STATEMENT OF MRS. LYNDON B. JOHNSON
The White House,
Washington, July 16, 1964.
The Honorable Earl Warren,
The Chief Justice of the United States,
Washington, D.C.
My Dear Mr. Chief Justice: Mr. Lee Rankin, chief counsel to the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, has advised me that the Commission would be interested to have a statement from me concerning my recollection of the events of November 22, 1963.
Beginning on November 30, and as I found time on the following 2 days, I dictated my recollection of that fateful and dreadful day on a small tape recorder which I had at The Elms, where we were then living. I did this primarily as a form of therapy—to help me over the shock and horror of the experience of President Kennedy's assassination. I did not intend that the tape should be used.
The quality of the tape recording is very poor, but upon considering your Commission's request, I decided to ask that the tape relating to November 22 be transcribed. I am sending the transcription to you with only a few, minor corrections. Perhaps it will serve your purposes. I hope so. In any event, it is a more faithful record of my recollection and impressions than I could produce at this late date.
Please accept, for yourself and the members of the Commission and its staff, my thanks and best wishes for the important task which you have undertaken and to which all of you have so generously dedicated yourselves.
Sincerely,
(S)Lady Bird Johnson,
Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson.
[Enclosure.]
*****
[Transcript from Mrs. Johnson's tapes relating to November 22, 1963]
It all began so beautifully. After a drizzle in the morning, the sun came out bright and beautiful. We were going into Dallas. In the lead car, President and Mrs. Kennedy, John and Nellie, and then a Secret Service car full of men, and then our car—Lyndon and me and Senator Yarborough. The streets were lined with people—lots and lots of people—the children all smiling; placards, confetti; people waving from windows. One last happy moment I had was looking up and seeing Mary Griffith leaning out of a window waving at me. Mary for many years had been in charge of altering the clothes which I purchased at a Dallas store.
Then almost at the edge of town, on our way to the Trade Mart where we were going to have the luncheon, we were rounding a curve, going down a hill, and suddenly there was a sharp loud report—a shot. It seemed to me to come from the right, above my shoulder, from a building. Then a moment and then two more shots in rapid succession. There had been such a gala air that I thought it must be firecrackers or some sort of celebration. Then, in the lead car, the Secret Service men were suddenly down. I heard over the radio system, "Let's get out of here," and our Secret Service man who was with us, Ruf Youngblood, I believe it was, vaulted over the front seat on top of Lyndon, threw him to the floor, and said, "Get down."
Senator Yarborough and I ducked our heads. The car accelerated terrifically fast—faster and faster. Then suddenly they put on the brakes so hard that I wondered if they were going to make it as we wheeled left and went around the corner. We pulled up to a building. I looked up and saw it said "Hospital." Only then did I believe that this might be what it was. Yarborough kept on saying in an excited voice, "Have they shot the President?" I said something like, "No; it can't be."
As we ground to a halt—we were still the third car—Secret Service men began to pull, lead, guide, and hustle us out. I cast one last look over my shoulder and saw, in the President's car, a bundle of pink, just like a drift of blossoms, lying on the back seat. I think it was Mrs. Kennedy lying over the President's body. They led us to the right, the left, and onward into a quiet room in the hospital—a very small room. It was lined with white sheets, I believe.
People came and went—Kenny O'Donnell, Congressman Thornberry, Congressman Jack Brooks. Always there was Ruf right there, Emory Roberts, Jerry Kivett, Lem Johns, and Woody Taylor. There was talk about where we would go—back to Washington, to the plane, to our house. People spoke of how widespread this may be. Through it all, Lyndon was remarkably calm and quiet. Every face that came in, you searched for the answers you must know. I think the face I kept seeing it on was the face of Kenny O'Donnell, who loved him so much.
It was Lyndon as usual who thought of it first, although I wasn't going to leave without doing it. He said, "You had better try to see if you can see Jackie and Nellie." We didn't know what had happened to John. I asked the Secret Service men if I could be taken to them. They began to lead me up one corridor, back stairs, and down another. Suddenly I found myself face to face with Jackie in a small hall. I think it was right outside the operating room. You always think of her—or someone like her—as being insulated, protected; she was quite alone. I don't think I ever saw anyone so much alone in my life. I went up to her, put my arms around her, and said something to her. I'm sure it was something like, "God, help us all," because my feelings for her were too tumultuous to put into words.
And then I went in to see Nellie. There it was different because Nellie and I have gone through so many things together since 1938. I hugged her tight and we both cried and I said, "Nellie, it's going to be all right." And Nellie said, "Yes; John's going to be all right." Among her many other fine qualities, she is also tough.
Then I turned and went back to the small white room where Lyndon was. Mr. Kilduff and Kenny O'Donnell were coming and going. I think it was from Kenny's face and Kenny's voice that I first heard the words, "The President is dead." Mr. Kilduff entered and said to Lyndon, "Mr. President."
It was decided that we would go immediately to the airport. Quick plans were made about how to get to the car, who to ride in what. It was Lyndon who said we should go to the plane in unmarked cars. Getting out of the hospital into the cars was one of the swiftest walks I have ever made. We got in. Lyndon said to stop the sirens. We drove along as fast as we could. I looked up at a building and there already was a flag at half-mast. I think that is when the enormity of what had happened first struck me.
When we got to the airplane, we entered airplane No. 1 for the first time. There was a TV set on, and the commentator was saying, "Lyndon B. Johnson, now President of the United States." They were saying they had a suspect. They were not sure he was the assassin. The President had been shot with a 30-30 rifle. On the plane, all the shades were lowered. Lyndon said that we were going to wait for Mrs. Kennedy and the coffin. There was discussion about when Lyndon should be sworn in as President. There was a telephone call to Washington—I believe to the Attorney General. It was decided that he should be sworn in in Dallas as quickly as possible because of international implications, and because we did not know how widespread this incident was as to intended victims. Judge Sarah Hughes, a Federal judge in Dallas—and I am glad it was she—was called to come in a hurry.
Mrs. Kennedy had arrived by this time and the coffin, and there—in the very narrow confines of the plane with Jackie on his left with her hair falling in her face, but very composed, and then Lyndon, and I was on his right, Judge Hughes with the Bible in front of her and a cluster of Secret Service people and Congressmen we had known for a long time—Lyndon took the oath of office.
It's odd at a time like that the little things that come to your mind and a moment of deep compassion you have for people who are really not at the center of the tragedy. I heard a Secret Service man say in the most desolate voice and I hurt for him, "We never lost a President in the Service," and then Police Chief Curry, of Dallas, came on the plane and said to Mrs. Kennedy, "Mrs. Kennedy, believe me, we did everything we possibly could."
We all sat around the plane. We had at first been ushered into the main private Presidential cabin on the plane—but Lyndon quickly said, "No, no" and immediately led us out of there; we felt that is where Mrs. Kennedy should be. The casket was in the hall. I went in to see Mrs. Kennedy and, though it was a very hard thing to do, she made it as easy as possible. She said things like, "Oh, Lady Bird, it's good that we've always liked you two so much." She said, "Oh, what if I had not been there? I'm so glad I was there." I looked at her. Mrs. Kennedy's dress was stained with blood. Her right glove was caked—that immaculate woman—it was caked with blood, her husband's blood. She always wore gloves like she was used to them. I never could. Somehow that was one of the most poignant sights—exquisitely dressed and caked in blood. I asked her if I couldn't get someone in to help her change, and she said, "Oh, no. Perhaps later I'll ask Mary Gallagher, but not right now."
She said a lot of other things, like, "What if I had not been there? Oh, I'm so glad I was there," and a lot of other things that made it so much easier for us. "Oh, Lady Bird, we've always liked you both so much." I tried to express something of how we felt. I said, "Oh, Mrs. Kennedy, you know we never even wanted to be Vice President and now, dear God, it's come to this." I would have done anything to help her, but there was nothing I could do to help her, so rather quickly I left and went back to the main part of the airplane where everyone was seated.
The ride to Washington was silent, strained—each with his own thoughts. One of mine was something I had said about Lyndon a long time ago—that he's a good man in a tight spot. I even remember one little thing he said in that hospital room, "Tell the children to get a Secret Service man with them."
Finally, we got to Washington, with a cluster of people watching. Many bright lights. The casket went off first; then Mrs. Kennedy. The family had come to join them, and then we followed. Lyndon made a very simple, very brief, and—I think—strong, talk to the folks there. Only about four sentences, I think. We got in cars; we dropped him off at the White House, and I came home.
[Tuesday, July 28, 1964]
TESTIMONY OF AMBASSADOR LLEWELLYN E. THOMPSON
The President's Commission met at 3 p.m., on July 28, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.
Present were Senator John Sherman Cooper (presiding), and Allen W. Dulles, members.
Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; W. David Slawson, assistant counsel; and Richard A. Frank, attorney, Office of the Legal Adviser, Department of State.
Senator Cooper. The Commission will be in order.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give before this Commission is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Ambassador Thompson. I do.
Mr. Slawson. Mr. Ambassador, could you please state for the record your full name and address?
Ambassador Thompson. My name is Llewellyn E. Thompson. I reside at 1913 23d Street NW., Washington.
Mr. Slawson. And could you state your present position with the U.S. Government and the positions you have held since late 1959?
Ambassador Thompson. In 1959 I was Ambassador in Moscow, and then I was transferred to the State Department as Ambassador at Large, and have been that since that time. In addition, I am now Acting Deputy Under Secretary of State.
Mr Slawson. Thank you. Ambassador Thompson has been asked to testify today on any contacts he may have had with Lee Harvey Oswald while the Ambassador was in his post with the American Embassy in Moscow and on any knowledge he may have on pertinent Soviet practices or American practices at that time which might relate to the treatment of Mr. Oswald.
Ambassador Thompson, could you state all of the times and describe them when you heard about Lee Harvey Oswald's dealings with your Embassy at Moscow while he was in Russia, either in late 1959 or thereafter?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes; the only recollection I have is that when I returned from a trip to the United States in November 1959, or some time after that, the consul informed me about the case, and said this man had asked to renounce his citizenship. I recall asking him——
Mr. Dulles. Was that Consul Richard E. Snyder?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes; I am almost certain of that. I recall asking him why he didn't accept the renunciation, and he explained that in cases of this kind he normally waited to make sure the man was serious, and also in order to normally consult the State Department.
I believe he told me at that time that the man had not come back again. And I believe that is the only recollection I have of the case at all at the time I was in Moscow.
Mr. Slawson. And that includes any other time thereafter, including through 1962?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes; of course I read the press and was aware of the case when it came up in the Department. There was some discussion of it. But no knowledge that I think would bear on the case.
I recall, I think, being in Germany at the time I read in the press that he was leaving the country—leaving Moscow, that is. But I don't recall having been consulted about his application to leave.
Mr. Slawson. Did you have any personal dealings or any knowledge of your subordinates' dealings with Marina Oswald, Lee Oswald's wife, when she applied to accompany him back to the United States in early 1961 and frequently thereafter?
Ambassador Thompson. None that I recall.
Mr. Slawson. Mr. Ambassador, I wonder if you could make any comments you would like to make on the policy which Consul Snyder and others testifying for the Department of State have described in their treatment of Americans who sought to renounce their citizenship when they came to Moscow, and how these Americans were handled?
Ambassador Thompson. Well, I am aware that we have had cases where someone would say they wanted to renounce their citizenship and then after a few days in the Soviet Union change their minds. And while I don't recall any specific cases, I do know we have had cases of that sort.
Mr. Slawson. Was there any particular time in your career when this sort of thing was more frequent than other times—any groups of people where it might have occurred?
Ambassador Thompson. Well, I know that prior to my arrival in Moscow in 1941, when I was Secretary in the Embassy, that there had been a great influx from the United States, particularly of people of Finnish origin, who had returned to the Soviet Union. I think that some of those people at least had not renounced their citizenship; they had come over there under the impression that they would receive very good treatment, and a great many of them applied subsequently to return to the United States. But many of them were unable to get exit visas.
Mr. Slawson. Were those that did not give up their American citizenship usually able to return to the United States if they changed their mind?
Ambassador Thompson. I believe so. I know of one case of a man of Finnish origin who worked for the Embassy, and he did return to the United States. It is the one case I know of personally. I am quite sure there were some others who did get out.
Mr. Slawson. Shifting now to the Soviet treatment of American defectors, or would-be defectors, are there any cases in your experience where you could comment on the Soviet treatment of such persons, how quickly the Russian Government made up its mind whether it wanted them for permanent residence in Russia and so on?
Ambassador Thompson. I think that in recent times, at least, my impression is that the Soviets, because of bad experience they have had with some people who came there to reside, and renounced their citizenship, have looked these people over and let them know that they could not remain. I think there was a case since I left the Soviet Union of that sort. I don't recall the exact particulars. But I do have the impression that they now don't automatically accept people who come and say they want to renounce their citizenship and would like to reside there.
Mr. Slawson. Can you give the Commission any estimate on the time periods that sometimes are involved in the Soviet authorities making up their mind?
Ambassador Thompson. I think that there has been at least a case or two during the time I was there where it was pretty obvious that the person concerned was unstable and that the Soviets very quickly let the person know that he could not reside. But since I did not handle these cases, I do not—I could not cite any specific cases.
Mr. Slawson. Mr. Ambassador, I have a name of an American citizen, Mr. William Edgerton Morehouse, Jr., who, according to the records of the Department of State, was hospitalized in a hospital in Moscow in the fall of 1959.
According to records furnished us by the Russian Government, and according to the personal diary kept by Lee Harvey Oswald, he, too, was hospitalized in the latter part of October, and commented—Oswald commented in his diary—that in his ward with him was what he described as an elderly American. We are trying to locate that American. We think that possibly this Mr. Morehouse was that person. I wonder if you had ever heard of Mr. Morehouse before, or know who he might be?
Ambassador Thompson. I have no recollection of having heard of this man before.
Mr. Slawson. Do you have any recollection of any other American that might fit this description?
Ambassador Thompson. No; I do recall that there have been American tourists who have been in the hospital in Moscow. But I don't recall at that particular date whether there were any.
Mr. Slawson. Mr. Ambassador, can you comment on how Americans were ordinarily given medical treatment in the Botkinskaya Hospital in Moscow, which was the hospital in which Oswald was treated, to the best of your knowledge?
Ambassador Thompson. The Botkinskaya Hospital has a section which is reserved for the members of the diplomatic corps, and in case of prominent Americans, particularly if the illness were serious, they were often treated there.
Mr. Slawson. You say the Americans normally were treated in a special ward in that hospital, or a special section of it?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes; it was a completely separate building, I believe.
Mr. Slawson. Was this the invariable method of treatment, or would there be a reasonable chance that an American might have gone into a normal Soviet ward which would have treated his type of illness?
Ambassador Thompson. I would think that the ward which was reserved for the diplomatic corps would probably only have been used for important visitors, but it is quite a large hospital, with a large number of separate buildings. It is quite possible for Americans to have been in one or the other. And obviously, if there were an infectious disease, they would be separated, and not in the regular section.
Mr. Slawson. If an ordinary American tourist or businessman in Moscow were to receive an injury in, say, an automobile accident or some other normal method, would he normally be put into the same ward as Embassy people were placed, or would he receive treatment right along with normal Soviet citizens?
Ambassador Thompson. I think that there is an emergency hospital type where he probably would normally be taken, rather than Botkinskaya. I cannot be sure of this. But we had an American doctor in the Embassy who would normally be called in on cases of this kind, and if he felt the case required it he would probably apply to have him taken to Botkinskaya.
Mr. Slawson. Do you recollect who this doctor was in the fall of 1959?
Ambassador Thompson. I believe at that time it was an Air Force officer. It sometimes rotated among the services. But I am almost certain it was an Air Force officer. I could get the name, but I don't recall it at the moment. I just don't recall the name.
Senator Cooper. I suggest that the Secretary can supply the name for the Commission.
Mr. Slawson. Mr. Ambassador, do you think it would be usual of the Soviet Government to permit someone in Oswald's circumstances, that is a would-be defector from his own government, to be treated in the same ward as other Americans, or particularly as Americans who might come under the category of this important person or Embassy official ward you were speaking of?
Ambassador Thompson. I would think it is probably somewhat unusual. This doctor could give you expert testimony on this, because he has been involved in almost all cases.
Mr. Dulles. Do you happen to know whether that doctor is in the United States at the present time?
Ambassador Thompson. He was in Texas the last I heard. I draw a blank on his name at the moment, although I know him quite well.
Mr. Slawson. I think with the lead you have given us, we shouldn't have any difficulty in finding his name. I have no other questions. Does anyone else present care to place a question?
Senator Cooper. It appears from the testimony that we have heard that Lee Oswald appeared at the Embassy on October 31, 1959, and stated he wished to renounce his American citizenship. As I understand, at that time you were out of the Soviet Union.
Ambassador Thompson. That is correct.
Senator Cooper. Was Edward L. Freers, Chargé d'Affaire?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes, sir.
Senator Cooper. Was there a consulate in Moscow?
Ambassador Thompson. There is a consular section of the Embassy, but not a separate consulate.
Senator Cooper. Who had charge of the consulate section of the Embassy?
Ambassador Thompson. At that time I believe it was Mr. Richard Snyder.
Senator Cooper. And was he the one who advised you on your return to Moscow that Oswald had applied to the Embassy and stated that he wished to renounce his citizenship?
Ambassador Thompson. I believe that is correct. I think the counselor was also present at the time. I think both of them informed me.
Senator Cooper. We have had in evidence dispatches from the Embassy at Moscow upon this question, and the matter was referred to the Department of State as to what steps should be taken towards his renunciation. Was that the normal way of the Embassy handling such applications for renunciation of citizenship?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes, sir; I believe that would be done in every case.
Senator Cooper. Did the State Department have any policy, other than reference to the State Department, as to the approval of such applications?
Ambassador Thompson. I believe our practice is that whenever we are convinced that the man is serious, and knows what he is doing, that this is allowed to take place—the renunciation is accepted.
Senator Cooper. Is there a policy or practice of attempting to determine whether the person is serious, or whether the person might change his or her mind after the original renunciation application?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes; that is correct. Because, as I said earlier, there have been cases where people have changed their minds in a very few days. Also, there is always the possibility that someone might be temporarily of unsound mind or some other reason, why it would need to be ascertained that they were aware of what they were doing.
Senator Cooper. There is also in evidence a letter, or a dispatch from the Embassy to the Department of State, dated May 26, 1961, signed for the Ambassador by Edward L. Freers, minister counselor. This dispatch deals with the application of Oswald to secure a renewal of his passport. Were you out of Moscow at that time?
Ambassador Thompson. What was the date, sir?
Senator Cooper. May 26, 1961.
Ambassador Thompson. I believe I was in Moscow at that time. I took a trip within the Soviet Union from May 10 to 14, 1961, but I believe I was there on May 9.
Senator Cooper. Then these dispatches, they were sent in your name, or by someone for the Ambassador?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes; but I don't recall having been shown them.
Mr. Slawson. For the record, Senator Cooper, could I state that the dispatch of May 26, 1961, you referred to is Commission Exhibit No. 936, and the memorandum you are also reading from is Commission Exhibit No. 935.
Mr. Dulles. How were those signed, Mr. Slawson?
Mr. Slawson. Commission Exhibit No. 935 is signed for the Ambassador by Boris H. Klosson, counselor for political affairs. And Commission Exhibit No. 936 is signed for the Ambassador by Edward L. Freers, minister counselor.
Senator Cooper. I might also refer to the earlier dispatch November 2, 1959, Commission Exhibit No. 908.
Now, were the procedures followed with respect to his request for renewal of his passport—that is in reference to the Department of State, for decision—was that the normal procedure followed when persons who had attempted to renounce or had renounced, claimed or desired to secure renewal of their passport—to refer it to the Department of State?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes, sir; I think in every case that would be done.
Senator Cooper. Now, between the time of Oswald's entrance into the Soviet Union and his exit, did you ever see Oswald yourself?
Ambassador Thompson. No, sir; I never saw him that I knew of.
Senator Cooper. Did you hear anything about him during his stay in the Soviet Union?
Ambassador Thompson. My only recollection is of this first briefing. I don't recall hearing anything else about him.
Senator Cooper. In evidence it has appeared that not too long after he came to Moscow, he went to Minsk and secured a job there.
