iii
Hi
mmm
! i i
rF
t
Given By
3^
INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE
ON IMPEOPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTIONS 74 AND 221, 85TH CONGRESS
AUGUST 5, 6, 7, 8, AND 12, 1958
PART 36
Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the
Labor or Management Field
INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SELECT COMMITTEE
ON IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTIONS 74 AND 221, 85TH CONGRESS
AUGUST 5, 6, 7, 8, AND 12, 1958
PART 36
Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the
Labor or Management Field
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
21243 WASHINGTON : 1958
Boston Public Librmry
Superintendent of Documents
JANl3 1b5y
DEPOSITORY
SELECT COMMITTEE ON IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR
OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas, Chairman
IRVING M. IVES, New York, Vice Chairman
JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota
SAM J. ERVIN, Je., North Carolina BARRY GOLDWATER, Arizona
FRANK CHURCH, Idaho CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska
Robert F. Kennedy, Chief Counsel
Ruth Young Watt, Chief Clerk
II
CONTENTS
James R. Hoffa and the International, Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America
Page
Appendix , 13707
Testimonv of —
Adlefman, Jerome S 13445, 13578, 13700
Balkwill, William H 13322, 13338
Belles, Ernest G 13616
Bellino, Carmine S 13336, 13702
Bitonti, John 13620
Brennan, Owen Bernard 13398, 13488
Brennan, William J 13548
Bushkin, Jack 13365
Davidson, Eml^rel 13458
DeLucia, Paul (Ricca) 13575, 13583
Feldman, Samuel 13565
Finazzo, Sam 13483
Fitzgerald, George 13439
Fitzsimmons, Frank E 13588
Grosberg, Herbert L 13410, 13448
Held, George 13598
Hoffa, James R. 13277, 13379, 13407, 13495, 13533, 13629, 13666, 13667, 13695
Kelly, James P 13666
Lantz, Conrad 133 16
LoCicero, Thomas 13357
Marroso, Samuel J 13452
Meissner, John C 13344
Miller, William H 13297
Morgan, Arthur L 13609
O'Carroll, Patrick P 13477
Quasarano, Raffaele 13483
Roberts, Robert D 13532
Rose, Lulubelle 13562
Salinger, Pierre E. G 13349, 13481, 13582
Scott, Robert P 13673
Stern, Max 13569
Watkins, Vincent B 13312
EXHIBITS
Introduced Appears
on page on page
1. Check No. 1352, dated May 2, 1949, payable to Conrad S.
Lantz, in the amount of $1,000 drawn on account of De-
troit Institute of Laundering 13319 13707
2A. Check No. 1203, dated September 30, 1948, payable to cash,
in the amount of $1,000 drawn on account of Detroit In-
stitute of Laundering 13332 13708
2B. Check No. 1538, dated April 17, 1950, payable to cash, in the
amount of $2,000 drawn on the account of Detroit Insti-
tute of Laundering 13332 13709
2C. Check No. 1347, dated April 24, 1949, payable to W. H.
Balkwill, in the amount of $1,000 drawn on the account
of Detroit Institute of Laundering 13332 13710
3A-0. Fifteen checks in various amounts drawn on the account
of Detroit Institute of Laundering from June 2, 1948,
through April 27, 1951 -- 13338 (*)
*May be found in the files of the select committee.
ni
IV
CONTENTS
Introduced Api)ears
on page on page
3P-DD. Check stubs and ledger sheets, "legal expenses" and
"travel and entertainment" 13338 (*)
4. Contract, agreement, and scale of wages between Detroit
Institute of Laundering and Laundry and Linen Drivers
Union, Local 285 "_ 13350 (*)
5A. Check dated March 15, 1955, payable to cash, in the amount
of $500, signed by Benjamin Dranow and endorsed by
Wilbur Clark's Desert Inn 13371 13711
5B. Check dated March 15, 1955, payable to cash, in the
amount of $1,500, signed by Benjamin Dranow and
endorsed by Wilbur Clark's Desert Inn 13371 13712
5C. Check dated March 15, 1955, payable to cash, in the
amount of $1,100, signed bv Ben Dranow and endorsed
by Hotel Flamingo, Inc___I 13371 13713
6A. Check No. 1010, dated March 17, 1956, payable to Sam
Marroso, in the amount of $250, drawn on special ac-
count of Herbert L. Grosberg 13437 13714
6B. Check No. 1011, dated March 17, 1956, payable to Sam
Marroso, in the amount of $50, drawn on special account
of Herbert L. Grosberg 13437 13715
6C. Check No. 1015, dated April 16, 1956, payable to Sam
Marroso, in the amount of $300, and drawn on special
account of Herbert L. Grosberg 13437 13716
6D. Check No. 1029, dated January 29, 1957, payable to Sam
Marroso, in the amount of $208.17, and drawn on the
special account of Herbert L. Grosberg 13437 13717
7. Picture of Jimmy Quasarano 13468 (*)
8. A group picture marked "Truck bombers" in which appears
the picture of Bernard Brennan 13492 (*)
9. Field report dated August 12, 1948, re Herman Kierdorf by
Phihp H. Collins, parole officer, Division of Pardons,
Paroles and Probation 13507 (*)
10. Check No. 1810, dated June 21, 1956, payable to Samuel
Feldman, in the amount of $750, drawn on the account of
Dewey's Famous, Inc 13567 13718
11. Photograph of the home formerly occupied by Paul DeLucia
at Long Beach, LaPorte County, Ind 13577 (*)
12. Plat of a survey made by Richard R. Frame, professional
engineer for the State of Indiana, consisting of 8 lots
which involves property of DeLucia or the Teamsters 13579 (*)
13. Trust Agreement No. 96 transferring property in tract B,
lots 37, 38, 39, and 40 to Teamster locals and back to
Paul DeLucia and back to Teamsters 13581 (*)
14. Trust Agreement No. 97 transferring tract A, lots 35, 36,
41, and 42 from DeLucia to the Teamsters 13581 (*)
15. Minutes of the executive board meeting of local 337, Jan-
uary 4, 1957 13582 (*)
16. The Long Beach zoning ordinance 13586 (*)
17. Decision by the National Labor Relations Board; Report
and Recommendation on Objections to Conduct Affecting
the Results of the Election of Teamsters Lhiion 13613 (*)
18. Letter dated September 26, 1957, addressed to Mr. Arthur
Morgan, Minneapolis, Minn., from Elmer J. Ryan, at-
torney at law, St. Paul, Minn '. 13613 13719
19. Letter dated January 5, 1943, addressed to Manpower
Branch, Civilian Personnel Division, War Department,
Washington, D. C, re induction of Roland Bovne Mc-
Master,\signed by James R. Hoffa ." 13639 (*)
♦May be found in the files of the select committee.
CONTENTS
Introduced Appears
on page on page
20. Document, prospectus of North American Rare Metals.
Ltd_._ 1 13656 (*)
21 A. Check No. 1318, dated April 19, 19.56, payable to Ahmed
Abass, drawn on local 299 in the amount of $12,000 13662 13720
21 B. Check stub No. 1318, dated April 19, 1956, payable to
Ahmed Abass for "Personal, 2d mortgage" in the amount
of $12,000 13662 13721
22. Check dated August 6, 1956, payable to Benjamin Dranow,
in the amount of $4,430, signed by Jack Bushkin 13664 13722
23. A\'ithdrawal card issued to Robert P. Scott: "Not active in
business," by local 50, Barbers Union 13686 13723
24. Ledger sheet showing the years Robert P. Scott paid dues
to Local 50, Barbers Union: 1943, 1944, 1945, 1956, and
part of 1947 13686 13724
25. Telegram received by Robert Scott from Elmer Albrecht,
secretary-treasurer, local 552 13689 13725
26. Check No. 415 dated February 21, 1955, payable to Joint
Council 43, in the amount of $3,000 and signed by
Frank Collins, Joint Council 43, defense fund 13704 13726
Proceedings of —
August 5, 1958 13275
August 6, 1958 13377
August 7, 1958 13451
Augusts, 1958 13547
August 12, 1958 13629
*May be found in the files of the select committee.
INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
TUESDAY, AUGUST 5, 1958
United States Senate,
Select Committee on Improper Activities
IN THE Labor or Management Field,
Washington, L
The select committee met at 10 : 30 a. m., pursuant to Senate R
tion 74, agreed to January 30, 1957, in the caucus room, Senate
Building, Senator Jolin L. McClellan (chairman of the select
mittee) presiding.
Present : Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; S(
John F. Kennedy, Democrat, Massachusetts; Senator Sam J. ]
Jr., Democrat, North Carolina; Senator Frank Church, Dem
Idaho ; Senator Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York ; Senator
E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota ; Senator Carl T. Curtis, E
lican, Nebraska.
Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Paul Tii
assistant counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; Carm
Bellino, accountant; Pierre E. Salinger, investigator; Ruth Y.
chief clerk.
(At the convening of the session, the following members were
ent : Senators McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Kennedy, Curtis, and Chi
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Good morning.
Mr. HoFFA. Good morning. Senator.
The Chairman. The Chair will make a brief opening state
Today the committee resumes its inquiry into the policies, prai
and activities of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, C
feurs. Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, and particularly
respect to the same under the leadership and direction of Jan
Hoffa, general president of this labor organization.
At the time Mr. Hoffa appeared before this committee last
he did not hold the top position in the Teamsters Union. Since
however, at a convention in Miami, Fla., he was elected to the
dency with attending circumstances that raised serious questic
the propriety and validity of his selection.
Nevertheless, he now heads the Nation's most powerful union,
potential for good and evil in the position he holds is tremei
The teamsters have both the capacity and the opportunity to
mighty driving and constructive force for the welfare of its mer
and for the betterment of the American economy. If the powe
ability of the International Teamsters Union should be imprc
directed and misused, then it could become an extremely evi
13275
13276 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
destructive force in the social, political, and economic life of our
country.
Obviously, tlie direction of this international union will depend
upon the integrity and the motivation of that leadership. This is
of great concern, not only' to this committee and the Congress but
to all decent, law-abiding American citizens evei-ywhere.
On the basis of previous testimony before this committee, replete
with improper practices and conduct on the part of Mr, Hoffa and
some of his associates, a serious question has arisen in the minds of
the committee as to Mr, Hoffa's motivation and the direction and
leadership he proposes to give this great and important union.
As spelled out in the committee's interim report, the evidence had
shown that in numerous instances Mr. Hotfa has alined himself with
certain underworld characters, who are a part and parcel of the crimi-
nal elements and most sinister forces in this country.
When he testified before the connnittee, Mr. Hotfa said he would
attempt to divest himself of some of his associations and give this
union the character and quality of leadership and administration
worthy of the importance and high purposes of this great labor
organization.
In these hearings the committee will be interested in ascertaining
whether he has been successful — or what efforts and progress he has
made in that direction.
It will be recalled that when Mr. Iloft'a testified before, he suffered
seriously from 'iack of memory,'' and thus avoided answering many
pertinent questions seeking information, about which he had knowl-
edge and in which the committee was interested.
It is to be hoped that his memory has improved and that he can
now give the committee the cooperation and assistance it is entitled
to receive and that he, as an American citizen and the leader of this
great union, is under obligation to give.
This series of hearings will not be of 1 day's duration. The affairs
of this union and its top officers are so intricate and complex that it
may well engage the attention of the committee here in public hear-
ings for several weeks.
Mr. Hoffa will be expected to remain here during that time to
answer all pertinent questions, to give explanations, or to refute any
testimony the committee may hear of improper practices, or that
which may be derogatory to him personally.
We have a right to expect from him candid and truthful answers.
For him to do less would seriously compromise his position and cast
further doubt upon his integrity and the propriety of his union
leadership,
I believe Mr. Hoffa observed recently in Seattle, Wash., that the
Teamsters have the power to shut down the economy of this Nation
at its will. That I think we can concede. Any union in which such
tremendous power is reposed also bears equal obligation and responsi-
bility to the people and to the Government of the United States.
It is unthinkable that the leaders of any such powerful organization
should have an alliance or understanding in any area of its activities
with racketeers, gangsters, and hoodlums.
Such an alliance or any working arrangements with such characters
and elements places a dangerous force at the jugular vein of America's
economic life.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13277
The committee is convinced that the great mass — the million and
a half members of the Teamsters Union — are honest, law-abiding
citizens. The committee is interested in serving them — in protecting
their interest and their welfare.
The committee is also interested in ascertaining the truth regarding
policies, activities, and practices associated with this union and its
leadership and with labor-management relations generally that need
to be corrected or prohibited.
To that end the committee seeks information with a view of sub-
mitting recommendations to the Congress for appropriate remedial
legislation.
Notwithstanding Mr. Hoffa's reported remarks of contempt for
this committee, its source of authority, the United States Senate, and
the purposes and objectives for which the committee labors, the com-
mittee will pursue its duty and carry out the mandate in the resolu-
tion creating it.
In this, we hope to have, and have every right to expect, Mr. Hoffa's
cooperation and assistance.
(At this point. Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.)
This is something he owes to the great mass of working people — •
dues-paying members whose interest he is supposed to represent,
whose welfare he is supposed to promote, and whose rights he is
■dutybound to protect.
The committee shall now proceed as faithfully and diligently in the
course herein set forth as it is within its capacity to do so.
Senator Ives. Mr. Chainnan, before you start, I would like to com-
mend you upon that statement. It is an excellent presentation. I
think it expresses the feeling of every single one of us. Before we
get through with this series of hearings, at which Mr. Hoffa will be
present, I have a feAv questions I expect to ask him.
The Chairman. Thank you. Senator Ives.
Are there any other comments ?
Senator Curtis?
Senator CtiRTis. No statement.
The CiiAiRMAx. Senator Kennedy ?
Senator Kennedy. No statement.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hoffa, will you be sworn, please, sir?
You do solemnly swear that the evidence you give before this
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing
but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Hoffa. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES R. HOFFA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWARD BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD, AND
DAVID PREVIANT
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and
your business or occupation.
Mr. Hoffa. My name is James R. Hoffa, 16154 Robeson, Detroit,
Mich., and I am president of the International Brotherhood of Team-
sters, Chauffeurs, "Warehousemen, and Helpers of America.
The Chairman. You have counsel.
Mr. Counsel, identify yourself.
13278 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir, I have counsel today, and I desire my counsel
to make a statement j^rior to the hearing also.
The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, identify yourself for the record.
If you have more than one
Mr. Williams. My name, sir, is Edward Bennett Williams of
Washington, D. C.
So that there will be no misunderstanding about my role here, I
would like to say for the record that I appear here as general counsel
for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chautl'eurs, Ware-
housemen, and Helpers of America, to counsel with the president
during his appearance here. I should like to just take one minute,.
Mr. Chairman, to say a few
The Chairman. May I ask before you do that if there are other
counsel representing him ?
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir.
Mr. George Fitzgerald of Detroit, Mich., and Mr. David Previant,.
of Milwaukee, Wis., also appear here as counsel.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to say just a couple of words relative
to the subject that you spoke on a minute ago. I think in order to
evaluate the pertinency of this interrogation, it is necessary to state a
little of the background that has shifted since the witness' last appear-
ance here on August 23d. As the Chair indicated, he has become
president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
The Chairman. Is there any objection on the part of the committee
to permit counsel to make a brief backgi'ound statement ?
Without objection, you may proceed.
Mr. Williams. On January 23, of this year, Mr. Chairman, as the
direct result of an order of the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia, the witness became seated as president of this
union; on January 31, just 8 days later, this international union vol-
untarily did unto itself what no union has done. It submitted itself
to the equity jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the
District of Columbia, acting through a court-appointed board of
monitors. That board of monitors, Mr. Chairman, was appointed to
advise the president and his executive board on matters of democratic
procedures, financial procedures, on questions of conflict of interest,
and on the removal of trusteeships in local unions.
It is exactly 6 months to the day since that board of monitors has
been in operation. I can report to you, Mr. Chairman, that there has
been no recommendation that has been made by this outside, impartial
board of monitors which has been refused. I say this to point out to
the chairman and the committee that many of these matters which
may be pertinent here are under the equity jurisdiction of the United
States District Court for the District of Columbia, and that they are
matters which are under the continuing scrutiny of the court and its
appointed officers.
I feel that this is a very important piece of information against
which to assess the pertinency of this interrogation because I am sure
that this committee does not want to intrude itself as a part of the
legislature into a case which is actively under the scrutmy of the
judiciary.
The Chairivian. The committee will not intrude upon the preroga-
tives of the court. We have no intention of doing that. Tlie re-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13279
sponsibility and authority vested in the court does not oontlict, neces-
sarily, in any instance, so far as I know, with the purposes and
objectives of this committee to ascertain what improper practices may
be current or may have occurred in the past that may warrant and
command the attention of tlie legishitive branch of the Government
with respect to laws to remedy such conditions, if they exist.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Mundt.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Williams — I would like to ask counsel a couple
of questions about this board of monitors, so that I can be sure that
I understand the picture in my own mind.
Wliat is tlie anticipated life expectancy of this board of monitors?
Mr. Williams. Senator Mundt, the consent decree, which was
entered into voluntarily by this international imion, provides that the
board of monitoi-s shall sit for no less than 1 year, and that they shall
sit, unless discharged by the court, in any event until the next conven-
tion of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
In the normal course of events, under the constitution, the next
convention of the international brotherhood would be in 1962.
Senator Mundt. So they have a minimum life of a year ?
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir.
Senator Mundt. And a maximum life until the next convention ?
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir.
Senator Mundt. And would you give just a quick, brief rundown
of what their responsibilities are and what their authority is, if any ?
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir.
Senator
Senator Mundt. It would be helpful, too, I think, to have in the
record the identity of the members.
Mr. Williams. Under this consent decree, and I repeat this inter-
national under the presidency of the witness entered into this volun-
tarily, the board of monitors is given jurisdiction over, first of all,
democratic procedures within the union. They have the right to
counsel with and make recommendations to the general executive
board of the Teamsters on these matters : On the election of officers,
on the right to honest advertised elections, on the right to fair mii-
form qualifications to stand for office, and, furthermore, on the right
to freedom to express views at meetings.
In other words, they have been given the jurisdiction voluntarily
by the IBT to police intraunion democracy.
Secondly, they have been given jurisdiction voluntarily by the inter-
national under the presidency of the witness to police financial and
accounting controls and procedures of the international.
They are authorized to and they have already. Senator Mundt, made
an audit of the international, through Price, Waterhouse and they are
continuing to make other audits at the local levels through this same
accounting firm.
In addition, they have been empowered to see that no officer of the
international has any conflict of interest in the performance of his
duties. In other words, if any officer of the international has any-
thing which can be construed as an investment which might conflict
or an interest which might conflict with the full performance of his
duties to the international, they have the authority to police this and
13280 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
bring it to the attention of the court. I might say to you, Senator,
that the past 6 months during the existence of this board of monitor-
ship, every investment, every interest, that any international officer
has had, has been divested, several months ago, which could possibly
be at war with the letter or spirit of this provision of the decree.
Again, they are authorized and empowered to look into the situ-
ation of trusteed locals. The last time that this witness appeared
here, Senator Mundt, I believe there were some 118 locals in trustee-
ship. As of this morning, my best information is that the figure is
45. In other words, the number of locals in trusteeship have been
more than halved.
They are now less than 50 percent of what they were. During the
existence of this board of monitorship, which originally was headed
by Chief Judge Nathan Cay ton, formerly chief judge of the Munic-
ipal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and which was
filled further by Godfrey Schmidt, of New York, and L. N. D. Wells,
of Dallas, Tex., all the recommendations which were made by the
board of monitors to the president and the general executive board
were abided by.
Every recommendation was adhered to. I may say to you, sir, that
there were scores and scores of these. Chief Judge Cay ton resigned
in April of this year, and he was succeeded by a District of Columbia
lawyer, Martin F. O'Donoghue. Since Mr. O'Donoghue assumed the
chairmanship of the board of monitors, again there have been numer-
ous recommendations. I can report to you that as of this moment
none has been declined. There are some still under advisement, but
none has been declined by the president of the general executive board.
Senator Mtjndt. Is Mr. Schmidt still a member of the board of
of monitors ?
Mr. Williams. Mr. Schmidt is still a member.
Senator ISIundt. The only change is the judge who has been re-
placed by Mr. O'Donoghue.
Senator Mundt. Is that former District of Columbia Jiggs Dono-
hue?
Mr. Williams. No; it is not. Senator Mundt. They are two dif-
ferent men. The chairman of the board is Mr. O'Donoghue.
Senator Mundt. I would like to ask a question about the consent
decree, under the terms of which this voluntary arrangement was
made.
Is there anything in that arrangement whereby the recommenda-
tions of the board of monitors have to be accepted? Or what hap-
pens under the consent decree if the board of monitors unanimously
recommend to the Teamsters that this be done and the Teamsters
say, "We don't think this is right, we can't do it, or we wouldn't do it."
If you have an impasse, what happens ?
Mr. Williams. As of this moment, Senator, that situation has not
taken place.
Senator Mundt. I understood that you said they had all been fol-
lowed. But this is a conceivable contingency. I am wondering, under
the terms of the consent decree, what happens then ?
Mr. Williams. Under the consent decree, if there were an arbitrary
pattern of noncooperation by the general executive board and its presi-
dent, with the recommendation of the board of monitors, and arbitrary
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13281
pattern of ignoring the board and failure to cooperate, the board has
taken the position, through the chairman, Mr, O'Donoghue, that it
could go to Judge Letts, who is the judge who signed the consent
decree, and call these facts to his attention for what action he would
take.
Senator Mundt. In other words, you are telling us that this board
does have some power, that there are some teeth in it, that if over a
period of some time a pattern were developed that they could enforce
it, or they could go to the judge and ask him to enforce it?
Mr. Williams. I am saying that under the decree they have recom-
mendatory and advisory powers only. As of this date, the question
of whether they have teetli or not is a moot question because it has not
arisen. Everything has been abided by.
Senator Mfndt. Is there any question in your mind but what the
court, if it desired, could enforce the recommendations of the board
if the board found that there were this arbitrary unwillingness, which,
happily, does not exist, but which could exist?
Mr. Williams. I don't want to leave you with the impression for a
moment. Senator, that the general executive board has surrendered
the autonomy of this international to the board of monitors.
Senator Mundt. I am trying to find out what the facts are.
Mr. Williams. I don't want to suggest to you for a moment that
the board of monitors can run this union under the decree, because we
have not given them that kind of power. We have given them advisory
and recommendatory power, and we have adhered to their recom-
mendations.
If we should refuse to accept their recommendations in an isolated
case here and there, certainly there would be nothing that they could
do about it, because we retain in the executive board and in the presi-
dent the final power to act in the administration and control of this
union. But I did say to you that if there were an arbitrary flaunting
as a pattern of the advice and recommendations of the board of moni-
tors, then they have taken the position, and I suppose the chairman of
the board is in a better position to answer than I what he conceives his
own functions and powers to be, but they have taken the position that
they could go to the United States district court and seek relief there.
Senator Mundt, What I am trying to establish primarily, Mr.
Williams, in my own mind, is whether or not this board has a decree
of administrative responsibility and authority which would indicate
that perhaps some of the questions that we propose to ask should be
directed to them instead of Hojffa and Bennett, or Hofi'a counseled by
Bennett,
It appears clear to me then from what you have said that whatever
questions are pertinent to this inquiry can appropriately be directed
to Mr, Hoffa, that he continues to function as president of the Team-
sters, and he has not flaunted these things arbitrarily ; he is the man
in control and can also speak with authority and is a free agent. Is
that correct ?
Mr. Williams. Senator, may I say to you I hope that this commit-
tee will, in the exercise of its functions, and in the spirit of fairness,
call the two chairmen of the board of monitors who have sat in office
over the past 6 months during Mr. Hoffa's administration, and ask
them, as impartial officers of the court, whether or not this union hor-
13282 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
been conducted in the spirit of this decree, which decree, I may say,
encompasses more reforms, I think, than any legislation that has been
proposed in either House of Congress, looking toward the restoration
of union democracy and the control of finances of the international.
Senator Mundt. Why do you call them 2 instead of 3 ?
Mr. Williams. Well, call all four of them, if you wish, Senator.
But I suggested the chairmen.
Senator Mundt. I thought there were three members.
Mr. Williams. I suggest that you call the chairman who resigned
in April because of the pressure of other business and the chairman
who succeeded him, because they would be in a position to speak for
the board.
Senator Mundt. I thought you were talking about the entire board.
May I say, speaking for myself, I think that is a very appropriate
suggestion, provided this inquiry dips back into the general affairs of
the Teamsters Union, and I am not sure whether it is going to or
not. But if so, I would think that would be a very helpful suggestion.
You do agree with me, then, that Mr. Hoffa appears here free from
any legal restraints or restrictions in his capacity as a Teamster to
freely respond to the questions ?
Mr. Williams. Senator, I will make that decision with ]\Ir. Hoffa
as each question is propounded.
Senator Mundt. You must have some general idea of the degree
in which he is exercising his authority now and the degree it is cir-
cumvented by the court. That is the purpose of my inquiry, not being
a lawyer.
Mr. Williams. I don't have an}' general idea, Senator, what ques-
tions are going to be propounded.
Senator Mundt. I don't either, but I am trying to get a general
idea of his status, vis-a-vis the court and vis-a-vis his office.
