer's sister and she knew of him but had not met him. He was also sure the Sunyer had no knowledge of Moldenhauer.
KV 2/1947-1, page 107e
Crown Copyright
RPS/PR/331.
Schaeffer Frederick Eugene.
Schaeffer then, of his own accord, mentioned that these was a slight personal episode, which he had not thought would have been of interest, which might - in view of the fact that he now learned that Moldenhauer was a German agent (of Ast Köln) (Ast Cologne) - be of some importance. When Schaeffer left Japan and Moldenhauer remained, Schaeffer - who was responsible for their joint business finance - was very anxious to keep the business money apart from his and Moldenhauer's own personal monies, lent Moldenhauer some money. Moldenhauer also had a certain shirts and collars which were paid for by Schaeffer. When they met in Madrid, Moldenhauer reminded Schaeffer that he owned him some money but did not know much, but thought it was about Ł15 or Ł16 and said that he was anxious to repay him and that he could do so in pesetas. Schaeffer said that he expected to leave Spain as soon as possible and that he had no need of pesetas and suggested that the matter should be be left until after the war. Moldenhauer then said that had a free hand account, as some business accounts were not blocked and there was was a clearing arrangement→
(AOB: clearing was a usual means exchanging different goods for other goods or services; without that foreign currencies had been directly involved. Foreign currencies - like dollars, maybe British Sterling, were important assets for State-Banks. Think of exchanging butter or other goods like timing devices of steel or coal quantities, but also ball-bearings and that like)
→ , so that he could arrange with his bank to pay him in Lisbon if he preferred, so as to avoid exchange difficulties. Schaeffer then said that if he kike he could send the money, the amount of which was agreed as 2,000 escudos (Portuguese currency), to him care of his sister. After his arrival in Lisbon, where he stayed a fortnight, Schaeffer received an envelope containing 2,000 escudos in notes, delivered by hand and addressed as arranged, but without a letter of explanation or any indication of the sender. He took for granted that the money had come from Moldenhauer, but sent no receipt or acknowledgement. He was surprised that the money did not come through a bank.
Conclusion.
4. Schaeffer appeared to be quite genuine and serious in his assurance that Moldenhauer had not revealed in any way that he was a German agent and had not endeavoured to influence Schaeffer. He pointed out that Moldenhauer was about 10 years younger and had been under his control in Japan and was always being corrected about his behaviour by Schaffer and that it was not likely, in the circumstances, that Moldenhauer would make any advances to him.
5. Schaffer was asked if he had made any other contacts in Lisbon and he said that he had not made any connections that he had not →
KV 2/1947-1, page 108f
Crown Copyright
RPS/PR/331.
Schaeffer Frederick Eugene.
previously mentioned, although his sister and brother-in-law had introduced him casually to a few people whom he had never seen again. The only name he could remember was that of an elderly Spanish lady and her daughter named Guerra. His brother in law a good Hungarian, was very careful as to choice of friends and avoided introducing him where, owing to the war, meeting might cause embarrassment.
6. The only point that did not seem to be completely explained was how the sum of 2,000 escudos and been arrived at, but it had been generally as am account stated.
7. Schaeffer confirmed the impression that he had made before, that he was a very intelligent, cautious and able business-man, with international contacts and business experience, but was of a serious and well-balanced mind and he gave the impression that he was telling the truth.
B,1,d/U.K. (War Rooms?) 25.3.44 JRJ (= J.R. Jones (Major)/JRG
(6) (since 20 January 2025)
KV 2/1947-1 page 113 (minute 49a)
Crown Copyright
B.1.d/U.K. Mr. Jones.
I (= Mr. A. Sydney, Albert) have now discussed this case with Col. Baxter, who thinks that it may well to see Schaeffer as soon as possible without waiting for the receipt of information which may or may not nor reach us from S.I.S.
I think the first thing to do is, by way of appendix as it were to the earlier interviews (a bit cheating the F.O. boys?), to clear up the question of Schaeffer's financial position. This should, I think, cover the period from the collapse of France until he left Lisbon. It may be that this will achieve the result at which we want to arrive; namely, disclosure of the funds he received in the manner yet to be accounted for while in Lisbon. I think, however, that it is important that no reference should be made to this payment and that no indication should be given that we are particularly interested in Schaeffer's financial position while in Lisbon, except in General terms as part of the general enquiry into his financial position.