From your experience as Ambassador, our Ambassador in Russia, and also in other positions in the Embassy, would you consider that unusual, that Oswald should be able to secure a job in a Russian factory while he was there?
Ambassador Thompson. No, sir; I think that once they had agreed to let him stay in the Soviet Union, they would have assisted him in obtaining employment, because they believe that everyone that is able to in the country should work, and since he was obviously not staying just as a tourist, I think they would normally have provided employment for him.
Senator Cooper. Also in evidence it indicates he was provided by the Soviet officials with a passport or document which described him as a stateless person.
From your experience would you be able to say whether or not that was a normal procedure for the Soviets to follow with respect to an American tourist?
Ambassador Thompson. I think that as long as they agreed to let him stay beyond the normal time of a tourist, that is a month or at the most 2 months, that they would then provide him with documentation so he could identify himself to the police. The police would not normally be able to read an American passport. In the Soviet Union, if you travel at all, you have to produce documentation—to stay in a hotel, very often to obtain transportation. So I think it would be normal that they would provide him with documentation.
Senator Cooper. Would you say that in late 1959, or 1960 or 1961 that the provision by the Soviet Union officials to a tourist of a document like this, saying he is a stateless person, and allowing him to stay beyond the usual time, for a tourist, was ordinary or usual? Would that indicate anything unusual to you, from your experience in the Embassy in Moscow?
Ambassador Thompson. No; I think not. I think that in cases of this kind that this would be normal.
Senator Cooper. Would it indicate in any way that they might be considering further his application to become a citizen of the Soviet Union or, in another way, that they were considering whether or not he might be used as an agent of the Soviet Union?
Ambassador Thompson. Well, I think there have been a good many cases of people who have come to the Soviet Union from abroad, and I believe that a number of them have not formally renounced citizenship. I recall that in 1941, when Germany attacked the Soviet Union, that there were a number of people who turned up that we had not known were in the Soviet Union, had never been near the Embassy, and had never, as far as we know renounced their citizenship. But they had been living there all this time.
Senator Cooper. You would not have any reason to think, then, that these circumstances might indicate that the Soviets were—could consider using him as an agent at some future time?
Ambassador Thompson. I would not have much on which to base a judgment on that, other than that it seems to me, of course, possible, in this or any other case in which a foreigner has come in to reside. But as I say there have been a great many cases.
For example, there are many people of Armenian origin who have returned to the Soviet Union and have been encouraged to do so by the Soviet Government. And in view of the very large numbers, I would think that the intention to use any of them as an agent would be very rare.
As far as I can understand, they encouraged them to come back because they wanted their skills available.
Senator Cooper. When he applied for a renewal of his passport, his wife, Marina, made application for a passport. And I believe it was said that that was a prerequisite to securing an exit visa from the Soviet Union.
From your experience as Ambassador and in other posts in the American Embassy, do you consider the time in which she was able to secure an exit visa from Russia, within so short time, as unusual?
Ambassador Thompson. Well, if it was a short time—and I am not aware of the exact time, myself—but if it were a short time, I would say it is unusual, because we have had cases that drag out over years, and in many cases, of course, they never get an exit visa.
Senator Cooper. Well, perhaps without reference to time, from your experience, have you found that—do you know whether it was difficult for a Soviet citizen, such as Marina Oswald, even though she might be married to an American—that it is difficult for them to secure an exit visa from the Soviet Union?
Ambassador Thompson. Yes; it is very difficult.
Senator Cooper. Do you know the basis for that? Is it that they do not want to permit the exit of any Soviet citizen?
Ambassador Thompson. I think that except in the cases of rather elderly people, they have not wanted any of their people to leave permanently. They let them go on tourist trips abroad, but not for permanent residence. As you possibly know, leaving the Soviet Union without permission is one of the most severely punished crimes you can commit in the Soviet Union.
Senator Cooper. What was that?
Ambassador Thompson. Leaving without permission.
Senator Cooper. Would the fact that there was a child born to Lee Oswald and Marina Oswald have altered this practice of the Soviet Union, as far as any experience that you have had or any knowledge you have had about such cases?
Ambassador Thompson. I think the existence of a child born in the Soviet Union would normally make it more difficult for a person to secure an exit visa.
Mr. Slawson. Mr. Ambassador, in the facts of the Oswald case they applied to leave the Soviet Union, of course, well before their first child was born, and in fact probably received Soviet permission to leave in late December 1961, and the child, I believe, was born in February 1962—although the Oswalds in fact did not leave until very early June 1962.
They nevertheless had received Soviet permission to do so before the child was born.
In light of that fact, could you comment further upon the perhaps greater difficulty of leaving when you have a child?
Ambassador Thompson. Well, I think probably having once processed the case and agreed to let the husband and wife leave, that they would have been more inclined then to let the child leave than if the case had been considered after the child was born.
Senator Cooper. I take it the policy of the United States would be the reverse—that is, because Marina was the wife of Lee Oswald, and because the baby had been born, the practice of the United States would be to grant a passport to Marina for the child.
Ambassador Thompson. I believe that is right, on compassionate grounds.
Senator Cooper. Are you familiar with the testimony about a loan that was made to the Oswalds in order to help them get back to the United States?
Ambassador Thompson. I have read in the press that they had received the normal loan.
Senator Cooper. Can you say anything about that as a practice of the American Government?
Ambassador Thompson. I only know that in general where a citizen wishes to return to the United States and doesn't have the means to do so, that we frequently do assist them. This goes back many years. But I haven't been myself concerned in this for probably 25 years, or even more.
Senator Cooper. But is it the practice that if a determination has been made that the individual is an American citizen, therefore entitled to what protections are given to American citizens, if necessary, loans will be made to assist them to return to the United States? Is that about the basis of the policy?
Ambassador Thompson. That is correct; yes, sir.
Senator Cooper. I think that is all I have.
Mr. Dulles. Did you have any conversations at any time while you were Ambassador or after you returned to the United States with any Soviet official with regard to the Oswald case?
Ambassador Thompson. I discussed with the Soviet Ambassador the desire of the Commission to receive any documentation that they might have available, but I did not in any way discuss the case itself, nor did the Soviet official with whom I talked.
Mr. Dulles. And do you know of any conversations of that nature that any other official of the Department had in connection with the Oswald case?
Ambassador Thompson. I do not myself know of any.
Mr. Dulles. You probably would, would you not, if that had taken place—of any importance?
Ambassador Thompson. Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
Mr. Dulles. Your testimony is you have no knowledge of any other conversations other than that of the Secretary of State, in connection with communications to and from the Soviet Government on this case?
Ambassador Thompson. That is correct. I know of no other cases where it was discussed with Soviet officials.
Mr. Dulles. That is all I have.
Mr. Slawson. Thank you very much, Mr. Ambassador.
(Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.)
[Wednesday, September 2, 1964]
TESTIMONY OF C. DOUGLAS DILLON
The President's Commission met at 12:05 p. m., on September 2, 1964, at 200 Maryland Avenue NE., Washington, D.C.
Present were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman; Senator Richard B. Russell, Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Gerald R. Ford, Allen W. Dulles, and John J. McCloy, members.
Also present was J. Lee Rankin, general counsel.
The Chairman. Mr. Secretary, would you please rise and follow me.
Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give before this Commission will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God.
Secretary Dillon. I do.
The Chairman. Mr. Rankin will conduct the examination, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Dillon. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, will you state your name and residence, please?
Secretary Dillon. C. Douglas Dillon of Far Hills, N.J., presently residing in Washington, 2534 Belmont Road, NW.
Mr. Rankin. Do you have an official position with the Government?
Secretary Dillon. Yes, I do. I am the Secretary of the Treasury.
Mr. Rankin. In that capacity do you have responsibility for the Secret Service of the United States?
Secretary Dillon. Yes, the Secret Service is part of the Treasury Department.
Mr. Rankin. Have you had that position responsibility for some time?
Secretary Dillon. Since January 21, 1961.
Mr. Rankin. Can you tell us briefly the nature of your supervision of the Secret Service, prior to the assassination?
Secretary Dillon. Yes. Prior to the assassination, when I first took office as Secretary of the Treasury, I naturally tried to find out, in as much detail as seemed practical, how the various offices of the Department functioned. One of the important ones was the Secret Service. So I had a number of interviews with Chief Baughman who was the Chief of the Secret Service at that time.
I got the general description from him of how the Secret Service operated, what their responsibilities were, what their problems were. After he retired, which was early, after I had only been there for a few months, I spoke with the President about this matter—President Kennedy—and it was my responsibility to find a new Chief of the Secret Service.
He had known James Rowley very well as head of the White House detail, and he felt that he would be an appropriate head of the Secret Service. I talked with Chief Baughman, and he thought there were two or three men, of whom Rowley was one, qualified to be head of the Secret Service; so I decided to appoint Rowley and thereafter talked with him considerably about the White House detail which he was more familiar with than Chief Baughman.
However, I did not in any sense conduct a day-to-day supervision, or close following, of its day-to-day operations. The Secret Service had been functioning for many years and the presumption from its record was that it had been functioning successfully. I think that the events that have developed since November have very clearly shown that some of the procedures, many of them, need to be changed and improved. I think this is probably largely due, to a considerable extent due, to a very rapid change which probably took place without our fully realizing its importance in the last 3 years, and which greatly increased the responsibility of the Secret Service. That is the greatly changed nature of Presidential travel.
Mr. Rankin. Will you describe to us how that affects the problems of the Secret Service?
Secretary Dillon. Yes. In earlier times, the Presidents did not travel very often. When he did travel, he generally traveled by train, which was a protected train. Doing that, he could not cover very many parts of the country, and the Secret Service could move easily right along with him on the train that he was on.
What happened since has been, first, the advent of airplanes. Presidents beginning with President Eisenhower began to move more rapidly and were able to travel considerably more, and on very short time differentials they could be in cities that were thousands of miles apart.
However, this only just began with President Eisenhower because, in the first place, jets were not yet available, and in the second place, in the last 4 years of his term, he had to take greater care of his health, and he didn't travel around the country quite as much as his successors have. So when President Kennedy came into office with the availability of, the relatively recent availability, of jets and his desire to travel, this greatly increased the burden on the Secret Service. Formerly when they had a trip, they used to send out an advance agent to some big town. Now the trip would be a 3-day trip, and there might be four towns, each one 1,000 miles apart, that would have to be covered thoroughly at the same time. I think that probably there was not a full realization by anyone of this problem.
Certainly the Secret Service came to me and said they needed more personnel, and we tried to get them more personnel. Chief Rowley testified, I thought quite convincingly, in 1962 before the various Appropriations Committees of the Congress and met with very little success because I think that this was not fully understood by the public. The Appropriations Committees were a reflection of public understanding, and probably it was not even fully understood within the Secret Service.
I would like——
Senator Russell. Has there been any increase, Mr. Secretary, in the number of agents assigned to guard the President. I thought there had been some increase in recent years?
Secretary Dillon. There has been some increase, and we have tried very hard to increase the Secret Service in the last 3 or 4 years. We have asked for more people every year, and while we never got the amount we asked for, we did get increases. I have the figures here. In 1961, the entire Secret Service amounted to 454 individuals, of whom 305 were classified as agents. In 1964, that is the fiscal year just finished, the figure was 571, of which 167 were clerks and 404 were agents. So we had achieved an increase of about 100 agents, a little over a third.
Mr. Dulles. That included both the counterfeiting responsibilities of the Secret Service as well as the Presidential protection?
Secretary Dillon. That is right. And I think it is important to note that the counterfeiting problem was also increasing in volume very rapidly and changing very rapidly at about the same time. Actually that may have started a few years earlier because of the development of photography, which enabled one to counterfeit by photography instead of having to do it by hand engraving.
Representative Ford. Wasn't the specific request for an increase in the White House detail—I use this in a broad sense for both the President and Vice President—primarily aimed at the increase of personnel for the Vice President?
Secretary Dillon. That was in one year.
Representative Ford. 1962?
Secretary Dillon. I think that was in—I think that was in 1963. In 1962 the law was passed, and we did have a deficiency appropriation which was given to us. The following year when we came up for our regular appropriation, we not only did not get the full amount that we thought was necessary to cover the Vice President, but they cut the protection we had been affording the Vice President in half, and whereas there had been 20 persons assigned, they reduced it to 10.
Representative Ford. But there had been no reduction in the funds for the protection of the President?
Secretary Dillon. For the White House detail; no.
Representative Ford. It was a reduction for the protection of the Vice President.
Secretary Dillon. That is correct. But the thing that I think we are coming to is, it is perfectly obvious that we have to do a great deal more in this advance work, field work, in interviewing people who are dangers to the President or could be classified as such. We need more people in the field on account of this. That is what I say was not probably fully realized, although Rowley specifically, when he first went up in 1962 asking for an increase, pitched it on that basis, but he did not have a very good reception from the Appropriations Committee at that time because they felt that the White House detail was the White House detail, right around the President. I don't think anyone fully understood the connection with people in the field. I am not sure that Secret Service made as good a case as they should, to be really understood on this. It has become clear now.
Representative Ford. Mr. Rowley in that presentation asked for additional funds for and personnel for the Protective Research Service?
Secretary Dillon. I don't think it was specifically for that. It was for protection of the President, and he was the first person that made this type of request. Baughman had always said that people in the field were counterfeiting and just worked a little bit for the President, and Rowley when he came in was the first one that made this claim that they were needed to actually protect the President. He wanted more people in the field to do these things, and that was the thing that did not go over right away. I think it would be interesting here. We have——
Mr. Rankin. May I interrupt a moment? We have a problem with some of the members of the Commission that have to go to the Congress right away for the vote. They would like to question you if they may.
Senator Cooper. I have a question which I think you can address yourself fully to later but considering these new factors which make the protection of the President more difficult, I would like to ask if it is your judgment that the Secret Service, if it is provided adequate personnel and if it is—if a broader criteria for the ascertainment of the persons who might be dangerous to the President is adopted, if it is your judgment that the Secret Service could meet these new factors and provide an effective protection for the President, taking into consideration the factors which you mentioned?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; I think they could. I think the answer is clearcut. I don't think that means that under every and all circumstances you could be absolutely a thousand percent certain that nothing can happen. You never can be in a situation like this. But I think they could be a great deal better, and you could feel everything has been done. We have just completed—the thing I wanted to say—this study we have been working on many months as to what is needed to provide this in the Secret Service. Chief Rowley was not able to give you this when he was here before. I have given a copy of this to Mr. Rankin. I think it ought to go into the record at this point.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, I will hand to you the document you just referred to, called Planning Document, U.S. Secret Service, and ask if that is the document that you were describing.
Secretary Dillon. Yes. That is the document; yes.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to ask leave at this time to mark this document our next exhibit number which I will furnish later to the reporter, and offer it in evidence as part of this examination.
The Chairman. Mr. Secretary, that is not a security matter that couldn't go into the record, is it?
Secretary Dillon. No. I have one thing I would like to say about that, and I think it should go into the record. What this is is our report as to how many personnel are needed and what has to be done and what they should do. We have transmitted that with a covering letter to the Bureau of the Budget. The final decision on what will be done on many of these things is taken in the light of recommendations of the Bureau of the Budget to the President and what he finally decides for budgetary reasons. So ordinarily budgetary matters are not published prior to the time the President has approved them. He hasn't approved this. He hasn't seen it, but I think under the circumstances I see no reason under this special circumstance, why this report should not go into the record, and I think it is perfectly all right.
The Chairman. The report may be admitted and take the next number.
(Commission Exhibit No. 1053-A was marked for identification and received in evidence.)
Representative Ford. This would be the recommendation of the Treasury Department to the Bureau of the Budget for the personnel and the funds for the Secret Service in fiscal year 1966?
Secretary Dillon. No. This is a recommendation to the Bureau of the Budget for the personnel and equipment that would be needed to put the Secret Service in what they consider adequate position to fully handle this problem. They feel that it would take about 20 months to get all the necessary people on board and trained. If this were started right away, as we think it could be if a reapportionment on a deficiency basis were approved, this could start in fiscal year 1965 and depending on whether such is approved, the fiscal year 1966 final recommendation would be affected. But this is the total picture, and it is assuming our recommendation that they start in the next couple of months.
Representative Ford. In other words, this is the plan that you would like instituted immediately regardless of budget considerations.
Secretary Dillon. That is right.
Mr. McCloy. Mr. Secretary, there is nothing in this exhibit that in any way, according to your judgment, would compromise the protection of the security of the President if it became——
Secretary Dillon. Oh, no; and there is also with it—it is just a covering letter but I think it is equally important—it is a letter which I wrote to the Director of the Budget on Monday when I forwarded this plan to him, and I think that probably should also go in because it has a recommendation at the end covering the matter Mr. Ford raised.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, I will ask you if this document, dated Angust 31, 1964, is a copy of the letter that you have just referred to now?
Secretary Dillon. That is correct.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask that this letter, dated August 31, 1964, directed "Dear Kermit," from the Secretary, be marked the next number in order and offered in evidence as part of the record.
The Chairman. It will be admitted.
(Commission Exhibit No. 1053-B was marked for identification and received in evidence.)
Secretary Dillon. It is marked "limited official use," and I think that should be declassified for this purpose.
Mr. Rankin. Now, Mr. Secretary, will you very briefly describe the general plan of your planning document. We have that so we can use it in considerable detail, but if you can just summarize briefly.
Secretary Dillon. Well, in brief, this asks for a total of 205 additional agents, which is about—not quite but nearly—a 50 percent increase from the 415 agents they now have. It asks also for 50 clerks to add to the 171 that are presently there. Those are stenographers, typists and other clerical workers. And for five technicians. Of this the idea is to put 17 agents and the 5 technicians in the PRS. Five would be used to maintain 24-hour coverage in the PRS which is not presently in force because of lack of personnel. One would add to the Research and Countermeasures Unit to fill out three full units that could be operating all the time. Six of them would do advance work for PRS with local agencies and institutions. One of the new things we have instituted is that each time they do an advance, someone from the PRS goes out and works with the local law enforcement agencies. I think that is obviously a very important thing. They need more people in view of the volume of traveling. Then they also need five more employees to expand our liaison with the other law enforcement and intelligence agencies. We now have one man assigned really full time to that. We found even in the period that we have been doing this that while that is a great help, much the best way would be to have individuals assigned to each agency that work full time with the agency, know the people in the agency, and that is the only way we can be sure we have adequate liaison.
Mr. Dulles. May I ask, would that include the FBI?
Secretary Dillon. Oh, yes.
Mr. Dulles. And the CIA and military intelligence services?
Secretary Dillon. Oh, yes.
Mr. Dulles. And the State Department possibly?
Secretary Dillon. Yes.
Representative Ford. Could you specify those agencies. I was interested in what agencies you were referring to.
Secretary Dillon. Well, I would think certainly it would be the military, the FBI, the security services of the State Department, and the CIA.
Now, there may be additional ones. There are additional ones within the Treasury Department. I think we probably have one, for instance, with the intelligence section of the Internal Revenue Service, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Unit, and so forth, which a good deal can come out of.
In addition we recommend here five technical specialists, two of which would be highly trained computer technicians, programers, and three less well trained to work with these others. The purpose of this is to automate the whole PRS operation. We have been thinking of that for some time. It was something that obviously needed to be done.
Mr. Rankin. Excuse me, Mr. Secretary. Will you describe a little more what you mean by automate.
Secretary Dillon. I mean using electronic processing, punchcard systems, so that they would be able to pull out of their files for any locality, various different types of people that might be a danger or might have made threats to the President or to other high officials, so that they would be able to function rapidly and well in planning protection as the President travels to these various cities.
Mr. Rankin. Does that include computer systems?
Secretary Dillon. Yes. And what I was going to say was about 2 or 3 months before the events in Dallas, the Secret Service had asked the IBM Co. to make a study of this problem for it. That study was not completed until after the events in Dallas, and it did not prove satisfactory because from our point of view it did not go into enough detail in being able to handle criteria so you could tell when you retrieved a name from the file whether it was truly dangerous or not.
We needed a more complex system and after working with Rand Corp., the Research Analysis Corp., and also talking with IBM, we all felt the best way would be to hire some good programers, knowing our problems, and then work out a pilot program and get consultants in.
One of the things we recommend here is appropriation of $100,000 to get consultants from IBM Co., Honeywell or other companies, and get pilot machines to try to work out the details of this system.
Mr. McCloy. For the record, Mr. Secretary, you had no electronic system of this character operating before the assassination?