The only thing I understand is that they entered into a voluntary
consent decree and that Mr. Hoffa is here to accept or reject recom-
mendations that are made by the board of monitors and, to his credit,
you have testified that he has accepted all of them.
But I thought you said he had the right to reject them. That would
indicate to me that he was a free agent.
Mr. Williams. Senator, perhaps this would answer your question.
Mr. Hoffa is here to cooperate with this committee and answer any
questions that are asked bona fides, which are relevant and germane
to a legislative purpose, which is the sole function for which this com-
mittee sits.
He will answer questions which are pertinent and germane to a
bona fide legislative purpose.
Senator Mundt. I think that is a big enough kimona to cover all of
the questions we are going to ask.
Mr. Williams. I certainly hope so.
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Williams, these monitors who are officers of
the court, as I understand it, are they confining their function to the
current operation of the union ?
They are not exercising any powers of investigation over past acts,
are they ?
Mr. Williams. Senator, I would have to say to you that it was my
concept of this decree, when it was entered into, that thev would con-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13283
fine themselves to the current operation of this union, but the fact is
otherwise because they have looked into grievances which are very,
very old. As a matter of fact, they have dipped back into grievances
of rank and filers that are as old, to my knowledge, as 10 years, in
some instances, and they have scrceened some cases which antedate
the administration which is now in office.
So that it isn't accurate to say that they are concerning themselves
solely and exclusively with the current operation of the union.
Senator Curtis. Did the monitors contend that there was a current
problem by reason of some complaint, even though it was 10 years
ago ? . . .
Have they taken jurisdiction in regard to anywhere it was ad-
mittedly it was a closed case and had no relevancy to any current
operations ?
Mr. Williams. Yes ; they have. I have a case in mind.
Of course, it is in my mind because it struck me as being so fan-
tastic. A rank and filer claimed that certain welfare benefits had
not been paid to him, which were owing to him since 1948. The board
of minitors went into that case and we conducted a thoroughgoing
investigation of it, we conducted a field investigation of it, at the in-
stance of the general president, and satisfied the board of monitors on
the case.
They have gone back into cases
Senator Curtis. But that man claimed as of this date that he had
something coming ?
Mr. Williams. As a result of something that happened 10 years
ago.
Senator Curtis. But he alleged that he had a current claim?
Mr, Williams. He alleged a current claim, yes.
Senator Curtis. Could you provide me witli a copy of that decree?
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir; I will provide you with a copy of it as
soon as we have a break in the recess. I will have a photostat made
for you.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
Senator Ives. I would like to get something cleared up with counsel.
He said that he was advising Mr. Hoffa to reply to all questions with-
in the limitations of what is called appropriate legislative domain.
Is that the term that you used ?
Mr, Williams. It is not the term I used but I will adopt your term.
Senator Ives. Wliat term did you use ?
Mr. Williams. I said that I would advise the witness and he is free,
of course, to accept or reject my advice, but I shall advise him to an-
swer all questions which are relevant and germane to what I regard
as a bona fide legislative purpose.
Senator Ives. All right, I will accept that.
Now, will you kindly tell me, that being the case, what you consider
not to be a bona fide legislative purpose ?
Mr. Williams. If tliis committee, for example, and I am sure or I
certainly hope this isn't the case, were conducting a personal vendetta
against Mr. Hoffa for the sole purpose of getting him removed from
office, I would not think that that was a bona fide legislative purpose,
Senator. In other words, if the committee had as its objective to
humiliate and expose and castigate and degrade Mr. Hoffa in public
13284 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
here, I would think it was outside of its legitimate function as a
committee.
I would then advise him, sir, not to cooperate in a vendetta against
himself.
Senator Ives. May I ask a question ? In that connection, has there
ever been any evidence of anybody on this committee trying to do
thattoMr. Hoffa?
Mr. Williams. Senator, I am not under oath
Senator Ives. Now wait a minute. There were times when some of
us got kind of disgusted because he ducked questions. As I said once
before, he has the most convenient f orgettery of anybody I have ever
known. Now, just because we nail him on that account doesn't mean
we are trying in any way to injure him. He brings that on himself.
There is no vendetta here. Now go ahead.
Mr. Williams. You asked me a question.
Senator Ives. Go ahead and answer it.
Mr. Williams. I would like to have the opportunity to answer it.
Senator I\t:s. Go ahead.
Mr. Williams. I feel, Senator, and I have examined the record
very carefully that there were areas which were gone into during the
life of the interrogation of this witness which could have no real rela-
tionshp to a legislative purpose. I feel. Senator, and I must say this
in all candor to you since you asked me, and I assume you will respect
my views as a lawyer.
Senator Ives. I certainly respect your views and I regard you very
highly as a lawyer.
Mr. Williams. I feel there were areas of interrogation when it
appeared to me, at least, as a lawyer looking over the record when
the questions were designed more to humiliate the witness than they
w^ere to elicit information that would be helpful to this committee in
proposing legislation to the United States Senate.
Senator Ives. Now, just a minute. I know of no question that
could possibly have been asked him during tlie previous hearing, a
year ago this month, which in any way could humiliate him, that
wasn't brought on by himself.
Anybody who ducks questions the way he did is bound to bring on
that kind of questioning, and he deserves it. It does have a legislative
purpose. The way he acted here the last time is almost contempt of
the Senate. The questions definitely had a legislative purpose. You
and I may not agree.
Mr. Williams. We don't.
Senator I'S'es. I am very broad in this matter. I don't think that
there is a thing in kingdom come that doesn't come within the pur-
view of legislative activity or scope. Even if it is outside of the
Constitution, it is not really outside because perhaps it calls for a
constitutional amendment. So anything we do is within our limi-
tations.
Mr. Williams. I thought that was your view.
Senator Ives. It is my view and it always has been.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
The Chair will make this observation: It is inherent in the law
profession for lawyers to disagree and honestly so many times, and to
make objections to the court as to the relevancy or pertinency of testi-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13285
mony. So the fact that counsel may feel that some questions were
not relevant or not pertinent or that the committee may feel they were
is something that is not unordinary or unusual.
It occurs daily in the trial of cases everywhere. While this is not
a trial, the committee, of course, in this instance has the tinal judg-
ment and final authority to rule as to whether a question is pertinent
or whether it will serve the legislative purpose. I can assure counsel
and his client that insofar as I am concerned, and I believe I speak
for every member of the connnitte, there is no comfort or measure de-
rived from this character of an investigation, insofar as I am con-
cerned. But we do have a duty, and a very high duty, and a very re-
sponsible mission here or function to perform because we all know
that there are practices going on, and it has been demonstrated, and it
has been placed on the record over and over again that there are prac-
tices going on in management-labor relations which need legislative
attention.
We will try to conduct these hearings with propriety and dignity
becoming tlie United States Senate committee. We may disagree, and
we wil proceed. As long as the witness and his counsel respect the
committee, I intend, so far as the Chair can control it, for the com-
mittee to treat all who come before us accordingly.
Proceed, Mr. Counsel.
Senator Ervix. I wish to make an observation : If I ever should
have occasion to need an advocate, I wouldn't want one who would
regard things which affected me in a judicial manner. I would want
him to be a little bit prejudiced in my favor. That is all.
The Chairman. Now, there is one question, or one thing, I think we
should get straight for the record. Counsel, you stated a few moments
ago that you appeared here as general counsel for the international
union. Now, there is some question might arise as to whether that con-
forms or comes within the rule of the committee. So far as the Chair
is concerned, he is willing to waive any technicality in that respect so
long as counsel desires to act and Mr. Hoifa desires to have him act as
his adviser in the course of these proceedings. He has a right to coun-
sel of his choice, and the fact that you may represent the international
union would not, in my opinion, in any way disqualify you, but you
must place yourself in the position here at this time of representing
Mr. HofTa.
Mr. Williams. I understand that.
The Chairman. And not as counsel for the union.
All right, with that record straightened out now, we may proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, did jon know Mr. Joseph Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. He was a close friend of yours, was he ?
Mr. HoFFA. I knew .Toe Holtzman.
Mr. Kennedy. He was a close friend of yours ?
Mr. HoFFA. I knew Joe Holtzman.
Mr. Kennedy. He was a close friend of yours ?
Mr. Hoffa. I knew Joe Holtzman.
Mr. Kennedy. He was a close friend of yours ?
Mr. Hoffa. Just a moment. I knew Joe Holtzman, and he wasn't
any particular friend of mine.
Mr. Kennedy. Just answer the Question.
21243--^8— pt. 36—2
13286 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The CiTATRMAN. Let us start off riglit liere. This is public business.
The question is wliether he was a close friend seems proper, and you
know a lot of people who may not be close friends, and may just barely
be acquaintances. In order to show the association and throw light on
testimony that may be forthcoming, it is quite proper the witness to
answer as to his acquaintanceship, whether it is one of friendship or
one of business association, or any other pertinent factor that might
help us to evaluate testimony as we proceed.
Go ahead, Mr, Counsel.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he a close friend of yours ?
Mr. HoFFA. I say he was an acquaintance.
Mr. Kennedy. An acquaintance?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You used to visit with him ?
Mr. HoFFA. Occasionally.
Mr. Kennedy. And he came to visit you ?
Mr. HoFFA. Occasionally.
Mr. Kennedy. "What was his business, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. HoFFA. He had a dry-cleaning concern, and he was a labor-
relations consultant.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known him, or had you known
him?
Mr. Hoffa. Probably since 1934.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he have a partner ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the partner's name ?
Mr. Hoffa. Jack Bushkin.
Mr. Kennedy. Is he still alive ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. He is a friend of yours ?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Is he a close friend of yours ?
Mr. HoFFA. An acquaintance.
Mr. Kennedy. Just an acquaintance ?
Mr. Hoffa. He is a person that I know and he is a friend, but a
friendly acquaintance.
Mr. Kennedy. A friendly acquaintance ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you visit with him occasionally ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And he visited with you occasionally ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Holtzman and Mr. Bushkin were in this labor-
relations business together ; were they ?
Mr. Hoffa. I believe they were.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever discuss any contracts with them ?
Mr. Hoffa. I certainly did.
Mr. Kennedy. You did on occasion ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you negotiate any contracts with them ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You did do that ?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes, sir.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13287
Mr. Kennedy. Did you receive any money from Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. I borrowed money from Holtzman and Biishkin both.
Mr. Kennedy. When was this ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe I will have to refer to the record because I
Testified to that the last time I was here— did you say "when" ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. Some time in 1952 or 1953.
Mr. Kennedy. How much money did you receive ?
Mr.HoFFA. $5,000.
Mr. Kennedy. From each one ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And I believe the record shows that that was in
.cash that you got from them ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And that there was no note on it ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And did you pay them both back ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. And there was no interest paid ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. So they at least were close enough friends that they
^vould loan you money without interest in cash and without any evi-
dence that there was in fact a loan ; is that correct ?
Mr.HoFFA. They did.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, do you know or did you know Mr. John Paris ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. How long ago did he die ?
Mr. HoFFA. Three or four years.
Mr. Kennedy. How long had you known him ?
Mr. HoFFA. Probably 15 or more years, 10 or 15 years or more.
Mr. Kennedy. You were a close friend of his ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not necessarily.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he used to visit you ?
Mr. HoFFA. You mean at home ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think that he ever did.
Mr. KJENNEDY. He was a business agent of the Laundry Workers'
Union, was he ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. He was married to a woman by the name of Sylvia?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. She is a friend of you and your family ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And they have a son ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. "\Miat is his name ?
Mr. HoFFA. Charles O'Brien.
Mr, Kennedy. And he is with your union, is he ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy, He used to be with the Retail Clerks' Union ?
Mr. HoFFA, That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And the Retail Clerks' Union had its headquarters
in the Teamsters' Buildinsf ?
13288 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. In Detroit ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And he is now working for yonr union, local 299?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. He is a business agent for 299 ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, on Mr. Holtzman and Mr. Bushkin, did they
represent on any occasion the Detroit Institute of Laundry ?
Mr. HoFFA. They may have, and I believe they did.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some discussions with them about
that?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think tliat I discussed it with them.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss the Detroit Institute of Laundry
with Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. I may have.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you remember that?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. In 1949, did they make arrangements for you to
visit with any of the representatives of the Detroit Institute of
Laundry ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know whether they did or not, and I met some
representatives of the laundry and I don't know who arranged the
meeting.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know how that was arranged ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. What did they come to see you about ?
Mr. HoFFA. With the question of the dispute between their organi-
zation and our organization.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us about .what conversations you had
with them ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, how long ago was that ?
Mr. Kennedy. I said 1949.
Mr. HoFFA. I believe that the contract was open for negotiations,
and there arose a question between the employers and our union as
to whether or not there was a right to strike or a necessity to arbi-
trate the differences when they couldn't agree.
Mr. Kennedy. This is not then, this is back in 1949. That was in
1951 when there was a question about that. That is when the con-
tract was up for renewal, and I believe the man conducting the nego-
tiations was Mr. Isaac Litwak, of Local 295 of the Teamsters.
Mr. HoFFA. Let us go back a step. You have asked me whether or
not Holtzman had ever talked to me about the question of the laundry
institute ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. To the best of my knowledge the only time that I ever
knew Holtzman was engaged or involved in any way with the laundi'y
institute was the one incident where he was involved Avitli Litwak.
Mr. Kennedy. In 1951 ?
Mr. HoFFA. That could have been, and I am not sure of the date.
Mr. Kennedy. Did they come to see you on two different occasions
then, the representatives of the Detroit Institute of Laundry ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13289
Mr, HoFFA. I don't know if it was once or twice, and they did come
to see me.
Mr. Kennedy. Going back to 1949 when the contract was np, and
Mr. Litwak was negotiating the contract, do you remember they came
to see you on that occasion ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think that your facts are wrong. I think when they
came to see me there was a question involving the contract as to
wliether or not he could strike because I believe, and this is only from
me, there were certain sections open for negotiations. When they got
into a deadlock, I believe it was a question whether they could strike
or had to arbitrate. And I don't recall any other incident that I
■discussed with them.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, all I asked you was whether in 1949,
when this contract was up, and there were negotiations going on be-
tween Mr. Isaac Litwak and this representative of the Detroit Insti-
tute of Laundrv, they came to visit you on that occasion.
Mr. Hoffa. I say they came to visit me, and the best I can recall
was one contract. Whether it was the one you mentioned first or the
second one, I don't recall but it seems to me that the question involved,
as I stated before
Mr. Kennedy. We have gone through that, and it was a 3-year con-
tract. Let me see if this refreshes your recollection. It was a 3-year
contract, I believe, signed in 1949, and in 1951 there was a question,
as you explained, as to whether local 285 could strike. I believe that
they came to see you on that occasion for you to make a determination
as to whether local 285 had the right to strike at that time.
Now, I am trying to find out, prior to that, in 1949, when there
were negotiations on tliis contract, whether representatives of the
Detroit Institute of Laundry came to see you ?
Mr. Hoffa. It seems to nie unless you refresh my memory in some
other direction, it seemed to me I only had one dealing with the
question of the laundry institute and Litwak, and that was the ques-
tion of the arbitration or the strike. I don't recall, and I don't think
that I did meet with the laundry owners concerning the contract when
it expired, because I don't remember any incident where there was a
threat of strike other than the one time.
Mr. Kennp:dy. Do you remember the representatives of the De-
troit Institute of Laundry coming to your office and complaining about
the difficulties that they were liaving with Isaac Litwak?
Mr. Hoffa. I believe they did come to my office once or twice, and
we did discuss it but it seems to me again that that was the particular
time of the dispute whether you could or couldn't strike.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Holtzman arrange one or both of those
meetings ?
Mr, Hoffa. No; I believe an attorney arranged it if I recall
rightly, and I don't think Holtzman arranged it, and I don't recall
offhand, but I think there nnist have been an attorney.
Mr. Kennedy. What was Mr. Holtzman doing in this matter ?
Mr. Hoffa. Well, I wouldn't know.
Mr. Kennedy. You said that you had talked to Mr. Holtzman
about it.
Mr. Hoffa, I didn't say that.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hofi'a, you said that you thought originally
xhnt Mr. Holtzman was involved in this.
13290 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA, I said if tliey employed liim and I understood tiiey
did, why you would have to ask them what they employed him for.
Mr. Kennedy. I want to ask you what conversations you liad.
Mr. HoFFA. You can't ask me, because I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. I can ask you what conversations you had with
them, and I can ask wdiether lie arranged any of the meetings.
Mr. HoFFA. If he arranged them, and 1 don't think that he did,
I think a lawyer arranged them.
Mr. Kennedy. Tliat is a slight change, with you that is all right.
Mr. HoFFA. It might be a slight change, but it is the truth. In any
event we had the meetings, put it that way.
Mr. Kennedy. I understand that, and now I want to find out Mr.
Holtzman's involvement, and did he have any conversations with you
about this ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think Holtzman represented them.
Mr. Kennedy. Did other people come when Mr. Ploltzmau was
there?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I don't believe Holtzman was present when they
were in my office.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Holtzman just had his conversations alone with
you then, is that right ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think he had any conversations with me con-
cerning the contract except the fact that his people wanted or may
have wanted to meet. I don't know if he arranged it or not.
Mr. Kennedy. What conversations did you have with Mr. Holtz-
man about this contract?
Mr. HoFFA. Well now, what conversations I had would probably
concern the question of the dispute. Now what the exact conversa-
tion was, I certainly couldn't recall. It Avasn't tliat important.
Mr. Kennedy. You can't remember whether he arranged the meet-
ing and you think it is possible, though ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if he did or not, either him or an attorney,
and I don't know which one arranged it, and it seemed to me it was an
attorney that arranged it.
Mr. Kennedy. ^\^ien you had your conversations with Mr. Holtz-
man, the representatives of the Detroit Institute of Laundry were not
present, is that right ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if I had a discussion with Holtzman or
not.
Mr. Kennedy. I thought that you said that you did.
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I didn't say that at all.
Mr. Kennedy. You found out Mr. Holtzman was representing the
Detroit Institute of Laundry ?
Mr. HoFFA. He may have been.
Mr. Kennedy. You understood that, Mr. Hoffa, and you must have
understood it from what Mr. Holtzman said ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think that you are right.
Mr. Kennedy. So then any conversations that you had with Mr.
Holtzman about this was just between you and Mr. Holtzman, and
no one else present ?
Mr. Hoffa. Not necessarily, and we may not have had a conversa-
tion, no more than the fact of arranging a meeting ; I don't know.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13291
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any conversations about the Detroit
Institute of Laundry or about the contract with Mr. Holtzman when
anyone else was present ?
Mr. HoFFA. 1 don't recall having a discussion Avith Holtzman about
the contract.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Holtzman arrange it?
Mr. HoFFA. He may have had.
Mr. Kennedy. Ditl you participate in any of the contract negotia-
tions for the contract in 1949 '?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think that I ever met with the negotiating com-
mittee of the Laundry Institute.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you ordinarily go to meetings of the locals?
Mr. HoFFA. Where there is a question involving a serious strike, that
can involve other local unions, as president of the council, I do many
times ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you go in 1949 to these negotiations ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall whether I did or not. I don't think that
I did.
Mr. Kennedy, Do you remember coming- into the Detroit Leland
Hotel in 1949, in connection with those negotiations ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I don't remember. If I did, I don't remember.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Church, Kennedy, Mundt, and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember that ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you remember giving instructions to Mr. Litwak
to sign the contract at that time ?
Mr. HoFFA. I never did instruct Litwak to sign the contract to my
recollection. I told Litwak, the time that I can recall, that in my
opinion he was bound by arbitration. I can't recall any other meet-
ing I had with the Laundry Institute.
Mr. Kennedy. I am talking about a meeting in 1949 at the Detroit
Leland Hotel, Mr. Hoffa. Did you come into the meeting at the
Detroit Leland Hotel when Mr. Litwak was meeting with the Detroit
Institute of Laundry and have discussions with him at that time about
signing the contract ?
Mr. HoFFA. I could have easily, but don't recall. There would be
nothing unusual about it. I go into hundreds of meetings every
Mr. Kennedy. How many meetings of the Detroit Institute of
Laundry did you ever go to when they were carrying on negotiations
with your union representative ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't recall, and I don't believe I did, attend any
meetings of the full negotiating board of the laundry companies. I
believe that I met with the representatives of the association.
Mr. Kennedy. So that your recollection is that you never went,
is that right?
Mr. HoFFA. My recollection is that I met with the representatives
of the association, but I do not recall, and I don't think I did, meet-
ing with the laundry owners. I possibly could have,
Mr. Kennedy. I am talking about the representatives of the asso-
ciation, and a meeting of it at the Detroit Leland Hotel. Did you
go to such a meeting ?
13292 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. If I did, I can't recall it and I don't believe I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever go to any meeting where there were
negotiations on the contract between the Detroit Institute of Laundry
and your union representative ?
Mr, HoFFA. I don't thinlv I ever met tlie negotiating committee of
the Laundry Institute. I don't believe I did.
Mr. Kennedy. You never did^ You never went to a meeting be-
tween the representatives of the Detroit Institute of Laundry and
your own union representative, Mr. Isaac Litwak ?
Mr, HoFFA. Well, if I did, it escapes my memory.
Mr. Kennp:dy. You don't remember tliat?
Mr. HoFFA, No, I don't. I met the representatives of the council,
but I do not recall any negotiating meeting.
Mr. Kennedy. Would it refresh your recollection that you told
Mr. Litwak at that meeting that if he did not sign a contract, that
you were going to take over the negotiations and settle these problems
yourself ?
Mr. HoFFA. I never told Isaac Litwak or any other business agent
that.
Mr. Kennedy, You never said anything like that?
Mr. HoFFA. Just a moment. You asked me whether I said I would
take over the negotiations, I had no authority as president of the
council at that time, or president of my own local union, to take any
such action.
Mr. Kennedy, Do you deny that vou had such a conversation,
Mr, Hoffa?
The Chairman, The witness says he has no authority to do that or
he never did it.
The question is specific: Do you deny that you did it or did not
doit?
A man may say "I have no authority to do that" and yet would
do it. To clarify, did you do it or did you not do it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall the conversation or the meeting at all.
But if I would have said any such a thing it would have been to
the effect that if they had made an offer, that it should be submitted
to the membership, and I would be bound by the membership, with
no authority to change their vote. I may have told them to submit
it to a membership meeting.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Do you remember telling them that at a meeting
at the Detroit Leland Hotel ?
Mr, HoFFA. I don't even remember the meeting.
Mr, Kennedy, Do you remember in 1949 Mr. Litwak was dis-
turbed about your interceding in this contract ?
Mr, HoFFA. I don't believe he was.
Mr. IvENNEDY, Do you remember that ?
Mr. Hoffa. No, I don't. But I don't believe Isaac has ever been
disturbed by what I do,
Mr, Kennedy. Do you deny that he was disturbed at that time
about your interceding in the contract ?
Mr. HoFFA. He was very disturbed about tlie owners.
Mr, Kennedy, What?
Mr. HoFFA. He was very disturbed about the owners.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, you have not answered any questions
for the last 25 minutes.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13293
Mr. HoFFA. That isn't true.
Mr. Williams. Mv. Chainnan, I think this is a good point to ask
what pertinency this 1949 negotiation in an intracity dispute has to
do with the legislative purpose of this committee. I don't see the
pertinency of it.
I have not objected, because I don't want to interrupt the continuity
of this interrogation, but I seriously challenge the pertinency of this
line of questions.
The Chairman. The Chair will make this observation and ruling :
As counsel well knows, in presenting a case, you cannot present every-
thing in one sentence or with one witness. There are going to be wit-
nesses here, I understand, who will testify regarding what occurred
at that time. It will involve, I may say for your information, what
appears on the face of it to be corruption. This committee and the
Congress is interested in the administration of affairs of unions with
respect to whether they are corrupt, or Avhether those who have the
responsibility of representing unions keep faith with their responsi-
bilities.
That will be involved throughout these hearings as a part, only, of
what the committee is interested in. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. In 1949, Mr. Hoffa, Mr. Isaac Litwak, was disturbed
at your intercession in the contract, was he not ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, if he was, he didn't express it to me.
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew about tliat ?
Mr. Hoffa. He was disturbed about the general president, if I recall,
intervening in this dispute.
Mr. Kennedy. He was disturbed about what ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe, now that I recall it, I believe he was disturbed
about the general president intervening in this dispute.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was the general president ?
Mr. HoFFA, Dave Beck.
Mr. Kennedy. He intervened in this dispute in Detroit?
Mr. HoFFA. If my memory serves me right, Dave Beck refused to
grant strike authority. I am doing this from memory, but I think
that the record will show that when Litwak filed for the question of
strike sanction, that he was refused the right to have strike benefits by
the international, wliich did not keep him from striking but would
have kept him from having financial benefits.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. He was executive vice president, I am informed by
Lawyer Williams, but he was having the same authority as president
since he was generally operating the international union.
Mr. Kennedy. Then it was not the general president ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, it could very well have been Dave Beck who was
acting as executive vice president.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it Mr. Tobin or Mr. Beck ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, it was probably — it was Mr. Beck.
Mr. Kennedy. I thought you said it was the general president.
Mr. HoFFA. Well, my memory happened to slip, and this is 9 years
ago, and I am now correcting it, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody give you any instructions to inject your-
self into the contract negotiations?
Mr. HoFFA. I probably gave myself instructions.