When this aspect of the case has been dealt with, I think that we then go for Schaeffer on his contacts in Madrid and Lisbon, with particular reference to Moldenhauer. There is no objection in informing him that we have reason to believe that Moldenhauer is a German agent, telling him that we therefore require a good deal more information about Schaeffer's contacts with him in Madrid. The implication will, I think, be perfectly clear to Schaeffer and further steps will have to be guided??? to this form of questioning. I see no objection, if the necessity should arise. to? asking him whether he was not in fact approached by Moldenhauer to work for him.
B.1.d/U.K. (War Rooms) 23.3.44 Sgd. A. Sydney Albert
KV 2/1947-2, page 1 (minute 48a)
Crown Copyright
Note.
I discussed this case with Mr. Wilson (B.1.a.) (= M.I.5) today in view of this note at 45a. and as a result of this discussion I subsequently arranged an interview with Mr. Graham Greene and Capt. Pakenham, both of (S.I.S.) Section V (= section espionage).
At the latter meeting it was agreed as follows:-
(1) Section V. had no objection to Schaeffer being informed that it was known that Moldenhauer was a member of the German I.S. (Intelligence Service). (actually Ast Köln (= Cologne).
(2) Section V and Mr. Wilson both thought that it would be dangerous to make any mention to Schaeffer of the possibility of a money payment having been made to him in Lisbon from a source which he has not so far disclosed. They saw no objection, however, to Schaeffer being asked generally as to his financial position in the hope that he might mention this payment. It was agreed that it was quite impossible to say what significance was attached to such payment in Schaeffer's mind.
(3) Mr. Greene, who was impressed with the urgency of the matter, promised to let me know as soon as any further information was received from Lisbon. He was told that Mr. Wilson knew that there was some such report which should by now have been received by him.
(4) Capt, Pakenham promised to look into the question of the V-Mann (= Vertrauens-Mann) A. 1312 referred to in Mr. Wilson's note at 50a, in case this could be linked up with Schaeffer in any way. Finally, Capt. Pakenham also promised to go further into the question of the possible identification of the Sylvester (Mr. Lester) about whom apparently further information was now available. He, too, promised to treat the matter as one of urgency.
B.1.d.?U.K. (War Rooms?) 22.3.44 Sgd. Mr. A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-2, page 2 (minute 47a)
Crown Copyright
(To Home Office)
Note for File.
Name Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene R.P.S. No PR331
Spoke to Mr. Stuart (G.2. Div, Home Office) (AOB: They rule the waves, not the Secret Services) and told him that I should be sending him a letter today requesting an extension of the detention order in this case.
Date 22.3.44
Signature A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-2, page 3
Crown Copyright
Internal Memorandum.
From B.1.s./U.K. Mr. Albert Tp B.1.d. Col. Baxter (M.I.5)
Herewith Letter to the Home Office, dated tomorrow, from signature. Mrs. Spring (B.1.b. )(= M.I.5.) has agreed to the terms of the last paragraph.
I promised to 'phone Mr Sturt before despatching the letter.
Date 21.3.44 Signature
RPS/PR/331/B1d/UK 22nd March 1944.
Dear Sturt,
I would refer you to the detention order under the Arrival from British or Foreign Territory Order 1943 dated the 11th March 1944 and served by the I.O. Whitchurch on Frederick Eugene Schaeffer. The I.O.'s reference is Whit. 1543.
We have not had an opportunity of concluding our enquiries in this case, and in the circumstances we should be grateful if the secretary of State could be approached with a view to directing that the period of detention be extended for a further fifteen days from the 26th March next.
Schaeffer has admitted that while in Madrid he was in contact with a German national who is known to be a member of the German Intelligence Service (actually Ast Köln (Ast Cologne) (AOB: but whom was factually a kind of deserter; as he disobeyed various orders to return to Ast Köln immediately!); and further enquiries are in train to determine the significance of this contact.
Yours sincerely,
G.M. Sturt, Esq., H.J. Baxter
Lt.-Col.