Secretary Dillon. No. Now, the total of that is 17 agents and 5 specialists for the PRS.
In addition, for a long time, Mr. Rowley has believed that it would be preferable to improve the capacity of the White House detail if we could establish a headquarters pool of 18 men where new individuals who are going into the White House detail would be fully trained first—before, they had to be trained sort of partially on the job—and also through which you could rotate people from the field from time to time, bringing them up to date on Presidential protection.
So we would ask for 18 people, 18 spaces for that.
We have asked for 25 spaces to provide adequate protection for the Vice President in addition to the 10 that are already on board.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, excuse me. I think spaces may not be clear to all our readers. Will you explain what that means?
Secretary Dillon. Twenty-five job positions. I think the thing that is very important here is to keep in mind that to keep one man on the job around the clock covering a post, which is the way the Secret Service works—one man that would be always with the President or the Vice President, that would be always watching his house—to get one man requires five job positions. In the first place, the coverage required is for 24 hours a day.
In the second place, there are holidays, there are weekends off. On a full-time basis, the Secret Service works a 40-hour week, 5-day week, as the rest of the Government does, and there are provisions for sickness and leave, and so forth. When the number of hours that a man can work a year full time is figured out, it requires 5 men to fill one spot.
So that is one reason why these protective numbers may seem rather high to the uninitiated.
When you are talking about the Vice President, and 10 people are required to produce two posts, coverage of two posts, it is obviously not adequate because you have to cover his house, whether he is there or not, so that someone can't come in and put a destructive device in it.
This simply can't be done with the present numbers that are assigned.
Then, going beyond this to complete this list, there is a request for 145 agents in the field offices who would handle the substantially increased volume of security investigations. We are now getting about twice as many referrals already as we did before. Instead of something like 25,000, we are up to something over 50,000, and they expect it will go over 60,000 next year.
To really run these down out in the districts, they need, obviously, more men than they have had.
Now, one thing that they also need these fellows for, which I think is important, is keeping track of more dangerous individuals. They have tried to keep track of a few of them. But I think that probably a good many more should be put on that list. It requires more people, so they can periodically check up, and particularly before a visit, that all of these people are looked at to see where they are and what they have been doing recently before the President visits a particular place.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, while you are on that subject, could you explain to the Commission how you make use of your agents in the White House duty and those in the field so they will understand that?
Secretary Dillon. Well, yes; the White House detail is composed of about 60 people now. About half of these are what you might call, more or less, permanent employees. They have been there for a long time, 10 years, 12 years, 15 years, on the White House detail.
The other half are shorter time employees who generally serve up to 3 years on the White House detail and then either leave because they prefer other duty in the Secret Service or sometimes leave because the Secret Service feels they can do other duty better.
Mr. Rankin. Now, for the protection of the President. Mr. Secretary, is there any need to have the White House detail have any connection or reciprocal arrangement with those in the field?
Secretary Dillon. Well, I think it is a great help. Because of this turnover that I mentioned, very many of the agents in the field have had service in the White House detail of up to 2 or 3 years. So they know what the problems are and they are able to fit in very easily and very readily and very quickly with the White House detail which is with the President when he comes out on a trip.
Mr. Dulles. By fieldwork you mean attached to your field stations, of which I believe there are 65 in the United States?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; that is right. And if they had not had this training, obviously they would be enforcement officers and they could work with White House detail when they come out, but they wouldn't be able to be as cognizant of its procedures, how the matter is handled, and they wouldn't be able to be fitted right into the routine as well as they can presently. I think it is highly valuable that we have this pool of experienced people around the country and, of course, this is again one reason that if we get a few more people out there, we will be able to do better.
One of the additional things that we are now undertaking, is, for instance, these building surveys that are partially a result of a study by the Research Analysis Corp. This seems to be something that we can probably do something about. We will probably use more people when the President travels through a city than we have in the past because you can have some success in designating certain buildings as high risk or higher risk than other buildings, and as I say, they are now trying to map the whole United States, at least the major cities where the President might travel, the routes he might follow, coming in from an airport, going to a major stadium or something like that so they will know ahead of time what the danger spots are. And one of the obvious ones which has come out is a warehouse where there are not so many people in it and where someone could more likely be alone and therefore more dangerous. A building that is full of people is not as dangerous because the other people would be watching. It is that sort of criteria. The same thing about roof access. If there is easy access to a roof and people are not usually on it, that would be more dangerous than if there wasn't.
Mr. Rankin. Now, have you made quite a change in the Secret Service in regard to the inspection of buildings along a motorcade route since the assassination?
Secretary Dillon. Oh yes. We have been doing this, and we have used a great many more people as a result of this in our procedures, both local police officers and also our own people. The figures we have here are interesting. They are in this report. From February 11—I don't know why that was the beginning date for these figures—but from there through June 30, we used 9,500 hours of work by other enforcement agencies. About 2,000 of that came from the Justice Department and the rest of it from other Treasury agencies, the biggest one being the Intelligence Section of the Internal Revenue, but also the Bureau of Narcotics, Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Unit and so on.
Mr. Rankin. And that is in connection with this motorcade route?
Secretary Dillon. That is largely in connection with that, both planning it out ahead and also stationing them in buildings that they thought might be difficult.
Mr. Rankin. Now, Mr. Secretary, returning to your Planning document, is there anything else that you have not covered in that?
Secretary Dillon. Well, this is just the number of people. It does not include in this figure any purchases of automatic data processing equipment. It just includes the study I mentioned. There are funds for a new armored car, various funds for improving the intrusion detection at the White House, and lighting at the White House. There is no automatic system now. If anyone breaks through the fence at night, nobody knows it unless someone should see them. They have developed such systems and the Secret Service would like to get one installed, so if anyone broke through, a bell rings automatically, and they know someone is on the grounds, and they can take action accordingly. Also, they would like emergency lighting that would be hidden behind various trees or behind the wall so that if someone broke through at a place, the lights would go on automatically and the person would be seen. Then there is just miscellaneous equipment that goes with increased staff, such as automobiles, radios, travel and transportation that goes with more staff, and so forth.
I mentioned some of the things briefly that they intend to do. I mentioned the PRS program, and ADP study. These special agents in the field I think we have covered pretty well. They have clearly in here a number of things they have to do, which there certainly is plenty of. In addition to that—I mentioned the pool. In addition to that we have made arrangements with the Department of Agriculture and the General Services Administration has put the funds in their budget, to get a new training facility. All we have now is a pistol range out at the Arboretum, and this new one will have classrooms, pistol range, and a place where they can practice automotive protection on a practice road. This will be out at Beltsville at the Agricultural Station out there. It is very useful. There are no funds for that in the plan.
Mr. McCloy. May I just ask you about the armored car, Mr. Secretary. Is that to transport the President?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; that is right. A protected car, a second one. One was fixed for the Government free by the Ford Motor Co., but our guess is that it cost the Ford Motor Co. somewhere between $175,000 and $200,000 to do this, and it didn't cost the Secret Service anything, although there was some research work done on the glass and armor by the Defense Department. This was combined with research work they needed for their own use, to develop protective glass and armor to use in helicopters in Vietnam. They split the cost. It cost about $30,000. So I think they assigned $15,000 of it to this project. But it was paid by the Defense Department. That is the only cost on that one. But I think the companies think that the Government should buy the new car.
Mr. McCloy. We had some testimony here in connection with the assassination where it was developed that the access within the car to the body of the President became very important. In the car in which the President was assassinated there was a bar behind the front seat making it very difficult if not impossible for the Secret Service man who was operating from the front seat to get to the body of the President, and we were strongly of the view that cars that should be hereafter designed should have freedom of access. Either the man should be in the jump seat or there should be means by which you could get, the Secret Service man could get to the body of the President in case of a threat of an attack, and I think it is likely we will mention that in the report. But it seemed to me this is something to bear in mind in connection with the design of a new armored car.
Secretary Dillon. That would apply to an open car.
Mr. McCloy. Yes.
Secretary Dillon. It wouldn't apply I think to a fully——
Mr. McCloy. Fully armored; no. That is right.
Secretary Dillon. Closed car.
Mr. McCloy. Usually on those motorcades you like to be seen.
Secretary Dillon. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. Have you covered your planning document, then, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Dillon. I think that covers this.
Mr. McCloy. May I ask a question at this point? I have a date at the White House at 1 o'clock, not with the President, but with Mr. Bundy, who wants to talk with me.
How long do you think we will be with the Secretary and will we resume after lunch?
Mr. Rankin. I was hoping to get through. I presume he was hoping we would.
Secretary Dillon. I would like to if we could. I have to leave tomorrow to go to Japan.
Mr. McCloy. Well, would it interrupt you if I ask a few questions?
Mr. Rankin. No; go ahead.
The Chairman. Ask what questions you want?
Mr. McCloy. You testified, Mr. Secretary, you felt with these additions that the Secret Service would be competent to cope with the added requirements for the protection of the President which have occurred.
In testifying to that effect, do you include—you include the investigative services of your own which are quite apart, as I understand it, from the information that you may gather from other agencies?
Secretary Dillon. That is correct; yes.
Mr. McCloy. We have had the thought that perhaps the Protective Research Section or Division of your organization wasn't as well equipped as it should have been nor as it might have been presumably for the purely preventive investigative work.
Do you feel that with this new plan of yours, that that would, be adequately taken care of?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; I do. It was not equipped, I think, adequately in two ways. First, it did not, as is clearly shown by the events in Dallas, receive information on enough dangerous people. At least, they didn't receive the information on Lee Oswald.
So that what is required is the development of criteria, better criteria, that can be circulated to law enforcement agencies generally, and which will insure that adequate information comes in. We are making progress there.
I think you have already seen a document with some criteria that were developed, which has been circulated in Washington. A similar document has now been circulated by the Secret Service Chief to all special agents asking them to write a briefer but somewhat similar letter to all chiefs of police, sheriffs, and State police in their localities which asks them to furnish any such information to the local Secret Service agent. That is being disseminated now throughout the country. It will be completed within the next 6 weeks or so.
In addition, we have established an interagency committee which has as one of its jobs the development of better criteria that will really result in getting the kind of information we want without swamping us. If we are too broad in our criteria and we get a million names, obviously nothing can work.
This committee is holding its first formal meeting next week. It has representatives of the President's Office of Science and Technology, of the Department of Defense, which is the Advanced Research Projects outfit, of the CIA, an individual who is highly competent in their file section and who understands the setting up of complex files and retrieval, that sort of business, and four people from PRS, the PRS head inspector, Mr. Thacker, the head of the research and development, Mr. Bouck, the head of the files section, Mr. Young, and Mr. Stoner, who is now handling the liaison job.
There will also be, although the individual has not yet been named, a representative of the FBI, and with that I think that we will be able to develop criteria that will both be useful to us and be an improvement on criteria that was so far developed with the help of outside consultants.
Mr. McCloy. Mr. Secretary, the impression has been gained, I think, by the Commission that perhaps too great emphasis has been directed to the mere investigation of the threat, of the particular individual, the crank, or the fellow that sends the poison food or the threatening letter, and perhaps not enough in a broader scope, recognizing, of course, that you can't be too broad without defeating your own purpose, but that there are perhaps groups or other areas of ferment that could provoke an attack quite without the threat. Would you comment on that?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; one of the criteria that is presently out is meant to cover individuals who have threatened bodily harm to any high Government official, with the idea that threat might be switched and visited upon the President.
That would have worked in this particular case in Dallas if that had been a specific criterion on at that time, which it wasn't. We are just talking about threats to the President. So I think that was one obvious case.
We hope that this committee would be able to possibly come up with other groups that can be identified that would fit into this without bringing in too many names.
There is one that may or may not work out. I just cite this as an example. People with bad conduct records in the Marine Corps for some reason have had a very bad record thereafter and there is quite a connection of crime with that class of individual.
It may be that it would even be worthwhile, if it is not too large, to cover this. Why that is so, nobody has quite figured out. I think the eye was focused on them because of this event in Dallas, but then it was discovered that this group has been involved in an awful lot of other crimes of violence.
Mr. Dulles. As you read the Oswald life story, it looks as though he was going into the Marines as a kind of escape.
Secretary Dillon. It could have been.
Mr. Dulles. What you say is very interesting in that connection.
The Chairman. Will you excuse us just a moment until we see if we can finish up.
Secretary Dillon. I would think you might want to put into the record at this point a copy of the memorandum that I mentioned from Mr. Rowley to the special agents asking them to send letters to the local law enforcement institutions.
Mr. Rankin. Yes. Mr. Secretary, I ask you to examine the memorandum dated August 26, from Chief Rowley and ask you if that, with the attachment, is the memorandum that you just described?
Secretary Dillon. That is. Fine. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave to give this document that the Secretary has just referred to the next number in order and offer it in evidence as part of this examination.
The Chairman. It may be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1053-C, for identification and received in evidence.)
Secretary Dillon. There is one other item—you asked whether there is anything else in general. We felt that the Secret Service did not have adequate regularized scientific advice. They got some—they have been getting it over the years from time to time from the President's office of Science and Technology, but we tried to regularize that. I have worked out an arrangement with Dr. Hornig and written him a letter which embodies that arrangement so that they would have their services constantly available to the Secret Service and would give certain specific advice; first, keeping the Secret Service informed of scientific developments of possible use in providing protection for the President, etc.; advising or arranging for scientific advice to the Secret Service in connection with specific problems of Presidential protection as they may arise; and reviewing the technical aspects of the protective operations of the Secret Service and its development program, and assisting it in establishing priorities and schedules for introducing technical and scientific improvements. I have an answer from Dr. Hornig saying they would be glad to carry this out and saying that he concurs in my judgment that the increasingly complex nature of Presidential protection requires that the Secret Service have access to the best scientific advice and that they are glad to take on this job.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, I will ask you if the exchange of letters, dated August 31, between you and Mr. Hornig are the copies that I have just given you?
Secretary Dillon. That is right.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave——
Mr. Dulles. Just for the record, I wonder if he would identify Mr. Hornig. I think we know, but possibly——
Secretary Dillon. Oh, yes; Dr. Hornig is Special Assistant to the President for Science and Technology.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chief Justice, I ask leave to give this document the next number in order and offer it in evidence as part of the examination.
The Chairman. It might be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit 1053-D for identification, and was received in evidence.)
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, would you just briefly tell us without getting into any classified matters or matters that are not properly to be revealed because of the effects they might have on the protection of the President, why the Secret Service would need a scientific adviser?
Secretary Dillon. Well, I think this is because they do a number of things. First, they need it in the communications field. There are all sorts of advances there, and they have been assuring or working to assure the security of the communications of the President. In addition there are all sorts of new developments in the form of protective devices that are being developed all the time, better forms of bulletproof glass, better forms of protection of that kind, new types of protection against access. For instance, there is under development, I understand, a sort of a radar type of fence so that you can see if a person comes through a certain area without there being any fence there.
They are developing, working on the development of other protection devices. They have had very substantial progress recently, I understand, in the detection of weapons that someone might be carrying, devices that are more effective. This is something people have tried to develop, I guess, for a long time. Apparently they are having some success. It is that sort of thing that is very necessary.
And then in addition this field of computer technology is highly scientific and complex, and I think that the scientific adviser is in an excellent position to be sure that the Secret Service has the very best advice in trying to identify their needs and develop the machines for those needs.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, it has been suggested to the Commission that it might be of assistance to you and other Secretaries of the Treasury and the Secret Service to have someone acting as Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Treasury, having supervision, under your direction, of the Secret Service in its various activities, both protection of the President and otherwise. Do you think that that would be of help or would it not?
Secretary Dillon. Well, I am not sure. You see, we have an Assistant Secretary, and I should think he probably would be able to do it as adequately as having another special assistant.
We also have a Special Assistant for Law Enforcement Coordination who coordinates the general work of all our law enforcement agencies and works with outside agencies on overall law enforcement problems.
Probably of interest is that the Treasury Department, I think, has more law enforcement officials working for it than any other agency of Government. It is a very large law enforcement organization, although there are a number of separate organizations that work in different fields.
So we already have this. I think that it probably can be made tighter and should be made tighter.
One aspect of this matter, I think, is the advent of computers, of course, which is very recent and has changed what can be done effectively in this PRS. I think that should be done anyway. One aspect of this matter that probably hasn't had as close and detailed supervision as we may feel appropriate now is the White House detail. It has always operated over the years in very close contact with the President and has operated in a slightly different manner with different Presidents, depending on their wishes.
And it has been felt that as long as they were doing an adequate job, that it was pretty hard to come in and tell them exactly what they should do on a day-by-day basis because the President might not want them to do that sort of thing.
It is a very complex and personal assignment here that is a little different than any other law enforcement agency, and I certainly think it should be followed more closely—gone into in more detail—from the top level of the Treasury Department probably than it has, but even if it is, we are still going to have this problem that we won't be able to tell the President exactly what he should do in each case. So there never will be that close sort of supervision of day-to-day operations of the White House detail—it wouldn't be effective anyway—that there would be in another police operation.
Mr. Rankin. After the assassination, you did have Mr. Carswell take over certain work in this area, did you not?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; Mr. Carswell is my special assistant, in my own office. He is a lawyer by profession and training. He has had investigative experience, 3 years in Naval Intelligence on the active side of it, and so he has some knowledge of this whole type of operation, and I felt in view of this investigation, in view of the work that had been done, it was important to have someone with legal experience that was close to me, that had immediate access any minute to me working on the matter. Then while this thing was running along, they would get to me at any time, and I could ask questions, they would bring matters to me, we could handle this matter of being sure that a proper long-range plan was developed, and that the whole effort in the Secret Service was organized as well as possible. That is why I asked Mr. Carswell, as part of his work for me, to undertake this special assignment, which he has done, and I think done very well.
Mr. Rankin. It has been suggested to the Commission that it might be helpful if the National Security Council or some Cabinet level committee would help to supervise in this area of Presidential protection. Do you have any comments you care to make?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; I think that would be helpful because in relationship with the President, if there are questions of what is the proper protection, I think a group of the Cabinet would have a stronger voice, and also having a group, the President would be more sure that this was not just one man's ideas, that it would be helpful.
I am not quite sure about the National Security Council as such because as I recall, the President himself is the Chairman of that, so he would be advising himself, and I suppose this would be a group to advise the President.
Mr. Dulles. We thought there might be certain advantages in that because if you prescribe things for the President to do, and he doesn't want to do them, they don't get done in the field of protection.
Secretary Dillon. That is right. Then if you describe it in the meeting at which he was present, that might be well.
The Chairman. I suppose, Mr. Secretary, also if a committee of that kind was composed of the Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and the Attorney General, that you would have on that committee the men who had all of the agencies that would of necessity have to be coordinated in order to bring all the work into focus.
Secretary Dillon. Yes, and the Central Intelligence Agency.
The Chairman. Yes.
Secretary Dillon. One thing about the National Security Council is that neither the Secretary of the Treasury nor the Attorney General are members of the National Security Council by law.
The Secretary of the Treasury has been asked by the Presidents to sit with the National Security Council for some years, practically since its beginning.
The Attorney General has sat with it during the last few years, but I don't know whether that will or will not continue into the future. So there is a certain problem there.
If this assignment is given by law to the National Security Council, and some other President comes along that doesn't ask the Secretary of the Treasury or the Attorney General to sit with it, the two people who are probably most concerned wouldn't have any part in this.
Mr. Dulles. It would have to provide that in all matters relating to Presidential security, of course, they will be present. One way of doing it, I would say.
Secretary Dillon. Yes; there should be some such provision; otherwise I see some advantages as you say.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, are you familiar with the method of selection of the Secret Service personnel?
Secretary Dillon. Only somewhat. They do get young men who meet their qualifications. They do hire them at GS-7 and they stay there for 1 year. If they have a year of satisfactory service, they are promoted two grades. Then if they have 2 more years of satisfactory service, they are promoted another double jump to GS-11.
These individuals do not have the legal qualifications that some other law enforcement agencies such as the FBI require, where you have to be a lawyer or an accountant, because they do other kinds of investigative work and that wasn't thought to be necessary in the case of the Secret Service.
But the Secret Service has felt, and I have inquired into this, that they have no difficulty in getting young men of the highest type to come and to take these jobs under the present setup.
Mr. Rankin. Do you have a printed or written list of the various qualifications that you seek in regard to the Secret Service?
Secretary Dillon. I don't—I am not aware of that. There probably is such a list; yes.