Mr. Kennedy. Why?
13294 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. Because I am president of joint council 43.
Mr. Kennedy. So yon did inject yourself into this contract ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Now we are making some progress.
Mr. HoFFA. That is fine.
Mr. Kennfjjy. Did you go to the meeting, then, at the Detroit
Leland Hotel ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know whether I did or not. I do not recall
the meeting. It is possible. It is 9 years ago, and one meeting more
or less doas not mean that much to me.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have conversations w^th Mr. Holtzman
about this contract ^
Mr. HoFFA. I may have had. I don't recall.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember that at all ?
Mr. HoFFA. It wasn't that important.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember at all ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't even remember the contract except the one
question of where we were involved in the dispute of arbitration or
strike. That is the outstanding thing in my mind concerning any-
thing to do with the laundry institute.
The Chairman. Mr. Hoil'a, I believe you said you borrowed $5,000
each from Mr. Buslikin and Mr. Holtzman.
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct, sir.
The Chaikman. Do you recall when you borrowed that money ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think I said it was 1952 or 1953. Yes, I testified it
was 1952 or 1953, Senator.
The Chairman. All right.
Now, prior to that time, had you had any financial transactions
with either of these men ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, not prior to that time.
The Chairman. Did you subsequent to that time ?
Mr. HoFFA. It is the only transaction I had with them concerning
the loaning of money to myself.
The Chairman. I beg your pardon ?
Mr. PIoFFA. It is the only transaction I had of them loaning me
any money.
The Chairman. All right. That is a matter of loan. Is that the
only business transaction you had with them in which money was
involved ?
Mr. HoFFA. Concerning money, yes.
The Chairman. Either before or since ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Concerning the loaning of money, yes.
The Chairman. I am not talking about just concerning the loan-
ing of money. I am talking about any other financial transaction or
business transaction with them in which money was involved.
Mr. HoFFA. I may have asked Bushkin or I wanted him to buy me
something at wholesale. I don't know. But so far as other than
purchasing something from them, that is the only financial trans-
action I had.
The Chairman. In other words, the borrowing of the money that
you have testified to, and the possibilities that you may have asked
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13295
them to do you a favor, to get sometliing wholesale for you, according
to your testimony, are the only business transactions you have had
with them involving money or other valuable considerations, is that
correct ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
The Chairman. When were these Loans repaid, Mr. Ho if a ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. Well, apparently — I want to correct the record. I have
had my accountant try to straighten out some of these answers since
the last time. My accountant shows here money was borrowed the
latter half of 1951 and was paid back in 1953, according to his records
that he has been able to reconstruct.
The Chairman. All right.
In the transaction, I believe you said the money you received in the
nature of loans was all cash ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
The Chairman. From each one ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
The Chairman. How were they repaid ?
Mr. HoFFA. By, I believe, a money order.
The Chairman. A post office money order ?
Mr. HoFFA. My secretary had the order made out and I would
assume that it was, Senator. It could have been a bank draft, but I
believe that it was a money order.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions, gentlemen ?
Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Your secretary handled the repayment, the details
■of transmitting i
Mr. HoFFA. I believe she did. She normally does for me. That is
why I said that.
Senator Curtis. What is her name ?
Mr. HoFFA. Diane Dubrescu.
Senator Curtis. What is her current address ; do you know ?
Mr. HoFFA. Offhand I don't know.
Senator Curtis. She lives in Detroit ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. You say, Mr. Hoffa, that your accountant pro-
duced records which described the repayment of these funds ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I did not say he produced records. I said I have
had him trying to reconstruct, talking to people, about certain loans
that I have made as to the dates I paid them back and the dates I
borrowed the money.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoft'a, liow did the accountant reconstruct
this if he had no records ?
Mr. HoFFA. He probably talked to the people.
Senator Kennedy. Who did he talk to ?
Mr. HoFFA. I imagine he talked to the people involved.
Senator Kennedy. He talked to you ?
Mr. HoFFA. We discussed the matter ; yes.
Senator Kennedy. And you told him what had happened ?
13296 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. No, I told him when I borrowed the money, when I
thought I borrowed the money and when I thought I paid it back, and
he checked it, and these are the records he gave me.
This shows how your memory can shp. Instead of 1951, apparentlv
it was 1952.
Senator Kennedy. Who else did he talk to in making the report to
you ?
Mr. PIOFFA. I assume the people who were involved.
Senator Kennedy. How many people were involved ?
Mr. HoFFA. Offhand, do you mean the loans ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. I would have to count them and tell you.
Senator Kennedy. Did he talk to Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. Holtzman happens to be dead.
Senator Kennedy. Who else did he talk to ?
Mr. HoFFA. Probably Bushkin.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, the people he talked to were you
and Mr. Bushkin. Did he talk to others ?
Mr. HoFJW. I don't know.
Senator Kennedy. You come and make the statement that your
accountant indicated that you borrowed the money in such and such
a year and repaid the money in such and such a year.
When did your accountant make this study ?
Mr. HoFFA. "^Vlien did he make it?
Senator Kennedy. Yes. Did he make it in the last few months?
Mr. HoFFA. In the last few days.
Senator Kennedy. And you can't tell us who he talked to beside.s
you. Mr. Hoft'a, and the other gentleman who was involved?
Mr. HoFFA. I think you will have to ask liim, Mr. Senator.
Senator Kennedy. I am asking you. You are the one who made
the report to the committee about what your accountant found, and
now we find that there are no records, that he merely talked to you
and the other gentleman involved, and that the whole transaction
was in cash.
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I don't see anything strange about that, and
I think I have answered your question.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoff'a, will you tell me? I am interested
because you read a document here purporting to come from your
accountant, and it looks like all your accountant relied on was your
statement and the statement of the other gentleman. There are no
other records in existence.
Mr. HoFFA. '\^niat else would he rely on. Senator?
Senator Kennedy. I would think usually when a loan is made,
particularly to anyone in your position, or who represents an employer
association, some record would be kept, and some record would be
kept of the payments back. Instead, there are no records kept.
It was a cash transaction between you and we only have your word
and the word of the other gentleman as to whether the money was
paid back.
Mr. HoFFA. I guess you will have to take our word.
Senator Kennedy. I want to say to your counsel, who raised the
question as to whether these were proper questions for the committee,
that the bill which passed the Senate does deal with the proprietor
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13297
of an employer or employer association making a payment to a union
leader.
I think it is completely within the bounds and within the legis-
lative area of this committee that we interrogate Mr. Hoffa on this
; subject.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions at this time ?
Mr. Kennedy. Not right now, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Mr. Holl'a, you may stand aside for the present.
You will be recalled.
Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. William H. Miller.
Mr. Hoft'a might like to stand by.
The Chairman. Mr. Miller can sit over here.
I think it is fair to the witness when we have testimony that he hear
it and try to clear up these points as we go along.
Mr. Miller, be sworn, please.
Do you solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Sen-
ate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so lielp you God ?
Mr. Miller. I do.
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM H. MILLER
The Chairman. All right, Mr. Miller. Be seated. State your
name, your place of residence, and your business or occupation.
Mr. Miller. William H. Miller, Watersmeet, Mich. I operate a
motel and restaurant up there.
The Chairman. Do you have counsel or do vou waive counsel,
Mr. Miller?
Mr. Miller. I have no counsel.
The Chairman. You waive counsel. All right.
Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Miller, you were in the laundry business, were
you, for a period of time?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. How long were you in the laundry business?
Mr. Miller. Fifteen years.
Mr. Kennedy. Up until when?
Mr. Miller. 1950.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Miller, there were negotiations that took place
in 1949, in connection with the contract between the representatives of
llie Detroit Institute of Laundry and the Teamsters Union?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. That was local 285 of the Teamsters?
Mr. Miijler. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And the representatives of that local was Mr. Isaac
Litwak; is that correct?
Mr. Miller; That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You have prepared a statement, have you not, that
has been submitted to the committee, giving the background and the
.-ituation that occurred in connection with those negotiations?
Mr. Miller. Tliat is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to liave permission for
llie Avitness to read that statement.
13298 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Was that statement submitted within the rules?:
Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; it was.
The Chairman. All rifjht.
Mr. Miller, you are prepared, as you read that statement, to read it
under oath, and the statements therein are your sworn testimony.
Mr. Miller. Yes. Well, the first thing I would like to say on this
is Mr. Salinger contacted me by telephone, and we had a very poor
connection, so that I could not hear him on the phone, and he would
have to tell the operator what he wanted to ask me, and then I would
have to repeat to the operator, I believe he called me about three
times, and we could not get a good connection.
Then he called me and said he would be up there. He made arrange-
ments, and I met him there. We talked this over, and he copied it
down in shorthand. After he copied it down in shorthand, he typed
it out on my typewriter, and I just read it over casually, not looking
it over real good. So there are some questions in here and answers
that will have to be clarified a little better than they are here.
The Chairman. All right.
You may read the statement if you choose to read it, and you may
point out any discrepancies in there as relate to the truth and the
facts.
(The following is the affidavit submitted by Mr. Miller and ordered
printed in the record at this point.)
Affidavit
State of Michigan,
County of Gogebic, ss:
I, William H. Miller, who resides at box 185, Watersnieet, Mich., do make
the following voluntary statement to Pierre Salinger, who has identified
himself to me as an investigator for the Senate Select Committee on Improper
Activities in the Labor or Management Field. This statement is made as the
result of no promise or threat to me and with the understanding that it may
be read at a public session of the above-named committee.
I am presently the owner of Bill Miller's Riverside Inn In Watersmeet.
Mich. From 1935 to 19.50, I was the owner of the New Method Laundry in
Detroit, Mich.
For a number of years, Local 285 of the Teamsters Union, which was headed
by Isaac Litwak, attempted to organize the drivers wJio worked for my com-
pany. In the early 1940's. a representative of the Detroit Laundry Owners
Association notified me he had had a visit from Isaac Litwak, and that unless
my drivers joined the Teamsters Union, shipments of coal and soap to my
place of business would be shut off. I called the men in and told them they
would have the union. When some of them protested I told them I could not
operate without coal and soap. Some of my drivers wanted to haul in the
soap and coal on Sundays, but I told them they would get tired of that pretty
soon. At any rate, at this time they became members of the union, and as an
added inducement they were not required to pay the $50 initiation fee, but
rather each paid $1.
For some years, I was a member of the labor committee of the Detroit
Laundry Owners Association. Other members of this committee were Horace
McKnight, who was one of the owners of the Palace-Model Laundry, and Fritz
Brady, the owner of the Modern Laundry.
Also assisting us in the negotiations were Howard Balkwill. the president
of the association, and John Meisner, the secretary of the association.
To the best of my belief, the contract of the Detroit laiindries with the Team-
sters Union came up for renegotiation in 1947. In an effort to reach a new
contract with the union, a number of meetings were held with Isaac Litwak.
Some of these meetings were held prior to the time the contract ran out in
March and some after. I sat in on the negotiations after the contract ran out.
One of the first things the managements agreed to do when the contract ran out
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13299
was to pay retroactive wages back to the expiration day for any increases we
might agree to.
I attended 3 or 4 of these negotiating sessions after the contract ran out.
These meetings were held at the Detroit Lelaiid Hotel and at tlie Old Wayne
Club in downtown Detroit. Isaac Litwak was the principal negotiator for the
union. He had other representatives with him. Litwak was adamant in all
of these negotiations, asking for all kinds of new provisions in the contract.
Fritz Brady and Horace McKnight had v/orked diligently getting up a memoran-
dum on what the laundry owners felt they could do. Litwak took one look at
this document and just discarded it and said he was not interested in reading
it any further.
Litwak kept meeting every request of the laundry owTiers with the threat of
a strike.
The negotiations kept dragging on and no progress was being made. Finally
a lunch was arranged at which Meisner, Balkwill and I attended. This lunch
was held in the lunchroom of the Detroiter Hotel. At this lunch, I suggested
that perhaps we should go to someone higher up in the Teamsters and attempt
to reach a settlement. Things had become critical and the union had already
levied a .$10 per mend)er assessment as a strike fund. I didn't want a strike
and neither did the other laundry owners.
It was agreed by Meisner and Balkwill that something should be done. They
then set up a meeting with James R. Hoffa. Either Meisner or Balkwill or both
reported the outcome of this meeting to me at the offices of the association in
the Detroiter Hotel. I was told that at the meeting with Hoffa it had been ar-
ranged that a contract could be signed with the payment of $90 per truck by
all the memliers of the association to Hoffa. At that time, the association repre-
sented all the laundries in Detroit. This payment would assure a 3 year con-
tract. I was told at this meeting by either Meisner or Balkwill or both that
Hoffa told them that the laundry owners would have to make no further con-
cessions to the union. Hoffa told them, however, that he could do nothing about
the concessions that had already been made. The payment of the $90 to Hoffa
was to be made over a 3-year period, $45 per truck the first year, $22.50 per truck
the second year, and $22.50 per truck the third year. The payments wei-e to
be made in cash. Meisner was chosen as the man who would make the collec-
tions. Hofta said he would appear at the next meeting with Litwak and see
that the contract was settled. Meisner came to me and collected the $450 first
installment before the negotiating session was held. This first payment was
made in cash in the oflSce of the New Method Laundry. I do not have knowledge
of how the other laundries made their payments or which ones did. I also
made the second and third payments of $225 each to Meisner, in cash, in the
succeetling years.
I did not attend the actual session but Meisner reported to me what happened
there. Firstly, Hoffa was late in appearing. In fact, Meisner expressed the
thought to me that he started worrying that the payoff might have gone down
the di-ain. Then there was a knock at the door. This meeting was being held
at the Detroit Leland Hotel. When the door opened, Hoffa was there with a
couple of his men. Meisner said the color drained from Litwak's face when
he saw Hoffa. Hoffa wanted to know what the meeting was all about. He then
read the contract which had been worked out up to then and expressed the view
that it was a good contract and there was nothing wrong with it. The negotia-
tions were then broken off and the contract signed sometime after.
It is my feeling and belief that Meisner and Balkwill were acting in the best
interests of the laundry owners and that this type of arrangement had to be
made to reach a contract.
I believe all the above statement to be the truth to the best of my knowledge.
William H. Miller.
NicKOLAS J. Kolinsky,
'Notary Public, Oogehic County, Mich.
My commission expires March 2, 1962.
Dated July 27, 1958.
Mr. Miller. O.K. I, William
Senator Mundt. You should make those corrections as you read it.
Mr. Miller. Submit those ?
13300 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Mttndt. As you read it, when you come to something you
want to correct, you should make the correction at that point.
The Chairman. That is what the Chair indicated to him.
As you come to something in there, if it is inaccurate in any sense
or needs expLanation, you may pause and exphiin it.
Mr, Miller (reading) : I, William H. Miller, who reside at Box
185, Watersmeet, Mich., do make the following voluntary statement
to Pierre Salinger, who has identified liimself to me as investigator
for the Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor
or Management Field. This statement is made as a result of no
promise or threat to me and with the understanding that it may be
read at a public session of the above-named committee. I am presently''
the owner of Bill Miller's Riverside Inn in Watersmeet, Mich.
From 1935 to 1050 I was the owner of the New Method Laundry in
Detroit, Mich. For a number of years local 285 of the Teamsters'
Union, which was headed by Isaac Litwak, attempted to organize the
drivers who worked for my company. In the early 1940's a repre-
sentative of the Detroit Laundry Owners' Association notified me he
had a visit from Isaac Litwak, and that unless my drivers joined the
Teamsters' Union shipments of coal and soap to my place of business
would be shut off.
I called the men in and told them they would have the union. When
some of them protested, I told them I could not operate without coal
and soap. Some of my drivers wanted to haul in the soap and coal
on Sundays, but I told them they would get tired of that pretty soon.
The Chairman. Let me interrupt you there. There was a threat
made against you by the president of the local union of the Teamsters
that unless you forced your men to join the union that they would
cut off deliveries to you ?
Mr. Miller. The threat was not made directly to me. It was made
through the association. They contacted the association as my plant
was the last plant in the city of Detroit to have the drivers organized.
The Chairman. You were a member of the association ?
Mr. Miller. I was a member of the association, and Isaac Litwak
had contacted me several times to have the drivers come into the union,
and I told him it was up to the drivers. I can't tell them.
The Chairman. He had previously contacted you personally about
it?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. Trying to persuade you to have your employees
join the union ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. And when that effort failed, then he went to the
association ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. And he delivered, in a sense, an ultimatum to them,
or to you through them, that if you did not have them join up, your
supplies wotdd be cut off?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. All right.
As we go along, we will get these things clarified. Proceed.
Mr. Miller (reading) : Some of the drivers wanted to haul the soap
and coal on Sundays, but I told them they would get tired of that
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13301
pretty soon. At any rate, at this time they became members of the
union, and as an added inducement they were not required to pay the
$50 initiation fee, but, rather, each paid $1. For some years, I was
a member of the hxbor committee of the Detroit Laundry Owners
Association. Other members of this committee were Horace
McKnight, who was one of the owners of the Palace-Model Laundry,
and Fritz Brady, the owner of the Modern Laundry.
Also assisting us in the negotiations were Howard Balkwill, the
president of the association, and John Meisner, the secretary of the
association. To the best of my belief, the contracts of the Detroit
laundries with the Teamsters Union came up for renegotiation in
1947.
As I explained to Salinger, I was not sure of the year, as this had
happened many years before. Since then I found it was 1949.
The Chairman. So that is one correction you make in your state-
ment ?
Mr. Miller. Right there.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Miller (reading) : In an effort to reach a new contract with
the union, a number of meetings were held with Isaac Litwak. Some
of these meetings were held prior to the time the contract ran out in
March and some after. I sat in on the negotiations after the contract
ran out. One of the first things the management agreed to do when
the contract ran out was to pay retroactive wages to the expiration
day for any increases we might agree to. I attended the
The Chairman. That was to prevent a strike ? In other words, if
you agreed from that time on, from the time the contract ran out, from
the time it expired, whatever you agreed to later would be retroactive
back to the date of the expiration of the contract ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Miller (reading) : I attended 3 or 4 of these negotiating ses-
sions after the contract ran out. These meetings were held at the
Detroit Leland Hotel and at the Old Wayne Club in downtown
Detroit. Isaac Litwak was the principal negotiator for the union.
He had other representatives with him. Litwak was adamant to all
of these negotiations, asking for all kinds of new provisions in the
contract.
Fritz Brady and Horace McKnight worked diligently getting up a
memorandum on what the laundry owners felt they could do. Litwak
took one look at this document and just discarded it, and said he was
not interested in reading it any farther.
Litwak kept meeting every request of the laundry owners with the
threat of a strike. The negotiations kept dragging on and no progress
was being made. Finally a lunch was arranged.
Well, that is wrong, we just happened to get together for a lunch.
It wasn't arranged.
The Chairman. It wasn't arranged, but you were together at lunch.
Mr. Miller. We were together.
The Chairman. That correction will be made.
Mr. Miller (reading) : It was arranged at which Meisner, Balkwill
and I attended.
21243— 58— pt. 36 3
13302 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
This lunch was held in the lunchroom of the Detroiter Hotel.
At this lunch, I suggested that perhaps we go to someone higher
up in the Teamsters and attempt to reach a settlement. Things had
become critical and the union had already levied $10 per member
assessment as a strike fund.
I did not want a strike and neither did the other laundry owners.
It was agreed by Meisner and Balkwill tliat something should be
done. Then they set up a meeting with James Hoffa.
I was not at that meeting, and I suggested that they meet Hoffa.
Whether they met Hoffa or not, I don't know.
The Chairman. Well, that was your suggestion.
Mr. Miller. That was my suggestion.
The Chairman. You may clarify it further in your statement.
Was it reported back to you that such a meeting was held ?
Mr. Miller. Well, it was reported back that they had a meeting,
but they did not tell me who the meeting was with.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed.
Mr. Miller. Either Meisner or Balkwill or both reported the out-
come of this meeting at the offices of the association in the Detroiter
Hotel.
Well, that is not true. It was just a chance meeting or probably
a telephone conversation that they had made the contact.
Tlie Chairman. In other words, that part is in error there, or is
not accurate, that they reported it at a meeting ?
Mr. Miller. Yes.
The Chairman. They did report it, but not necessarily at a meeting ?
Mr. Miller. That is right. They had no reason to report it to me,
because I was no official in the Institute of Laundering outside of the
fact that I was on the labor committee and tiymg to work out a con-
tract.
I was told that at this meeting with Hoffa it had been arranged
Well, the meeting, as I say, I don't know whether it was with Hoffa.
The Chairman. You were told that a meeting had been arranged.
Mr. Miller. A meeting had been arranged — that a contract could be
signed with the payment of $90 per truck by all the members of the
association, to Hoffa.
Well, there again that is not true, because I don't know who the
payments were to be made to.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Chairman ?
Tlie Chairman. Just a moment. You were told, though as a result
of the meeting, that a settlement could be arranged by the payment
of $90 per truck?
;Mr. ^IiLLER. That is right.
The Chairman. Were you interested in knowing to whom the pay-
ments were to be made ?
Mr. Miller. Well, being as I suggested that it be made to Hoffa, I
just took it for granted that that is who the payments were made to.
The Chairman. Did you ever learn anything different, that the
meeting was held with anyone other than Hoffa ?
Mr. Miller. No, I did not.
The Chairman. You never heard of it being held with anyone else
to this day ?
Mr. Miller. No, never did.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13303
The Chairman. And you had suggested it with Hoffa ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. And they reported to you that the meeting had
been arranged ?
Mr. Miller. They did not tell me who the meeting had been ar-
ranged with.
The Chairman. They said a meeting had been arranged?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. Later they told you what the terms were, that was
the proposition made to them at the meeting ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Do you at this time know with whom the meeting
was held?
Mr. Miller. No, I don't.
Senator Curtis. No one ever told you ?
Mr. Miller. They never told me.
Senator Curtis. You never asked the question ?
Mr. Miller. No, I did not. I never asked the question.
Senator Mundt. Do you know to whom the $90 was paid ?
Mr. Miller. Well, I paid it to John Meisner.
Senator Mundt. You paid your $90 to Jolm Meisner ?
Mr. Miller. To John Meisner.
Senator Mundt. Was he a Teamster official ?
Mr. Miller. Well, I didn't pay him the whole $90. It was $90 per
tiTick, and I paid him $45 per truck at that time, and the following
year I paid him $225, and then the third year $225. It was $90 per
truck over a period of 3 years, with half to be paid the first year, one-
quarter the second, and one-quarter the third.
Senator Mundt. Identify for me who John Meisner is ?
Mr. Miller. He was the secretary of the Detroit Institute of Laun-
dering.
Senator Curtis. Who is Howard Balkwill ?
Mr. Miller. He was the president.
Senator Curtis. Are both of those men living ?
Mr. Miller. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Where do they live ?
Mr. Miller. In Detroit.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Proceed with your statement.
Mr. Miller (reading) : At that time, the association represented all
the laundries of Detroit.
Well, they did not represent quite all of them, but nearly all of them.
This payment would assure a 3-year contract.
I have heard since that it was a 5-year contract.
I was told at this meeting by either Meisner, Balkwill or both, that
Hoffa told them that the laundry owners would have to make no fur-
ther concessions to the union.
Well, I don't know who they contacted, but that was the report, that
they would have to make no further concessions.
The Chairman. That the laundry owners would have to make no
further concessions if they carried out their plan or accepted this pro-
posal of paying $90 per truck ?
13304 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Hoffa told them, however, that he could do nothing about the con-
cessions that had already been made.
The payment of $90 was to Hoffa, I said here, but I don't know for
sure who got it, was to be made over a period of 3 years, $45 per truck
the first year, $22.50 per truck the second year, and $22.50 per truck
the third year.
The payments were to be made in cash. Meisner was chosen as the
man who would make the collections. Hoffa said he would appear at
the next meeting —
That is just hearsay. He did not tell me, but it is hearsay.
The Chairman. Tliat is what they reported to you ?
Mr. Miller. That is right. [Reading:]
At the next meeting with Litwak, and see that the contract was
settled.
Meisner came to me and collected the $450 first installment before
the negotiating session was lield. The first payment was made in cash
in the office of the New Method Laundry. I do not have knowledge
of how the other laundries made their payments or whicli ones did.
I also made the second and third payment of $225 each to Meisner
in cash in the succeeding years. I did not attend the actual session,
but Meisner reported to me what happened. Firstly, Hoffa was late
in appearing. In fact, Meisner expressed the thought to me that he
started worrying that the payoff might have gone down the drain.
The Chairman. Just a moment. He reported to you that Hoffa
did appear at the meeting ?
Mr. Miller. Tliat is right.
The Chairman. And he had previously reported to you that Hoffa
said he would settle it ?
Mr. Miller. AVell, his contacts with Hoffa agreed they would settle
it, yes.
The Chairman. In other words, as a result of these folks contacting
someone higher, whom at the time you had suggested as Hoff'a, and
so far as you knew, you never knew anything to the contrary but
what it was Hoffa?
Mr. Miller. Well, I surmised it was Hoffa.
The Chairman. Well, you have never known anything to the
contrary ?
Mr. Miller. That is right, I never knew anything to the contrary.
The Chairman. When the test came at the negotiating session, it
was reported to you that Hoffa showed up there ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed. We will have other proof.
Mr. Miller. This meeting was held at the Detroit Lei and Hotel.
When the door opened, Hoffa was there with a couple of his men.