G.2. Division,
Home Office
KV 2/1947-2, page 5 Minute 45a
Crown Copyright
B.1.d/U.K. Mr. Albert. (Mr. A. Sydney Albert)
Schaeffer.
Thank you for showing me the attached report (36a). I agree that it is probable that Schaeffer knows a good deal about Moldenhauer then he has so far mentioned. Apart fro anything else, Schaeffer must surely be aware that a German of Moldenhauer's age would not be permitted to go on living in Spain unless he was working for some German department.
(AOB: towards the end of Springtime 1944; K.O. Spain was put under immense stress due to Allied pressure put upon the Spanish Government. After tough negotiations they were forced to reduce their staff by ca. 500 men! This surplus of employees was the result of the wartime situation and the quasi freedom of war-dangers and the relatively living standard in Spain. Every body in the position to become engaged in Madrid was considered a lucky man and did everything possible to remain stationed there. Most of these men returned to Germany and became engaged in the current wartime circumstances.
Personally I should have thought there was no objection to interrogating Schaeffer further about Moldenhauer on the basis that we know that Moldenhauer works for the Abwehr. (AOB: that was the impression he gave, thought his continued to disobey orders to return immediately to Ast Köln (Ast Cologne) he simply was a deserter, with an act keeping his status for the time being!) This however is clearly a matter upon which the consent of S.I.S. would be necessary, because our knowledge of Moldenhauer came from Hart's material (M.I.5.'s Loop-up section), (b) Artist (Johannes Jebsen; see https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm ) (AOB: Jebsen was a double-Cross agent also employed by K.O. Portugal), and (c) S.I.S. Madrid. Obviously Schaeffer must not be permitted to guess that we have any knowledge from sources (a) and (b), but as there are so many ways which S.I.S. might have become aware of Moldenhauer's activities in Madrid they may have become aware Moldenhauer's activities in Madrid they may be willing to permit their knowledge to be known.
My notes have now arrived from Lisbon but I find there is nothing more in these notes than was contained in the preliminary note I made on 9.3.44, except that I did record that Artist told me (Mr. D.I. Wilson) that he did not think that Moldenhauer had in fact recruited Schaeffer, although might well have pretended to the Abwehr to have recruited him. If the case rested solely on Artist's information, I should say that there was little chance of Schaeffer having any mission, because, according to Artist (Johannes Jebsen) the suggestion made by Moldenhauer ( who has a fair idea of the Artist/Tricycle position (AOB: both men were employed, knowingly or un-knowingly by Operation Fortitute) (AOB: though the OKW was aware of the false information received from Britain) to Artist was that with Artist's aid Schaeffer should be give an ink, instructions, etc. and be told to confess this to the British, who would then see that he wrote letters under British control.
The object of all this was that Moldenhauer could then claim to the running an agent in England, and this would be an insurance for him against being called back to Germany to fight. For personal reasons, and in order to support his friendship Moldenhauer, Artist (Johannes Jebsen) was keen that this should be done, but he did not press the matter when I told him that we did not want to run Schaeffer.
KV 2/1047-2, page 6
Crown Copyright
According to Artist, Moldenhauer is half Jew (as was Hans Brandes too and bitterly anti-Nazi, (in Portugal lived another half Jewish friend of Artist name Hnas Brandes, cover-name Bahlhorn, KV 2/3295; PF 307718
and at least it can be said in Moldenhauer's favour that he was put in a position, through a foolish act of Artist's (AOB: afteral, albeit that Jebsen studied in Freiburg, I do not consider him, in 1944, not as a too smart and intellectual personality) and he has not done so.
Unfortunately, against this evidence of Artist's there is a report from S.I.S. Madrid, which I saw in Lisbon, which would suggest that Moldenhauer might have recruited Schaeffer. If you have not yet got this report out of S.I.S., perhaps you could get them to obtain it as quickly as possible.