Mr. Rankin. If you have such a list will you please supply it to us?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; I will be glad to.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chief Justice, I would like to ask leave to give the next number of exhibits to that document once supplied and make it part of the record.
The Chairman. It may be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 1053-E for identification and received in evidence.)
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Secretary, are you familiar in a general way with the investigation that the Commission has been making with regard to this matter?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; In a general way, I have followed it through Mr. Carswell, who has followed it more closely, and through the Secret Service, so I am generally aware of it.
Mr. Rankin. And are you generally aware of the investigation in connection with the assassination, the entire matter?
Secretary Dillon. Oh, yes.
Mr. Rankin. Have you made any inquiry in the Secret Service to determine whether or not Lee Harvey Oswald was ever an agent of that Service?
Secretary Dillon. Yes. I heard rumors of this type of thing very early, and I asked the direct question of Chief Rowley and was informed that he never had any connection with the Secret Service.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know of any evidence in regard to Lee Harvey Oswald being an agent of any part of the government?
Secretary Dillon. I am not aware of any evidence myself in that way, but I don't think I necessarily would be fully competent in that.
Mr. Rankin. But you have never heard of any such evidence?
Secretary Dillon. I have never heard it.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know of any area of the investigation of the Commission that you would like to suggest that we do more than we have insofar as you are familiar with it?
Secretary Dillon. No. As far as I know, the investigation has been very thorough.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know of any credible evidence that would lead you or anyone to believe that there was a conspiracy, foreign or domestic, involved in the assassination of President Kennedy?
Secretary Dillon. No. From all the evidence I have seen, this was the work of one deranged individual.
Mr. Rankin. And who would that be?
Secretary Dillon. Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know of any evidence in regard to any connection between Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald?
Secretary Dillon. No, no.
Mr. Rankin. Is there anything that you would like to call to the attention of the Commission at this time that we should know or that we should cover?
Secretary Dillon. No; I think we have covered my area of competence pretty thoroughly this morning. I can't think of anything else.
The Chairman. Mr. Dulles?
Mr. Dulles. Doug, in the field that in the Commission here we have described as the preventive intelligence field; that is, trying to identify beforehand the individuals or the type of individuals who might be a danger to the President, have you ever thought of any possible division of responsibility and of work between the Secret Service and the FBI to define more clearly which each should do in that field?
Secretary Dillon. Well, my own feeling is that the agency that handles the actual work of deciding who the individuals are that the Secret Service should watch out for, which is the PRS, would function much better and would strengthen the Service if it works as it does now as part of the whole Secret Service operation, and working very closely with the people who are on the White House detail and not having to be involved in a liaison operation somewhere else.
So I think our problem is to strengthen this PRS, and I think that this long-range plan is a good beginning.
I don't think it is necessarily an end because as soon as we develop the automated machinery that we need, then we will know a little better, and we may need some people to make full use of that.
But this is enough to get it underway and all you can use, I think, well, for that purpose at present.
I would think that there is a liaison problem which exists whenever you have liaison with anyone, whether it is within your department or without, as long as it is a separate organization. And I think there has been clearly a problem of inadequate liaison with other Government agencies.
It is much better now. We have already taken steps. And additional steps of assigning specific liaison officers will help. But I think this is something that has just got to be worked out continually at all levels to make it work. So the problem is not unique to this situation; it affects all intergovernmental relations.
Mr. Dulles. Today with the Communist Party and with rightist groups and we have more and more groups—we have always had them, but we seem to have more than others which might breed up elements of danger—is there any part of that you would like to turn over to anybody else or——
Secretary Dillon. Well, I think the identification of groups that are likely to be dangerous as groups would probably more likely fall on the FBI because they study the background of these groups and they are aware of them and try to penetrate them, and so forth.
So I think that from that point of view, they would certainly be the purveyor, the first purveyor of the information that is needed and the ones who would have the responsibility of signaling to the Secret Service that this is a dangerous group and to the best of our knowledge these are its members. Some of the members would probably be subterranean and might not be known. And it would be important that they pass on that information on the individuals.
The Secret Service I think would be more concerned in dealing with—trying to protect against the actual individuals.
I think that probably on the basis of thinking of something that would be sort of an international plot, Communist Party plot, or something like that, I think you probably need all arms of the Government working on that.
We can't say that Secret Service can do it alone. Central Intelligence Agency might get wind of it anywhere in the world or FBI would have to use all its resources. Just to beat back something like that you would need the combined resources of whatever you have got.
I think there is sort of a greater thrust of continuing responsibility obviously on the FBI for following these groups, as you call them. For following individuals which may come to their notice because they were somewhat deranged or did something bad at one time, they would then pass that on to the Secret Service, and with adequate manpower, I think that the Secret Service would have more or less the primary responsibility of following those sort of individuals.
The Chairman. I suppose you wouldn't want to take away from the Secret Service entirely the concern that it might have for groups?
The Chairman. And the necessity of going into those groups to ascertain further whether they were a threat to the President?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; but I don't think it is their function to try, for instance, to have undercover people to penetrate groups or do things of that nature which the FBI generally does.
The Chairman. Yes.
Secretary Dillon. And it is their job to do that. That would require, of course, a much larger organization, but I certainly think the Service has to keep track of them, and they can't just say we have no interest and everything must come from somewhere else. I don't mean that at all. But that is not their primary responsibility. I thought that is what Mr. Dulles' view of it was.
The Chairman. Anything more?
Mr. Dulles. Mr. Secretary, just one other question. It raises the question of the combination of the—in the Secret Service of the two functions of Presidential protection and of the counterfeiting and related investigatory duties in connection with counterfeiting. Have you got any comments on that? Is that a logical or wise combination or would you suggest any change there?
Secretary Dillon. Well, these are two separate functions. I do think that there is a certain advantage to it that has developed and which I think should be maintained. That comes from the fact that counterfeiting is not an operation that is overly large; so it means that people who are engaged in this can very well be trained. Many have had tours such as earlier in the White House detail.
Mr. Dulles. You transfer back and forth, do you, from these two functions?
Secretary Dillon. Oh, yes; many of the people after a little service in the White House detail find that life too strenuous, the hours bad, or prefer not to travel, and so forth, prefer the type of work that opens up in the counterfeiting section. Then they move out into one of the field offices, and there are probably a few more possibilities as heads of these fields offices for higher level jobs than there would be in the White House detail. So there is an interchange.
Now, that interchange, I think, is useful because you do have these field offices that you can then call upon to do protective work, and I think there can be much more of that because, as what I indicated earlier, with this development of more detailed criteria, the greater number of people coming in to check up on, there are going to be more investigations in the field that should be done by the Secret Service, and it can be done by these people who have had this training and who know what to look for and who have worked on this same sort of assignment.
They also are readily available and fit right into the pattern of Presidential protection when the President goes to their area. So I think that is another great advantage.
So therefore I think there is substantial advantage by having this additional assignment which is in a different area, counterfeiting. I think it is probable happenstance; it grew that way. It could have been in some other different area, but the size of it which is large enough but not too large I think combines very well with the White House detail to give us a possibility of making a very effective operation.
Mr. Dulles. Do I correctly assume from what you have said that initially your field offices were largely organized for the counterfeiting side of the work but that is now changing, and more and more the work of the field office is coming into the Presidential protection?
Secretary Dillon. Well, I think certainly the amount that they will be doing on Presidential protection has greatly increased.
The counterfeiting hasn't decreased. That has increased also. But whereas earlier I think they were only used in Presidential protection when they had to be, when they were pulled off their other jobs and brought to Washington and sent to travel on a trip or something like that, because extra people were needed, I think now if we get an adequate staff they will be doing more of this as a regular routine part of their job, investigating people in their areas as well as investigating counterfeit cases in their area.
So they will have more or less two permanent jobs to do.
The Chairman. While you may have had a decrease in counterfeiting, I suppose you have had a great increase in forgeries, haven't you?
Secretary Dillon. Yes; we have had an increase I said in counterfeiting and also in forgeries.
The Chairman. Oh, in counterfeiting. I misunderstood you. I thought you said you had a decrease.
Secretary Dillon. No; a great increase in counterfeiting on account of development of these methods of photography.
The Chairman. Yes; I recall now.
Secretary Dillon. That is similar to check forgery which is the same problem on Government checks which has also increased.
Mr. Dulles. That is all I have, Mr. Chief Justice.
The Chairman. Very well. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Before we adjourn, I would like to say to you, Mr. Secretary, that the Secret Service has been most cooperative ever since this Commission was formed. It has been very attentive to our every wish and has been very helpful throughout. We appreciate it very much indeed.
Secretary Dillon. Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice.
The Chairman. Also, we appreciate the very fine work which the Internal Revenue agents did in making a study of reconstructing income of persons involved in the investigation and the other assistance that the agents gave in connection with our work.
[In connection with the testimony of Secretary Dillon the Commission requested and received additional information on Secret Service budget requests for the fiscal years 1960 through 1965. The document containing the information was marked as Commission Exhibit No. 1053-F for identification and received in evidence.]
We will adjourn now.
(Whereupon, at 1:25 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.)
[Sunday, September 6, 1964]
TESTIMONY OF MRS. LEE HARVEY OSWALD RESUMED
The President's Commission met at 3:20 p.m., on September 6, 1964, at the U.S. Naval Air Station, Dallas, Tex.
Present were Senator Richard Russell, presiding; Senator John Sherman Cooper, and Congressman Hale Boggs, members.
Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; Dean R. G. Storey, special counsel to the attorney general of Texas; Leon I. Gopadze and Peter P. Gregory, interpreters; and John Joe Howlett, Secret Service agent.
[Note.—The witness, Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald, having been previously sworn in these proceedings, testified through the interpreters as shown in this transcript as follows: *Translation is by Mr. Paul D. Gregory, interpreter; **translation is by Mr. Leon I. Gopadze, interpreter. Where the answer or a paragraph shown as part of an answer has no asterisk, the answer is by the witness herself without the use of the interpreters.]
Mr. Rankin. Senator Russell, will you swear the witness?
Senator Russell. Since she is already under oath in this hearing, I assume that oath will carry over?
Mr. Rankin. All right.
Senator Russell. You understand that you have been sworn?*
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Gregory, have you been sworn in connection with these proceedings?
Senator Russell. Will you do it, Mr. Rankin?
Mr. Rankin. Will you rise and raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony that you are going to translate of Mrs. Oswald will be truly translated?
Mr. Gregory. To the best of my knowledge and ability, so help me God.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Gopadze, have you been sworn as a translator in these proceedings?
Mr. Gopadze. No, sir.
Mr. Rankin. Will you rise, please?
Do you solemnly swear that your translation of anything of the testimony of Mrs. Oswald will be true and correct, to the best of your knowledge?
Mr. Gopadze. I do.
Mr. Rankin. Thank you. Mrs. Oswald, we're going to ask you rather informally a number of questions about matters that have come up that we would like to get your testimony about. Senator Russell will start, then Senator Cooper will have some, and then I'll have a few I would like to ask you about, and Representative Boggs will have some.
Representative Boggs. I suggest we designate Senator Russell as chairman of this meeting.
Mr. Rankin. Will you record Senator Russell, Miss Reporter, as the chairman of the meeting, please?
The Reporter. Yes, sir.
Dean Storey. This is Miss Oliver. She is the reporter to Judge Hughes, a Federal judge here.
Mr. Rankin. Yes; we know her well by her reporting in other matters for us.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, there may be some repetition in what we say, in the testimony that was taken in Washington, because, I among others, could not attend that hearing, so you will understand if we ask questions that are similar to those that were asked of you when you were in Washington on other occasions.*
We will try to avoid any more of that than we can help.
I have read all of your testimony. I don't mean that I recall all of it, but I read it, as well as your memoirs that were submitted to the Commission.
When you first met Lee Oswald, did he ever mention anything about politics or his political philosophy?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. Did you ever ask him his reason for coming to Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Not the first evening when we got acquainted.
Senator Russell. Prior to the time that you were married to him, did you ask him his reasons for coming to Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. Why did he say that he had come to Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He told me that the Soviet Union is the outstanding Communist country and he wanted to see it with his own eyes.
Senator Russell. Well, I notice in your testimony that you said that his memoirs insofar as he claimed that he wished to be a citizen of the Soviet Union were erroneous?*
In other words, I want to continue the statement so there won't be any confusion—I'm not trying to trap her. But that he told you that he had been offered citizenship in the Soviet Union and had declined?* **
**Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
*Yes, that's what he said to me.
Senator Russell. Did he give any reasons why he declined citizenship in the Soviet Union?*
*Mrs. Oswald. The reason he gave me for declining to become a Soviet citizen was because he said that in case he did not like the way they do things in the Soviet Union, it would be easier for him to leave the country than if he did become a citizen.
Senator Russell. After you were married to Lee, did he complain about the way they did things in the Soviet Union?* **
Mrs. Oswald. What?
Mr. Gregory. Senator, excuse me, sir. I'm a little mixed up on your question. Would you mind to repeat that question, sir?
Senator Russell. Did he ever, after their marriage, complain about conditions as he found them in the Soviet Union, or the way they did things in the Soviet Union? I believe that was the word you said she used.*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; he did.
Senator Russell. What was the subject of his complaint?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He did not like his job. He did not like the wage scale that they paid him, not only for him but for people that were engaged in the same line of work.
*Then, he was unhappy about the restrictions that his movements were subjected to, being a noncitizen of the Soviet Union. Every 3 months he was obliged to report—every 3 months or every so often——
Senator Russell. Periodically?
*Mrs. Oswald. Periodically, he had to report to a certain government institution, where they would extend his permit of residence.
Senator Russell. Were there any other restrictions on his movements? If he had reported duly as he was required, could he have gone down to Kharkov or any other place that he might have wished to go? * **
*Mrs. Oswald. Of course, in addition to restrictions imposed on his movements, there were other things that he was dissatisfied with in the Soviet Union.
Senator Russell. Do you care to give any of those?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He was dissatisfied with high prices for everything that he had to pay. He was dissatisfied with the quarters, living quarters that he had.
Senator Russell. Do you know whether or not he had any friends that he made there in Minsk while he was living there?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. Did most of them work in the same plant where he did or did he make other friends out in the community?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He had many acquaintances that worked in the same place, but he had no friends. He had two friends at work, in other words, closer than acquaintances—friends—those that I know personally.
Senator Russell. But none other than those that worked there in the same plant?*
*Mrs. Oswald. There was one young man who was a friend of his, which did not work in the same plant, but was a student at the medical college.
Senator Russell. Did Lee go to school while he was there in Minsk? Did he do any studying in any of the institutes?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. He did not.
*Mrs. Oswald. Lee wanted to attend Patrice Lumumba Institute in Moscow but his application was turned down. He was very much put out, because he told me that one of the main reasons he came to the Soviet Union was to get education. He said that after his application was turned down. He told that to me after his application was turned down.
Senator Russell. Was that before or after you were married?
Mrs. Oswald. After.
Senator Russell. Now, in reading your testimony, Mrs. Oswald, I noticed that you referred to a number of foreign students who attended the institutes in Minsk, including, I believe you said, a number of Cubans. Do you know whether or not Lee Oswald was acquainted with any of those Cubans?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I have never met these Cuban friends of his, but I do know that he and Erich; Erich is the medical student previously referred to, they had Cuban friends. What they were talking about, I do not know. I have never met him. Lee was interested in Cuba and in Cuban affairs, but I don't know anything in detail, just through conversations.
Senator Russell. Do you know whether he had any Cuban friends here in Texas or in New Orleans after he came back from Russia?
Mrs. Oswald. No. [Nodding a negative response.]
Senator Russell. You don't know whether he did or not?
Mrs. Oswald. No; I don't think he had.
Senator Russell. You don't think he did. Now, you referred to the fact in your testimony about his joining some gun club or rifle club in Minsk?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. And he purchased, I believe, a rifle or he had a rifle?
*Mrs. Oswald. By the time we got married, he already owned a rifle and he already was a member of a gun club in Minsk.
Senator Russell. From your testimony I gathered that he was not very active in the gun club in carrying on with his rifle?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No. He never went hunting except once during all the time that we lived in Minsk.
Senator Russell. Did he ever discuss with you his desire to meet any high official with the Soviet Government?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. He never did?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. Do you know whether or not he carried on any correspondence?
Mrs. Oswald. Excuse me——
*The only instance I recall—when we filed an application for our returning to the United States, he visited some colonel, some Soviet colonel, Aksenov [spelling] A-k-s-e-n-o-v, in order to expedite the exit visas for us. I also visited this Colonel Aksenov.
Mrs. Oswald. I'm sorry——
*Correction. He never got to see Colonel Aksenov because when he went to discuss this question in the—whatever office that was—he talked to some junior officer, and they would not let him have an audience with the colonel.
Senator Russell. Did you go to see the colonel likewise?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. You were both there together?
*Mrs. Oswald. We never got to see him. I saw Colonel Aksenov later on.
Senator Russell. Was he a colonel in the army or in the militia or in the police or just what? Where did he get his rank?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He was a colonel in the MVD, which is the Administer of Internal Affairs.
Senator Russell. He had to do then with the passports. His recommendation would have had to have been had with the passports?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I think so. I do not know definitely, but that meeting was in the Ministry of Internal Affairs. He was not dressed in a military uniform.
Senator Russell. Had you known the colonel prior to that time?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he introduced himself as Colonel Aksenov.
Mr. Gregory. When?
*Mrs. Oswald. When I talked to him concerning these documents for exit visas. Even if he were in a uniform, I would not have known what the insignia meant.
Senator Russell. If you didn't know him prior to that time, why is it you got to see him and Lee could not visit him?*
*Mrs. Oswald. When Lee went to see Colonel Aksenov in regard to the exit visas and other documents, he could not see the colonel. Then, on another later occasion, I went to see the colonel and they let me see him, on a later occasion.
Senator Russell. But you don't know why?*
Mrs. Oswald (no response).
Senator Russell. Did any of your friends or relatives intercede with the colonel in your behalf?*
*Mrs. Oswald. My uncle works in the MVD, but I'm sure that he did not discuss this matter of exit visas with Colonel Aksenov because I think he would have been afraid to talk about it. When my uncle knew that Lee and I were planning to go back to the United States, my uncle was afraid for his own job and for his own welfare.
Senator Russell. I knew you testified before that he did not want you to come to the United States, that your uncle did not, but he was working in the same line of work as this colonel was?*
Mrs. Oswald. In the same building, but not in the same department. I believe that Colonel Aksenov knew my uncle.
Senator Russell. Yes; but you didn't testify before, I believe, that your uncle would have been afraid to have helped you. You did testify that he did not want you to leave Russia? That's the way I recall it. I could be in error about that—do you know why he was afraid? Why should he have been afraid for you to leave Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. My uncle never told me personally that he was afraid that something might happen to him if I went to America, but his wife, my aunt, confided in me that my uncle was afraid for his job and for his well-being if I went to America.
Senator Russell. What rank did your uncle hold in the MVD? If this man was a colonel, what was your uncle, was he a colonel or a major or what?*
*Mrs. Oswald. My uncle has a degree in forestry, but he is also a colonel in MVD. Every employee has to be in the service, in the military service. He has a degree in forestry, but he is also a colonel in MVD.
Senator Russell. He also has the rank of a colonel in the MVD?*
Mrs. Oswald. No. He is the head of the forestry department in MVD. I don't know what he is doing there.
Senator Russell. Did you ever have any occasion or know any other Russian wife of a foreigner who tried to leave Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Mrs. Zeger. Mrs. Zeger and her husband lived in Argentina for 25 years——
Senator Russell. Well, you testified very fully about them. But I am asking now if you know of any Russian national or citizen who was married to a foreign national who ever was able to get a visa to leave from Russia?
*Mrs. Oswald. No; I don't know—I don't know of anyone. I only heard in the American Embassy in Moscow, where I heard of a Russian woman married to an American, who had difficulty leaving the country.
Senator Russell. Well, that's what I had in mind.
*Mrs. Oswald. Therefore, to the very last moment we did not believe that they would let us out of the Soviet Union.
Senator Russell. Did they examine you very much or ask you many questions about why you wished to leave, other than the fact that your husband decided to return to the United States?*
Mrs. Oswald. No.
*No. We only filled out a proper questionnaire containing a statement that this will be a permanent residence in the United States, or leaving the Soviet Union for permanent residence in the United States.