Well, I am not sure who was with him.
The Chairman. That is what was reported to you ?
Mr. Miller. Yes, sir.
• The Chairman. Say so.
Mr. Miller (reading) : Miesner said the color drained from Lit-
wak's face when he saw Hoffa. Hoffa wanted to know what the meet-
ing was all about. He then read the contract which had been worked
out up to then, and expressed the view that it was a good contract
and that there was nothins: wrons: with it.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13305
The negotiations were then broken off and the contract signed some
time later. It is my feeling and belief that Meisner and Balkwill
were acting in the best interests of the laundry owners and that this
type of arrangement had to be made to reach contract.
The Chairman. Is that still your honest belief about it from what
you know and from what part you played in it ?
Mr. Miller. Yes, that is right.
The Chairman. In other words, there was no doubt in your mind
but what there had to be a payoff to get this contract settled?
Mr. Miller. Definitely. I know I paid $450 the first year, $225
the second, and $225 the third.
The Chairman. And you were paying to get a contract and pre-
vent a strike ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. And you were paying it in cash ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Mundt. You paid it to a man by the name of Meisner?
Mr. Miller. John Meisner.
Senator Mundt. Who is still alive ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Mundt. And who should be able to tell the committee
what he did with the money ?
Mr. JVIiLLER, He should be able to ; yes.
Senator Mundt. The last you saw of your money it was in the
hands of Mr. Meisner ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Mundt. It should not be very hard to find out from him
what he did with the money.
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. He will be a witness, Senator.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Miller. Well, that is all there is to it. That is the end.
The Chairman. Have you made the corrections in the written
statement that you read where you found inaccuracies to be?
Mr. Miller. Well, I never met Hoffa myself.
In fact, I never seen him in my life until today, outside of pictures
in the paper. But I knew that he was Litwak's boss, and whatever
negotiating we had to get a contract would probably have to go
through him. That is why I made the suggestion.
The Chairman. In other words, you were under pressure about this
contract, there was a strike threatened against the whole industry
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. You had been negotiating with the president of
the local time and again.
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. You were on the negotiating board, were you?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. And you had done your best to get a contract, to
get it settled ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. And you had been unsuccessful ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. Prior to Mr. Hoffa's appearance at the meeting — •
and I think the proof will show that, if you were not present at that
13306 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
meeting; — had you offered everything prior to that time that was
accepted at the time that Mr. Hoffa intervened ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. You had already made these proposals. What is
the other man's name, the president of the local ?
Mr. Miller. Isaac Litwak.
The Chairman. Litwak was rejecting the proposals ? He was turn-
ing them down. You failed to get anywhere with him ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. But when Mr. Hoffa intervened, if he did inter-
vene, it was immediately settled upon the terms that the laundry
institute had offered ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
The Chairman. But it cost a little money ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator I\'ls. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question ?
The Chairman. Senator Ives.
Senator Ives. I want to ask the witness if anybody has talked to
him about testifying before this committee about this meeting?
Mr. Miller. No ; only Mr. Salinger.
Senator I\t:s. Nobody else has iDeen in touch with you at all about
testifying?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, he talked to Mr. Meisner.
You have talked to Mr. Meisner ; have you not ?
Mr. Miller. Well, I talked to Meisner and Balkwill.
Mr. Kennedy. Also, when you say you read this statement casually,
do not your initials appear on each page ?
Mr. AIiLLER. That is right
Mr. Kennedy. It has been notarized ?
Mr. Miller. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You read it over ; did you not ?
INIr. ;Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You approved of the statement at that time ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Your changes you made regarding your conversa-
tions with Mr. Meisner and Mr. Meisner identifying the recipient as
Mr. Hoffa, those changes have been made in the last 48 hours?
Mr. Miller. Well, no, they weren't.
Mr. Kennedy. Since last night ?
Mr. ]\IiLLER. Not in the last 48 hours. I told Mr. Salinger I was
not there.
Mr. Kennedy. I am asking you if in your conversations with Mr.
Meisner, Mr. Meisner identified Mr. Hoffa as the recipient of the
money ; did he not, to you ?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Kennedy. That is what appears in the statement ?
Mr. Miller. That is what appears there, but I wanted to cor-
rect it.
Mr. Kennedy. As of yesterday, your statement was correct, as of
the time I talked to you yesterday ?
Mr. Miller. My statement is still correct, but I don't know
Mr. Kennedy. John Meisner identified Hoffa as the man; did he
not, to you ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13307
]\Ir. Miller. Not in that many words ; no.
JMr, Keistnedt. That is what you said in the statement ?
Mr. Miller. I just took that for granted that Hoffa was the man.
Mr. IvENNEDY. You did not discuss that with Meisner ?
Mr. Miller. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Tliat is what appears in your statement.
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And as of yesterday you stated to me in the office
that that was correct ?
Mr. Miller. Well, that is true, but, as I say, that I wasn't sure of,
and I am still not sure of that, because I wasn't there.
Mr. Kennedy. But from what was reported to you, you still say
that if it had not been for the intervention of Mr. Hoffa as it was
related to you, this contract would not have been signed ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Hoffa did come to negotiation at the De-
troit Leland Hotel as it was related to you ?
Mr. Miller. As it was related to me, that is right.
Mr. Kennedy. There is one more question I would like to ask the
the witness.
Wliat caused him to change his statement?
Mr. Miller. Change my statement ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes, to make corrections in it as you went along.
Presumably it was right yesterday and now it is wrong.
Mr. Miller. As I told Mr. Salinger when he come up to speak to
me, this happened 10 or 11 years ago. He asked me things on the
telephone. He couldn't ask me direct. He relayed it to the operator
and the operator had to relay it back to me. Then when he came up
there, it was quite late, and I was doing other things while he was
typing it out. But as far as to know John Meisner made the pay-
ments to Hoffa, that I don't know because I wasn't there.
Mr, Kennedy. I know, but you read that statement before you
signed it, did you not ?
Mr. INIiller. Just casually. I only looked it over once.
Mr. Ivennedy. Well, a statement like that is an important state-
ment. Did you not make affidavit to it ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. When you do that, is it your custom to just casually
glance at an affidavit before you swear to it ?
I am just curious to know what made you change that statement.
Are you scared of something ?
Mr. Miller. No ; I am not.
Mr. Kennedy. You act that way.
Mr. Miller. No ; I am not a bit scared. But what I am trying to
say is that I can't prove that John Meisner had any connections or
paid any money directly to Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. You knew that when you signed the statement, did
you not ?
Mr. Miller. Sure I knew it.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliy did you sign the statement ?
Mr. Miller. I told Mr. Salinger that.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger did not make you swear to it, did he?
Mr. Miller. No.
13308 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. I^NNEDT. You swore to it yourself freely, did you not, of your
own will ?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Mr. Kennedy. Yet you come along today and make all of these
revisions in it. There is something very peculiar about this.
Senator Mundt. This man looks like a good, honest American. He
probably has not had much experience in appearing before a commit-
tee, testifying under oath and making affidavits.
How many affidavits have you made out in your lifetime?
Mr. Miller. That is the first one.
Senator Mundt. You get up here and testify under oath and you
simply do not want to say something that you are not sure of under
oath ?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator Mundt. Now you want to tell us the true facts as you
understand them ?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator Mundt. I commend you for that. If there are any changes
to be made, you should make them, because you are testifying under
oath, and you do not want to get in trouble.
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator ]Mundt. I think your testimony has been helpful, and the
greatest significance of it, as I see it, is that you have at least told us
the name of the man who told you that they met with Mr. Hoffa in
the Detroit Leland Hotel.
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator IMundt. There is no question in your mind but what they
told you that?
Mr. Miller. They were at the meeting.
Senator Mundt. That they were at the meeting with Hoffa?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Mundt. And their names are Meisner and — who is the
other one ?
Mr. ]\IiLLER. Balkwill.
Senator Mundt. It seems to me that that is enough contribution
for one fellow to make, and I do not criticize you at all for the fact
that you are simply trying to be sure that what you tell us is the
absolute truth.
Mr. Miller. That is true.
The Chairman. The Chair undertook to give the witness every
opportunity to make any correction he wished to as he presented his
statement. The corrections have been made, according to his testi-
mony.
Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Miller, I want to ask you about the happenings
when your drivers were first organized. You say you were the last
one to have your drivers unionized ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Curtis. Were your supplies of coal and soap actually cut
off?
Mr. Miller. No.
Senator Curtis. They were threatened ?
Mr. Miller. Threatened, that is right.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13309
Senator Curtis. Did those communications that amounted to a
threat come to you or to the suppliers of coal and soap ?
Mr. Miller. Well, Mr. Litwak had made me 3 or 4 visits, and he
wanted to organize the drivers. I told him to go ahead. He talked to
the drivers, and said he couldn't get them organized, that they didn't
want to join the union. I said, "That is up to you. Wliat do you
want me to do, put them in ?"
So he contacted the institute and they give me a telephone call and
told me I better join the union, because they could stop my coal and
soap supplies coming in.
(At this point. Senator Mundt withdrew from the hearing room.)
Senator Curtis. In other words, your drivers didn't want to join
the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Miller. They definitely didn't want to.
Senator Curtis. And the organizer reported to you that they did
not want to join?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Curtis. Did you personally know your drivers ?
Mr. Miller. That is right ; I did.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we could have order
in the room ? I can't hear.
The Chairman. Let us have order.
Senator Curtis. You believed that was the opinion of the majority
of your drivers, they didn't want to join the union ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Curtis. So then the approach was made to you that you
put them in the union, that is correct ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Curtis, And you were threatened with having your sup-
plies of coal and soap and anything else you might use shut off if you
didn't force your drivers into the union ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Curtis. Were any other supplies involved besides coal and
soap ?
Mr. Miller. No, sir; it was just a telephone threat, and that is what
it was. They said there are other supplies that could be shut off, but
there was only soap and coal mentioned.
Senator Curtis. Was your place ever picketed ?
Mr. Miller. No.
Senator Curtis. Was anything said about picketing ?
Mr. Miller. It was never mentioned. They never mentioned any
picket lines.
Senator Curtis. Did you put your men in the union ?
Mr. Miller. I did.
Senator Curtis. Was there reaction to that?
Mr. Miller. Well, they were very unhappy, and their remark was
that they accused me of selling them down the river.
Senator Curtis. And they were put in the miion against their will
because you were threatened with being shut up if you didn't force
them to join?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator Curtis. Well, I think that is a very bad set of facts. It is
not unusual, however. The law gives to workers the right to organize
13310 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
and bargain collectively, and it doesn't give to unions any rights to
organize somebody that doesn't want to be organized. That is just
illustrative of certain elements of unlawful conduct.
That is all.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions at this time ?
Senator Church. Mr. Miller, in connection with the testimony that
you have just given, in this telephone conversation when you were ad-
vised that unless your truckers joined the Teamsters Union these sup-
plies would be cut off, with whom was that telephone conversation?
Mr. Miliar. Well, it came from the institute..
Senator Church. Do you recall who gave you that inf onnation ?
Mr. Miller. Mr. Balkwill.
Senator Church. Of the institute ?
Mr. Miller. Yes, sir.
Senator Church. You had no direct communication from the rep-
resentatives of the Teamsters themselves ?
Mr. Miller. No.
Senator Church, But it was Mr. Balkwill, of the institute, who
told you that he had been advised by the Teamsters that unless your
truckers were put into the Teamsters Union, these supplies would be
cut off ; is that correct ?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator Church. There is one other aspect. Let me follow that up
with this question : Then you proceeded to put these truckers into the
Teamsters' local ?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator Church. Did I understand you to testify that as a part
of that arrangement, each paid $1 instead of the customary initiation
fee?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator Church. ^Yho paid that ? Did the employees pay it, or did
you pay it ?
Mr. Miller. The employees paid it.
Senator Church. And after you put them into the Teamsters, you
had no further difficulties with regard to your supplies or any further
troubles in that connection ?
Mr. Miller. No.
Senator Church. Now, as far as you can personally testify of your
own knowledge, you were a member of the negotiating committee of
the institute that was attempting to get a new contract with the Team-
sters Union for all of the members of the institute ; is that correct ?
Mr. Miller. That is true.
Senator Church. And certain offers had been made, and these offers
had not been accepted by the president of the Teamsters' local with
whom you were dealing ?
Mr. Miller. That is correct.
Senator Church. And then, if I understood, and correct me if 1
misunderstood your testimony, you directly testified that you were ad-
vised by Mr. Meissner and Balkwill that a payment should be made
by the members, and the payment was $90 per truck.
^ Now, were thev the ones who told you this ?
Mr. Miller. Well, I don't know how they agreed on the $90.
Senator Church. But were they the ones who told you that that
would be the amount required ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13311
Mr. Miller. Well, when Jolin Meissner came to me, he said it
would be $90.
Senator Church. Did he tell you that this $90 per truck would have
to be paid in order to get a contract ? Was that his explanation to
you?
Mr. Miller. Oh, yes ; we understood that.
Senator Church. It was clearly understood that this was in pay-
ment for a contract ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Church. And then later these same two men informed
you that Mr. Hoffa did appear at a meeting in which these negotia-
tions for a contract were being discussed ?
Mr. Miller. Well, as I say, we were having lunch and there was
probably several of us there, and he wasn't at the meeting, but the
report did come back that Mr. Hoffa came to the Leland Hotel
in 1949.
Senator Church. And the report came from whom? Who told
you this ? That is what I was trying to get.
Mr. Miller. John Meissner told me that.
Senator Church. Then you paid the $90 per truck, in 3 install-
ments ?
Mr. Miller. That is right.
Senator Church. And to your knowledge did other laundry owners
also make this payment ?
Mr. Miller. I don't know.
Senator Church. But any way, you made the payment ?
Mr. Miller. I made it.
Senator Church. Shortly thereafter, a contract was entered into,
and the contract consisted of the same terms that had been previously
offered but not accepted by the union ?
Mr. Miller. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And the local union official who had been conduct-
ing the negotiations, Mr. Isaac Litwak, was very upset that Mr. Hoffa
had gone over his head ?
Mr. Miller. That is as they told it to me ; that is right.
The Chairman. All right.
Senator Curtiss. I have one other question. At the time that this
attempt was made to organize your drivers, did you have any con-
troversy or trouble with your drivers or any dispute with them ?
Mr. Miller. None whatsoever.
Senator Curtis. They were not complaining about their pay and
their working conditions ?
Mr. Miller. No.
Senator Curtis. Did any of them belong to the Teamsters Union
at that time ?
Mr. ]\IiLLER. Well, that I don't know for sure, but previous to that
there had been one or two who had belonged to it, but whether any of
them belonged to it at that particular time, I don't know.
Senator Curtis. You had 10 drivers ?
Mr. JNIiLLER. That is right.
Senator Curtis. So far as the Teamsters Union was concerned,
they were just outsiders butting in, were they not, and they did not
represent your drivers ?
Mr. Miller. No.
13312 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. That is all.
The Chairman. Tlie committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 25, the committee recessed, to reconvene at
2 p. m., the same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
The Chairman. The committee will be in order.
(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session
were : Senators McClellan and Ives. )
The Chairman. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Vincent Watldns.
The Chairman. Will stand and be sworn ? Do you solemnly swear
that the evidence, given before this Senate select committee shall be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Watkins. I do.
TESTIMONY OF VINCENT B. WATKINS
The Chairman. Mr. Watkins, state your name and your place of
residence and your business or occupation.
Mr. Watkins. Vincent B. Watkins, 587 Henley, Birmingham,
Mich. I am a partner of the Grand Laundry.
The Chairman. Mr. Watkins, do you waive counsel ?
Mr. Watkins. I do, sir.
The Chairman. How long have you been in the laundry business ?
Mr. Watkins. I have been in the business about 30 years. I have
owned the Grand Laundry since 1944, and I have been a partner of
it since 1944.
The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Watkins, were you a member of the
negotiating committee of the Detroit Institute of Laundry in 1949?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir,
Mr. Kennedy. The others that were on that committee with you
were Mr. Horace McKnight ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And Charles Ladides, Howard Balkwill, and John
Meisner; is that correct?
Mr. Watkins. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, were you having difficulties reaching an agree-
ment with Mr. Isaac Litwak of local 285 of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. He was very adamant in his position about signing
a contract with you ?
Mr. Watkins. Quite so.
Mr. Kennedy. And he particularly wanted to go into a 5-day week,
which you felt would be very costly ; is that right ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it ultimately discussed that it would be neces-
sary or steps should be taken to get somebody higher up in the
Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. That took place at a meeting of your group, did it?
Mr. Watkins. That some arrangements should be made to ap-
proach someboy higher up in the Teamsters ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13313
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How long had these negotiations been going on
before you decided to go to someone higher up ?
Mr. Watkins. If I remember correctly, it was a couple of months.
The Chairman, Iu the meantime had the contract expired ?
Mr. Watkins. I don't remember.
The Chairman. But you do know that the negotiations had been
going on for around 2 months at least before you decided to try to
go over the head of the president of the local union ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, I believe the record shows that the_ contract
expired in February and your negotiations were going on in April,
May, and June of that year ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes.
Mr. Ivennedy. After you had this discussion about going to a
higher up in the Teamsters Union, did a report then come back ta
you that it was going to cost some money i
Mr. Watkins. It did, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Who gave you that report?
Mr. Watkins. I don't remember correctly, but I remember at the
meeting that the gentlemen whose names you have read off were
present, and I can't say which one made the report.
Mr. IvENNEDY. One of this group made a report that it was going
to cost some money ?
Mr. Watkins. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Then did you discuss or did he report to you how
much money it was going to cost ?
Mr. Watkins. To my recollection, not at that particular meeting.
Mr. Kennedy. This money was to be paid to the higher up in the
Teamsters Union, as you understood it ?
Mr. Watkins. Presumably so, yes.
Mr. ICennedy. Now, were you ultimately told how much it was
going to cost ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you remember w4io told you that?
Mr. Watkins. No ; I don't remember for certain, but I would say
it was probably Mr, Balkwill or Mr. Meisner.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Now, liow mucli did you understand it was going
to cost each laundry owner?
Mr. Watkins. Up to yesterday when your Mr. Willse refreshed
my memory, I didn't remember exactly. But the figure that he men-
tioned of $90 a truck, that has been discussed here today, sounds
reasonable to me.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that to be paid all at one time?
Mr. Watkins. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. It was $90 a truck, to be paid over a 3-year period ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And it was $90 a truck for the first year ?
Mr. Watkins. No.
Mr. Kennedy. $45 for the first year ?
Mr. Watkins. I believe so, yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Then it was to be followed bv 2 payments, the suc-
ceeding years of $22.50, is that right ?
13314 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Watkins. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Over a 3-year period ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Did you decide to make that payment ?
Mr. Watkins. I did.
Mr. Ivennedy. And did you collect the money ?
Mr. Watkins. Did I pay the money, you mean ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. I^NNEDY. How much money did you pay altogether ?
Mr. Watkins. I don't remember.
Mr. I^NNEDY. Do you know approximately how much ?
Mr. Watkins. I think at that time we had someplace between
12 and 15 trucks.
Mr. Kennedy. So you paid $1,000 or $1,200 ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. To whom did you give this money ?
Mr. Watkins. Mr. Meissner.
Mr. KJENNEDY. Was it explained to you that the money would
have to be in the form of cash ?
Mr. Watkins. I think so, and at least that was the medium of
exchange.
Mr. Kennedy. After you paid the cash to Mr. Meissner, did the
Detroit Institute of Laundry go get the contract signed ?
Mr. Watkins. I don't remember the chronology of it.
Mr. Ivennedy. But subsequently ?
Mr. Watkins. ^Vliether it was after the payment or whether it
was after the meeting where they said that they had had a discussion
with someone, but nevertheless the contract was ultimately signed.
Mr. Kennedy. And it was generally or basically on the terms that
you wished to have the contract signed at that time ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, because we had already given up so much we
couldn't get back, that what was left we felt we had to keep.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not have to give anything more ?
Mr. Watkins. No ; we did not give the 5-day week.
Mr. Kennedy. It was explained to you that the concessions already
made would have to remain in effect, but you wouldn't have to give
any more ?
^Ir. Watkins. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And you didn't have to give in to any more points
and the contract was signed, is that right ?
Mr. Watkins. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that Mr. Litwak was upset at
the fact that Mr. Hoffa had gone over his head in this matter?
Mr. Watkins. I don't think so. I don't think I had any knowledge
of that situation.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it ever reported to you ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir; I think it was discussed years afterwards,
that there was some upsetment. But I don't remember exactly.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand Mr. Hoffa had intervened in
this contract ?
Mr. Watkins. No ; I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13315
The Chairman. Do you know whether the other laundry owners
had to pay the same as you did ?
Mr. Watkins. No; I presumed that they did, but I don't know.
The Chairman. Was that the understanding that all of them
would have to pay ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir ; I would say that substantially is correct.
The Chairman. You were not agreeing to something that was not
applicable to all of your associates, were you?
^Ir. Watkins. I hope not.
The Chairman. Well, you tried to make a little certain about it at
the time ?
Mr. AYatkins. I expected that they were all contributing some-
thing.
The Chairman. That was the general idea ?
Mr. Watkins. That is correct.
The Chairman. What was the purpose of the contribution ?
Mr. Watkins. Presumably to get a contract closed that we were
having great difficulty in closing, despite what we felt was a ];)resenta-
tion of good facts and figures.
The Chairman. Well, placing it in another terminology, you were
paying off, is that correct ?
Mr. Watkins. In the vernacular ; yes.
The Chairman. Can you give any other appropriate description
for it?
JNIr. Watkins. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you regard that as a legitimate transaction?
Mr. Watkins. No, sir.
The Chairman. Why not ?
Mr. Watkins. Because I think it is morally wrong.
The Chairman. You think, too, that it was an exploitation of the
situation ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes.
The Chairman. Did you understand that money was going into the
union treasury ?
Mr. Watkins. No ; I don't think that I had any such understanding.
The Chairman. You never even had any such suspicion, did you ?
Mr. Watkins. No ; I don't believe so.
The Chairman. Then what you actually paid it for or what you all
paid it for was to keep from having further trouble with the union?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
(At this point. Senator Church entered the hearing room. )
The Chairman. In other words, it was an exaction that was made of
you in order to let you have peace ?
Mr. Watkins. That is right.
The Chairman. But you felt you had no other alternative under
the circumstances, was that correct ?
Mr. Watkins. I am afraid so ; yes, sir.
The Chairman. Well, you know how you felt about it at the time,
and I don't think that you would just
Mr. Watkins. I had made a commitment that they would go higher
up before I realized that it would cost money, and I am afraid if I knew
it would cost money to start with I would not have been in favor of it.
The Chairman. In other words, if you had known that going higher
13316 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
up was going to involve you in this kind of a shady deal, you wouldn't
have agreed to it ?
Mr. Watkins. That is correct.
The Chairman. And you do regard it as a form of extortion, do
you not ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions ?
Actually, if you had 12 trucks, it cost a total of more than $1,000?
Mr. Wx\TKiNS. That is right.
The Chairman. And you paid it ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And you paid it in cash ?
Mr. Watkins. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. So that there would be no record of it ?
Mr. Watkins. That is correct.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ? Are there any further
questions?
All right, thank you, you may stand aside. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Conrad Lantz.
The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear that the evidence, given
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth,
and notliing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Lantz. I do.
TESTIMONY OF CONRAD LANTZ
The Chairman. State your name, and your place of residence, and
your business or occupation.
Mr. Lantz. My name is Conrad Lantz, I live in Bellriver, Ontario,
and I am general manager of the LaMeasure Bros. Laundry.
The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes : I do.
The Chairman. Have you formerly lived in the United States ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
The Chairman. Are you a citizen of this country or of Canada ?
Mr. Lantz. Of the United States.
The Chairman. A citizen of the United States ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What business did you operate in this country?
Mr. Lantz. The Pilgrim Laundry.
The Chairman. Where ?
Mr. Lantz. 1949, from 1939 and they still own it.
The Chairman. And 3'ou stiH operate it ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Where is it located ?
Mr. Lantz. In Detroit.
The Chairman. All right, you may proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. You are the manager of the LaMeasure Bros.
Laundry ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you held that position ?
Mr. Lantz. About 3 yeare.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13317
Mr. Kennedy. What position did you have in the laundry business
in 1949?
Mr. Lantz. I was an owner of the Pilgrim Laimdiy, and I still am.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have difficulties in negotiating a contract
with the Teamsters Local 285, Mr. Isaac Litwak in 1949 ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he taking a very adamant position in connec-
tion with the signing of the contract ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And you were having a great number of problems^
is that right ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it then discussed among your committee that
you would make an approach to someone higher up in the Teamsters
Union ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
Mr. Ivennedy. And could you tell the committee what you were
told then? After it was decided to make that approach to someone
higher up in the Teamsters Union, was it then reported back to you
that it would be necessai-y for some money to be paid ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us how much money it was decided
upon ?
Mr. Lantz. I believe it was around $90 per truck.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, was it explained to you as to whom the money
would be given ?
Mr. Lantz. I was told it would be given to Mr. Holtzman who was
engaged as labor relations man.
Mr. Kennedy. And did you understand why it was to be given to
Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. Lantz. I presume because he had the contract with the higher-
ups.
Mr. Kennedy. Specifically were you told as to who Mr, Holtzman
was close to ?