Whatever steps are taken to deal with Schaeffer I do not think he should, under any circumstances, be asked whether he knows Artist (Johannes Jebsen: https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm )
I have since read your comments, with which I am in entire agreement. You might like to look at the card of Ryder Street relating to V-Mann A. 1312. It seems to me remotely possible that this might be Schaeffer, because the V-Mann is question seems to have received money from Artist out of funds of Ast Brussels. Even if the identity is correct it does not prove whether or not any actual attempt was made to recruit Schaeffer in view of Artist's statement that Moldenhauer for his personal reasons wish to pretend to have sent a V-Mann to England.
B.1.a. 23.3.44 Sgd. D.I. Wilson (M.I.5)
KV 2/1947-2, page 7
Crown Copyright
Note for File.
Name Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene R.P.S. No. PR/331
At the suggestion of Mr. Wilson (B.1.a. )(= M.I.5) I spoke to Mr. Graham Greene (Section V; espionage, S.I.S.), who, however, stated that he had received no further information from Lisbon about Schaeffer. He promised to make enquiries and let us have anything which had or might come in.
KV 2/1947-2, page 9a (minute 42a)
Crown Copyright
Note.
The following comments can be made on the report of Schaeffer's interrogation a 36a.
Paragraphs 1 and 2.
It will be observed that Schaeffer was in the first instance invited in general terms, but so as to leave him in no doubt of what was required of him, to give an account of his experiences and contacts, especially in Spain and Portugal. He did not accept this invitation, and only subsequently, after a lengthy interview, he did see fit to go into detail about his contacts in the Peninsular. Even at that stage (para 53) he appears to have been reluctant to make any mention of Moldenhauer, whose name he kept back until the last moment.
Paragraphs 3 - 13.
Schaeffer has given a detailed account of his career and activities up to the outbreak of the war, and has made no pretence that his outlook and attachments were other than that of a cosmopolitan business man with no particular ties with this country.
Paragraphs 19 - 23.
Schaeffer's stay at Montauban and Marseilles between the French collapse and April 1942 requires no particular comment. There is little doubt that Laptow was sufficiently influential to obtain permission for Schaffer, as a British subject, to remain on the coast until the time when he was finally forced to leave, and the account which he has given of his documentation and contact with the local authorities at this period is credible. His attempts to obtain legal permission to leave France do not seen to have been made with any enthusiasm; and it seems clear that so long as he was under the protection of Laptow and things were not too uncomfortable, he was prepared to stay in France in the hope to uncomfortable, he was prepared to stay in France in the hope that conditions would in the course improve.
Paragraphs 24 - 28.
The conditions obtaining at Grenoble during Schaeffer's residence there conform with the information which we have about →
KV 2/1947-2, page 10b
Crown Copyright
(7) (since 24 January 2025)
→ them, and his behaviour there is in his character. In October 1943 he learned that his position was becoming impossible and accordingly procured for himself a false identity card from someone of whom we have no records but who appears to have been in a position to obtain false papers which would have passed muster. There is no reason to doubt that the journey from Grenoble to Montauban was uncontrolled.
Paragraphs 29 - 33.
Schaeffer's journey to Montauban and his subsequent move to stay at Droiturier cannot be checked, but there is no reason to doubt the account which he has given it. While living at the latter place he got into touch with someone whom he claims as previous acquaintance, a Mme. Sillon, sales agent of Chocolate Pupier at St. Etienne. This woman, described as having formerly been a Mrs. Pulham, figures in the interrogation report of Warisse (RPS/16,747 Y. Box 4010), para 42 et seq. It appears from that report that she was at that time (February 1943) living in hiding at St. Etienne with Marcel Pupier, the owner of the chocolate business, and that with her was her husband, Xavier. Subsequently Warisse made attempts to help Mme. Sillon and her husband to escape into Switzerland, but for reason which appear in that report they returned to St. Etienne and it seems quite possibly that they still have been living there at the time referred to by Schaeffer. It seems from what Warisse said, that Mrs. Sillon was greatly under the influence of Pere Pinson, whom Warisse distrusted and who, according to Schaeffer, was still intimate friend of hers at the time when he met her. There seems, however, no reason to think that, despite Warisse's fears, either Pinson or Sillons were, either ate the time then Warisse met them or subsequently, suspect in the sense that they would have betrayed the organisation for which Warisse was working and with which they appear to have been connected; and in the absence of any evidence to the contrary one can assume that the individuals to whom Schaeffer was introduced by the Sillons were genuine member of a resistance organisation. Apart from Pinson, these individuals (para 33) have not been identified: it seems likely, however, that the organisation for which they are all working is an indigenous French resistance organisation.