Senator Russell. And none of the officials or police examined you at all about your reason for wishing to leave?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It's very surprising, but nobody did.
Senator Russell. Do you know as to whether or not Lee corresponded with any of his friends in Russia after he came back to this country?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
*He did.
Mrs. Oswald. With Mr. and Mrs. Zeger.
*With Mr. and Mrs. Zeger, and Erich; the medical student. I don't recall the medical student, and Pavel Golovachev.
Senator Russell. Paul—he was one of your old boy friends, wasn't he?
Mrs. Oswald. Paul?
Senator Russell. I thought one of them was named Paul?*
Mrs. Oswald (no response).
Senator Russell. Did he correspond very frequently?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Not often.
Senator Russell. Did you write very often to your family and friends in Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I wrote several letters shortly after we came to America, but I never received any answer. I also wrote to some of my colleagues where I worked.
Senator Russell. In Minsk?
Mrs. Oswald. And shortly after that, my aunt wrote me. Then I understood that perhaps the letters I wrote my aunt never reached her.
Senator Russell. She did not refer to your letters when she wrote to you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; the only thing that she wrote, she was glad to get—that she learned my address.
Senator Russell. Did she say how she learned it? That was my next question?*
*Mrs. Oswald. The supervisory of a drugstore, an apothecary——
Senator Russell. An apothecary?
*Mrs. Oswald. Or manager of a drugstore telephoned my aunt and told her she received a letter from me.
Senator Russell. But she did not answer that letter, or if she did, you didn't receive it?
Mrs. Oswald. No—she answered this letter.
Senator Russell. I understand, but the friend in the apothecary, did he answer?*
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. Now, in some of your testimony you referred to a time when you became somewhat piqued with Lee about something and wrote one of your old friends there and forgot to put the stamp or didn't know that the stamps had been increased—you recall that testimony, do you not?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. Did you write to any of your other friends there and put the proper stamps on them?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; this was the only letter I wrote.
Senator Russell. The only one you wrote?
*Mrs. Oswald. This was the only letter I wrote after I found out the proper postage required for mailing letters. After that, my aunt never wrote me.
Senator Russell. Have you corresponded with your uncle or aunt at any time since this great tragedy?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; I did.
Senator Russell. And did you receive any reply?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. Have you written them more than once since this great tragedy?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I don't remember exactly whether I did or not.
Senator Russell. But you've written them at least once without receiving a reply?
*Mrs. Oswald. I remember well that I wrote at least once, maybe it was twice or three times, but I don't remember.
Senator Russell. Has any official of the Russian Government communicated with you since this great tragedy?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; no one ever communicated with me from the Soviet Embassy or any other representative of the Soviet Government, and I felt rather bad about it, because there I was—all alone in a strange country and I did not receive any encouragement from anyone. They didn't approach me even as a show of interest in my well-being.
Senator Russell. You didn't even hear from them with reference to your application for visas to return to Russia, although you had heard from them prior to the time Lee was killed?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. Not after Lee was killed.
Senator Russell. Now, if I've understood it from reading your testimony, Mrs. Oswald, Lee went to Mexico from New Orleans a day or two after Mrs. Paine brought you back to Texas, is that right?
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know definitely, but I believe Mrs. Paine and I left one day before he went to Mexico.
Senator Russell. He had talked to you about going to Mexico, had he not?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; he had told me he was going to Mexico.
Senator Russell. And he had told you that he intended to visit the Russian Embassy and the Cuban consulate while he was there?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. And that was at a time when he was very anxious to get to Cuba, I believe?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. When was it, Mrs. Oswald, that Lee told you he thought it was best for you to go back to Russia, as to time? I know you testified he told you that, but was that after the Walker case or before the Walker case? *
*Mrs. Oswald. I believe it was before he made the attempt on General Walker's life. It may be that I stated it differently in my deposition, but I believe it was before. Lee insisted on my returning to the Soviet Union before the attempt on Walker's life.
Senator Russell. I gather from your evidence, Mrs. Oswald, that Lee was a very devoted husband, unusually so for an American husband, even though you had little spats at times. Do you think that he advised you that because he thought something was going to happen that would involve the family in difficulties?*
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. You don't think so?
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he was not a good husband. I may have said so in my deposition, but if I did, it was when I was in a state of shock.
Senator Russell. You not only said so in your deposition, Mrs. Oswald, but you testified in your testimony before the Commission several times that he was a very good husband and he was very devoted to you, and that when he was at home and not employed that he did a great deal of the housework and in looking after the children?
*Mrs. Oswald. Well, I also testified to the fact that he beat me on many occasions, so some of the statements I made regarding him were good and some were bad.
Senator Russell. In other words, some of them were not true that you made?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; everything was true.
Senator Russell. Everything was true?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
*I made statements in the record that he was good when he did housework and washed the floors and was good to the baby, and again, he was not good when he beat me and was insolent.
Senator Russell. Did he beat you on many occasions?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Rather—many.
Senator Russell. Well, you only testified to one, did you not, before the Commission?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I was rather embarrassed to discuss this before the Commission, but he beat me on more than on one occasion.
Senator Russell. And you stated at that time that you bruise very readily and that's the reason you had such a bad black eye? Did you not testify to that?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. Was that true or not true?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It is true—it is—whatever I said.
Senator Russell. It is true that you bruise easily, but that was just one of many occasions he had beat you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. On one occasion; yes.
Senator Russell. But you didn't testify to the others, did you?
*Mrs. Oswald. I think I testified only about one particular occasion that I was asked about, whether he beat me or not, and I replied that he did, but he beat me on more than one occasion.
Senator Russell. Did he ever fail to provide for you and the children?*
Mrs. Oswald. No——
*While he never earned too much, but when he had the job and earned, say, around $200 a month, we never had any particular need of anything. However, Lee was so frugal, not only frugal, but he kept part of the money in his own possession all the time that was not available for the family.
Senator Russell. You always had plenty to eat and the children had plenty to wear?
Mrs. Oswald. Not really.
We were never hungry, but we didn't have much. We were never too hungry, but we never had any plentitude. We never had too much, and I wanted—I always wanted this and that, but that was not available.
Senator Russell. But he never made a great deal of money, did he?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I marvel now how we managed to live on what he earned at that time in comparison with what I have now. We spent $12 or $15 a week at that time.
We spent $12 or $15 a week at that time—you know, we can live—that was for milk and so on.
Senator Russell. He didn't spent any money on himself, did he, he wasn't extravagant in his own habits? He didn't spend his money on clothes or whisky or women or things of that kind, did he?
Mrs. Oswald. Oh, no. He told—somebody told about Jack Ruby—he went to his nightclub, he never did go to nightclub.
Senator Russell. Well, I mean just extravagance in his own habits—he was frugal in his own eating habits, he didn't eat much when he was away from home, did he?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. You knew where he kept his money in your home, did you not?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He had a black wallet, but I never ventured into it.
Senator Russell. Did he not tell you to take some of the money out of the wallet at one time and buy some clothes for the children and yourself?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Gopadze. Pardon—you don't understand the question?**
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; he did. It was the morning before the tragedy.
Senator Russell. Before the assassination of the President?
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. Did he ever talk to you about the result of his visit to Mexico?
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. Did he say his efforts were all a failure there, that he got any assistance that he was seeking?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He told me that he visited the Cuban Embassy and the Soviet Embassy and that they have the same bureaucracy in the Cuban Embassy that they have in the Soviet Embassy and that he obtained no results.
Senator Russell. Did you have less money in the United States than you had in Russia when you were married over there?
*Mrs. Oswald. We had more money in the United States than we did in the Soviet Union, but here we have to pay $65 a month rent from $200 earned, and we didn't have to do that in the Soviet Union. Here the house rent amounted to 30 percent of total wages earned, while in the Soviet Union we paid 10 percent of the wages earned. Then, all the medical expenses, medical assistance—expenses are paid there. However, Lee didn't spend much money on medical expenses here because he found ways to get the expenses free; the services free.
Senator Russell. You have testified, I believe, that Lee didn't use his rifle much, the one he had in the Soviet Union. Did he ever discuss shooting anyone in the Soviet Union like he did in shooting Nixon and Walker here in this country?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; not in the Soviet Union.
Senator Russell. You haven't then heard from anyone except one letter from your aunt, since you left Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; I received letters from my girl friend.
Senator Russell. Oh, how many letters from your girl friend?
Mrs. Oswald. Just from one—a Christmas card—I don't remember how many, probably not more than four or five.
*But only one letter from the aunt.
*Mrs. Oswald. We received letters from Lee's friends written to both of us—several letters.
Senator Russell. Written to you?
Mrs. Oswald. Written to Lee and to me.
Senator Russell. I see, but it's strange about your family that you didn't hear from them when you had written to them?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It is strange and it's hurtful.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, I believe you testified that Lee didn't ever discuss political matters with you very much? *
*Mrs. Oswald. He discussed politics with me very little.
Senator Russell. And that when he was discussing political matters with Mr. Paine and Mr. De Mohrenschildt and others, that you didn't pay any attention, that they didn't address any of it to you, that they discussed it between themselves?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; I did not participate in those conversations.
Senator Russell. And that he didn't discuss a great many things about his work and things of that kind with you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. The only time he discussed his work with me was when he worked for a printing company. He told me that he liked that job.
Senator Russell. Why do you suppose he told you about the fact that he was going to shoot Mr. Nixon and had shot at General Walker?*
*Mrs. Oswald. As regards General Walker, he came home late. He left me a note and so that is the reason why he discussed the Walker affair with me.
*Now, in regard to Mr. Nixon, he got dressed up in his suit and he put a gun in his belt.
Senator Russell. You testified in his belt—I was going to ask about that, because that was a very unusual place to carry a gun. Usually, he would carry it in his coat. Did you ever see him have a gun in his belt before?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; I would have noticed it if he did.
Senator Russell. You wouldn't have noticed it?
*Mrs. Oswald. I would have noticed it if he did.
Senator Russell. I see—you would have noticed it.
*Mrs. Oswald. And so—I have never seen him before with the pistol.
Senator Russell. He didn't state to you that he talked to any person in Mexico other than at the Russian Embassy and the Cuban Embassy?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No. The only persons he mentioned were the Cuban Embassy and the Soviet Embassy in Mexico.
Senator Russell. Now, going back to your personal relations, Mrs. Oswald, with Lee. Do you think he wanted to send you back to Russia just to get rid of you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. This is the question that I am puzzled about and I am wondering about it myself, whether he wanted to get rid of me.
Senator Russell. Do you think he was really devoted to the children or was he just putting on a show about liking the children?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; he loved the children.
*I believe he loved the children, but at times—one side of his life was such that I wondered whether he did or not. Some of the things that he did certainly were not good for his children—some of the acts he was engaged in.
Senator Russell. He knew you would take the children back to Russia with you, if you wanted, did he not?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Of course I would have taken the children with me to the Soviet Union.
Senator Russell. It seems to me that I recall once or twice in this testimony when you had had some little domestic trouble, as all married couples have, that he had cried, which is most unusual for a man in this country—men don't cry very often, and do you think that he cried despite the fact that he wasn't very devoted to you and loved you a great deal?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. The fact that he cried, and on one occasion he begged me to come back to him—he stood on his knees and begged me to come back to him—whether that meant that he loved me—perhaps he did. On the other hand, the acts that he committed showed to me that he didn't particularly care for me.
Senator Russell. You think then that his acts that he committed outside your domestic life within the family, within the realm of the family, was an indication that he did not love you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. The fact that he made attempts on the lives of other people showed to me that he did not treasure his family life and his children, also the fact that he beat me and wanted to send me to the Soviet Union.
Senator Russell. And you think that the fact that he promised you after the Walker incident that he would never do anything like that again but did, is an indication that he didn't love you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Logically—yes. That shows to me that he did not love me. At times he cried, and did all sorts of helpful things around the house. At other times he was mean. Frankly, I am lost as to what to think about him.
And I did not have any choice, because he was the only person that I knew and I could count on—the only person in the United States.
Senator Russell. Did he beat you very often, Mrs. Oswald, strike you hard blows with his fists? Did he hit you with his fists?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. When he beat me, sometimes he would beat me hard and sometimes not too hard. Sometimes he would leave a black eye and sometimes he wouldn't, depending on which part of me he would strike me. When we lived in New Orleans he never beat me up.
Senator Russell. Did he ever beat you in Russia before you came to this country?*
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. Had you ever heard of any husband striking his wife in Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It seems that beating of wives by the Russian husbands is a rather common thing in the Soviet Union and that is why I was afraid to marry a Russian.
Senator Russell. I see. Do they beat them with anything other than their hands?
There was a law in my State at one time that a man could whip his wife as long as he didn't use a switch that was larger than his thumb. That law has been repealed.
But, did they ever whip their wives with anything other than their hands in Russia?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know. I was not interested in what manner they beat their wives.
Senator Russell. That's difficult for me to believe—that a very charming and attractive girl who was being courted by a number of men, I would have thought you would have been greatly interested in all the aspects of matrimony?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. How would I know?
Senator Russell. How would you know it—well, by general conversation. Don't people talk about those things all over the world—in Russia and everywhere else?
Mrs. Oswald. That's different there.
Senator Russell. People are very much the same, aren't they, all over the world? If a man in the neighborhood gets drunk and beats and abuses his wife and children, isn't that discussed by all the people in the block—in that area?
Mrs. Oswald. **Sometimes during a life of 20 years with a husband, everything will be all right, and then some occasion will arise or something will happen that the wife will learn about what kind of person he is.
*I know of one family in the Soviet Union in Minsk, where a husband was married to a woman 17 years, and he just went to another woman.
For 1 year.
*For 1 year—then he came back to the first one full of shame and repentance and he cried and she took him back in. He lived with her for 3 days and then left her again. He was excluded from the party.
Senator Russell. Excommunicated from the party?
Mrs. Oswald. **Expelled from the party.
*But he took all the possessions of their common property when he left.
Senator Russell. I'm taking too much time, and I will hurry along. Did he ever beat you badly enough, Mrs. Oswald, for you to require the services of a doctor, a physician?*
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. Did he ever strike you during your pregnancy, when you were pregnant?*
Mr. Gopadze. She said, "I think." She said, "I think."
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; he did strike me.
Senator Russell. What reason did he give for striking you, usually?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Well, the reasons were if—they were very petty—I can't even remember what the reasons were after this quarrel was over. Sometimes he would tell me to shut up, and I don't take that from him.
**I'm not a very quiet woman myself.
Senator Russell. "I'm not—" what?
**Mrs. Oswald. I'm not a quiet woman myself and sometimes it gets on your nerves and you'll just tell him he's an idiot and he will become more angry with you.
*Enraged. When I would call him an idiot, he would say, "Well, I'll show you what kind of an idiot I am," so he would beat me up.
Senator Russell. Did you ever strike him?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I would give him some in return.
Senator Russell. You would give him some in return.
As I recall your testimony, when he told you about the Nixon incident, you testified that you held him in the bathroom by physical strength for some 4 or 5 minutes, so you should have been able to hold your own pretty well with him if you could do that?* **
Mrs. Oswald. Probably not 5 minutes, but a long time for him.
*Sometimes one can gather all of his strength in a moment like that. I am not a strong person, but sometimes under stress and strain perhaps I am stronger than I ordinarily am.
Senator Russell. Did you ever strike him with anything other than your hand?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Well, I think at one time I told him that if he would beat me again, I will hurl a radio, a transistor radio, and when he did strike me, I threw the radio at him.
Senator Russell. You missed him?
*Mrs. Oswald. No—it broke. I missed him.
Senator Russell. Yes, she missed him.
*Mrs. Oswald. I tried not to hit him.
Senator Russell. Now, going back a moment or two to your uncle, whom you lived with and to whom I understand you are quite devoted—did he try to keep you from coming to the United States very vigorously?
*Mrs. Oswald. My uncle was against my going to America, but he never imposed his will or his opinion on me.
Senator Russell. Did he or any other members of your family ever tell you why you had such little difficulty in getting your passport approved?*
*Mrs. Oswald. During the pendency of receiving this exit visa, we never discussed the question, my uncle and my aunt, but when we received it, the exit visa and it was granted to us so quickly, they were very much surprised.
Mr. Gopadze. Now, Marina, I'm sorry. I would like to make a correction to that point.
Mr. Gregory. All right.
Mr. Gopadze. That during the time they were expecting a visa to depart the Soviet Union, the relatives didn't express too much about it—because they didn't [think] they would depart, and when they did receive it, they were very much surprised——
Mr. Gregory. Correct.
Mr. Gopadze. With the expediency of the visa. Therefore, they didn't bother asking any questions or into their affairs concerning the departure. The last time they visited their aunt and uncle, they say, "Oh, of all places, you're going to the United States."
Senator Russell. Lee never did make much more than $225 a month, in that area, did he, and he was unemployed almost as much as he was employed?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. How did he manage to pay the State Department the money he had borrowed from them and to pay his brother Robert under those circumstances?*
Mrs. Oswald. He paid those debts out of his earnings. The first few weeks when we came to the United States, we lived with his mother, and that gave us the opportunity to pay the debts.
Senator Russell. Well, you only lived with Mrs. Oswald a matter of 3 or 4 weeks, didn't you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; but he was earning money during that time.
Senator Russell. I understand, but he was not earning more than $200 a month, was he, and he paid four or five or six—what was it, Mr. Rankin?
Mr. Rankin. It was over $400.
Senator Russell. Over $450 or more to the State Department and some amount to his brother Robert.
Mrs. Oswald. Around $100.
*It was $100.
It was probably $100.
Senator Russell. That's $550, and a person that's earning $200 a month part of the time, and having to support a family, that's a rather remarkable feat, isn't it, of financing?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I think that at the time we were leaving Russia, some of the rubles were exchanged for dollars, and maybe he kept part of that money, of which I have no knowledge, when we arrived in the United States. The only thing I know is that we lived very, very economically and Lee was saying all the time that the debts have to be paid as quickly as possible.
Senator Russell. I was under the impression that there was a very drastic limit on the number of rubles that could be exchanged, that it was a hundred or 130 or something in that area?*
*Mrs. Oswald. According to the law in the Soviet Union, they allow about 90 rubles per person to be exchanged into foreign currency or dollars—$180 in our case because Lee was including the baby, and she——
Senator Russell. For each of them—the exchange.
Mrs. Oswald. Not for Lee.
Senator Russell. No; he couldn't bring out any more than he took in with him. Well, he wasn't a visitor, though—yes, he was a visitor then. I know they checked my money when I went in there.**
**Mrs. Oswald. I don't know the reason why they didn't allow Lee to exchange $90, but I believe that there is a Soviet law that for Soviet citizens they allow $90 for each person. Excuse me.
*I believe that a foreigner is also entitled to exchange rubles for dollars, but in a very limited amount.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, do you have any plans to return to the Soviet Union, or do you intend to live in this country?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Of course—to remain in the United States.
Senator Russell. I have a few other questions, but I'm already taking too much time.
Senator Cooper. I want to say something off the record.
(Conference between Senator Cooper and Senator Russell off the record.)
Representative Boggs. I have just one question.
Senator Cooper. All right.
Senator Russell. Go right ahead.
Representative Boggs. Mrs. Oswald, have you been taking English lessons?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Representative Boggs. Do you speak English now?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I can't call it speaking English.
Representative Boggs. But you understand English, you replied to my question a moment ago?**
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Representative Boggs. But you have been speaking English, studying English, and whom do you live with now?
Mrs. Oswald. With myself and my kids, with my neighbors.
Representative Boggs. Do you read English?
Mrs. Oswald. No. A little bit.
*A little bit.
Mr. Gopadze. Naturally, she knows the English alphabet, but she doesn't read too much.
**Sometimes I read on my own, but on the other hand, it might be entirely different for an American.
Senator Russell. Well, I believe you can speak it pretty well, Mrs. Oswald. You are a very intelligent person, and I've never seen a woman yet that didn't learn a foreign language three times as fast as a man.
Mrs. Oswald. Thank you.
Senator Russell. They all do, and in some places in Russia you run into women that speak three or four languages very fluently, including in the high schools, where they have 10 or 12 years of English, starting in the first grade with it?
Mrs. Oswald. That's the way they try—to learn it in school.