Mr. Lantz. I presume the name of Mr, Hoffa was mentioned.
Mr. Kennedy. I am not asking what you presume, and weren't you
told?
Mr. Lantz. Frankly, I can't remember. It was quite some time ago.
Mr. Kennedy. Weren't you told, or you remembered about 5 hours
ago in my office downstairs ?
Mr. Lantz. I am sorry, Mr. Kennedy. Vriiat was that again ?
Mr, Kennedy. You remember about 5 hours ago in my office down-
stairs. Let me just ask you this : When it was stated that money would
be paid to Mr. Holtzman, why was it explained to you that the money
would go to him ?
Mr. Lantz. Well, he was in the labor-relations business, and I pre-
sume as such was entitled to a fee,
Mr. Kennedy. What else was explained to you about Mr. Holtz-
man?
Mr. Lantz. That was it.
Mr. Kennedy. That was all that was said about Mr. Holtzman?
21243—58 — pt. 36— 4
13318 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Lantz. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Was anything said about his connection with any
individual in the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Lantz. As I said, I presume.
Mr. Kennedy. I am not asking what you presume. I am asking
what was said at that time.
Mr. Lantz. I can't remember that far back.
Mr. Kennedy. Didn't you tell me this morning at 9 : 30 in my office
that tlie reason the money was to be paid to Mr. Holtzman is because,
"he had the ear of Mr. Hoffa" ?
Mr. Lantz. Possibly, yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, there is no question about "possibly." You
told me that.
Mr. Lantz. I don't remember the exact words and perhaps you
have it written down, but I don't, and I didn't write them down.
Mr. Kennedy. You told me that this morning, and isn't that correct,
as to why the money was paid ?
Mr. Lantz. I believe I told you that he was in the labor relations,
and he had a direct communication with Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. And that was the reason the money was paid to
him ; was it not ?
Mr. Lantz. Well, as a consultant, yes.
Mr. Kennedy. But also because of the fact that he was a close
friend or he had the ear of Mr. James Hoffa ?
]Mr. Lantz. And apparently was quite conversant with our problem
in connection with the 5-day week.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that at least part of the reason the
money was going to be paid to Mr. Holtzman, and I will say the only
reason you gave me in my office downstairs, was that he had tlie ear
of Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Lantz. That was probably very close to it.
Mr. Kennedy. That is not probably very close to the truth ; that is
the truth ; is it not ?
Mr. Lantz. Mr. Kennedy, perhaps you have it written down, and
I don't remember it.
Mr. Kennedy. That is what you told me this morning. Isn't that
correct, the reason the money was paid to Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Thank you.
Now, did Mr. Holtzman ever go on a negotiating session for the
Detroit Institute of Laundry ?
Mr. Lantz. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you ever present when Mr. Holtzman had
any conversations about your problems with any union official ?
Mr. Lantz. None whatsoever.
Mr. Kennedy. He never particij^ated in any open negotiations that
you know of ?
Mr. Lantz. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Kennedy. And the money was to be paid in cash, was it not?
Mr. Lantz, That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. To him ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand then that Mr. Hoffa intervened
in this contract?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13319
Mr. Lantz. We did have a meeting with Mr. Hoffa shortly after
that.
Mr. Kennedy, After this was arranged ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Hokzman arranged for you to meet with
Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Lantz. I can't say that.
Mr. Kennedy. Who arranged for the meeting ?
Mr. Lantz. I am sorry, I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. But shortly after the arrangements were made to
pay Mr. Holtzman, you did meet with Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And did Mr. Hoffa then inject himself into the ne-
gotiations for this contract ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes, we met on Trumbull Avenue, at the Teamsters
headquarters.
Mr. Kennedy. You went there, and also didn't he come to the
negotiations for the contract at the Detroit Leland Hotel?
Mr. Lantz. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that reported to you ?
Mr. Lantz. No, not to my knowledge.
Mr. Kennedy. All right, but you did go to see him after the money
was paid to Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct, yes, on Trumbull Avenue.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, ancl Church. )
Mr. Kennedy. I would like to ask about this item.
(At this point. Senator Curtis entered the hearing room.)
The Chairman. The Chair presents to you a photostatic copy of
a check dated May 2, 1949, made payable to you in the amount of
$1,000 drawn on the account of the Detroit Institute of Laundry.
I ask you to examine this check and state if you identify it.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you identify the check ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes, I do. Senator.
The Chairman. That check may be made exhibit No. 1.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 1" for refer-
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13707.)
Mr. Kennedy. This is a check dated May 2, 1949, pay to the order
of Conrad S. Lantz, for $1,000. It is written on the account of the
Detroit Institute of Laundry, and it is endorsed on the back by Conrad
S. Lantz. You received this $1,000?
Mr. Lantz. I received the check, that is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Then you cashed the check ?
Mr. Lantz. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat did you do with the cash ?
Mr. Lantz. I gave it to John Meisner.
Mr. Kennedy. For what purpose ?
Mr. Lantz. I believe it had something to do with the inside laundry
workers union.
Mr. Kennedy. This is another laundry workers imion ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
13320 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
JVIr. Kennedy. And this money was to be given to a member of
that union?
Mr. Lantz. I believe so.
Mr. Kennedy. Yon were told that?
Mr. Lantz. It probably came up in our conversations.
Mr. Kennedy. Yon were told that, were you not ?
Mr. Lantz. I would say probably, yes.
Mr. Kennedy. This was to go to whom in that union ?
Mr. Lantz. Jolm Paris.
Mr. Kennedy. P-a-r-i-s?
Mr. Lantz. I think that is the spelling.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he receiving payments of money periodically ?
Mr. Lantz. That I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Is this the only check you know about ?
Mv. Lantz. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. "What was the purpose of paying Mr. Paris money ?
Mr. Lantz. I believe it was pretty much we were in negotiations
at that time, on the inside contract, and I believe it was to expedite the
contract.
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
The Chairman. Who was Paris representing, the laundiy men or
the union?
Mr. Lantz. The inside workers, the laundry workers.
The Chairman. Inside workers ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes ; representing the union.
The Chairman. Well, then, let's see. This was another payoff to
a union man ? Is that what you are saying ?
Mr. Lantz. I say this is ; yes.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. How much money did you pay — I don't know
whether I asked you this — how much money did you pay on the other
payoff that you made ?
Mr. Lantz. I don't recall how many trucks I had, but it was prob-
ably at the rate of $90 per truck.
Mr. Kennedy. And you paid over a 3-year period ?
Mr. Lantz. I believe so ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa's name was mentioned frequently in con-
nection with this, was it not, the meetings ?
Mr. Lantz. I can't say that, Mr. Kennedy.
The Chairman. Approximately how much did you pay on the
other transactions ?
Mr. Lantz. "VYliat transaction. Senator?
The Chairman. Well, your part, at so much per truck. About liow
many trucks did you have?
Mr. Lantz. I think I probably had about eight trucks.
The Chairman. About how many ?
JSIr. Lantz, About nine.
The Chairman. About nine ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes. So it would be about $800.
The Chairman. It cost you about $800, $400 in casli at that time
and then $400 after that time for each of the 2 years ( .
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
The Chairman. You didn't sret anv of tliis J*>1.(H)>'). did vou (
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13321
Mr. Lantz. No; I did not.
The Chairman. This came out of the treasury of the Detroit Insti-
tute of Laundry.
Mr. Lantz. That is right.
The Chairman. You were a member of that institute, were you?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
The Chairman. And part of this was dues or money that you had
paid in for your membership ?
Mr. Lantz. Right.
The Chairman. And it was known at the time that this whole
thing was a payoff, that it was extortion, tliat you had to do it in orde>'
to save your businesses and get a contract.
Mr. Lantz. I would say so.
The Chairman. Is that the way you felt about it at that time ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
The Chairman. Is that the way all of you felt about it as you dis-
cussed it?
Mr. Lantz. I would say so.
The Chairman. Well, there is no other explanation for it, is there?
You didn't want to have to just hand out $90 per truck to somebody,
did you ?
Mr. Lantz. I sure didn't want to.
The Chairman. But you had that alternative of either doing that
or. continuing to have trouble over the contract and any consequences
that might follow that truck ?
Mr. Lantz. I would say so.
The Chairman. Do you know any other name for this except ex-
tortion ?
Mr. Lantz. No.
• The Chairman. Thank you. Are there any other questions ?
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. What would have happened if you had not paid
the money?
Mr. Lantz. We probably would have had a strike.
Senator Curtis. What would have taken place then ?
Mr. Lantz, We probably would have gone out of business.
Senator Curtis. What I mean is, would it have been your own
employees going on strike ?
Were your own employees dissatisfied ?
Mr. Lantz. Believe you me, I don't know. The union had represent-
atives of the various plants there, and they were demanding a contract
that we just could not see our way clear to fulfill.
Senator Curtis. Did you ever go through a strike ?
Mr. Lantz. No ; never have.
Senator Curtis. Did you explore what the result would be had you
refused to pay and sought some relief in court ?
Mr. Lantz. I believe it was shortly before that, Senator, when they
did have a strike situation in one of the large cities. I believe it was
Philadelphia. The results were pretty drastic. They could not get
relief from the courts.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
13322 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Do you know why this check was not just made
out to Mr. Paris to begin with ?
Mr. Lantz. No.
The Chairman. You have a pretty good idea, don't you ?
Mr. Lantz. Yes.
The Chairman. He woukhi't accept the check, would he?
Mr. Lantz. I don't know. I don't talk to Mr. Paris. We have a
contract with a different union than Mr. Paris'.
The Chairman. You must have talked to him or seen him or some-
body to get this money to him.
Mr. Lantz. I am sorry ; I turned it over to Mr. Meisner.
The Chairman. Mr. Meisner?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
The Chairman. You cashed the check and turned it back to Mr.
Meisner ?
Mr. Lantz. That is right.
The Chairman. Who is Mr. Meisner ?
Mr. Lantz. The executive secretary of the trade institute of
laundry.
The Chairman. In other words, he needed the cash ?
Mr. Lantz. That is right.
The Chairman. He couldn't handle the transaction by check ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
The Chairman. So he used you as the man to get the money in
cash and made the check to you ?
Mr. Lantz. That is correct.
The Chairman. All right. Are there any other questions ?
If not, thank you very much. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. William Ballovill.
The Chairman. Be sworn, please, sir. You do solemnly swear the
evidence you shall give before this Senate Select Committee shall be
the truth, the wliole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Mr. Balkwill. I do.
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM H. BALKWILL
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and
your business or occupation, please, sir.
Mr. Balkwill. William H. Balkwill, 2522 West Grand Boulevard,
Detroit, executive secretary of the Detroit Institute of Laundry.
The Chairman. You waive counsel, do you, Mr. Balkwill ?
Mr. Balkwill. I do, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Kennedy, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. You are an executive secretary of the Detroit Insti-
tute of Laundry ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You have held that position for how long?
Mr. Balkwill. Since 1953.
Mr. Kennedy. What position did you hold in 1949 ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I was operating a laundry, and I was presi-
dent of the Detroit Institute of Laundry.
Mr. Kennedy. You were president at that time ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13323
Mr. Balkwtll. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the name of the laundry that you were
operating ?
Mr. Balkwill. The Fine Arts Laundry in Detroit.
Mr. Kennedy. The contract with Local 285 of the Teamsters came
up for renewal in 1949, did it not?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Isaac Litwak was the negotiator for local
285?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you having considerable difficulty with Mr.
Litwak during the negotiations in 1949 ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is true.
Mr. Kennedy. That would be in the beginning of the year, would
it not?
Mr. Balkwill. I believe we started to discuss it in December 1948.
It expired in February.
Mr. Kennedy. February of 1949 ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. But you went on and had discussions after that time?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Litwak indicated that he was going to
strike all the laundries, is that right, unless he could get a contract?
Mr. Balkwill. That is always his position.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, it was his position during this period of time?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, it was.
Mr. Kennedy. And you and the rest of the institute and the mem-
bers of the institute were quite concerned; is that right?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not seem to be getting anywhere with
them?
Mr. Balkwill. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it then decided or discussed about going then
and making an approach to a higher union official ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Of the Teamsters ?
ISIr. Balkwill. That is true.
Mr. Kennedy. You made the decision that you should go and
see a higher union official. Could you tell us who suggested the
arrangements as to how that could be handled ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I couldn't state the individual. Some of our
committee suggested how we might approach it was through a labor
councilor or labor relations man, Mr. Joe Holtzman.
Mr. Kennedy. Who suggested that you go see Mr. Holtzman?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I couldn't say just who the individual was.
It was one of our committee.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was it that made the suggestion ?
Mr. Balkwill. I have never stated, and I don't know exactly the
name.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you been told as to who made the suggestion
that you go see Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, we were told that. We were told that Mr
Holtzman might be able to do us some irood.
13324 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Who told you that ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I say I don't know just who told me at first.
Mr. Kennedy. You knew yesterday.
Mr. Balkwill. Well, no, I don't believe you are asking me the same
question you did yesterday.
Mr. Kennedy. Who introduced you to Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. Balkwill. Mr. Moe Dalitz.
Mr. Kennedy. Who is Mr. Moe Dalitz ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he is a man about the country, I would say.
At that time he was interested and possibly still is interested in a
laundry in Detroit.
Mr. Kennedy. And he now also has the interest in Havana and in
Las Vegas, is that right ?
Mr. Balkwill. I believe so.
Mr. Kennedy. And he made the suggestion that you talk to Mr.
Holtzman ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I don't know as he made the suggestion to me.
I did not know him, you see.
But someone made a contact with Mr. Moe Dalitz, and the word was
given me that we go to lunch at a place in Detroit and he would meet
us there.
Mr. Kennedy. IVliat was the name of the lunch place ?
Mr. Balkwill. It was Charles' Chop House.
Mr Kennedy. Charles' Chop House?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Charles Chop House that is close to the Teamsters'
headquarters?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, it is not too far.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was going to meet you there ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I did not know at the time, but it was Mr. Moe
Dalitz that did meet us, and he introduced me to — well, I say me, he
introduced Mr. Meisner and I to Mr. Holtzman, and possibly 4 or 5
other gentlemen that were there,
Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Buslikin also present at that luncheon?
Mr. Balkwill. I did not Iniow it. I believe he was.
Mr. Kennedy. It was understood that it was Mr. Holtzman that was
going to be able to do you some good in this matter ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; that is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some conversations with Mr. Holtz-
man, then ?
Mr. Blakwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat did he say he would do, what arrangements
would he make ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he heard our story, if I remember right, and
we had the contract there, the demands that Mr. Litwak had made.
We outlined to him how far we had got to that time, the offer we
had made, and the differences involved.
He made notes of that. I am not sure whether he took a copy of the
contract with him, though I believe he did.
And that he would see what he could do about it. He was going to
study it and see what he could do.
Mr. Kennedy. Then did he come back later on and have another
conversation with you ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13325
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. KJENNEDY. What did he tell you then ?
Mr. Balkwill. He said that — I couldn't get all the detail right
now — he could get it very much as we had suggested it.
Mr. Kennedy. How much was it going to cost you ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, the first proposition, I believe, was $25,000.
Mr. Kennedy. In cash ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You were to pay $25,000 in cash, is that right?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What was your reaction to that ?
Mr, Balkwill. Well, we nearly fainted. It is a lot of money.
We just couldn't pay it.
The Chairman. What was that money to go for ?
Mr. Balkwill. I beg your pardon ?
The Chairman. What was that money to go for, the $25,000 in
cash ?
Mr. Blackwell. Well, it was for his expense. Just what he was
going to do with it, I don't know. He naturally didn't tell us.
The Chairman. He just told you that that is what it would cost
you ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; that is what it would cost for him to handle it.
Mr. Kennedy. You knew he was very close to Mr. Hojffa, did you
not?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes. We knew that he knew Mr. Hoffa. He knew
all the teamster fellows there.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell him you couldn't pay the $25,000?
Mr. Balkwill. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You negotiated back and forth ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you finally reach another figure that you would
pay him ?
Mr. Balkwill. We finally reached a figure. If I remember rightly,
it was $17,500.
Mr. Kennedy. You agreed to pay the $17,500 ?
Mr. Balkwill. We couldn't pay that at that time, but we did set-
tle on getting him, I believe, $7,500, and then the balance in 2 annual
payments.
Mr. Kennedy. And that would be $7,500 the first year, and $5,000
each succeeding year, is that correct ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. All of those payments were to be in cash?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. He then said that with this payment he could deliver
to you the contract, basically as you wished to have it, is that right,
or as it was at that particular stage ?
Mr. Balkwill. I believe with a few adjustments that he said would
be necessary.
Mr. Kennedy. But you would not have to make any more major
concessions, is that right ?
Mr. Balkwill. I guess that is correct ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't that correct ?
Mr. Balkwill. I think so.
13326 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy, And that you would not have a strike, that Mr.
Litwak would sign the contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. Tliat is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Then did you have a meeting with Mr. Hoffa him-
self?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, some time after that.
Mr. Kennedy. You went to see Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Balkavill. Well, there was a meeting arranged with Mr. Hoffa
and some of his board, I assumed it was.
Mr. Kennedy. That was at the Teamster headquarters ?
Mr, Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And that meeting was arranged by Mr. Holtzman?
Mr, Balkwill. I believe so. We were not notified by Mr, Holtz-
man, I don't believe. I believe our attorney made the arrangements.
I am not sure about that.
Mr. Kennedy. It was either Mr. Holtzman or your attorney ?
Mr, Balkwell, Yes.
Mr, Kennedy. Who was your attorney ?
Mr, Balkwill, Mr, Thomas LoCicero,
Mr, Kennedy. You say that either he or Mr, Holtzman made the
arrangements ?
Mr, Balkw^ill, I believe so ; yes,
Mr, Kennedy, But you think it is very possible Mr. Holtzman
arranged for you to meet with Mr. Hoffa then ?
Mr. Balkwill, Well, he was an expensive counsel, I assume he
made it possible,
Mr, Kennedy, Well, you paid him the money. You expected to get
something out of it. So shortly after you arranged to meet with
Mr, Hoffa,
Mr, Balkwill. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. So it would appear that Mr. Holtzman at least,
whether you knew it or not, had made the arrangements.
Mr, Balkwill. Yes,
Mr. Kennedy. After that, you explained to Mr. Hoffa the difficulties
you were having with Mr. Litwak ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa then intercede in the contract, in the
negotiations for the contract ?
Mr, Balkwill. Well, not immediately. He did discuss it with us,
with our group. It was sort of a hearing,
I don't believe we got anywhere with it that day. But we went on
negotiating with Mr. Litwak. We had several meetings, and we did
get it boiled down closer to a conclusion.
Mr. Kennedy. Then did Mr. Hoffa ever actually come to a nego-
tiating session?
Mr, Balkwill, Yes, Once,
Mr, Kennedy, Mr, Hoffa came, himself?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes. The last meeting we had in concluding the
contract was at the Detroit Leland Hotel.
Mr, Kennedy, This was the last meeting that you had? The last
major meeting?
Mr, Balkwill, Major meeting ; yes,
Mr, Kennedy. And Mr, Hoffa came to that meeting ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13327
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Litwak surprised to see him there?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I don't know. You vSee, we were invited on
each side, as we are here, and he come in from the other door.
He didn't come at the time the meeting started
Mr, Kennedy. Had you requested that Mr. Hoffa come ?
Mr. Balkwill. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Was IMr. Litwak angry that Mr. Hoffa had come
, and was intervening in this contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he was angry before he arrived. I don't know
that that aggravated it.
Mr. Kennedy. During this period of time after you made the pay-
ments to Mr. Holtzman, was Mr. Litwak angry at the intervention of
Mr. Hoila in this contract?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I believe it would be normal to say "Yes,"
because he did not appreciate it, I am sure.
Mr. Kennedy. He knew about the fact that Mr. Hoffa was inter-
vening in the contract?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he was there.
Mr. Kennedy. And lie indicated to you and stated to you on that
occasion, or on a later occasion, that he was angry at the inteiwention
of Mr. Hoffa, and that you had gone over his head ?
Mr. Balkwill. Not at that time he didn't ; no.
Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, subsequently, since that time.
Mr. Kennedy. He obviously did not do it while Mr. Hoffa was
present.
Mr. Balkwill. No.
Mr. Kennedy. But at a subsequent date he did make those state-
ments to you ; did he not ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And following Mr. Hoffa's appearance at the De-
troit Leland Hotel, the contract, the major matters in the contract,
were signed ; is that right ?
They were agreed to?
Mr. Balkwill. I am sorry, I didn't get the question.
Mr. Kennedy. After Mr. Hoffa's appearance at the Detroit Leland
Hotel, the major matters in the contract were agreed to between the
Detroit Institute of Laundry and local 285 ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; that is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And it is your belief, is it not, that it was the inter-
vention of Mr. Hoffa that brought about a settlement?
Mr. Balkwili.. We felt it was ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also believe, in discussions that you had,
that the payment that you had been making to Mr. Holtzman, at least
a part of that went to Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, we wouldn't have any right to say that it did.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you believe that?
Mr. Balkwill. We would assume maybe it did. We had not any
conversation to say that.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, Mr. Hoffa most probably would not take the
payment directly from you in a situation such as this?
Mr. Balkwill. I am sure he would not.
13328 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. It would be going through a third party.
Where did you believe the money was going 'i
Mr. Balkwill. Well, we knew it went to Mr. Holtzman.
Mr. Kennedy. And you believed from there it went on to a third
party ?
Mr. Balkwill. How many assistants he had, we did not know. He
led us to believe, just by inference, because he did not mention any
names, except to say that he had been instrumental in settling some
waitress' contract, and he understood the problem so well. Pie didn't,
as I say, mention any names, but he inferred there were a bunch of
people to be paid with that money. So in the light of that, it was
not so much.
Mr. Kennedy. And he told you specifically he had to take care of
somebody ?
Mr. Balkwill. Some people, yes.
The Chairman. In otlier words, there was never any doubt in your
mind at all except that this was a payoff?
Mr. Balkwill. No.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Balkwill, you got generally what you paid for,
did you not? The contract was signed generally on the terms that
you had reached at that time ?
Mr. Balkwill. Generally speaking, yes.
The Chairman. Senator Ives.
Senator I\^s. I would like to ask the witness if he realizes that,
under the Taft-Hartley Act, that is a direct violation ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I know much better now than I did then.
Senator Ives. You know it is now ?
Mr. Balkwill. I have been told that.
Senator I\tes. Well, it is a pretty serious offense. It violates sec-
tion 302 of the Taft-Hartley Act, if you are operating under that act.
It is a criminal offense under it. I simply wanted to point out the
seriousness of all this.
Mr. Kennedy. I have some other checks that I would like to ask
you about.
Senator Curtis. Have you completed this transaction ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
The Chairman. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. You never believed that the money you were
giving to Mr. Holtzman was going to Mr. Litwak, did you? For
payment ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, no, I would not.
Senator Ivennedy. You never assumed that from any conversations
or any of the negotiating procedure which you had with Mr. Litwak ?
You never assumed that he was looking for a payoff, did you ?
Mr. Balkwill. No.
Senator Kennedy. There was no evidence of that ?
]Mr. Balkwill. No .
Senator Kennedy. You are stating very clearly in your mind what
was the opinion of you and your associates, that whatever INIr. Holtz-
man was going to do with the money, he was not going to give it to
Mr. Litwak, is that what you are telling us ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13329
Mr. Kennedy. Just on that point, Mr. Litwak actually would not
Gven take a cigar, as I understand it. Isn't that generally his repu-
tation ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is true.
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Balkwill, how was this $17,500 raised ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, it was figured out how many trucks was in-
volved, and it was divided up, so much per truck.
Senator Curtis. Your members were assessed for that, according
to the number of trucks they drove ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, those that had trucks. They didn't all have
trucks. That is why it was a separate fund. It was not handled
through the institute, you see, because they did not all participate.
Senator Curtis. Those that had trucks, did it run about $90 a truck ?
Mr. Balkwill. I believe that would be about the sum.
Senator Curtis. And they paid it in three payments ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Now, is this incident involving the $17,500 the same
incident that the witness this morning, Mr. Miller, testified about?
Mr, Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. You were present when he testified ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. How long had this strike gone along before you
abandoned your efforts to try to get a settlement ?
Mr. Balkwill. It was not a strike as yet, sir.
Senator Curtis. Or the negotiations, I meant.
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, the negotiations. Possibly it was a couple of
months.
Senator Curtis. Then at that point, some of your members came
forth with the suggestion that they ought to take it up with somebody
else ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is right.
Senator Curtis. Now, in this discussion that they ought to take it
up with someone else, was any higher up in particular mentioned ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; I would say there was. We only know who in
Detroit is higher up, Mr. Hoffa, and Mr. Brennan. We know they
have associates, but we look to them as the head of the joint council,
Mr. Litwak's superior.
Senator Curtis. But instead of getting in touch with any direct
officers of the Teamsters Union, you got in touch with Mr. Dalitz ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes; it was one of those things that came up, and
we didn't know Mr. Hoffa that well, to go and discuss the matter with
him, and we thought Mr. Holtzman did possibly.
Senator Curtis. Was Holtzman the man you were seeking out to
contact or did that suggestion come from Mr. Dalitz ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I say the suggestion. Our introduction was
by Mr. Dalitz. I didn't have any conversations with him, only that
I met him at the Chop House. They were there at lunch and so when
we came in, we sat down, or we went in there and he introduced us
and he left.