- - - - -
KV 2/1947-2, page 12c
Crown Copyright
Schaeffer stayed in or near Pau for some days, still in charge of the organisation which was helping him. It was here that he first met "Gross", with whom he eventually travelled into Spain. "Gross" has also yet to be identified, but from the information which Schaeffer has given about him there seems no reason to think that he was not part of the organisation which was looking after him or that he was not perfectly genuine.
Paragraph 44 and 45.
The first stage of Schaeffer's final escape was by train from Pau to Bocau. There he stayed the night, and the next day proceeded again by train to St. Jean de Luz. The journey was proceeded again by train to St. Jean de Luz. The journey was ,made on the engine of the train, a method of which we have heard on previous occasions,, and the details which Schaeffer has given of this part of the journey are convincing.
GoogleEarth
St. Jean de Luz and San Sebastian; all south of Biarritz
The train is border-crossing at Henday (in France) /Irun (in Spain)
Paragraph 46.
The final stage of the journey to Spain was made on foot from St. Jean de Luz to San Sebastian. Schaeffer has given an acceptable explanation of why he does not remember very much about the details of this part of the trip; and there seems no reason to question it in any way.
Paragraphs 47 - 53.
Schaeffer stayed for a month in Madrid. During that time he got into contact with a member of the insurance companies and former business friends. Among these was Moldenhauer whom we know know to be working for the German I.S. (AOB: Intelligence Service; actually he kept himself out of the picture, as he apparently disobeyed orders to return to Ast Köln (Ast Cologne) instantly). It is clear that Schaeffer and Moldenhauer were at one time intimate friends. (AOB: both men lived before the before the war started, in Japan) and Schaeffer's account of this contact with Moldenhauer in Madrid is not by any means convincing. If seems extraordinary that a keen businessman such as Schaeffer obviously is should not bother to enquire what Moldenhauer's present occupation is or should show so little curiosity about his meetings with him were confined to a few causal encounters in cafes.
Paragraphs 54 and 55.
In due course Schaeffer proceeded to Lisbon, where he stayed with his sister, the wife of a man for whom there are traces at →
KV 2/1947-2, page 13d + 14e
Crown Copyright
35A (1,2 & 3). This man, the Baron de Dirzstay, is the father of a man who was formerly, interned in this country (England), and there are, admittedly vague, suspicions that he himself was at one time a German agent. This information can probably be discounted as it seems unlikely, were de Dirzstay in fact a German agent who had been living in Lisbon for a considerable length of time, that the fact would be unknown to us.
. . . .
Subject to the result of pending look-ups being received and also if possible, to the satisfactory identification of the individuals who were responsible for Schaefer's escape into Spain, I feel satisfied that until he reached Madrid Schaeffer was not approached to work on behalf of the German I.S. (Intelligence Service). He has given what appears to me to be satisfactory account of his experiences and contacts in France, and while his escape story and the events leading up to have not at this stage proved capable of being checked, except to the extent referred to earlier, they are in my view perfectly credible.
So far as Schaeffer's contacts with Moldenhauer in Madrid is concerned, I am not satisfied that he has been perfectly frank with us. At this stage it is impossible to hazard a guess as to whether Moldenhauer made any actual proposition to Schaeffer to work on behalf of the German I.S. (Intelligent Service). That Schaeffer, however, knew perfectly well that Moldenhauer himself was so working difficult to disbelieve. It will be observed that even now Schaeffer has made no mention of the money given or advanced to him at Moldenhauer's instigation by intermediaries provi
ded by "Artist". ( https://www.cdvandt.org/kv-2-560-wrede-artist.htm ). Until further information and instructions are received from B.1.a. it is difficult to know how best to take further the question of Schaeffer's contact with Moldenhauer.