Senator Russell. Is that your foreign language? I understand in Russia each student has to study some one foreign language all the way—or at least for 5 or 6 years?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes; but I don't like this system of education in Russia to study some languages—well, he can speak, you know.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, your attorney—your then attorney, according to the record, asked the Commission some questions about your memoirs, your diary or whatever it was that you have written—your reminiscences, and that they not be released. Have you ever made arrangements yet to sell them? Have you gotten rid of them? Because—the record of the Commission will be printed at a rather early date?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not want these memoirs to be published by Warren Commission.
Senator Russell. Yes; I understand that.
*Mrs. Oswald. I am now working on a book and I may wish to include these memoirs in that book. I have no objection to the publication of the material in those memoirs that have any relation to the assassination of the President, or anything that is pertinent to this particular inquiry.
Senator Russell. Of course, a great deal of it is very personal. It's about your social relations when you were a young woman. Of course, you are a young woman now, but when you were even younger than you are now, and the friends that you had, and things of that nature, and this report is going to be published before too long. And that's among the evidence there, and I was trying to get some timing on your book or whatever it is you are going to publish that would utilize this material, in an effort to help you—that is the only purpose I had, to try to see that you don't lose the publicity value of the memoirs.*
*Mrs. Oswald. I understand that and I'm certainly grateful to you for it.
**Would it be possible to publish in the report only parts of my life, that pertaining to the assassination, instead of my private life?
Senator Russell. I cannot answer that, and only the entire Commission could answer that, but when I read that in the testimony, I was hoping that you had found some means of commercializing on it either to the moving picture people or to the publishing world.
Mrs. Oswald. As yet, I have not availed myself of that opportunity, sir.
Senator Russell. When do you think you will publish this book?*
*Mrs. Oswald. The publisher will possibly publish the book toward the end of December, maybe in January and even perhaps——
Mr. Gopadze. Not the publisher. The person who writes the story is hoping to be able to finish it in the latter part of December.
Senator Russell. Of course, it goes into much more detail, I'm sure, than this sketch we have, because this wouldn't be anything like a book. It would be more of a magazine article.
**Mrs. Oswald. Would it be possible to delete it from the Commission's report?
Senator Russell. I can't answer that because I'm not the whole Commission.**
Very frankly, I think the Commission would be disposed to publish all the material that they have, is my own honest view about it. The reason I am discussing it with you is to find out if you have done anything about it. Of course, if you are writing a whole book, it won't be so important, just this one phase of it.
Mrs. Oswald, during the course of your testimony, you testified that Lee often called you twice a day while he was working away from home.
Why do you think he called you if he was not in love with you?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. When he was away from me, he told me that he missed me.
Senator Russell. You don't think that's an indication that he loved you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. This shows—this would show that he loved me. He was a dual personality.
Senator Russell. Split personality.
Mrs. Oswald. Split personality—that's it.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, I noticed that one of the witnesses, I've forgotten which one it was, that ran the boarding house where Lee lived, testified that he called someone every night and talked to them at some length in a foreign language. That couldn't have been anyone except you, could it, that he was calling?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I believe that I was the person he talked to.
Senator Russell. He did call you quite frequently, did he not when you were in Irving and he was in Dallas, for example?
Mrs. Oswald. Every day.
Senator Russell. But he didn't call you to abuse you over the phone, did he?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. Of course not.
Senator Russell. It was the ordinary small talk you would have between a man and his wife—he would ask you about how the children were—one of them—was?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He always talked about our daughter June.
Senator Russell. Did he ever say anything about, "I love you" or anything like that over the phone?**
Mrs. Oswald. (no response).
Mr. Gopadze. Did he?
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. He did?
*Mrs. Oswald. He did.
Senator Russell. Now, you've testified before, and I'm just going on recollection, but I'm sure I'm right about this, that he told you in New Orleans that he was going to Mexico City and that he was going by bus and that a round trip would be much cheaper than a one-way fare. I noticed something in the paper the other day where you had found a one-way ticket or stub on the bus from Mexico City to Dallas, I believe it was. How did you happen to come into possession of that stub?*
*Mrs. Oswald. You say round trip was cheaper than one-way?
Senator Russell. Yes; that's what you testified he told you in New Orleans when he said he was going. But here, according to the press—I don't know—a one-way stub turns up where he came back here to Dallas. Where did you get that stub?*
*Mrs. Oswald. My statement apparently was misinterpreted in the record, because Lee stated that the cost of the ticket, say, from Dallas to Mexico is cheaper than it is from Mexico City to Dallas or from one point to Mexico and from Mexico to that same point.
Senator Russell. Well, that very easily could have become confused in translation, but it certainly is in there.*
Mr. Rankin. I think they have confused your question, Senator, I think they have confused your question. I think they think that you were saying that a round trip was cheaper than one way? Or—two ways?
Senator Russell. I'm sorry, Mr. Gregory. You misunderstood it. I didn't mean that a round trip was cheaper than one way. I meant that a round trip was cheaper than to go there and back on individual tickets—than two ways.
Mr. Gregory. She understood you correctly. I misunderstood you, Senator. I'm sorry.
*Mrs. Oswald. The fact remains, according to Lee, that it is cheaper from Mexico—a one-way ticket from Mexico City, say, to Dallas costs less than from Dallas to Mexico, Mexico City. Or vice versa.
Senator Russell. Be that as it may, how about the stub?
*Mrs. Oswald. I found the stub of this ticket approximately 2 weeks ago when working with Priscilla Johnson on the book. Three weeks.
*Three weeks ago—I found this stub of a ticket among old magazines, Spanish magazines, and there was a television program also in Spanish and there was the stub of this ticket.
Mrs. Oswald. But this was, you know, a piece of paper and I didn't know this was a ticket.
Senator Russell. You didn't know it was a ticket?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. Until you showed it to Miss Johnson?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes—it was in the TV book and then Mr. Liebeler called me on telephone and asked me some questions about Mexico.
Senator Russell. Yes?
Mrs. Oswald. And I told him, "Just a minute, I'll go and inquire and tell him what I have," and I told him I have some kind of piece of paper. I don't know what it is. I don't know whether it would be interested—the Commission, and somebody who was at my house one time——
*Read what was on the stub.
Senator Russell. You could read the stub all right, could you, Mrs. Oswald? There wasn't anything complicated there, you could read "One-way ticket," couldn't you? You know that much English?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It was a mixture of Spanish and English.
Senator Russell. Oh, I see—it had it both ways, and the name of the bus company, too, perhaps.
Mrs. Oswald. I didn't understand this in languages—you can't say this.
Senator Russell. Where had that magazine been that had this bus ticket in it, was anything else in it, any tickets to bull fights or anywhere else?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I turned all of this material over to the FBI, thinking that they might find something of interest in it. I did not try to determine for myself what it was.
Senator Russell. Was it in the possessions that were removed from Mrs. Paine's room, or was it in some of Lee's material that was moved from his boardinghouse?*
Mrs. Oswald. It was with Mrs. Paine.
Senator Russell. Didn't you testify, Mrs. Oswald, that Lee couldn't read Spanish, when you were testifying before? What was he doing with a Spanish magazine?
Mrs. Oswald. It wasn't a Spanish magazine, it was a TV program.
Senator Russell. Pardon?
Mrs. Oswald. It was a TV program.
*It was not a Spanish magazine, it was a TV program.
Senator Russell. Oh, it was not a magazine, it was a TV program. I understood you to say it was a Spanish magazine? I'm sorry.
*Mrs. Oswald. I found all this among my old magazines and newspapers, that I was collecting after the assassination of the President, and there also were English books which could have been in that small suitcase in which I put everything.
Senator Russell. How did the FBI happen to overlook that when they made the raid out there at Mrs. Paine's? I thought they carried off everything you had out there, practically?*
*Mrs. Oswald. The reason they overlooked this particular suitcase is because I took it with me to——
**To the hotel—the first night they moved us.
*When we stayed in the hotel.
It was in Dallas.
Senator Russell. It was in Dallas. That's when they were at the big hotel—where you spent one night there?
*Mrs. Oswald. It was in Dallas and I took it with me because there were children's books.
Senator Russell. I thought the FBI had already removed your passports and your diploma and everything before that time?
*Mrs. Oswald. The first day when Lee was arrested, the FBI made a search.
Mr. Gopadze. The FBI or police.
Mr. Gregory. The FBI or police.
Senator Russell. I believe it was the police then.
*Mrs. Oswald. The police made the search in the Paine's house.
Senator Russell. Yes.
*Mrs. Oswald. And everything was there. I did not take anything with me that first day when I was arrested.
Senator Russell. When you returned to Mrs. Paine's you found they had left this particular program there with this bus stub? You testified they had removed your passport and your diploma and Lee's union cards and Social Security card and everything else—I was just wondering how they happened to leave this particular article with the bus stub in it?*
Mrs. Oswald. **I never retained that for any special reason.
Senator Russell. I'm quite sure of that. I wasn't asking that at all.**
Mrs. Oswald. **I don't know the reason.
Senator Russell. They just overlooked that?
Mrs. Oswald. **It was just overlooked—the same way they overlooked that other.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, what are your relations now with the friends that you made in the Russian community here in Dallas? I don't remember all of the names—one of them was named Elena Hall, is that right, and Katya Ford, Anna Meller, De Mohrenschildt, De Mohrenschildt's wife and children—are you still on friendly terms with them, do you see them occasionally?*
*Mrs. Oswald. As far as I'm concerned, I consider all of them as my friends, but George Bouhe, and Katya Ford are the only two people that come to visit me. Others perhaps feel that it is not healthy for them to come to see me.
Senator Russell. I wondered if they had expressed their opinion or whether they were afraid of you on account of publicity contamination?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No, they never said that to me personally that they are afraid to come to see me. When we meet in the church, they are all very pleasant to me, but they never invite me.
Mr. Gopadze. No.
**Mrs. Oswald. Sometimes they invite Katya Ford, but they never invite me. Nataska Krassovska is very nice to me.
Senator Russell. When was the first time you ever heard of Jack Ruby or Jack Rubenstein?*
Mrs. Oswald. When he killed him.
Senator Russell. You had never heard of him until that time?
Mrs. Oswald. (Nodding a negative response.)
Senator Russell. That's all.
Senator Cooper. What is your address now, Mrs. Oswald, and with whom do you live?
Mrs. Oswald. 629 Belt Line Road, Richardson, Tex.
Senator Cooper. Does someone live with you or do you live with someone?
Mrs. Oswald. No; I live by myself with my children.
Senator Cooper. After the death of your husband, you had a lawyer, Mr. Thorne, and a business agent, Mr. Martin, and they were discharged. Was there any particular reason for discharging them?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I got rid of them because the contract that they prepared was unfair to me, and it was prepared at a time when I did not understand it and when it was not translated to me.
Senator Cooper. Now, you later employed Mr. McKenzie as your attorney and you have since discharged him, haven't you?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I employed Mr. McKenzie to wind up the affair with Mr. Martin and Mr. Thorne, and he was not employed on any other basis—just for that particular thing.
**Not permanently.
*Not permanently—just for that particular thing, despite the fact that he did give advice on other business of mine. Of course, I needed an attorney in my dealings with the Commission that's what he told me—that I needed an attorney to deal with the Commission.
Mr. Gopadze. She said——
Mr. Rankin. She said more than that.
*Mrs. Oswald. Now, as I feel now, I don't need any lawyer before the Commission.
Senator Cooper. If you'll just answer my question now: Do you have a lawyer to represent you now?*
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Cooper. Who is your business agent?
Mrs. Oswald. Mrs. Katya Ford.
Senator Cooper. Can you tell the Commission about how much money has been donated to you or how much you have earned through contracts?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know at this time how much money I have.
Senator Cooper. Approximately?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Donations were $57,000, from which twelve and one-half thousand plus expenses were paid to Martin and Thorne, and $15,000 to Mr. McKenzie.
Senator Cooper. Do you have any contracts, have you made any contracts for the sale of your writings which may be payable in the future?* **
Mrs. Oswald. The publishing company contract with me is all.
*I have not signed any contracts with the publishing company, except I have already signed several contracts with Life Magazine.
After the diary was published.
**After the diary was published.
Senator Cooper. That's for $20,000?
Mrs. Oswald. $20,000 plus $1,000 for Parade Magazine, and one girl—Helen—I don't know her last name, I know we did——
*Also, I signed—I agreed with a girl by the name of Helen—I cannot remember her last name, for possible future stories Helen might write.
We have interview.
Senator Cooper. You testified that your uncle is an official and a Colonel in the MVD?* ** And, a member of the Communist Party, is that correct?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Cooper. Do you know that any other members of your family are members of the Communist Party?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. The husband of another aunt.
Senator Cooper. Is that the aunt you visited from time to time?* **
**Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Cooper. At Kharkov?
Mrs. Oswald. At Minsk.
Senator Cooper. With whom did you file your declaration for an exit visa?** *
*Mrs. Oswald. There is a special institution in Minsk where prospective departees filed application for exit visa. They leave the application in that institution, and that institution transmits it to Moscow where the decision is made whether to grant or to deny the exit permit. The reply then comes to the MVD in Minsk.
*I want to assure the Commission that I was never given any assignment by the Soviet Government or the American Government, and that I was so surprised myself that I got the exit visa.
Senator Cooper. When you talked to Colonel Aksenov, what did he tell you when you asked him about the exit visa?*
*Mrs. Oswald. When I went to see Colonel Aksenov, I went to ask him about the state in which my application is for exit visa, and he replied——
Mr. Gopadze. No. "Was it favorable or not," and he said it was favorable.
Mr. Gregory. Yes, and he said——
Mr. Gopadze. That it takes official process of getting the answer.
*Mrs. Oswald. He said, "You are not the only one who is seeking exit permit, and so you have to wait your turn."
Senator Cooper. Did he attempt to discourage you from seeking the exit visa?
Senator Cooper. Did Lee Oswald ever express any opinion to you as to why he thought an exit visa might be granted to you and your daughter?
*Mrs. Oswald. He encouraged me and he thought that I would consider that he exerted every effort on his part for me to get this exit. Maybe he just was saying that that way, but never hoped that actually I would get the exit permit.
Senator Cooper. During that time or at any other time, did Lee ever say to you that he might do some work for the Soviet Union if you did return to the United States?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He did not.
Senator Cooper. I would like to turn to your testimony about your knowledge of the rifle that Lee possessed. Now, as I remember your testimony, you stated that you first learned that he had the rifle early in 1963.*
*Mrs. Oswald. In the year that he bought it, I learned it.
Senator Cooper. You had seen him clean it, you had watched him sight the rifle in New Orleans and work the bolt?* **
Mr. Gregory. In New Orleans?
Senator Cooper. Yes; in your testimony, you said you saw him sitting on the little back porch——
Mrs. Oswald. On the little back porch—yes.
Senator Cooper. And sight the rifle?
*Mrs. Oswald. I'm sorry, I might be mixed up.
Senator Cooper. When you testified that you believed he did some target practice at least a few times?
*Mrs. Oswald. In Dallas or New Orleans?* **
*Yes; when we lived on Neely Street.
Senator Cooper. He told you that he had used this rifle to fire at General Walker?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Cooper. He told you he had threatened Vice President Nixon, you had said?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He did not say "Vice President Nixon," he just said "Nixon."
Senator Cooper. Now, was it your opinion throughout these months that he was keeping this rifle for his purpose of using it again, firing at some individual, perhaps an official of the United States Government?* **
Mrs. Oswald. **He never expressed himself.
*When the assassination of President Kennedy took place, I was asking people whether—people in general—whether General Walker was with President Kennedy. It perhaps was a silly question, but I thought that he——
Senator Cooper. Listen to my question: During this time, didn't you have the opinion that he was keeping possession of this rifle and practicing with it for the purpose of using it to shoot at some individual, and perhaps an official of the United States Government?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I never thought—I was afraid to think that he would do anything like that until the shooting of General Walker occurred.
Senator Cooper. But now my question. After that—the continued possession——* **
**Mrs. Oswald. After the attempting of the killing of General Walker, I thought he might do it, but I didn't visualize that he could do anything like that.
Senator Cooper. When you testified before the Commission, you said—generally—you didn't think Lee would repeat anything like that—"Generally, I knew that the rifle was very tempting for him".
"Very tempting for him"—what did you mean by that, about the rifle being very tempting for him? Did you believe he might be tempted to shoot at someone else?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; I was afraid that he did have temptation to kill someone else.
Senator Cooper. Mrs. Oswald, you testified that when you talked to Lee after he had shot at General Walker, or told you he had shot at General Walker, he said that it would have been well if someone had killed Hitler because many lives would be saved, is that correct?
Senator Cooper. After that, you testified that many times or a number of times he read you articles about President Kennedy?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Cooper. And said at one time, discussing President Kennedy's father, that he had made his money through wine and he had a great deal of money, and that enabled him to educate his sons and to give them a start.
I want you to remember and tell the Commission if he did ever express any hatred or dislike for President Kennedy. You have several times—not changed—but you have told the Commission things you did not tell them when first asked.
Now, if he did speak to you about President Kennedy, we think you should tell the Commission?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I don't think he ever expressed hatred toward President Kennedy, but perhaps he expressed jealousy, not only jealousy, but envy, but perhaps he envied, because he said, "Whoever has money has it easy." That was his general attitude. It was not a direct quotation.
Representative Boggs. Pursuing this—I asked you that very question in Washington back in February, and the answer was "No." I asked you whether or not your husband ever expressed hostility toward President Kennedy—is your answer still "No"?*
*Mrs. Oswald. My answer is "No."
**He never expressed himself anything against President Kennedy, anything detrimental toward him. What I told them generally before, I am repeating now too.
Representative Boggs. Did he ever indicate to you, except in the Walker situation where he said he'd shot at General Walker, that he would kill anyone?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Representative Boggs. What about Nixon?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He did tell me he was about ready to commit that particular act, with respect to Nixon. That's when I kept him in the bathroom, but he never said, "Well, today it's Walker and then I'm going to kill someone else." He never said that. He never related to me any of his plans about killing anybody.
*In other words, he never said to me, "Now, I'll kill Walker and then I'll kill this fellow" and so on—he never did.
Senator Cooper. You testified that your husband said that he did not like the United States for several reasons; one, because of certain Fascist organizations; two, because of difficulty of securing employment; and another reason—because of the high cost of medical care. Did he ever say that those things that he did not like could be remedied or changed if an official of the Government were done away with?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he never told me.
**No; he never told me—he never told me.
Senator Cooper. Did any official of the Soviet Union, or any person who was a Soviet citizen, ever talk to you or ever talk to Lee to your knowledge, during the time that you were in the United States?
Mr. Gregory. At any time before or after?
Senator Cooper. Yes?
Senator Russell. You said—in the United States, didn't you?
Senator Cooper. Yes; in the United States.*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; no one ever did. The only time Lee talked with a representative of the Soviet Union was in Mexico, but not me and Lee, we were never approached by the Soviet representatives.
Senator Cooper. When was the first time you ever heard of Police Officer Tippit?*
*Mrs. Oswald. When there was a broadcast over the radio that Officer Tippit was killed.
Senator Cooper. Have you seen Mrs. Paine since the time you left her home after the assassination?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
I saw her twice since I left Irving, since I lived with her in Irving.
Senator Cooper. When was that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Once, when I lived with Katya Ford in February of this year, and the next time I do not recall—maybe 1 month later.
In my house.
Senator Cooper. You had quite an association with her, and I need not recall all of the facts, but is there any reason now that you do not wish to see her?*
*Mrs. Oswald. One of the reasons is that she belongs to the Civil Liberties Union and I don't want to get mixed up in anything. I already have plenty of grief.
Senator Cooper. Just one other question—is there any other fact about this subject, which you have been asked by the Commission or by anyone else that you have knowledge of that you have not told us about it? Any fact that would bear on this inquiry?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I would be glad to, but I don't know of any.
Representative Boggs. May I just ask one or two questions?
Have you seen Mrs. Marguerite Oswald at any time since you first appeared before the Commission?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Representative Boggs. Have you heard from her?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Representative Boggs. You've had no communication from her either directly or indirectly?* **
Mrs. Oswald. No.
*She tried to get in touch with me.
**Through Attorney McKenzie.
Representative Boggs. And you refused to see her?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
*I think that she may have been bad influence with the children—improper influence with the children.
**I feel that—I hardly believe—that Lee Oswald really tried to kill President Kennedy.
Mrs. Oswald. I feel in my own mind that Lee did not have President Kennedy as a prime target when he assassinated him.
Representative Boggs. Well, who was it?