Senator CuRns. Has Mr. Dalitz been interested in the laundry
business, too ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
13330 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. Was he at that time ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; not active in Detroit, though.
Senator Curtis. Was this arrangement to pay $17,500 arrived at
before or after your first conference with Hoff a ?
Mr. Balkwill. It was before.
Senator Curtis. How long before ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I don't just recall.
Senator Curtis A week or two, would you say ?
Mr. Balkwill. It would be a week or two possibly.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
The Chairman. All right, Mr. Counsel.
Mr. Kennedy. Just in summary on this particular thing, sum-
marizing your testimony, you had trouble with the union, that is
No.l?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And Litwak would not sign the contract, that is
No.2?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And it was then suggested that you take it up with
a higher union official ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Which would be either Mr. Hoffa or Mr. Brennan?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You saw Mr. Holtzman, and arrangements were
made to pay him in cash ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And that he then said that lie could arrange the
contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. He thought he could.
Mr. Kennedy. That shortly after these arrangements were made,
Mr. Hoffa intervened in the contract, in the negotiations for the
contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. The contract was signed on the terms generally that
were agreed, and Mr. Litwak, the local union official, was angry about
the situation ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he didn't express too much anger in the con-
clusion.
Mr. Kennedy. That is generally correct, that he was angry with
the situation as it had developed ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; I think so.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, I want to ask you about these other checks.
The Chairman. Wlien you in the course of these negotiations and
conferences with your associates referred to "higher ups," whom did
you mean ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, it depended on which union was involved.
The Chairman. Well, I am talking about the Teamsters Union.
Mr. Balkwill. Well, the Teamsters, I had said Mr. Hoffa and Mr.
Brennan.
The Chairman. Wlien they referred to higher ups, whom did you
understand them to mean ?
Mr. Balkwill. They mean Mr. Hoffa.
The Chairman. I mean your associates.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13331
Mr. Balkwill. They mean the same people ; yes.
The Chairman. There wasn't any misunderstanding, was there?
Mr. Balkwill. No ; I don't think so.
The Chairman. Well, I hand you here three checks.
Senator Curtis. I have one more question before you go into this
other transaction. Did Mr. Holtzman at any time either name or
indicate in any way who was to get the $17,500 ?
Mr. Balkwill. No.
Senator Curtis. Did you have any knowledge as to who was to
get it ?
Mr, Balkwill. No, not beyond Mr. Holtzman.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
Mr. Kennedy. Just so we get the record clear, you understood, did
you not, in your discussions with one another, that the money was to
go to Mr. Hoff a, or at least part of it ?
Mr. Balkwill. We only assumed that.
Mr. Kennedy, You understood from the conversations that you
had had originally, and what you wanted to accomplish, and the con-
versations that you had with Mr. Holtzman, that part of the money
was to go to Mr. Hoff a ?
Mr. Balkwill. The conversations with Mr. Holtzman didn't in-
fluence that. He didn't mention it.
Mr, Kennedy. He said he wanted the money in cash ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Mr. KJENNEDY. And he said he could get the terms of the contract
and he would see somebody ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is true.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Well, from the conversations that you had with him
and the facts that were developed, you understood that the money,
at least in part, was to go to Mr. Hoffa, isn't that right ?
Mr. Balkwill. Or someone higher up.
Mr. Kennedy. It is Mv. Hoffa or Mr. Brennan, and you under-
stood that it was to go to Mr. Hoffa, did you not ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I only had my own imagination to use.
Mr. Kennedy, Based on the facts, and based on working with it at
that time, you understood that the money was to go to Mr. Hoffa, did
you not ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is what I understood, and I didn't talk ta
anybody about it, and I might have thought so. But there was no
imderstanding with anybody.
Mr. Kennedy. You believed that it was to go to Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I wouldn't make that statement either.
The Chairman. You had no curiosity about it?
Mr. Balkwell. Well, yes ; I did.
The Chairman. And you kind of satisfied your curiosity in your
thinking a little, didn't you ?
Mr, Balkwill. It was not much satisfaction.
The Chairman. There wasn't much satisfaction?
Mr. Balkwill. No.
The Chairman. Because he felt that you were simply being ex-
ploited and that this was actually extortion money ?
Mr. Balkwell. Yes ; that is right.
The Chairman. That is tlie way you felt about it?
Mr. Balkwill. That is rig-ht.
13332 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. And you know who the higher up was, don't you ?
Mr. Balkwill.. Yes.
The Chairman. And you know the manipulations that went on
that caused that higher up to walk in and settle that contract, don't
you?
Mr. Balkwill. I don't know it.
The Chairman. You were there ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, not when that was done.
The Chairman. You were not there at the negotiations ?
Mr. Balkwill. At the negotiations?
The Chairman. The last negotiation meeting when the contract was
agreed upon.
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Who came in there and influenced the decision to
make that contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, Mr. Hoffa.
The Chairman. All right.
Now I present to you 3 checks, photostatic copies, and 1 dated
September 30, 1948, in the amount of $1,000, drawn on the Detroit
Institute of Laundering, and made payable to cash, and apparently
it bears your signature as president of the Detroit Institute of Laun-
dering. I wish you would examine that check. And then I present
to you another check drawn in like manner, payable to cash, on April
17, 1950, in the amount of $2,000, and bearing your signature as presi-
dent of the Detroit Institute of Laundering. And then I present
you a third clieck in the amount of $1,000, dated April 24, 1949, made
payable to W. H. Balkwill in the amount of $1,000, and drawn on
the Detroit Institute of Laundering, and signed by W. H. Balkwill
as president of that institute.
Will 3'ou please examine the three clicks that I have referred to
and state if you can identify them.
(The checks were handed to the witness.)
The Chairman. You do identify each of the checks that I have
presented to you?
]Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Are the checks drawn by you on the account of the
Detroit Institute of Laundering?
Mr. Balkwill. They are, sir.
The Chairman. Let the cliecks be made exhibits 2-A, B, and C, in
order in which I presented them.
(Documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 2-A, B, and C,"
for identification and will be found in the appendix on pp. 13708-
13710.)
The Chairman. Now, then proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. As I understand it, you were not told by Mr.
Holtzman what union official he would intervene with; is that correct?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. But you understood that he would intervene with
a higlier union official, who was higher than JNIr. Litwak, is that
correct ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. Now, Mr. Litwak's title at that time was presi-
dent of the local ?
Mr. Balkwill. He was president and business manager.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13333
Senator Kexnedy. Now, who besides Mr. Hotta and Mr. Brenan
Jiad authority over these negotiations, with higher union officials than
Mr. Litwak ? Was there anyone ?
Mr. Balkwill. I wouldn't know.
Senator Kennedy. Is the reason that you have presumed, and we
don't w'ant to be inaccurate here, but the reason all along, or the only
reason that you have presumed that Mr. Holtzman may have given the
money to Mr. Hoffa is because. No. 1, he is a higher union official than
Mr. Litwak, and No. 2, he did intervene in the case and Mr. Brenan did
not. Is that the reason for your opinion or do you have other informa-
tion ?
Mr. Balkw^ill. I previously stated Mr. Brenan w^as present at one
of the meetings.
Senator Kennedy. You think the money could have gone to either
Mr. Brenan or ]Mr. Ilotl'a ?
Mr. Balkwill. It could have.
Senator Kennedy. Who else could it have gone to or did it go to
neither one ?
Mr. Balkw^ill. Well, I don't know^ the setup over there. There
are quite a number of union officials, and I don't know how many might
be higher than Mr. Litwak. He is j ust one local.
Senator Kennedy. What is the reason tluit you presume that it
might have gone to Mr. Hotfa ?
Mr. Balkw^ill. Well
Senator Kennedy. Because he intervened in the case, and you say
Mr. Brenan did too ?
Mr. Balkw^ill. I didn't say that I presumed it went to jNIr. Hoffa ;
I am sorry. I said I thought it was possible.
Senator Kennedy. Are you of the opinion that Mr. Holtzman made
some arrangement with somebody in a higher position than Mr. Lit-
wak '? Is that what you are saying ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes; I didn't get along so good myself, and so he
did better than I could in getting the settlement.
Senator Kennedy. Who did better than you did ?
Mr. Balkwill. Mr. Holtzman, and so I assume that he did have
somebody's ear more than I did.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, it wasn't Mr. Litwak's ear in
your opinion, from your experience with Mv. Litwak, and so it is higher
than Mr. Litwak, and you don't know who that might be ?
Mv. Balkwill. Not for sure.
Senator Kennedy. But the only two union officials that you know-
that intervened with either Mr. Brenan and/or Mr. Hoffa, is that
correct ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, that is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa was close to Mr. Holtzman, was he not ?
You understood that?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, I understood that.
Senator Kennedy. Was Mr. Brenan close to Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. Balkw'ill. Well, I have seen them quite often, all 3 or 5 union
officials, and sometimes Mr. Holtzman at lunch, in the past, since
then, and before.
21243—58 — pt. 30 5
13334 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR P'lELD
The Chairman. We have presented these checks and they have been
identified. Are there any questions about them? Can you give us
some explanation of the checks?
You wrote 1 check for $2,000 to cash, and another 1 for $1,000 to
cash, and those checks written to cash appear to have your endorse-
ment on the back.
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, it appears that I cash them, sir.
The Chairman. You identify your signature ?
Mr. Balkwell. Yes, it is my signature.
The Chairman. You cashed those two checks for cash '.
Mr. Balkwill. Three of them, sir.
The Chairman. You also cashed one that vou made out to your-
self?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, yes, that was probably made direct to me.
I don't believe that is my writing, is it'?
The Chairman. Well, you signed the check made out to yourself.
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, possibly if I had made it out, I would have
made it out to cash, and the other part I made it out.
The (^HAiRMAX. You have 8 checks involving $4,000, and tell us
what this is all about ?
Mr. Balkwill. Sir, could you tell me if the dates are all the same \
The Chairman. No, I gave you the dates, and the earliest one i>
September 80, 1948, $1,000. The next one is April 24, 1949, $1,000,
and the third one is April 17, 1950, $2,000.
Mr. ]1\LKWH.L. Those were in the same category, but to a ditfei'enl
party.
The Chairman. In the same category, but to difl'ereut parties?
Mr. Balkwill. It was a ])ayoti' the same as the other. I mean to
influence a contract, but a different union.
The Chairman. A different union ?
Mr. llvLKwiLL. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What other miion now is that ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is the inside workers aixl it lias I>een men-
tioned here previously.
The C^hair:max. The inside workers union ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, the AFL.
The Chairman. You cashed these checks?
Mr. Balkwill. And I gave them the money.
The Chairman. Gave who the money ?
Mr. Balkwill. It was a man by the name of John Paris.
The Chairman. A^^io?
Mr. Balkwill. Paris, P-a-r-i-s.
The Chairman. "\A^iat position did he hold ?
Mr. Balkwill. He was, I believe, executive business agent of the
International Laundry Workers Local 129. That was the inside
AYorkers.
The Chairman. You had to sweeten him up, too ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How much did you pay him altogether ?
Mr. Balkv/ill. Well, those dates, I believe, represents all of 1
year, or ])0ssibly part of 2 years.
Mr. Kennedy. I would like to call Jilr. Bellino. if I may, at rliis
time, and he can put the rest of the checks in.
IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13335
The Chairman. At the time that you were carrying on this nego-
tiation with the Teamsters, you also carried on the negotiation with
the laundry workers ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes. It was at different times.
The Chairmax. I know at different times, but all along about the
same time ?
Mr. Balkwill. It was in operation.
(At this point the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Church, Keiinedy, and Curtis.)
The Chairmax. So you had to make a payoff' to the Teamsters to
get a contract, and you also had to make a payoff' to the laundry
workers* representative to get a contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, let's say it was necessary to employ counsel
on the Teamsters.
The Chairmax. This guy you paid this to was not counsel, he was
representing the other side.
Mr. Balkwill. Xo, but you involve the other item in your ques-
tion.
The Chairmax. In the other case, you say you employed counsel?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
The Chairmax. In this case, you say j^ou paid it directly ?
Mr. Balkwill. Tliat is right.
The Chairmax. And you say they come in tlie same category?
Tliat is wliat you said 'i
Mr. Balkwill. You are possibly right.
The Chairmax. 1 am not possibly. Isn't it exactly what you said?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, I did.
Senator CrRTis. Where is Mr. Paris now?
Mr. Balkwill. He is dead.
Senator Curtis. What was his official position ?
Mr. Balkwill. 'Well, he was business manager. I am not sure
lie was president at that time.
Senator Curtis. Did he represent your workers ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Curtis. He already liad them organized ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Cl'rtis. This was during the process of negotiating with
tliem?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Curtis. He was a local official?
Mr. Balkwill. He was a local official. He was the head of this
local, and that arrangement was made direct with him. It was a
consideration that was necessary for us to get f^nj settlement on the
contract at that time. It run over more than 1 year. It was more
tlian one contract, I believe. It was a situation that we were in-
voh-ed in there that I just did not know aiw other way to do it,
because lie insisted on doing it that way.
I don't know what he got for it, if anything, but he insisted tliat
it was well worth it. And he could not operate without it.
That is actually what happened.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kexxedt. Mr. Chairman?
13336 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chaikman. Mr. Bellino, be sworn. You solemnly swear that
the evidence you shall give before this Senate select committee shall
be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Mr. Belling. I do.
TESTIMONY OF CARMINE S. BELLINO
The Chairman. Mr. Bellino, state your name, your place of resi-
dence, and your business or occuj)ation.
Mr. Belling. My name is Carmine S. Bellino. I reside in Be-
thescla, Md. My occupation is certified public accountant.
The Chairman. How long have you been a certified public ac-
countant ?
Mr. Belling. Since 1932.
The Chairman. How long have you been employed by the com-
mittees of Congress in that cai)acity ?
Mr. Belling. Since 1947.
The Chairman. And you have been working for this committee
since it was established ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Mr. Bellino, liave you made a study of the Detroit
Institute of Laundry books and records?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Their financial records ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Are there certain checks that we found which were
of questionable nature?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. IvENNEDY. That is over a period of what time ?
Mr. Belling. From 1948 through 1951.
Mr. Kennedy. And what is the total amount involved ?
Mr. Belling. $16,000.
Mr. Kennedy. For that i-year period, is that right ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
IMr. Kennedy. Could you tell us about the checks we are interested
in?
The Chairman. Does that include the checks here for $4,000 that
the witness has identified ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. That includes the $4,000, and then we had a wit-
ness identify a $1,000 check also this afternoon.
Mr. Belling. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. That includes $5,000. It was $16,000 altogether?
Mr. Belling. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that total amount of money paid to Mv. Paris?
jMr. Balkwill. Yes ; if tlie the checks are that amount.
Mr. Kennedy. "Would you tell us about the checks and how they are
marked on tlie books and records ?
Mv. Belling. The first check was dated June 2, 1948, payable to
John C. Meissner, in the amount of $1,500. It was shown to reimburse
for check from him, indicating that Meissner may liave used his own
check and this was reimbursement to him.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13337
The Chairman. It shows reimbursement or what?
Mr. Belling. In this case on the check stnb book, it merely says to
reimburse for check from him, account 21. Account 21 is legal
ex])enses. It is charged to legal expenses.
The Chairman. So if that money went to Paris, it was charged as
legal expenses ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Belling. The next check is No. 1159, dated June IT, 1948; that
is payable to cash. It was cashed by John Meissner on June IT, 1948.
The records show for extra legal expenses.
The Chairman. Extra legal expenses i
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir. The next one is dated September 30, 1948,
check No. 1203, payable to cash, in the amount of $1,000, and en-
dorsed by Mr. Balkwill. That is shown for labor counsel expenses.
The Chairman. What kind ?
Mr. Belling. Labor counsel expense.
The CiiAiRMA.N O. K.
Mr. Belling. That was $4,000 in 1948. In 1949, on April 24, 1949,
a check to W. H. Balkwdll in the amount of $1,000, cashed by him.
That is shown as special expenses for drivers contract.
The Chairman. That was a little more accurate.
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir. The next one was check No. 1351, dated
May 2, 1949, payable to Samuel P. Baker, in the amount of $1,000.
That was shown as expenses negotiating committee. The next one,
check No. 1352, dated May 2, 1949, payable to Conrad S. Lantz, $1,000.
It is shown as reimbursed expenses in negotiating union contracts.
May 2, 1949, check No. 1353, to John C. Meissner, in the amount of
$1,000. That is shown as leimbursed expenses negotiating union con-
tracts. That makes another total of $4,000 in 1949.
In 1950, on April IT, 1950, is a check payable to cash in the amount
of $2,000, endorsed by Mr. Balkwill. That is shown as legal. The
next one is May 18, 1950, check No. 1549, payable to cash, $1,000,
endorsed by J. W. Meissner.
That is shown for legal expenses.
The next one is check No. 1563, dated June 16, 1950, payable to cash,
$1,000, endorsed by John C. Meissner, That is shown as legal expenses.
December 19, 1950, check No. 1645, John C. Meissner, $2,000, en-
dorsed by Meissner, shown in the books as legal expenses.
In addition, there are 4 checks issued in 1951, which were charged
to travel and entertainment. Check No. ITOO, dated April 2T, 1951,
payable to S. P. Baker, $380.50, endorsed by Baker and cashed.
Check No. ITOl, of the same date, to C. S. Lantz, $560.25, endorsed
by Lantz. Check No. 1T02, dated April 2T, 1951, W. H. Balkwill,
$805.T5, endorsed by Balkw^ill; and check No. 1T03, dated April 2T,
1951, to John C. Meissner, $253.50, endorsed by Meissner. The total
of those 4 checks is $2,000.
Senator Curtis. What was that money used for ?
Mr. Belling. According to the testimony it was used to pay off
John Paris, the business agent of the inside workers laundry union.
Senator Curtis. How much of it ?
Mr. Belling. All of it, according to Mr. Balkwill,
Senator Curtis. All $16,000?
13338 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman, Let nie at this luoment make all those checks to
which this witness has testified exhibit No. 3 A, B, C, D, and such
further letters as you need.
(The document's referred to were marked "Exhibits 3 A through O"
for reference and may be fomid in the tiles of the select committee.)
The CiiAmMAx. Let the ])hotostatic copies of the check stubs and
ledo:er be attached and further lettered accordingly.
(The docnnients referred to were marked "Exhibits 3P through
DD'' for reference and may be found in the tiles of the select com-
mittee.)
TESTIMONY OF HOWARD BALKWILI^— Resumed
The Chairman. Senator (\n'tis.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Balkwill, do you know of any payoffs to any-
bod}' where the recii)ient is still alive ^
Mr. Balkwill. Xo, 1 don't, Senator.
Senator Curtis. Either in your business or any otliei- '.
Mr. Balkwill. No, I don't know.
Senator Church. Mr. Chairman i*
The^CHAiRMAN. Senator Church.
Senator Church. Mr. IValkwill, at this time, this period under in-
quiry, you were president of the Detroit Institute of Lanndry; were
you not?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, Senator.
Senator Chitrch. Could you tell me something about the Detroit
Institute of Laundry ? Does it comprise all the operating laundries or
nearly all the operating laundries in the Detroit area?
Mr. Balkwill. The majority, the larger laundries.
Senator Church. The larger portion of the laundries?
]\Ir. Balkwill. Yes, the larger laundries. There are a lot of small
laundries.
Sen.ator Church. Would it be a fair statement to say that your
membership comprises the bulk of the laundry business, volumewise,
in Detroit?
JMr. Balkwill. It did at that time.
Senator Church, These negotiations that you were condncting
with the — well, let's refer to the negotiations with the Teamsters
Union — tliese negotiations had to do with a contract tliat would affect
all of your members?
Mr, Balkwill. The one with the Teamsters Union only affected
those that had drivers.
Senator Church. Those that had drivers?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Senator Church. But all of those that had drivers would have
been affected by these negotiations?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, that is right.
Senator Church. In other words, in this sense it was industrywide,
the negotiations ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; that is right.
Senator Church. You referred to the payments that were made in
this connection to Mr. Holtzman as a payoff. From the testimony
that has come into the committee thus far, I would regard that as
seemingly an accurate description of what was in fact involved.
IMPROPER ACTRITIt.S IX THV. LAEOR FIELD 13339
This committee has as its objective the investigation of improper
practices in tlie hibor-manaoement fiekh Very rarely have I found
that all the angels are ever in one camp. A payoff is a practice that
enables you to secure an objective by sweetening the pot, so to speak,
with certain people with whoni you can deal to secure that objective.
Now, didn't you and the other members of the institute regard that
payoff that you made as a ver\' improper practice, so far as manage-
ment was concerned ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes ; we felt that way about it.
Senator Church. Yet you testified that it was not as the result of
any direct contact on the part of the Teamster leadership in the first
instance, but it was, rather, as the result of certain suggestions that
were made among your own membership, that the initiative was taken
to contact Mr. Holt /man in order that this payoff could be arranged.
You were the ones that motivated this from the time that you
decided to get hold of Mr. Holtzman to see if you could go upstairs and
get the thing settled.
Mr. Balkwill. Well, as I say, it was self-defense.
Senator Churcfi. Self-defense?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes; that is right.
Senator Ciiurcii. You had a contract and you could not come to
terms with Mi". Litwak, and he was negotiating on behalf of the truck-
drivers he represented.
You weren't able to come to terms. In other words, your offer was
unacceptable to him, and his demands were unacceptable to you; is
that correct ?
Mr. Balkwill. That is right.
Senator Church. So in order to make a contract acceptable to you,
it was suggested among your membership that perhaps you could
arrange a payoff through Mr. Holtzman with those higher up in the
union.
This seems to me to be a very improper practice. You say it was
a matter of self-defense. "Why?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, it was a matter of doing it one of two ways,
probably, and the question was which might be successful.
Now, other parties had taken the method of employing ex])ensive
counsel, lawyers with political influence, new people in Washington.
These are facts. You know them. And we knew that cost a lot of
money, more than involved in this case.
So Ave discussed those angles. We did not have that much money.
We ended up paying more money than we ever thought we would.
However, it was spread over the contract, the 3 years. After we had
gotten started, we got carried along with it.
We didn't feel we had any choice because the demands were so
heavy. So we went along with the deal. As has been mentioned here
before, I am sure some of our members would never have listened to
the idea had they known what they were going to get into.
After we had got started with it and committed ourselves to ])ay
the man, we could not back out very well without Avelching on a deal
Ave had made with him. He Avas to handle the deal.
Plow he did it we did not know, hoAv he was going to do it, any
more than if we had employed counsel. There Avas no laAV AA^e knew
13340 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
tliat we could employ to compel the man, Mr. Litwak, to accept a-
reasonable ot^'er which we had offered him.
Senator Church. Ordinarily, when management and labor try to
come to terms over a bar<iainin_<>- table, they negotiate back and forth
and they finally reach common oround.
Always yoii feel that your last offer is reasonable and their demands
are unreasonable.
But in this case you paid $17,500 in what you have described as a
payoff to get yourself a contract that strongly conformed, basically
conformed witli, the last offer that management made; is that not
correct ?
Mr. Balkw^ll. Well, there was one big item involved. We avoided
accepting that at that time. Now, if you are familiar with what that
was, you would know that we got off cheaply.
Senator Ciiurcit. You got off cheap ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Church. In other words, the $17,500 was cheap enough
a price to pay as compared to what Mr. Litwak was asking for the
people, the t]-uckers, that he represented ?
(At this ])oint. Senator ^fcClellan withdrew from the hearing
room.)
Mr. Balkwill. Yes; his demand was not good for iis or his people
either.
It has ruined the industry. It has been forced on us since then.
We did not pay any further than that. It has since been forced on us,
after that contract expired, and it has put half of the laundries out of
business, and the others are dying on their feet. You can understand
why we did fight that; that we went to that extent to avoid accepting
it at that time.
We did avoid half of it for, I believe it was, 18 months. This con-
tract was for 5 years, I believe. In the middle of the contract, we
had agreed in there to consider the issue again; we were forced to
accept a portion of the demand. The other was delayed until the
end of the contract. Then it was opened. They could strike ajrain.
We didn't choose to do this all over again, so we had to take it. I was
going to say live with it, but we could not do that. Many of our
launclries have passed out. That is just the essence of it and the truth.
If we did wrong — I don't think that is any question about it. We
are over 21 and we know — I am sure we could not have gotten permis-
sion from any court to do it.
That is why it had to be cash.
Senator IvENXEDY. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Ives. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kenxedt. In answer to Senator Church, you stated that it
was your initative which secured the services of Mr. Holtzman. Why
did you go to Mr. Holtzman instead of someone else to make this
payoff?
What was it about Mr. Holtzman that made him particularly quali-
fied to handle this arangement?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he was known to have handled some other
cases labor cases like that; not in our industry, but he was quite well
known in some circles in Detroit. I didn't know him, but he had been
in the dry-cleaning field. He was in that business himself.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13341
Senator Kenxp^dy. He had done what in the fields Writmg in
the field?
Mr. Balkwill. He had done some work liiniself simihir to this.
Senator Kennedy. Do you mean some payoli' work before 't
Mr. Balkwill. I woukhi't say ''payoff." Negotiations. How suc-
cessful they were, I don't know. J3ut these were common conversa-
tions. I could not say who said
Senator Kennedy. It takes a little more than going to someone you
regard as an expert in the field and asking him to be the intermediary
in the payoff to the union leaders. What was there about Holtzman?