In the meantime it is perhaps worth while emphasising that Schaeffer's background, both family and business, is entirely a international one; and he appears to be the type of man who would be prepared to put his business interest above all feelings loyalty, both political and personal. His pre-war activities and contacts (para 3 - 13), the arrangements which he entered into the preserve his stake in his business on the collapse of France (para 15), his association with Laptow, who and whose kind of attempts to justify (para 58), his abandonment of his mistress when she became an embarrassment (para 11), and his lack of compunction (regret) in renewing friendship with former German business acquaintances in Spain (para 50 - 52), all point to a man of cosmopolitan tastes and outlook, in whose life self-interest is the dominant factor. It is not to be wondered at that he appealed to members of the German I.S. (Secret Intelligence) as a likely recruit. It would perhaps, however, be surprising were it found that that he had accepted and proposition that me have so little to gain materially by undertaking such an enterprise. That he may have been approached I am quite prepared to believe: and that he has not revealed the whole story of his contacts with Moldenhauer, and possibly other members of the German I.S., I feel sure.
Until further enquiries, involving if possible a more hostile interrogation, can be made, there is no point in considering whether, on available information, Schaeffer is the type of man respect of whom an Order under (Home Office:) D.R. 18a or D.R. 18b can or should be applied for. (AOB: their actually imagined changes should be considered being rather low, as these will certainly not be accepted by the Home Office; and they may well have been confronted with the British Home Office legal points of view (which I (AOB) do admire very much, and would certainly intervene with M.I.5's or The War Room's desires!)
B.1.d./U.K. (War Room) 21.3.44 Sgd. A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-2, page 15 (minute 41a)
Crown Copyright
Note for file.
Name Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene PR/331
I spoke to Capt. Beaumont (E.1.a/F) and asked him to ascertain from his French contacts the maiden name of Ghislaine Conochie.
Capt. Beaumont later telephoned to say that Mrs. Connochie's maiden name was Bru.
There are two possible traces of this name in our records: one a police official of Grenoble, and the other a timber merchant, also of Grenoble. The former is said to be a collaborationist, and the latter a man who double-crossed an organisation in 1942. Neither of them would appear to be identical with either "Armand" or "Gross", and certainly identity cannot be established on available information.
Date 20.3.44 Signature .. A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-2, page 16a + 17b (minute 40a)
Crown Copyright
Note for File.
Name ... Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene R.P.S. No. PR/331
Mr. Hale's secretary asked me to speak to Mr. Sturt (G.2. Div. Home Office) about this case. I accordingly did so and he told me that he would dealing with these detention cases in future.
In this particular case, as the first fifteen days expire next Saturday, 25 March, and the Home Secretary is difficult to get on that day, he would like and request for an extension of the detention in his hands by Thursday next, 23rd March. I explained that we should almost certainly have to ask for a extension in view of the information which we had that Schaeffer had been in contact with a man whom we knew to be a member of the German I.S. (Intelligence Service) in Madrid.
I promised to ring Mr. Sturt before I actually sent the letter.
I subsequently settled the form for a draft letter to the Home Office with Mr. Spring B.1.b. (= M.I.5).
20.3.44 Sgd. A. Sydney Albert.
KV 2/1947-2, page 18 (minute 39a)
Crown Copyright
Note for File.
Name Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene R.P/S. PR331
I spoke to Capt. Hughes (Assistant R.S.L.O. Birmingham) and asked him to find out if possible by indirect enquiry the maiden name of Mrs. Ghislaine Connochie of Market Drayton.
Capt. Hughes subsequently phoned me to say the Chislaine Connochie had left Marker Drayton in 1943 as was now believed to be working for the French headquarters in London.
Date.. 20.3.44 Signature A. Sydney Albert)
KV 2/1947-2, page 19 (minute 38a)
Crown Copyright
Name Schaeffer, Frederick Eugene. R.P.S. PR/331
Spoke to Major Mott (S.O.E.) and asked him whether his organisation could identify Arman @ Joe @ Challand.
Spoke to Miss Barnes (B.4.a.) (= M.I.5) and asked her whether the Americans could let us have Chevraux's story as from the point where he was picked up by an organisation at Toulouse.
Major Mott later telephoned to say that this organisation could not identify this man.
Date 20.3.44 Signature A. Sydney Albert
To be continued in due course
By Arthur O. Bauer