*Mrs. Oswald. I think it was Connally. That's my personal opinion that he perhaps was shooting at Governor Connally, the Governor of Texas.
Senator Russell. You've testified before us before that Lee told you he was coming back to Texas—if he was back in Texas, he would vote for Connally for Governor. Why do you think he would shoot him?
Mrs. Oswald. **I feel that the reason that he had Connally in his mind was on account of his discharge from the Marines and various letters they exchanged between the Marine Corps and the Governor's office, but actually, I didn't think that he had any idea concerning President Kennedy.
Representative Boggs. Well, now, my next question is—did he ever express any hostility to Governor Connally?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He never expressed that to me—his displeasure or hatred of Connally, but I feel that there could have been some connection, due to the fact that Lee was dishonorably discharged from the Corps, and there was an exchange of letters between the Governor's Office and Lee. That's my personal opinion.
Representative Boggs. Just a minute. Excuse me, Senator.
I asked you in February, Mrs. Oswald, I said, "What motive would you ascribe to your husband in killing President Kennedy?" And, you said, "As I saw the documents that were being read to me, I came to the conclusion that he wanted by any means, good or bad to get into history, and now that I've read a part of the translation of some of the documents, I think that there was some political foundation to it, a foundation of which I am not aware."
And then you go on and you express no doubt in your mind that he intended to kill President Kennedy.
Mrs. Oswald. **Did I say that, this last time in Dallas? The last time in Dallas, apparently there was some misunderstanding on the part of my answers to the Commission, because I was told by Mr. McKenzie that it wasn't reported accurately.
*The record should read that on the basis of the documents that I have read, I have no doubt—that I had available to me to read—I had no doubt that he did——
Mr. Gopadze. That he could kill him——
Mr. Gregory. Could or have wanted to—could have wanted to——
Mr. Gopadze. He could kill—she doesn't say "want"—he could have killed him.
Representative Boggs. Let's straighten this out because this is very important.
Mrs. Oswald. Okay.
Representative Boggs. I'll read it to you, "I gather that you have reached the conclusion in your own mind that your husband killed President Kennedy?" You replied, "Regretfully—yes."
Now, do you have any reason to change that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. That's correct. I have no doubt that he did kill the President.
Representative Boggs. Now, the other answer as I read it was: "On the basis of documents that you had seen presented at the Commission hearing"—isn't that right?
Mrs. Oswald. **The word "documents" is wrong—the facts presented—that's what I mean.
Representative Boggs. Again we get back to the question of motive. You said again today that you are convinced that Lee Oswald killed President Kennedy.
You said something additionally today, though, and that is that you feel that it was his intention not to kill President Kennedy, but to kill Governor Connally.
Now, am I correct in saying that she had not said this previously?
Mr. Rankin. Ask her that.* **
Representative Boggs. Let's get an answer. I think this answer is quite important.
*Mrs. Oswald. On the basis of all the available facts, I have no doubt in my mind that Lee Oswald killed President Kennedy.
*At the same time, I feel in my own mind as far as I am concerned, I feel that Lee—that my husband perhaps intended to kill Governor Connally instead of President Kennedy.
Representative Boggs. Now, let me ask you one other question: Assuming that this is correct, would you feel that there would be any less guilt in killing Governor Connally than in killing the President?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I am not trying to vindicate or justify or excuse Lee as my husband. Even if he killed one of his neighbors, still it wouldn't make much difference—it wouldn't make any difference—a killing is a killing. I am sorry.
Representative Boggs. There are one or two other questions I want to ask her.
I know you've been asked a lot of questions about this thing. How old were you when you left Russia?*
Mrs. Oswald. Twenty years. My birthday—I was 21 when I came here. In July—my birthday was in July.
Representative Boggs. Were you a member of the Communist Party in Russia?*
Mrs. Oswald. No.
*I was a member of a Komsomol organization.
Representative Boggs. What is that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It is an association of young Communist youth. It is not party, sir. In order to become a member of the Communist Party, one has to be first a member of the Komsomol, but I didn't even have the membership card in Komsomol Association.
Representative Boggs. Would it be normal for one to graduate, so to speak, from the Komsomol to the membership in the Communist Party?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It is a prerequisite for a prospective member of the Communist Party to be first a member of the Komsomol organization, but not every member of Komsomol becomes a Communist Party member.
Mr. Rankin. What percentage?
Senator Cooper. She was expelled?
Senator Russell. No; she testified she quit the Youth Movement.*
*Mrs. Oswald. I was dismissed.
**I was expelled from Komsomol.
Senator Russell. Why—for what reason?*
*Mrs. Oswald. The reason given to me for being expelled from Komsomol was because I did not get my card, because I did not take out my Komsomol card for 1 year. That was the reason given to me, but I believe the true reason why they expelled me from Komsomol was because I married an American.
It also happened about the time when I visited the American Embassy. I was expelled the following week after I visited the American Embassy in Moscow.
Senator Russell. Did you pay any dues to the Komsomol?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes; 30¢
*Yes; 30¢ every month.
Senator Russell. I thought that practically all young people belonged to the Komsomol?* **
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. There are many more of them than there are members of the Communist Party, aren't there?*
Mrs. Oswald. Oh, yes.
Senator Russell. Nearly every city in Russia has a big building, there is a Youth Komsomol Building?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; I was persuaded or talked into joining the Komsomol organization.
Senator Russell. I thought that was automatic?**
Mrs. Oswald. No.
*No—one has to be accepted into Komsomol. It is not automatic.
Representative Boggs. One further question, and this is off the record.
(Interrogatories and answers off the record at this point.)
Representative Boggs. In response to Senator Russell, I gathered that you plan to stay in the United States?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; if possible.
Representative Boggs. Do you aspire to become a citizen of the United States, or are you a citizen?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I am not a citizen. I wish to become an American citizen.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, when you were before us before, you testified that you were not a member of any church, but you had your own religion in your own heart, as I recall?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. In Russia I did not belong to any church. No one belongs to any church in Russia.
Senator Russell. Except old women?
*Mrs. Oswald. I'll say this—that I believe it's unhealthy in the Soviet Union to openly belong to any church. While there is no persecution of religious belief in Russia, the officials look at it with much disfavor.
Senator Russell. But you are not actually a member of the church, are you?* **
**Mrs. Oswald. In Russian churches, they don't have a fee or they don't have any membership, they have dues in Russian churches.
Senator Russell. But you've not been baptized in any church?*
Mrs. Oswald. Oh, yes; I have been baptized.
Senator Russell. When were you baptized?
Mrs. Oswald. I don't remember.
Senator Russell. Are you actually a member of the church?* **
**Mrs. Oswald. Actually, I am not a member as you know in the United States. However, I belong to the church, the Russian church here in Dallas, and I don't pay dues.
Senator Russell. You are more of a communicant now than you are a member of the church?
Mrs. Oswald. I think the understanding of church membership is different in the Soviet Union or in the understanding of a person that was brought up in the Soviet Union.
Senator Russell. I am concerned about this testimony, Mrs. Oswald, about your believing now that Lee was shooting at Connally and not at the President, because you did not tell us that before.*
*Mrs. Oswald. At that time I didn't think so, but the more I mull over it in my own mind trying to get it in my own mind what made him do what he did, the more I think that he was shooting at Connally rather than President Kennedy.
Senator Russell. Now, did you not testify before that Lee wrote a letter to Connally when he was Secretary of the Navy about the nature of his Marine discharge?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. And that when he got a letter back, that you asked him what it was?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. And he said, "Well, it's just some Bureaucrat's statement"?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
*Yes.
Senator Russell. Did you not further testify that Lee said in discussing the gubernatorial election in Texas that if he were here and voting, that he would vote for Mr. Connally?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Russell. Now, do you think he would shoot and kill a man that he would vote for, for the Governor of his state?* **
**Mrs. Oswald. The only reason is—I am trying to analyze, myself, there was a reason—more reason to dislike Connally as a man than he had for Kennedy.
Senator Russell. Well, she testified before that he had spoken, as far as Lee spoke favorably of anyone, that he had spoken favorably of both Kennedy and of Governor Connally.**
**Mrs. Oswald. He also told me that he was also favorable toward Connally, while they were in Russia. There is a possibility that he changed his mind, but he never told her that.
Senator Russell. Well, I think that's about as speculative as the answers I've read here. He might have changed his mind, but he didn't tell her anything about it, as she testified—that discussing politics in Texas, that he said that if he were here when they had the election, that he would vote for John Connally for Governor, and that was after he got the letter about the Marine corps.* **
**Mrs. Oswald. That happened in Russia when he received some kind of pamphlet with a picture of Connally, a separate time, at which time he remarked that when he returned, if and when he returned to Texas he would vote for Connally.
Senator Russell. That's right—that's exactly right, but yet now you say that he was his prime target.
I want to know what Connally had done to Lee since he got back from Russia that would cause him to change his mind, to shoot him?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know, but there is a possibility that Lee became hateful of Connally because the matter of this dishonorable discharge was dragging so long.
Senator Russell. Yes; but Connally had left the Navy, where he had anything to do with the discharge, before he got the pamphlet about his being a candidate for Governor?** *
**Mrs. Oswald. I am not sure when that particular thing happened, whether Mr. Connally was the Secretary of the Navy or what he was doing.
Senator Russell. Well, it's a matter of common knowledge that he ran for Governor after he resigned as Secretary of the Navy.
Mrs. Oswald. I don't know.
Senator Russell. Did you not know that when Mr. Connally was running for Governor of Texas, he was no longer Secretary of the Navy and had nothing to do with the Marine Corps?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes, I knew—I knew that he was not the Secretary of the Navy any more because Lee told me that Connally stated in the letter to Lee that he was no longer Secretary of Navy and hence he couldn't do anything for him, and that Connally referred the petition to the proper authorities.
Senator Russell. Mrs. Oswald, didn't Lee read about government a great deal? Didn't Lee read about civic affairs and about government a great deal?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He read books about Kennedy, about Hitler, about others.
Senator Russell. Haven't you been in this country long enough to know that the President is Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy and he's even head of the Secretary of the Navy. He can order him to do anything he wants to?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I didn't pay any attention to it or I didn't know it or wasn't told.
Senator Russell. Do you have any facts on which you base your opinion now that Lee Oswald was shooting and was intending to kill Connally rather than President Kennedy?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I have no facts whatsoever. I simply express an opinion which perhaps is not logical at all, but I am sorry if I mixed everybody up.
Senator Russell. You haven't mixed anybody up, except I think that you have your evidence terribly confused.*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; I have no facts whatsover. I'm sorry I told them that.
Senator Russell. Do you know whether or not Lee knew Connally personally or did he know that he was going to be in this motorcade at all?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; I did not know whether Lee knew or ever contacted the Governor personally, and I don't know whether Lee knew that the Governor would be in the motorcade.
Senator Russell. But Lee did take his gun into town that day, and so far as you know, I believe you said that was the first day he had carried it into town?
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not personally know that Lee took the rifle that morning or the night before. Apparently the Commission has witnesses or information to that effect, but of my own knowledge, I don't know.
Senator Russell. Did you not testify that you thought this was Lee's rifle that was shown you as the one that shot Connally and the President?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; I testified that that was the rifle.
Mr. Gopadze. No—I'm sorry. As far as she knows about the arms, the rifle which was shown to her looked like the one he had.
Mr. Gregory. Yes; that's right.
Senator Russell. That's all I asked her. That's just exactly what I asked her.
Mr. Gregory. Yes; that's correct.
Senator Russell. In discussing the motorcade, did he say anything about Connally would be riding with the President?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he did not.
Senator Russell. I believe you testified, did you not, Mrs. Oswald, that the day before Lee told you that he fired at General Walker, that he seemed to be under great emotional stress, strain, very tense?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. He was angry and excited. He was angry and excited.
Senator Russell. Did he show any of that on the morning that he left home when the President was assassinated?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. Well, I did not notice any difference in Lee's attitude during that morning from any other day. But sometimes, quite often, he was impulsive and nervous and excited. I got tired from watching him in those particular moods, in his moods, and I didn't pay any attention.
Senator Russell. Why did you happen to watch him then on the morning that he shot at General Walker?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I simply—his mood left no impression on me that particular morning. There was nothing extraordinary about it.
Senator Russell. On the Walker morning?
Mrs. Oswald. No, no—on the morning of the President's assassination.
Senator Russell. Yes, but you said you noticed it on the morning before he shot Walker?
Mrs. Oswald. Are you talking about Walker?
Senator Russell. If you didn't notice his moods, how did you happen to notice it on the day before he shot at General Walker?* **
Mrs. Oswald. The reason I didn't notice that particular morning about his mood was because the night before we had a little quarrel and I didn't pay any attention to that, particularly, and I was thinking that it was due to that quarrel we had the night before.
Senator Russell. Well, of course, that was the quarrel you had about him registering under an assumed name or giving an assumed name at his room.**
Was that not the time, did you not try to telephone him and they told you that no such person stayed there at all?
*Mrs. Oswald. That was the cause of the quarrel. You see, at this particular morning of the assassination, I was very tired because the baby woke up several times during the night and I was very tired, and in the morning I did not register or I did not even attempt to register his moods.
Senator Russell. I think you testified before that you only saw him when he got up, that you stayed in bed and that he got up and fixed his own coffee and got out.* **
*Mrs. Oswald. The only extraordinary thing that I noticed about him the morning of the assassination was that when Lee was leaving the house, he asked me if I purchased a pair of shoes.
Senator Russell. For June?
Mrs. Oswald. For me.
Senator Russell. And for June?*
*Mrs. Oswald. And for the baby.
Senator Russell. And for June?
*Mrs. Oswald. And that was the only thing that was extraordinary, and I wondered what was happening that he became, that he was so kind all of a sudden.
Senator Russell. That was out of the money in the black wallet, too?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
*Yes—that was a fleeting thought in my mind of why the change in him.
Senator Russell. But apparently he was not as excited and as upset as he was the morning before the Walker shooting?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He was just as usual—sort of sleepy that particular morning. He was not excited. Then, I was so sleepy myself that I didn't pay any attention.
Senator Russell. But you did testify that he was unusually excited the night before he shot at General walker, did you not?
*Mrs. Oswald. The more time is passing, the more I am mixed up as to the exact occurrence. I'm forgetting these fine details with the passing of time.
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we could take a 5-minute recess? The reporter has been at it a long time?
Senator Russell. Oh, yes; I don't know how she's stood it. I've never seen one in the Congress that took it anything like that long.
The Reporter. Thank you.
Mr. Rankin. And we will let you have a 5 minute recess, Mrs. Oswald.
(At this point the proceedings were recessed and resumed as stated, at 6:40 p.m., Sunday, September 6, 1964.)
Mr. Rankin. Mr. Chairman.
Mrs. Oswald, you have not appeared here today with a lawyer, have you?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. You have not, is that right? You have no lawyer with you?
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Senator Russell. No.
Mr. Rankin. When you appeared before the Commission the other two times, you did have a lawyer with you, did you not?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes—the other two times.
Mr. Rankin. Is there some reason why you do not have a lawyer at this time?*
*Mrs. Oswald. That attorney cost me too much.
Mr. Rankin. And—before this hearing, Mrs. Oswald, we offered to, that is the Commission offered to furnish you an attorney if you wanted one to be supplied to you for this hearing, did it not?* **
**Mrs. Oswald. You did so?
Mr. Rankin. I understood that that message was given to you by the Secret Service that we would ask for the appointment of counsel to attend the meeting with you, if you wished it, and you said you didn't need it, you would just tell the truth?
Mrs. Oswald. Mr. Sorrels called me on telephone and he asked me if I have a lawyer, an attorney, and I said, "No," and he told me, "Do I want to have one?" and I said, "No."
Mr. Rankin. And you understood that you would be supplied a lawyer if you wanted one and you said you didn't, is that right?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. You referred to the fact, when you were asked, that your husband had a rifle in the Soviet Union while he was there. In your prior testimony, you referred to either a rifle or a shotgun, do you know which it was?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know the difference between the shotgun and the rifle.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know that he had one or the other?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I know that there is a difference between this particular rifle and another rifle, but I don't know what the difference is. It was perhaps a different color.
Mr. Rankin. You know that in the Soviet Union he did have either a rifle or a shotgun, do you?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. Turning to the period when you were in New Orleans, just before you went back to Dallas with Ruth Paine, do you recall that time?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes—faintly.
Mr. Rankin. Do you remember that was the latter part of September?*
Mrs. Oswald. **Possibly.
Mr. Rankin. Do you remember what date you went back to Dallas from New Orleans?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. It wasn't the 26th of September?
Mr. Rankin. Wasn't it about the 23d of September that you went back?* **
Mrs. Oswald. The 23d?
*I do not know.
Mr. Rankin. Do you remember that you had a discussion with your husband about the unemployment check that he was to receive about that time?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I remember Lee told me that he was expecting an unemployment check just before he left for Mexico.
Mr. Rankin. Did he tell you that he had changed the postal address and that that check would probably come to Ruth Paine's?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He told me that he was going to change his address and that the letters would come to that new address of Ruth Paine.
Mr. Rankin. Did the unemployment check ever come to Ruth Paine's?*
*Mrs. Oswald. When he returned from Mexico, he asked me if the unemployment check arrived, and I replied that I did not know. No; there was no check.
Mr. Rankin. Did he say anything about getting the check at New Orleans and cashing it himself?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not remember it right now, but if I mentioned that to the Commission before, then it was so.
Mr. Rankin. Do you have any recollection about it now?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not recall distinctly now, but I think there was some conversation about the check being long in transit, that the check was sent from Dallas to New Orleans and from New Orleans to Irving.
Mr. Rankin. Well apparently, Mrs. Oswald, the facts show that the check was cashed by your husband with a stamped mark of the bank, dated the 26th of September, in New Orleans. Does that refresh your memory at all?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I was not with Lee at that time.
Mr. Rankin. Did he ever tell you anything about it?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not remember at this moment.
Mr. Rankin. Apparently he cashed the check at the little store, or the supermarket, near where you lived there in New Orleans. Did he every tell you that?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he did not tell me. I do not remember that he told me.
Mr. Rankin. Did Lee ever tell you where he stayed the night after you left, that is, the night of the 23d of September?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He told me that he stayed in that same house.
Mr. Rankin. At the house where you had lived?**
**Mrs. Oswald. He stayed with his aunt. I remember something that he stayed a couple days with his aunt in New Orleans.
*Did I leave on the 23d?
Mr. Rankin. Yes.
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not recall distinctly at this moment, but I believe he said he spent the first night at the house where we lived, and perhaps one or two nights at Aunt Lillian's.
Mr. Rankin. Is there something else?
Mrs. Oswald. It is so difficult for me to remember now.
Mr. Rankin. Did your husband have any Cuban friends at New Orleans?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know about this.
Mr. Rankin. Do you remember the time a man by the name of Bringuier came to the house there? Bringuier [spelling] B-r-i-n-g-u-i-e-r.
*Mrs. Oswald. Someone came, but I don't know from which organization or who he was.
Mr. Rankin. Was there more than one person who came asking about that or only one?*
Mrs. Oswald. Just one.
Mr. Rankin. Do you recall that your husband hired someone to help hand out leaflets about fair play for Cuba on the streets of New Orleans?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He mentioned that he hired a boy to help him, by giving him some money to buy ice cream or something—I don't know.
Mr. Rankin. I'll hand you what is marked as Frank Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-A, which is a photograph, and ask you if you recognize your husband there, and also, any of the other men there in the picture?*
*Mrs. Oswald (examining instrument mentioned). I recognize only my husband.
Mr. Rankin. Is your husband the man with the marks that sort of look like a "T" in light green?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. I ask you if you recognize anyone besides your husband in Frank Pizzo Exhibit No. 453-B?*
Mrs. Oswald. No. *No. [Examining instrument mentioned.] No.
Mr. Rankin. But you do recognize your husband there?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes—yes.
Mr. Rankin. He has a green mark over his photograph, does he not?
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know whether or not your husband consulted any attorneys in New Orleans while he was there?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know about this.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know of a Clay Bertrand, [spelling] B-e-r-t-r-a-n-d?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. Did your husband ever say anything about consulting an attorney about his discharge from the Marines or about his American citizenship?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. He did not.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know whether or not your husband was in Dallas in September between the 23d, the date that you left with Mrs. Paine, and the 26th of September—at any time?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know.