Mr. BxVLKwiLL. Vre did not ask him to do that.
Sejiator Kennedy. Was it the fact that he was friendly with the
top leadership of the union ?
Is that the reason ?
Mr. Balkwill. Most successful men in that field are.
Senator Kennedy. Are what?
Mr. Balkwill. Are on friendly terms with the officials of the union.
I try to liold that position myself. I haven't been too successful.
Senator Kennedy. You can't be any more precise as to why Mr.
Ploltzman was tlie man that you would go to on what is an outrageous
offer ?
Mr. BxVLKAViLL. I didn't know much more about it myself. I was
just told. I did not know Mr. Holtzman to speak to him even.
Senator Kennedy. Was it because you were looking for someone
who was friendly with the top officials of the Teamsters i
Mr. Balkwile. We were looking for someone tliat could do the job.
We didn't think anyone else could.
Senator Kennedy. There is no sense beating around the bush.
What was the reason you tliought Mr. Holtzman could do the job?
Mr. Balkwill. I did not say ; I just thought so. We thought so.
Senator Kennedy. Whoever thought so among your group.
Mr. Balkwill. I believe that w;is the motivating idea ; yes.
Senator Kennedy. That you thougiit Mr. Holtzman was on terms
wdth the leadership of the Teamsters wliicli would make such an offer
through him acceptable to that leadership ; is that correct?
Mr. Balkwill. He would be able to convince them in some manner.
Senator Kennedy. You knew the manner he was going to convince
them in was to be through this money. Did you understand in obtain-
ing the services of Mr. Holtzman, that Mr. Holtzman was on terms of
such intimacy w^ith the leaders of the union that he would be the inter-
mediary for such an offer to secure for you the prevention of having to
place in your laundries the 5-day week instead of the 6-day week ?
You felt Mr. Holtzman was the best intermediary to pay off the lead-
ership of the teamsters so that you would not have to put in a 5-day
week in your laundry.
Is that correct or not correct ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, after discussing it with Mr. Holtzman, he
convinced us that he could handle it if it could be done.
Senator Kennedy. How did he convince you ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well — —
Senator Kennedy. Did lie inform you that he was on a condition of
intimacy with the leadership of tlie teamsters so that this arrangement
could be worked out ?
13342 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
( Senator McClellrtii, at this point, entered the hearinir room.)
Mr. Balkwill. I don't know that he told us that.
Senator Kexnedy. You knew it, didn't you ?
Mr. Balkwill. We somehow knew it ; yes.
Senator Kennedy. How could yon give $17,000 to just somebody
that comes along? You have to have some assurances that they will
deliver when you give him cash.
Mr. Balkwill. He was a neigliborho<^)(l boy, in business there in
Grand Iviver. He was not going to run awa}'. He agreed to get this,^
or we did not pay him the rest of it.
Senator Kennedy. You went on for 3 years.
During that 3-year period when you had gotten tiie deal you wanted
with this money, who tlid you think was getting this money?
Mr. Balkwill. 1 tried not to think about it, sir. It v as very painful.
Senator Kennedy. I know you tried not to, but every now and then
you did. Who did you think was getting it ?
Mr. Balkwili.. Well, somebody
Senator Kennedy. I am just asking you who you thought was get-
ting it.
Mr. Balkwill. Well, somebody who had intluence with Mr. Litwak.
Senator Kennedy. Who was above Mr. Litwak i
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. But you never knew more precisely than that?
Mr. Balkwill. No.
Senator Kennedy. Previous to this you thought it was Mr. ?Iotfa ?
Mr. Balkwill. Who did I tell that f
Senator Kennedy. I thought you told the connuittee.
Mr. Balkwill. Well, they wrote it down for me, and I agreed to
Senator Kennedy. I am asking you questions that afternoon. I
am trying to get at it. Who did you think i That is all.
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I say, that is as far as I could go with it.
There was somebody higher up than Mr. Litwak.
Mr. Kennedy. You discussed with your fellow people that it went
to Mr. Holf a, did you not ?
Mr. Balkwill. We discussed who it went to.
Mr. Kennedy. And reached tlie conclusion that it went to Mr.
Hoffa?
Mr. Balkwill. We arrived at the conclusion that it went to some
people, or some of that did.
Mr. Kennedy. To Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. Balkwill. We don't think that they got all of it anyway. We
think that Joe — and we thought sometimes we might have been saps,
that he might have kept most of it; but we don't knoAv. I don't
hardly think he did.
Senator Ives. Counsel, is this witness' testimony now varying from
what he told you personally 5 hours or 6 hours ago ?
Mr. Kennedy. Generally, in the last couple of days. When I first
talked to him a week ago in Detroit, it is quite different.
Is that right?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I refused to give you these statements at that
time. You told me I had to come down here, so I hated to talk about
it.
Mr. Kennedy. In fact, you told an entirely different story.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13343
Mr. Balkwill. No, I did not, I am sorry.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Ives. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Where is Litwak now ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he is in Detroit, I think, if he is not here. I
don't know whether he is.
Senator Curtis. I am looking for a live witness who knows some-
thing about this.
Is he still with the Teamsters ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Did he know anything about this $17,500 deal ?
Mr. Balkwill. He has not told me.
Senator Curtis. I did not ask you that.
Did he know anything about it?
Mr. Balkwill. I don't know. If he did, I think he would tell the
world.
Senator Curtis. Was it a pretty closely guarded secret ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, apparently not too closely.
Senator Curtis. Some of your members had to make financial ar-
rangements to raise their money, didn't they ?
Mr. Balkwill. Each one had his own problem ; yes.
Senator Curtis. The}' knew about it.
Some of their bankers knew about it.
Mr. Balkwill. I don't know.
Senator Curtis. Some of their secretaries. Probably some of their
families. This was not any real secret, was it ?
Mr. Balkwill. It should have been. It wasn't guarded too closely,
I don't believe. But in fairness to the man we were dealing with, it
was necessary that we not tell the public about it.
Senator Curtis. What was Litwak's position at that time ?
Mr. Balkwill. Very impossible.
Senator Curtis. No. Was he president of a union ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Is he still president of the union ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Curtis. And he is still living under that contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, not that same one.
Senator Curtis. But he did live under that contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. I just negotiated one with him the other day. But
that one run out long ago, but we have continued a contract with him
since then.
Senator Curtis. Was he present when the final negotiations were
made ?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, he always was, so he was then. He has been
for about 20 years.
Senator Curtis. Did he sign the contract ?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Did he take it to his membership ?
Mr. Balkwill. He said he did.
Senator Curtis. He said he did?
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Did they vote on it ?
Mr. Balkwill. He said they did.
13344 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. I would like to find out.
Mr. Balkwill. Well, I was not there.
Senator Curtis. I know you were not there.
Mr. Balkwill. I hear stories about it, how they voted on it, but
then that isn't my business. I don't know. He said that they voted
on it. Pie said he had to take it to tliem before he could accept it.
There was a meeting, and they O. K.'d it. Usually, I perhaps could
say they always do. If Mr. Litwak O. K.'s it, he takes it to his mem-
bers and they O. K. it.
Senator Curtis. Was any of tlie $17,500 used to get it O. K.'d?
Mr. Balkwill. Well, sir, I don't tliink so.
Senator Curtis. It seems to me Mr. Litwak is our most important
witness. If he was running the union and still is, signing the con-
tracts and taking it to his membership and getting it voted upon.
Mr. Blackwill. That particular local, he was running that; yes.
Senator Curtis. That was tlie h)cal vou were dealin<>- with, wasn't
it? . .
Mr. Balkwill. Yes.
Senator Curtis. And that was the only local?
Mr. Blackwill. Of the Teamsters; yes.
Senator Curtis. Yes.
That is all, Mr. Chairman,
The Chairman. Is there anything further?
If not, thank you very much. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. John Charles Meissner.
The Chairman. Be sworn, please, sir. You do solemnly swear the
evidence you shall give before this Senate select committee shall be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Mr. ]\Ieissner. Yes, sir.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN C. MEISSNEK
The Chairman. State your name, your phice of residence, and
your business or occupation.
Mr. Meissner. Jolm C. JMeissner, 14260 Longacre Eoad, Detroit,
Mich.
I am a CPA, and at tluit time was executive secretary of the
Laundry Institute.
The Chairman. Do you waive counsel, Mr. Meissner ?
Mr. Meissner. I do.'
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. In 1949 you were having difficulties getting a con-
tract signed with Mr. Litwak of local 285; is that right?
Mr. Meissner. Right.
Mr. Kennedy. It was discussed at that time that you should go to
a higher union official to see if you could not get some arrangements
made; is that right?
Mr. Meissner. That is right. Excuse me a moment. You said
some higher officials ?
Mr. Kennedy. It was discussed that you should approach a higher
union official ?
Mr. jVIeissner. Someone that could handle the situation ; ves.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13345
Mr. Kexxedy. Somebody that could handle the situation i
Mr. MEishsNEE. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you referred to anyone in particular, Mr.
^leissner ?
Mr. Meissnek. AVell, as has been testified liere, the suggestion from
Moe Dalitz tliat we a[)proacli Joe Holtzman, wliicli was followed.
Mr. Kennedy. Then you had some discussions witli Mr. Holtzman,
and Mr. Holtzman said that lie thought he could do something for
yovi if you paid him $25,000 in cash; is that right?
Mr. Meissner. To start with ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You ultimately bargained back and forth and
reached a figure of $17,500, in cash ?
Mr. Meissnek. About that, yes, as far as my memory serves.
Mr. Kennedy. You then went back and collected so nuicli money
from each laundry owner; is that right?
Mr. Meissnek. Y^es ; some laundries, not all of them.
Mr. Kennedy. And you corrected approximately $90 per truck; is
that right?
Mr. jIeissnek. That is over a o-year period.
Mr. Kennedy. Over a o-year period. You couldn't afi'ord to pay
in 1 year, so you paid over a 8-year period ?
Mr. Meissnek. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Holtzman explained that that money would
have to be in cash ?
Mr. Meissnek. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And this payment that was made was never entered
into any books oi- records of the Detroit Institute ?
Mr. Meissnek. Well, I don't believe he said that. But he wanted it
in cash.
Mr. Kennedy. I mean you never entered this into any books or
records {
Mr. Meissnek. No. It was supposed to be a separate fund.
Mr. Kennedy. There is nothing in the minutes that you were hiring
Mr. Holtzman as a labor consultant, a labor relations consultant?
Mr. Meissnek. There, there wasn't.
Air. Kennedy. It was to be a secret arrangement ?
Mr. Meissnek. It was not a direct affair of the Institute of Laundry,
officially.
Mr. Kennedy. It was to get a contract signed ?
Mr. ^Ieissnek. It was a group of laundry men that wanted a sepa-
rate fund for that purpose.
Mr. Kennedy. After you made payment to Holtzman, then was it
arranged for you to visit with Mr. Hofi'a ?
Mr. Meissnek. Xot in that connection.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, did you go see Mr. Hoff a ?
Mr. Meissnek. We went to see him in regard to see if he could do
something for us.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have discussions with him along those lines?
Mr. Meissnek. I believe we did ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the connnittee who arranged that
a])pointment?
Air. Meissnek. That I am not clear on.
13346 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. You do not know?
Mr. Meissner. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. LoCicero, your attorney, never knew that you
were making this payment, did he ?
Mr. Meissner. He did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Then following the meeting with Holla, you then
had some further negotiations with Mr. Litwak ; is that correct ?
Mr. Meissner. I believe so ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And toward the end of the negotiations, at one of the
final meetings, did Mr. T Toff a come to the meeting at the Detroit
Leland Hotel ?
Mr. Meissner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. He did ?
Mr. IMeissner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. He came in ?
Mr. Meissner. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you loll Ihe committee what he stated as of
that time?
Mr. Meissner. I don't believe he made any definite statement.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he have a conference with Mr. Litwak?
Mr. Meissner. If my memory serves me, he did talk to Mr. Litwak
on the side.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he call him to the side ?
Mr. Meissner. To the side ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. He did call him to the side ?
Mr. Meissner. Yes ; I believe he did.
Mr. Kennedy. And he had a talk with him, himself?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Following this, you reached a general arrangement,
an agreement as to the terms of the contract, is that right ?
Mr. Meissner. Following that : yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And the Detroit Institute of Laundry did not have
to make any more major concessions after you made the arrange-
ments with Mr. Holtzman, is that correct ?
]\Ir. Meissner. I believe there Avere some concessions and some con-
cessions on his part.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not make any major concessions?
Mr. Meissner. I don't believe there were any major concessions.
Mr. Kennedy. You kept your 6-day week ?
INIr. Meissner. I believe we did at that time.
Mr. Kennedy. And you did not have a strike?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct tliat Mr. Litwak was furious at ^h:
Hoffa coming to the meeting, and you people going over his head?
Mr. Meissner. Yes, but I don't consider that of any moment, be-
cause he was infuriated any time that he was crossed or butted into,
what he did.
j\Ir. Kennedy. You say he was furious all the time?
Mr. Meissner. Yes ; very much.
(At this point, Senator Kennedy withdrew from tlie hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Did he use as a reason for being furious, or did he
say, at this time, at least, that he was furious because you had gone
over his head to Mr. Hoffa in this contract ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13347
Mr. Meissner. I presume he was.
Mr. Kennedy. From what he said, and from the conversations that
you had with him subsequently ?
Mr. Meissner. From insinuations and remarks made by him, I pre-
sume he was ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You understood that he was ?
Mr. Meissner. Yes; that is riglit.
Mr. Kennedy. And you made the payment over the 3-year period ?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that this money was to be paid,
to be passed, at least part of it was to be passed, on to a miion official ?
Mr. Meissner. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not ?
Mr. JVIeissner. Xo.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did you pay it in cash ?
Mr. Meissner. He asked it that way.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that that was the reason?
Mr. Meissner. No; I didn't. He told us nothing about what he was
going to do with the money.
Mr. Kennedy. It never occurred to you that it was going on to any
union official ?
Mr. Meissner. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. It never did?
Mr. Meissner. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. It never entered your mind ?
Mr. Meissner. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Then why was it handled in this fashion ?
Mr. Meissner. I didn't know whether he was trying to evade income
tax or what. He wanted it in cash.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Meissner, what you were looking for in this
contract was you were looking for someone who could make an ar-
rangement or an approach to a higher union official, were you not?
Mr. Meissner. Not necessarily. Men have influence in that line in
labor relations. I did not know what his connections were.
Mr. Kennedy. That is what you were looking for, somebody to
influence Mr. Litwak.
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. I'ltimately somebody did influence Mr. Litwak in
this case.
Mr. Meissner. After we were introduced to him, and from his sales
talk and so on, we presumed that he could, and we decided that was
going to be in our favor.
Mr. Kennedy. Tlien you did pay, you did make arrangements to
make a payoff of $17,500.
Mr. Meissner. To pay him his fees, not a payoff.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Balk will described it as a payoff.
Mr. Meissner. I can't help what Mr. Balkwill says.
Mr. Kennedy. Every other laundry owner who contributed and
who has testified has presumed it was a payoff.
Mr. Meissner. Let them presume what "they want.
Mr. Kennedy. They paid the money to you ?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
13348 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. They understood from you tliat it was to be a pay-
off.
Mr. Meissner. No ; they did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Miller testified this mornina" that you came back
and reported about Mr. Hofl'a being- at the meetino-, that he was late
in arriving, and you felt the money was goiuo- down the drain, because
he was late at the meeting.
Mr. ]\fEissNER. The visit from Mr. IForta did not liave anything to
do with Joe Holtzman. Our deal was with Joe IToltzman and him
alone, and he never once inferred or insinuated who he was paying or
Avhat influence he had.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny, Mr. Meissner, that you told Mr. Miller,
after his conference with Mr. Litwak and Mr. Hoffa, that you were
worried that ]Mr. Tloffa would be late coming in, and you thought the
money had gone down the drain '.
Mr. Meissnkk. I never said such a think to Mr. Miller.
Mr. Kennedy. You nevei- said anything like that I
Mr. Meissner. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. So Mr. Miller's testimony this morning to the con-
trarv is incorrect, is that I'ight ?
Mr. Meissner. Tt is, if he made th.at assei'tion. but not from his
testimony this morning.
Mr. Kennedy. That is what he testified to this moi-nino'.
]\rr. :Meis8Ner. He didn't testify to that, that I heard.
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing I'oom.)
Mr. Kennedy (reading) :
I (lid not attend the actual session, hut ileissner reported to nie what ha))-
pened. Firstly. Hoffa was late in appearing. In fact. Meissner expressed the
thought t(» nie he started worrying that the iiayoff might have gone down the
drain.
That is what he testified to this morning.
Mr. ]Metssner. I never told them there was ;inv connection between
Mr. Hofi'a's visit and our fees to Joe IToltzman.
lyir. Kennedy (reading) :
Then there was a knock at the door, this meeting was being held at the
Detroit Leland Hotel, when the door opened. Hoffa was there with a couple of
his men.
Meissner said the color drained from liitwak's face when he saw Hoffa.
Iloft'a wanted to know what the meeting was all about. He then read the
contract which had been worked out to then and expressed the view that it
was a good contract, there was nothing wrong with it. The negotiations were
then broken off and the contract signed sometime after.
Mr. Meissner. Mr. Miller has quite an inutginatiou to make those
remarks.
Mr. Kennedy. That is what he testified to.
You were the one that was going around and collecting this money
in cash. We have had every one of the people that testified here
understand that it was going to be a payoff.
Mr. Meissner. I can't help what they consider it to be. AVe had
an arrangement with Joe Holtzman to ])ay him the fees.
Mr. Kennedy. Then why didn't you enter it into any books?
Mr. Meissner. He asked for it in cash.
Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you enter it in the books and records?
Mr. Meissner. Why should we? It was not a part of the insti-
tute transactions.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13349
Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you tell tliis to me wlien I wiis out seeing
yon last Monday?
Mr. Meissner. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. You never told nie about any payments like this,
did you ?
Mr. Meissner. No, I didn't tell vou anything- at that time. Why
should I?
Mr. Kennedy. It Mas because you AA'anted to cover up. That is why
you didn't.
Mr. Meissner. I did not cover up anything. I was not ready to talk
at that time, and 1 wanted to recollect what did happen.
Senator Curtis. Who drew the contract?
Mr. Meissner. l^sually the union man drew the contract, or the at-
torne}'.
Senator (\'Rtis. Do you know who drew this one ?
Mr. Meissner. Not oli'hand, I don't.
Senator Curtis. You don't recall whether it was pre])ared V)y the
union or by managfnient ?
Mr. Meissner. I couldn't tell unless I saw the contract, and I don't
know.
Senator ( 'urtis. Do we have the contract here ?
Mr. Kennedy. Here is the contract.
Senator Cirtis. This appears to be a copy. It is not the contract.
Mr. Chairman, if we could have this identified, I would like to ask
him about it.
The Chairman. May I have the contract?
The Chair presents to you what ])ur])orts to be a copy of the con-
tract that was entered into. I ask you to examine it and state if you
identify it as such.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
Mr. Meissner. This is not a signed copy of the contract.
The Chairman. That is not a signed copy, but you may identify it,
1 would assume, from its terms and provisions.
Mr. Meissner. This is just one of the mimeographed copies. I
presume it to be that contract; I wouldn't know.
The Chairman. Who of our stalf would know about this?
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger.
The Chairman. Have you been sworn ? I will help you identify it.
Do you solemnly swear that the evidence given before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth and notliing but the
truth, so help you God?
Mr. Salin(;er. I do.
TESTIMONY OF PIEREE E. G. SALINGER
The CHAiR?>rAN. You have not been previously sworn in this series?
Mr. Salinger. No, sir.
The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and
and your present employment.
Mr. Salinger. My name is Pierre Salinger, and I reside at 3611 O
Street, NW., Washington, D. C. I am an investigator on the staff of
this committee.
2124.3— oS—pt. .3(5 6
13350 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Did you make an investigation in connection with
the contract that we have been referring to?
Mr. Salinger, I did, sir.
The (^HAiRMAN. Did you procure a copy of tliat contract ?
Mr. Salinger. I did, sir.
The Chairman. Do you have such a copy now ?
Mr. Salinger. I have it in front of me.
The C^HAiRMAN. Wliere did you procure it ?
Mr. Salin(;er. This contract was turned over to me by Mr. Horace
McKnight, the owner of the Palace ]Model Laundiy, in Detroit, Mich.,
and it is a copy of tlie contract signed on the 27th day of June 1949,
and shows that tlie contract was signed by Mr. W. H. Balkwill, and
Mr. Jolm C. Meissner, representing tlie Detroit Institute of Launder-
ing, and Mr. Isaac Litwak, reprasenting the Laundrymen and Linen
Drivers LTnion.
The Chair:\ian. Have you examined the original or photostatic
copy of it 'i
Mr. Salinger. I have examined this copy, which was told me by
Mr. ]McKnight to be a copy.
The Chairman. Who was Mr. McKnight?
Mr. Salingj:r. He is the owner of the Palace Model Laundiy and
was a member of the labor committee of the institute at the time this
contract was entered into.
The Chairman. He was a member of the negotiating committee
that negotiated the contract?
Mr. Salinger. Yes, sir.
The Chaip.man. And he gave you that as a copy of the contract that
was negotiated at that time?
Mr. Salinger. He did, sir.
The Chairman. That copy may be made exhibit No. 4 for reference
(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 4" for reference
and may be found in the files of the select committee.)
The Chairman. Now, do you want to make any statement as to
wliether that is a copv of the contract ? You may examine it if you
like.
]Mr. Meissner. I don't say that isn't an exact copy of the contract,
but it is only a photostat that I saw.
The Chairman. If there is anybody that doubts it, they can j^ro-
duce anything to the contrary, and we will correct the record. But
for the purposes of interrogation, we will proceed on the basis that
this is a contract, and it was obtained fi-om one of your associates wlio
negotiated it.
Mr. Meissner. T was asked whether Mr. LoCicero, or an attorney
wrote the contract, and I can't tell from merely a mimeographed copy.
The Chairman. Perhaps j'ou are not able to immediately identify
it.
Mr. Meissner. I am trying to answer the question.
Senator Curtis. I think in fairness to the witness, I would like to
ask ]Mr. Salinger, this is not a carbon copy, and neither is it a photo-
stat?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Senator Cfrtis. It is a copy that somebody has made?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13351
Mr. Meissner. Sometimes we find in industrywide contracts sncli
as this, tliey make up a number of copies so that all of the laundries
involved can have a copy of the contract.
Senator Cuktis. It purports to be a copy of the contract as distin-
guished from a photostat or a pictiu-e of the contract or as distin-
guished from a carbon copy ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Meissner. May I clarify the atmosphere^
Senator Curtis. My sole question is, Who drew it ^ Do you know '^
Mr. Meissner. That, oti'hand, I don't know. I understand some-
times our attorney would draw it and sometimes Mr, Litwak would
draw it. Not it was a habit in the institute on account of the num-
ber of members that we coiddn't pass on the original or the duplicate,
so we made a mimeographed copy, and each member got a mimeo-
graphed copy, and the original stayed in the institute.
The Chairman. So it was your practice whenever you made an
industrywide contract, to provide each member of your association
who was affected by the contract a mimeographed copy of it?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
The Chairman. So we would know the terms of it?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
The Chairman. I assume then that if Mr. McKnight says this is his
copy, we can substantially rely on that?
Mr, Meissner. I wouldn't doubt Mr. McKnight's word.
Senator Curtis. Now, I see that this copy that someone has pre-
pared is signed by two people on the part of the institute, Mr. Balk-
will and Mr. Meissner, and for the Laundry and Linen Drivers Union,
Local 285, it is signed by Isaac Litwak.
Mr. Meissner. That "is right.
Senator Curtis. That appears to be the only union signature on
there.
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Senator Curtis. Were you present when it was signed ?
Mr. Meissner. I imagine I was. My signature is on there.
Senator Citrtis. When Mr. Litwak signed it?
Mr. Meissner. That I couldn't say exactly. He may liave signed
it and returned it, you understand.
Senator Curtis.' Did j\Ir. Litwak know about this $17,500 deal ?
Mr. Meissner. He did not.
Senator Curtis. He knew nothing about it ?
Mr. Meissner. No, sir.
Senator Curtis. How do you know he did not ?
Mr. Meissner, Not from ine.
Senator Curtis. How do you know he did not knf)w it from any
other source, and I do not know tliat he did t
Mr. Meissner. Tlint I don't knov,-.
Senator Curtis. Did Mr. Litwak report that this was taken to the
membership ?
Mr. Meissner. Well, we usually presumed he did, and he would
bring it back and say the membership OK'd it, but we didn't know
whether he actually did, or whether it was a presumption.
Senator Curtis. Did Mr. Litwak protest the terms of it ?
Mr. Meissner. The finished contract, you mean ?
13352 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. Yes.
Mr. Meissner. Xo, I don't believe, he liad no right to, because it was.
concluded.
Senator Curtis. I mean when it was taking form.
Mr. Meissxer. Until the bargaining- was through and we arrixetl
at the conclusion, he always protested.
Senator Curtis. He alwa3's protested?
Mr. Meissnp:r. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Xow, did you know that the bargaining had beeui
concluded l)et'ore Mr. Litwak did?