Mr. Rankin. Did he ever say anything about anything like that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. Did you ever know a Sylvia Odio, [spelling] O-d-i-o?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. You never heard of her?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. Sylvia Odio is a woman in Dallas who said that your husband, along with two Cubans, came to see her under the name "Leon Oswald," on the evening of the 25th or the 26th of September 1963. Do you know anything about that?*
**Mrs. Oswald. No; I do not know about this.
Mr. Rankin. Have you ever heard of her?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. Did you ever hear of a person by the name of Rodriguez [Spelling] R-o-d-r-i-g-u-e-z, that your husband was said to have known in New Orleans, while you were there? Do you know whether your husband ever knew a Rodriguez [spelling] R-o-d-r-i-g-u-e-z in New Orleans?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He may have known him, but I don't know anything about it.
Mr. Rankin. He never told you that he knew anyone like that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he did not tell me.
Mr. Rankin. When you lived in New Orleans and after your husband lost his job, did he stay away from home in the evenings much?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He was not at home during the day time, but he was at home most of the time in the evenings.
Mr. Rankin. And by being at home in the evenings, what time do you mean—from 6 o'clock on, or 7 o'clock, or what time?*
*Mrs. Oswald. After 7.
Mr. Rankin. Did he ever show signs of having been drinking or being drunk when he came home?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Never.
Mr. Rankin. Did he ever talk about having seen some friends or some Cubans or Mexicans in the bar or some bar in New Orleans?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. No; it's strange for me to hear that Lee visited bars or that he drank.
Mr. Rankin. Did you know of his drinking at all in New Orleans?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I never did.
Mr. Rankin. He was arrested in connection with the Fair Play for Cuba matter around August 9, if you will recall. You may not remember the exact date, but I refresh your memory and call your attention to the fact that it was that date—August 9?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I know about this.
Mr. Rankin. How did that come to your attention, how did you learn about it?*
*Mrs. Oswald. That night I waited for him until 3 o'clock in the morning. Then, I went to bed. When he came in the morning, I asked him where he had been and he told me he was arrested by the police.
Mr. Rankin. Had he stayed out all night that way before?* **
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. It hadn't ever happened before?**
Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. You say it never happened that he would even stay out late in the evening?*
Mrs. Oswald. No; sometimes he was delayed, but he would be home by 9 o'clock.
Mr. Rankin. Did you ever hear your husband say anything about being associated with any pro-Castro or anti-Castro groups in Dallas?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I didn't know that he belonged to any organization in Dallas.
Mr. Rankin. Did you know of any such associations or any associations with Cubans after he returned from Mexico City?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know about this.
Mr. Rankin. Did he ever mention Sylvia Odio to you or any name like that, that you recall?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. Now, when you testified before the Commission before, you were asked what kind of a job your husband had at the Minsk factory, do you recall that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. You said he read blueprints and translated them into the finished product. Do you remember your husband saying anything like that to you?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I don't think I testified to that.
Mr. Rankin. You don't recall testifying to that?*
Mrs. Oswald. I testified that he was a—slesar.
Mr. Gregory. Off the record, please?
She names a trade and that Russian word stands for locksmith, but I know that he was not a locksmith, I mean, from the description of work that he was doing. He was working at a factory where he was assembling details for—metallic details. He was a machinist apprentice working on parts for radio receivers.
Mr. Rankin. He told the FBI at one time in one of the interviews that he was busy reading blueprints and translating them.
Mr. Gregory, are you telling me what she says his job was or are you telling me what you know?
Mr. Gregory. No; she's telling me, but Mrs. Oswald tells me that the technical name of his job was the Russian word (spelling) s-l-e-s-a-r'.
Mr. Rankin. Now, will you describe, Mrs. Oswald, what he did in that job so it will be clearer than just that word. Tell us what he did?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I have never been at the plant where Lee worked or in any factory, but from the description that Lee gave me——
Mr. Rankin. Tell us that?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. He was grinding details—detailed parts for small parts, small metallic parts for radio receivers, on a lathe.
Perhaps he was boasting about the importance of his work when he told you about reading the blueprints and translating them into the finished product. He may have actually done that kind of work, but I know nothing about that.
Mr. Rankin. Was the only work that he told you he was doing during the period that you were there in Minsk, this job of grinding these parts on the lathe?*
*Mrs. Oswald. While he and I lived together—yes. That was the kind of work that he was doing in Minsk.
Mr. Rankin. And that's all that you know of?*
*Mrs. Oswald. That's all I know about his work.
Mr. Rankin. Now, turning to the period that your husband was in Moscow in 1959 when he first came there, and, of course, you were married later than that, did he tell you about his experiences when he first came to Moscow?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He told me that for the most part he visited museums and studied the Russian language.
Mr. Rankin. Did he say anything about the intourist guides, the women studied the Russian language.
Mrs. Oswald. The Russian guides?
Mr. Rankin. Did he tell you about any of the others that he knew there?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He did, but I don't remember their names, except Rimma. The only reason I remember Rimma Sherikova is because she visited us in Minsk. She did not come especially to see us, but she was passing through Minsk and stopped to see us.
Mr. Rankin. What did your husband tell you about Rimma?*
*Mrs. Oswald. That she was a very fine, pretty, smart young girl, and unfortunately, older than he is, and that she helped him a great deal.
Mr. Rankin. Did he tell you how she helped him?*
*Mrs. Oswald. First of all, as an interpreter.
Mr. Rankin. What else?
*Mrs. Oswald. And that he spent time with her and did not feel lonesome.
Mr. Rankin. Did he say anything about Rimma or the other intourist guides helping him with learning Russian?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; he did.
Mr. Rankin. Did he say how much they did that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he did not.
Mr. Rankin. Did he say anything about the guides helping him in dealing with the Embassy about his citizenship or giving up his citizenship?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he did not tell me about that.
Mr. Rankin. Did he say anything about the guides giving him any financial help?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he did not tell me.
Mr. Rankin. Did your husband say anything about when he learned that he might be able to stay in Russia, how he learned it?
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he did not. He, Lee, took part in radio broadcasts, propaganda in favor of the Soviet Union, which he felt helped him to get permission to stay in the Soviet Union.
Mr. Rankin. Did he say when he did that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. That was before my time.
Mr. Rankin. How did you learn about it?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He told me about it. Lee told me that the Soviet Union offered him Soviet citizenship, but he turned it down. He told me that he turned it down. At the same time, other developments as I recall, left the impression with me that he actually wanted to become a Soviet citizen, but I didn't connect the two. There is a discrepancy between the two, but at the time, I couldn't reconcile these apparent differences in what he said.
Mr. Rankin. You know he told the reporters that he talked to in Moscow in November, that the Government was going to let him stay, but his diary says he didn't get that word until January the 4th of the following year. Now, do you know anything about that, how that happened?*
Mrs. Oswald. 1960?
Mr. Rankin. 1959 in November is when he told the reporters, and it was January 4, 1960, that he actually put it in his diary that he had the first learning of it?*
Mrs. Oswald. That they would let him stay in the Soviet Union?
Mr. Rankin. Yes.
Mrs. Oswald. Newspaper reporters?
Mr. Rankin. Yes; newspaper reporters—Miss Johnson and Miss Mosby.*
*Mrs. Oswald. He made the entry into his diary, I think, at a later date, and they may not be correct or precise—just one.
Mr. Gregory. I think she's a little tired. She's saying many words, but I can't connect them. She says, "To be brief, I don't believe I know."
Mr. Rankin. We will soon be through, Mrs. Oswald. There are just a few more questions.*
When your husband said that he had spoken over the radio and he thought that helped him, did he tell you what he said over the radio?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. He spoke over the radio of how everything—how wonderful everything was in the Soviet Union, or what he thought they liked to hear.
Mr. Rankin. And did you understand that he spoke that in Moscow while he was there?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; while he was in Moscow.
Mr. Rankin. That was during the period after he had first come to the country and before he came to Minsk, is that right?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Mr. Rankin. Now, do you recall any more than you have told us about the time you had the interview with the MVD about your visa—what they said to you and what you said to them?*
*Mrs. Oswald. First of all, Colonel Aksenov asked me why I wanted to go to America, "Is it so bad here that you want to leave?" And I replied that I wanted to go to America with my husband and that I believe that I have that right.
Mr. Rankin. What did they say to that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Then he said, "You will simply have to wait because you are not the only one who wants to leave. You will have to wait your turn."
Mr. Rankin. Do you recall anything else that was said at that time?*
*Mrs. Oswald. At that time I was pregnant and Colonel Aksenov suggested that may be it would be better for me to wait until the baby came.
Mr. Rankin. What did you say to that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I told him that I would prefer to leave as soon as possible.
Mr. Rankin. Is that all you remember of the conversation?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Nothing of importance.
Mr. Rankin. Where did this conversation occur?*
*Mrs. Oswald. In the MVD building in Minsk.
Mr. Rankin. And who was present besides you and Colonel Aksenov?*
Mrs. Oswald. At first there were two military men who later left, and they accompanied me or rather they showed me to the room where Colonel Aksenov was. We were the only two in the room.
Mr. Rankin. Now, your husband said that before you both left for the United States, he had an interview with the MVD. Do you recall that?*
Mrs. Oswald. Before we left where?
Mr. Rankin. Before you left the Soviet Union?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know about this.
Mr. Rankin. Do you recall anything like that while you were in Moscow before you left for the United States?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. You were never told about anything like that by your husband?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. By anyone else?*
Mrs. Oswald. Nobody.
Mr. Rankin. You were not present at any such meeting?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No.
Mr. Rankin. Do you know of any meeting of that kind in Minsk?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He never told me that he had interviews.
Mr. Rankin. He said he quarreled with them trying to expedite the visas, the exit permits, and where was that?*
*Mrs. Oswald. In Minsk.
Mr. Rankin. And did he tell you whom he talked to when he quarreled with them about the exit visas?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know their names, but all the people that were empowered with issuance of the exit permits.
Mr. Rankin. Was that the time that you said he tried to get to see Colonel Aksenov and they wouldn't let him?* **
Mrs. Oswald. It could have happened before we moved because he apparently had a conversation with the Colonel.**
**I remember it was cold.
Mr. Gregory. May I ask Marina—will you mind to read the question?
The Reporter. "Was that the time that you said he tried to get to see Colonel Aksenov and they wouldn't let him?"
Mr. Rankin. I was asking about the meeting with the MVD.
Mr. Gregory. Lee meeting with the MVD in Minsk?
Mr. Rankin. Yes—about the exit visas.
Mr. Gregory. And you wanted to know the year and the month of the year?
Mr. Rankin. No; I was first trying to find out what meeting she was talking about and whether it was the one she referred to later.
Mr. Gregory. When she could not get the audience with the man?
Mr. Rankin. That's right.* **
*Mrs. Oswald. It was approximately in January 1962.
Mr. Rankin. And did he tell you what happened at that meeting?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He did not meet with—he did not get to see Colonel Aksenov.
Mr. Rankin. But he did see someone else in there?
*Mrs. Oswald. Apparently he talked to someone who substituted or was inferior to Colonel Aksenov.
Mr. Rankin. And what did he tell you happened at that time?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Lee told me that when he came to MVD he asked to see Colonel Aksenov, and the people in the office asked him the nature of the business he wanted to discuss with him, and he told them that it was about exit visas, and they told him that he could not see Aksenov, but that they, whoever "they" were, were empowered to act on that question, but he insisted on seeing the colonel, and he did not get to see him.
Mr. Rankin. Then what happened?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Then he came home—then I went to MVD, then he sent me to MVD. I said, "I don't want to go there and he said, "I insist." Then, I was afraid to go there, but I did go, and the Colonel did not eat me up.
Mr. Rankin. Did you talk to the colonel about both your visa and your husband's at that time?*
Mrs. Oswald. The conversation with Colonel Aksenov was to find out why the delay in the issuance of the exit permits.
Mr. Rankin. That's all I have.
Senator Cooper. There has been a good deal of testimony that you and your husband were good friends with the De Mohrenschildt family?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes.
Senator Cooper. Is it correct that when he came to your house on one occasion that he saw the rifle, your husband's rifle?*
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know about this. It is possible that I have shown the rifle to them.
Senator Cooper. Do you remember when Mr. De Mohrenschildt said something like this after the Walker incident: "How could you miss it?" or something like that.*
*Mrs. Oswald. De Mohrenschildt—as soon as he opened the door, he said to Lee, "How could you have missed, how could you have missed him?"
Senator Cooper. Do you have any explanation for that?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know whether Lee told De Mohrenschildt about shooting at Walker, and then Lee looked at me thinking—whether I told De Mohrenschildt about it—I don't know. He even couldn't speak that evening. Lee could not speak that evening. We were on the porch.
Senator Cooper. Did he later ask you if you had told De Mohrenschildt?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He asked me if I told De Mohrenschildt about it and when I said I didn't, he said, "How did he guess it?"
Mr. Gopadze. No; she said, "Maybe you have told him."
*Mrs. Oswald. Then he said, "Maybe you've told him about it", and then he added—he said, "How did he guess it?"
Senator Cooper. De Mohrenschildt said he had lived in Minsk, did he ever talk to you about Minsk?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; he did say he lived in Minsk when he was a small child.
Senator Cooper. You said also you heard them talking on occasions, that is, you heard Lee Oswald and De Mohrenschildt talking about Russia, did you hear them talking about political problems, political affiliations?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Yes; they discussed politics.
Senator Cooper. Was De Mohrenschildt living in Dallas at the time of the assassination of President Kennedy?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He lived in Haiti.
Mr. Gopadze. Do you know if he was in Haiti?
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know whether he lived in Dallas at the time of the assassination or whether he lived in Haiti.
Senator Cooper. Could you think back, Mrs. Oswald, is there any fact which comes to your mind which would lead you to believe that any person or persons were associated with your husband in any plan to assassinate President Kennedy, or you thought, Governor Connally?*
*Mrs. Oswald. Of course, I don't know anything about it.
Senator Cooper. But my question was—not whether you knew. I asked you whether you had any facts which would lead you to believe that there was anyone?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. I do not know about this.
Senator Cooper. One other question. Did Lee Oswald ever say to you that he had any kind of connection with the Cuban Government or any of its agents?*
*Mrs. Oswald. He did not tell me.
Senator Cooper. I said one more, and this is the last one, I promise you.
Once you said that when you went to New Orleans together, he said something like this: "I'm lost." If that's correct, what was he talking about? Do you remember that?* **
*Mrs. Oswald. On that particular occasion he sat by the icebox or the frigidaire and he sat there and he had his head in his hands and he said, "I am lost." I believe that that was the result of all the failures of his.
Senator Cooper. Did you feel sympathy for him and love for him in those days?*
Mrs. Oswald. Yes; I felt sorry for him. I knew it was difficult for him with his family. I felt sorry for him.
Senator Cooper. All right.
Senator Russell. When you testified the second time in Washington, Mrs. Oswald, that you didn't think Mr. De Mohrenschildt was as dangerous as he sounds—that was your personal opinion—what did you mean by that?*
Here it is: "Mr. Mohrenschildt once took us out to the Fords' house. It was at New Year's, I think—Katya Ford's house. It was either Christmas or New Year's. I don't think Mr. De Mohrenschildt is as dangerous as he sounds. That's my personal opinion."
No one had said anything about him being dangerous, so why was that your opinion?** *
Mr. Gregory. Off the record.
Senator Russell. She understood that.
Mr. Gregory. This goes into the record, of course?
Senator Russell. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gregory. I think she's hesitated——
Senator Russell. I think she should explain it.
*Mrs. Oswald. George is such a big mouth.
Senator Russell. Let's let her testify, if you don't mind?
Mr. Gregory. I'm translating what she said.
Senator Russell. Oh, is that what she said? I see. I'm sorry. I'm sorry—I didn't hear it.
*Mrs. Oswald. George is such a loud mouth or big talker——
Senator Russell. Big talker—that would be the equivalent, I'm sure.
*Mrs. Oswald. I simply do not believe that—it is my intuition——
Mr. Gopadze. No; that point?
*Mrs. Oswald. It is my opinion that people that talk too much do little.
Senator Russell. And did he talk too much or talk very loud? I don't know Mr. De Mohrenschildt.** *
Mrs. Oswald. Very loud.
*He jokes all the time and people don't know when he talks sense and when he jokes.
**Sometimes he would say something jokingly and people would think that he's telling the truth.
Senator Russell. Was that boasting about some imaginary achievement of his?*
*Mrs. Oswald. It's simply his manner of speaking—of talking. It's his character.
Senator Russell. He didn't talk then about his feats of any kind, about performing any great feats?*
*Mrs. Oswald. No; he never did.
Senator Russell. It was merely his tone of voice and his manner of expression that made him sound dangerous?**
**Mrs. Oswald. He was boasting about it, but he never would follow through.
Mr. Rankin. You might tell the full story.
Mrs. Oswald. Quite often he would be boasting about something big but he never did follow through.
Senator Russell. So he did talk about great achievements most of the time?*
**Mrs. Oswald. Just like a fellow who is just a happy go-around man, a happy go-lucky man.
Senator Russell. If there is nothing further, the Commission thanks you very much for your assistance, and you, Mr. Gregory, and above all, the very remarkable reporter who has been able to stay with us from the beginning.
The Commission will now recess subject to the call of the Chairman or Chief Justice Warren.
Mrs. Oswald. Thank you very much.
Senator Russell. Thank you.
(Whereupon, at 8 p.m., the President's Commission adjourned.)
[Transcriber's Notes]
Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.
Misspellings in quoted evidence not changed; misspellings that could be due to mispronunciations were not changed.
Some simple typographical errors were corrected.
Inconsistent hyphenation of compound words retained.
Ambiguous end-of-line hyphens retained.
Occasional uses of "Mr." for "Mrs." and of "Mrs." for "Mr." corrected.
Dubious repeated words, (e.g., "What took place by way of of conversation?") retained.
Several unbalanced quotation marks not remedied.
Occasional periods that should be question marks not changed.
Occasional periods that should be commas, and commas that should be periods, were changed only when they clearly had been misprinted (at the end of a paragraph or following a speaker's name in small-caps at the beginning of a line). Some commas and semi-colons were printed so faintly that they appear to be periods or colons: some were found and corrected, but some almost certainly remain.
The Index and illustrated Exhibits volumes of this series may not be available at Project Gutenberg.
Asterisks in the Marina Oswald testimony have been reproduced as originally printed.
Page [vii]: No Table of Contents entry for "Testimony of Mrs. Lee Harvey Oswald (resumed)" beginning on page [588].
Page [47]: "is a photostat is a photostat" was printed that way.
Page [51]: "Will you tell us on what date you wrote or dictated Exhibit 711?" occurs twice. The second occurrence either was spoken by Mr. Rankin or is a typesetting error.
Page [88] and elsewhere: "Mr. Specter" misprinted five times as "Mr. Spector"; corrected here.
Page [107]: "these tall building on either side" should be "buildings".
Page [138]: "contains angels of sight" is a misprint for "angles".
Page [139]: One occurrence of "Main Street" was misprinted as "Maine Street"; corrected here.
Page [142]: "Dr. Hume" is a misprint for "Dr. Humes".
Page [152]: "The other hand, his left hand is on his lapel" was misprinted as "left had"; corrected here.
Page [163]: "Did the surveyor make that placement" misprinted as "surveyer"; corrected here.
Page [177]: "Those are 88 mm., too" is a misprint for "8 mm."
Page [186]: "implusive" probably is a misprint for "impulsive".
Pages [273] and elsewhere: "Mr. Snyder" misprinted six times as "Mr. Synder"; corrected here.
Page [298]: "exist visa" probably is a misprint for "exit visa".
Page [306]: "would't" was printed that way.
Page [335]: "name." is repeated, originally on the next line; looks like a misprint.
Page [365]: "How could you tell us" possibly should be "Now could".
Page [482]: "Do you thing that is a handicap" should be "think".
Page [528]: "handwriting. It that yours?" should be "Is".
Page [529]: "handwriting it that?" should be "is".
Page [530]: "I do not know which exhibit is." should be "it is".
Page [562]: "miles and hour." should be "an".
Page [563]: "take as much as minute" probably should be "as a minute".
Page [611]: "whatsover" was printed that way.
Page [613]: "Did he every tell you that" should be "ever".
Page [618]: 'I said, "I don't want to go there and he said, "I insist."' either is missing a closing quotation mark or has a spurious opening one.