Mr. Meissxer. Xo, 1 don't believe so. We always concluded witli
him.
Senator Curtis. Who told you that an agreement had been arrived
at and it would be reduced to writing ?
Mr. Meissner. I was usuall}^ present.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Litwak told you that ?
Mr. Meissner. X"o.
What was the question, })lease ?
Senator Citrtis. Who told you that an agreement had been arrived!
at or who agreed on behalf of the union as to the terms that were
later incorparted in this written document?
Mr. Meissner. 1 was usually present when the conclusion was ar-
rived at.
Senator Ci Rtis. ]^ut who spoke up for the union '.
^\v. Meissner. Mr. Litwak.
Senator Curtis. He did?
Mr. Meissner. Yes.
Senator Cirtis. Where did that occur '.
Mr. Meissner. "Well, wherever we were holding our bargainings^
sessions.
Senator Cirtis. Li this i)articular case, tlo you remember where-
it was {
Mr. Meissner. I do not.
Senator Curtis. Do you remember what other union oiKcials, if
any, were present ?
Mr. Meissner. Well, 1 only can assume from the signing of that
contract that Isaac Litwak was usually theiv at the end of the session
and concluded tlie contract.
Xow, which man was on his committee ; usuall}', he had a committee'
with him, and we usually had a committee, and we arrived at a conclu-
sion, and it was agreed that that was the contract. Then it was reduced
to typing, and it was typed up because usually it was nothing but a
bunch of scratch paper, really.
Senator Curtis. Well, during this negotiation that ended up in a
contract dated June 27, 1949, did Mr. Litwak have a conmiittee from
his membership ?
Mr. Meissner. I think he did : yes.
Senator Curtis. And he had it present during the negotiations I
Mr. Meissner. Yes, sir ; he usually did. I don't remember that one
particularly, understand, but he always did, and that is the way it
happened.
Senator Curtis. Is it your opinion that Mr. Holtzman arranged
terms of this contract over the protest of Mr. Litwak ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13353
Mr. Meissner. That I don't know.
Senator Curtis. Was there anything in the cuhninating of the
agreement that indicated to you that it was not the agreement of Mr.
Litwak and his bargaining committee and its membership ?
Mr. Meissner. No one told me that.
Senator Curtis. "Was there any tiling that happened or took place
that put YOU on notice that this was not the voluntary agreement of Mr.
Litwak and his committee and his membership ?
Mr. Meissner. No.
The Chairman. May I ask you a question there ?
You say there was nothing to put you on notice of it. How many of
the negotiating meetings had Mr. Hoila attended before ?
Mr. Meissner. Before the conclusion of this, I believe one.
The Chairman. That was the only one ?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
The Chairman. He walked in the door, and he said, "What goes on
here?"
Mr. Meissner. No.
The Chairman. What did he say ?
Mr. Meissner. I don't think that he said anything, and I think he
walked into the meeting, and he said "Hello."
The Chairman. What did you do ?
Mr. Meissner. He sat down and he listened.
The CiiAiR^iAN. When did he call Litwak otf and talk to him ?
" Mr. Meissner. During the session.
The Chairman. Then what happened ?
Mr. Meissner. Then Mr. Hotla went out after a while.
The Chairman. And then what happened ?
Mr. Meissner. We kept on bargaining.
The Chairman. And Litwak agreed ?
Mr. Meissner. No ; not at that sitting.
The Chairman. I understand he agreed at that time and wrote up
the contract later.
Mr. Meissner. No.
The Chairman. Did you have anv more negotiating meetings after
that?
Mr. Meissner. Possibly I did.
The Chairman. Not possibly, and now^ it has been testified here
that was the last negotiating meeting.
Mr. Meissner. I don't recollect whether it was or not.
The Chairman. Did you make any record of this transaction at all?
Mr. Meissner. What transaction ?
The Chairman. The $17,500.
Mr. Meissner. No, sir.
The Chairman. Did you have any authorization from your board
of directors of your Detroit Laundrymen's Institute to employ counsel
at a rate of $17*500?
Mr. Meissner. Not from the board of directors ; no.
The Chairman. Was there ever any authorization for you to take
such action by the duly constituted board of directors of that institute ?
Mr. Meissner. No, sir.
The Chairman. Therefore, no minutes were made of it ?
Mr. Meissner. No, sir.
13354 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. All transactions were handled in cash ?
Mr. Meissner. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And, therefore, on that basis, you state that you
had nothing to conceal ?
Mr. Meissner. I don't state that.
The Chairman. Well, yon did have somethino; to conceal ?
Mr. Meissner. We kept it quiet.
The Chairman. You were concealing the Avhole transaction ?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
The Chairman. All right.
Senator Kennedy. Were you interviewed on August 2 by Mr. Pierre
Salinger, of this committee, and Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Bellino?
Mr. Meissner. Yes ; I believe at my home.
Senator Kennedy. Now, here is a report of that conversation sub-
mitted, which you had with the three people, and it said :
Mr. Meissner said, as a result of their inability to get anywliere with Litwak,
he and Harold Balkwill went to see Jimmy Iloffa, and he said they told Hoffa
thta Litwak was absolutely out of order, and Meissner said they told Hoffa that
the laundry industry did not want a strike, and Hoffa said he would take up
the matter with Litwak. And he said that thereafter negotiations began to be
much easier and the contract was signed.
Did you say that or did you not ?
Mr. Meissner. I probably did.
Senator Kennedy. You said that ?
Mr. Meissner. Yes. I don't know what he wrote down on the paper.
Senator Kennedy. Is that a report of your conversation?
Mr. Meissner. Approximately it is right; yes.
Sena<^or Kennedy. Now, JVfr. JMeissner, did you understand that
the money that was given to Mr. Holtzman was for a payoff?
Mr. Meissner. I never made that remark, and we hired Mr. Holtz-
man as a management counsel.
Senator Kennedy. What did you think he was going to do with
the cash ?
Mr. Meissner. I didn't have any right to think, and he didn't
tell me.
Senator Kennedy. Did you have anv idea? Did you ever discuss
it with Mr. Balkwill ? "
Mr. Meissner. I might have talked about it, but I don't think we
ever arrived at any conclusion.
Senator Kennedy. You did not think it was going to be a payoff?
Mr. Meissner. We didn't know.
Mr. Kennedy. This witness is under oath, and you have heard
Mr. Balkwill's testimony before this committee that he understood it
was a payoff, and are you stating now that you never understood it
was a payoff ?
Mr. Meissner. I didn't know.
Senator Kennedy. Did you think it was a payoff? Did you sur-
mise it was a payoff? You are not going to give someone $17,000
W' ithout knowing what they are going to do with it.
Mr. Meissner. Do you want me to testify here ?
Senator Kennedy. I want you to answer that question and testify
whether you assumed, when you gave Mr, Holtzman the $17,000, that
it was for the purposes of a payoff. Did you or did you not ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13355
Mr. Meissner. I didirt know what Mr. Holtzmaii did, or wliether
he had a staff he had to pay, or whether he would pay the union offi-
cial, and I didn't Icnow anything about it.
Senator Ives. Will the Senator yield '^
I would like to laise this question: Did it make any ditt'erenee to
you whether it was or was not a payolf i
Mr. Meissner. After we turned it over to Mr. Holtznian, I
Senator Ives. You did not care whether it was a payoff or not ?
Mr. Meissner. I couldn't do anything about it.
Sen.ator Ives. I still raise the point ; you did not care whether it
was a pa^'oft' or not, apparently 'i
Mr. JMeissnkr. No, really.
Senator Ives. All right.
Senator Kennedy. 1 do not think that Ave can accept this answer
as it stands. I think that we ought to know what purpose you had
in mind in giving the $17,000 to Mr. Holtzman.
Mr. Meissner. General Motors has a counsel, or legal counsel, in
connection with their labor relations, and we hired Mr, Holtzman as
an outside representative to handle this situation.
Senator Kennedy. Now, Mr. Meissner, that statement that you be-
lieved that the purpose in giving Mr. Holtzman the $17,000 in cash
was for the purpose of doing normal labor relations; is that correct?
Mr. Meissner. I didn't know.
Senator Kennedy. What did you give him the money for, then 'I
Mr. Meissner. For doing the labor-relations work.
Senator Kennedy. What kind of labor-relations work ?
Mr. Meissner. Whether he used it to pay off someone or not, I don't
know.
Senator Kennedy. Did you ever assume that he did ?
Mr.3lEissNER. I had no right to assume.
Senator Kennedy. Yes you did; you paid him the money, and
did you have a discussion with Mi-. BalkAvill to that effect?
Mr. Meissner. We talked about it.
Senator Kennedy. He has testified very clearly, and he left no
doubt in anyone's mind it was for a payoff, and you must have had
a discussion with him.
Mr. Meissner. What Mr. Balkwill assumed in his own mind and
what I assumed in my mind are two different things.
Senator Kennedy. You were a participant, and you were the one
who, I believe, secured the services of Mr. Holtzman ; did you not ?
Mr. Meissner. I was the hired man, the legman.
Senator Kennedy. Did you pay off Mr. Paris ?
Mr. JNIeissner. Yes ; but not all of it.
Senator Kennedy. That w^as a payoff' ?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. Was it not the same in this case of Mr. Holtz-
man ?
Mr. Meissner. No; we hired a labor-relations counsel in that case.
Senator Kennedy. All right; now, I want to ask you, and I want
you to answer it, or I would like to have Mr. Salinger put under oath :
Did you tell Mr. Salinger last evening that you understood that this
13356 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
money for Mr. Holtznian was going to be paid to Mr. Hoff a, and that
was the understanding ?
Mr. Meissner. I didn't tell that to him.
Senator Kennedy. I would like to have Mr. Salinger sworn to
testify on that point.
Senator Ives. Mr. Salinger has already been sworn.
Senator Kennedy. Will you come ai'ound and answer that ques-
tion? Did you have a conversation last night with Mr. Meissner?
Mr. Salinger. I had a conversation with both Mr. Meissner and Mr.
Balkwill.
Senator Kennedy. "Where did that conversation take place ?
Mr. Salinger. At the Carroll Arms Hotel.
Senator Kennedy. In the conversation, did you discuss what Mr.
Holtzman had done witli the $17,000 in cash i
Mr, Salinger. I asked both ^Ir. Balkwill and Mr. Meissner wliether
they had any idea as to wliat Mr. Holtzman had done with the $17,500.
Senator Kennedy. What was the answer Mr, Meissner gave you?
Mr. Salinger. Mr. Meissner said that they had had a discussion;
he and Mr. Balkwill had a discussion, and, while they couldn't prove
it, it was their assumption that the money had gone to ]Mr. lloil'a.
Senator Kennedy. Did you have that discusssion last night ?
Mr. Meissner. I never told him I presumed Mr, Hoffa got it.
Senator Kennedy. Do you deny what Mr. Salinger has just said?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. You did not have any such conversation with
him ?
Mr. Meissner. That is right.
Senator Kennedy, Did you have a conversation witli him?
Mr. Meissner. Yes, sir; I did.
Senator Kennedy. Did the question come up as to what Mr. Holtz-
man had done with the money ?
Mr. Meissner. He was asking about it.
Senator Kennedy. A^Hiat did you say ?
Mr. Meissner. I don't recollect, exactly.
Senator Kennedy. Do you deny that you stated what Mr. Salinger
stated you did state ?
Mr. Meissneb. I did not state that I presumed ]\Ir. Hoffa got it.
Senator Kennedy. You never mentioned that ?
Mr. Meissner. If somebody got it, I don't know.
Senator Kerr. But you never stated that?
Mr. Meissner. If Mr. Hoft'a got it all, I don't know.
Senator Kennedy. You never stated to Mr. Salinger hLst night at
the Carroll Arms Hotel, to a member of this committee staff, that you
and Mr. Balkwill had discussed the matter after the payment to Mr.
Holtzman, and that you had assumed Mr. Iloff'a had gotten the money.
You deny you made that statement?
Mr. Meissner. You are using the wrong word, "assumed," and I
didn't assume anything. We might have talked in conjecture about it.
Senator Kennedy. Did you conjecture that Mr. Hoffa got it ?
Mr. Meissner. What is that ?
Senator Kennedy. Did you conjecture he got it ?
Mr. Meissner. We conjectured that Mr. Hoffa might have gotten
some of it.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13357
Senator Kexnedy. Is tliat what you stiid last nifilit to Mr. Salinger?
Mr. ]Meissnee. I presume something along that line.
Senator Kennedy. That is all right. Thank yon.
Senator I^^F:s. Mr. Counsel, do you have any further question.s of the
witness ?
Mr. Kennedy. Not right now.
Senator Ives. You are excused for tl\e time heing, and please stand
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. LoCicero.
Senator Ives. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are
about to give will be' the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
truth, so help you God ?
Mr. LoCicEEO. I do.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS LoCICERO
Senator Ives. Do you have counsel?
Mr. LoCicero. I have none, sir.
Senator Ives. Will you kindly state your name, your profession, and
3'our address, and so forth ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. My name is Thomas LoCicero and I live at 1105
Three Mill Drive, West Park Point, Midi., and I am an attorney.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. LoCicero, I just have a few questions to ask
You were the attorney for the Detroit Institute of Launderino- in
1919?
Mr. LoCicero. Yes ; our office has been their attorney since 1941.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever know that they had made any financial
arrangements with Mr. Bushkin and Mr. Holtzman or Mr. Hoft' a ?
a\Ir. LoCicero. None whatever.
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew about it at all ?
Mr. LoCicero. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew anything about the $17,500 ?
Mr. LoCicero. I heard it last night or this morning, and I have for-
gotten when.
Mr. Kennedy. They never told you about it ?
Mr. LoCiOERo. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew that anybody was being hired or
l>eing jiaid any money in connection with this contract?
Mr. LoCicero. Nobody ever mentioned it to me.
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew up until last night ?
Mr. LoCicero. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, you attended the negotiation meeting with Mr.
Litwak which Mr. Hoffa attended also ?
Mr. LoCicero. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa came late, did he ?
Mr. LoCicero. No.
Mr. Kennedy. All right, strike that.
Mr. Balkwill and Mr. Meissner went to see Mr. Hoffa at the Team-
ster headquarters?
Mr. LoCicero. I don't know that.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not arrange the meeting ?
Mr. LoCicero. No. sir.
13358 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kexxedy. You did not arrange for the appointment of Mr.
Balkwill and Mr. Meissner at the Teamster headquarters with Mr.
Holfa?
Mr. LoCiCERo. No, sir ; I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the second point.
Now, the third point is this : Mr. Plofi'a attended a negotiation meet-
ing at tlie Detroit Leland Hotel.
Mr. LoCiCERO. We had had about, I dare say, 20 or 22 sessions with
Mr. Litwak, and his committee, and our committee.
Mr. Kennedy. You were liaving diiHcuky with Mr. Litwak ?
INIr. LoCiCERO. We always had difficulty with Mr. Litwak. We had
difficulty with him in 1946, and 1949, and 1954, and 1957. He is a very
tough bargainer.
Mr. Kennj:dy. In 1949 you were having difficulty, as well as every
other year ?
yir. LoCiCERO. That year was the first year. T take that back, or
194G was the first year in which we got a so-called industrywide con-
tract covering the drivers. Prior to that time, each company had had
individual contracts. In 1949, we felt that there had to be a major
revision of that contract, and so we made a number of demands that
the contract be revised. Mr. Litwak objected, and he said, "What is
wrong with the old contract?"
As a result of that, we started with the very first paragraj)h of the
contract, wliich, incidentally, a question came up a little while ago,
I prepared, and I repaired all of the contracts that had been negoti-
ated. We started with the very first paragraph, and liad difficulty
with every paragraph in the wording of it. That continued right on
through to the end of the contract.
I believe that I still have the rough copies where we worked out
the wording of each paragi'aph at those sessions.
Mr. Kennedy'. Did Mr. Hoffa attend one of those meetings?
Mr. LoCiCERO. At about the last day, I would say around the 20th
or 22d meeting, but not da^'S, because these were not day after day, but
about the 22d day I went to the Detroit Leland, and in connection with
their negotiations to be continued, our sessions at that time were from
about 4 o'clock until 11 o'clock in the evening, and I found Mr. Hoffa
there with Mr. Litwak and his committee, and a number of our people
were there.
Mr. Kennedy*. Was that unusual for him to come to a bargaining
negotiation like this ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Who?
]Mr. Kennedy'. Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. LoCiCERO. Well, yes, I thought it was a bit because he had never
attended any of our sessions at any time, and as a matter of fact, he has
never attended any since.
Mr. Kennedy*. That was the only one that he ever attended ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. That I recall.
Mr. Kennedy'. Could you tell us whether Mr. Hoffa made any state-
ment when he attended this meeting?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Well, as I got there I made some remark, "Hello,
Jimmy, what are you doing here?" tnd he said, "What have you got to
discuss or bargain with, Isaac?" and I said, "We have a few points
left." To the best of my recollection, most of the major points of the
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13359
"Contract had been already agreed upon, but as I indicated to you, we
were having difficulty with the wording of eveiy paragraph. Eveiy
word had to be argued out.
I told Mr. Hoffa that we had these few points, and I don't recall
'exactly what they were. He said, "Well, look, you fellows, get going
•on this thing. You have been at it for a long time, and get this done
■or I will do it for you."
As a result, we sat down around the table and the committee was
there, and all of the parties that had been negotiating before, includ-
ing myself — I was primaiy spokesman for our group — and we con-
tinued with our negotiations. The same thing went on, and we
worded each paragraph as we went along and completed the contract,
and the agreement on it; that is, the essence of it was agreed upon
just about that time, but Mr. Litwak and I continued with several
meetings after that in connection with the wording.
(x\t this point, the follow^ing members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Church, Kennedy, and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. But the essence was agreed on it at that date?
Mr. LoCiCERO. I would say so.
Mr. KJENNEDY. Did you understand subsequently that Mr. Litwak
was upset with you for having brought Mr. Hoffa to the meeting ?
Mr. LoCicERO. Well, a i-emark was niade at one time that he thought
I had called Mr. Hoffa in, and I had not called him in. As a matter
of fact, wlien I went to the meeting, I assumed that Mr. Litwak had
called him in, because it was logical for him to be there.
Mr. Kennedy. It was obvious from the remark that he made that
Mr. Litwak had not brought Mr. Hoffa to the meeting.
Mr. LoCiCERO. As I say, a remark was made that he had not called
him in.
Mr. Kennedy. And he thought you had gone over his head and
brought him?
Mr. LoCicERo. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know why or how Mr. Hoffa happened to
'corne to that meeting?
Mr. LoCiCERO. I know nothing about it.
Senator Cltitis. About how long did these negotiations run ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Well, I believe there were at least 20 or 22 sessions.
By sessions, I mean at different days, over a period of weeks, where we
would start, perhaps, at 4 or 5 o'clock in the afternoon, and some of
them continued until 3 or 4 o'clock in the moi'ning.
However, we did have a rule at that time that we would not con-
tinue beyond 11 o'clock, unless it was necessary to do so, because in
the 1946 negotiations we had had an extremely difficult time, and we
could not get any agreement from Mr. Litwak until about 3 o'clock
in the morning.
Senator Curtis. There was a disagreement over the wording of
practically all the paragraphs, you say, or at least the contest over
them ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Well, as I told the committee, as I am telling you
now, Mr. Litwak does not like to have words changed in a contract.
The contract had been made in 1946, and he did not want this one
changed. Yet we insisted that it had to be changed. For example,
definitions of what a connnercial laundiy driver was. a house driver.
13360 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
and various other types of drivers. Not alone the matters relating
to wages and so forth, but even the definitions in the contract.
Senator Curtis. That leads me up to my question. Those issues
involved relating to wages and other economic issues, so far as the
drivers were concerned, were they the last thing agreed upon''^
Mr. LoCiCERO. No, sir. We went along in this contract and took
them up as we went along. If you have a copy of the contract, you
can get the continuity of our discussions practically from following
that contract out, because that is one time when we took it paragraph
by paragraph.
Senator Curtis. Will you examine the contract and tell me prob-
ably about when the negotiations on the matter of wages and compen-
sation and fringe benehts if any, were granted, or an agreement
arrived at?
Mr. LoCiCERO. I will attempt to do that, sir.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
The Chairman. Mr. Witness, will you identify that as a copy of
the contract, specifically ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Yes, sir. This is apparently a mimeographed copy
of the contract. It is entitled "Agreement and scale of wages of the
Detroit Institute of Laundering and Laundry and Linen Drivers
Union, Local 285", and so forth.
The Chairman. Let the record show the witness is examining
exhibit 4.
Mr. LoCiGERO. Now, sir, may I have your question ?
Senator Curtis. How early in the negotiations did you come to an
agreement on the matter of wages and fringe benefits, if there are any
covered ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Well, as I recall it, our first problem was definitions,
and that is contained in article III on page 3.
The next problem was that of the wage scale for domestic laundry
drivers.
We had a very strong argument about base pay, and about com-
missions. Minimum pay was a very hotly contested item.
Senator Curtis. Do you think you arrived at the agreement on pay^
say, in the first half of your meetings ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. In a sense, I will have to be guessing, but I would
say it was about the middle or perhaps two-thirds of the way through.
Senator Curtis. ,That answers the question.
That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I have one point.
The Chairman. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. I just want to emphasize that the real basic issue
involved here in the dispute between you and Mr. Litwak was on the
question of the 5- or 6-day week, and that it is my understanding that
the point you could not get together on until this meeting at which
Mr. Hoffa attended was on this basic question, and then that you did
get together on it.
Is that correct ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Senator, that is correct, according to the best of my
recollection.
Senator Kennedy. What was the issue?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13361
Mr. LoCiCERo. In 194(), the issue of the H-day week was brought up
for the tirst time.
Senator Kennedy, Right.
Mr. LoCiCEKO. At that time, Mr. Lester E. Deely, my predecessor
in this work, was associated with me and we negotiated at the same
time. At tliat time, tlie union agreed that whatever phmts were
iilready on a oi/o-day week would remain that way, but those that were
over that woukftry to reach the r)i/2-day mark within a period of time.
Mr. Litwak's attitude was always this, that he knew that it was a
difficult change from a 5-day to a 6-day week, that it would have to take
time. Therefore, in the 1946 contract he gave us the opportunity of
working out, say, to a 51/2-day week, as soon as we possibly could.
I believe the contract has some provision along that line. And in
the 1949 contract, the agreement was finally made and, frankly, I know
of no one else that made it other than myself, tliat the contract would
require a 5-day week after 18 months of that contract.
In other words, foi- the first 18 months of that contract we would
continue on the present basis, but in the meantime we would start
making efforts toward reducing it to a 5-day week.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Balkwill informed us that the issue which
they felt was ruinous was the acceptance of the 5-day week in the
laundry industry and it was for that reason that he felt, and I think
in his colloquy with Senator Church, he said, they got off cheap, by
paying $17,000 and avoiding the 5-day week.
They felt that that was a substantial savings. I have gone under
the assum]:)tion that this was a basic issue between the association and
Mr. Litwak.
Mr. LoCiCEKo. AVell, it was a very important one, as events later on
proved. But it was not the only one. Senator.
Senator Kennedy. Would you say it was basic one ?
Mr. LoCioERO. No, it was just one of the major items.
Senator Kennedy. Very important, though ?
Mr. LoCiCERO. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. As I understand it, you had not reached a deci-
sion, and agreement with Mi-. Litwak on that question of the 5-day
week.
Mr. LoCkt.ro. No, I don't agree Avith him on that.
Senator Kennedy. I have not finished yet.
Had you reached an agreement with Mr. Litwak ?
Mr. LoC^icERO. It is my recollection. Senator, as I testified before,
that when Mr. Hoffa came to this meeting, we had covered practically
all of the terms of that contract, other than 3 or 4 points. I don't know
which ones they w^ere.
My notes may reveal what they were.
Senator Kennedy. Let me ask you this: What was the payoff all
about, then?
Mr. LoCk'ero. I don't know, sir.
Senator Kennedy. You don't know?
Mr. LoCiCERo. I don't know a thing about it.
Senator Kennedy. We have heard very clear testimony. Was Mr.
Balkwill a participant in this whole transaction ?
Mr. LoCiCERo. I don't know who ]>artici)iated in it.
13362 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Kennedy. Balkwill ?
Mr. I^tCiCERo. I don't know who participated in it.
Senator Kennedy. He signed the contract?
Mr. LoCicERo. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. He lias testified before this committee, just tlii.-
afternoon
]Mr. LoCicp:ro. I lieard him, sir.
Senator Kennedy. That the 5-day week was the issue that he-
thonglit would ruin the laundry industry, so 1 would consider it very
important. He said since it has gone in in lOoo or 1954, it has put a
lot of laundi'ies out of business.
He said that was tlie issue they could not settle on. \'ou may dis-
agree and say it was a vei'v important one, but he said it was the im-
portant one. He said to get that matter settled was why thev made-
the payotl' of $17,000.
Mr. LoCicERo. 1 know nothing about it, sir.
Senator Kennedy. The only point 1 wanted to get at was this m;it-
ter, according to his testimony, and you indicate you don't know any-
thing about it. was not settled until they made the payotl' to Mr„
Holtziiian.
"^'ou don't know anything about that.
Mr. LoCicERO. 1 don't know.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Holtzman did not attend any of the bar-
gaining sessions ; is that correct?
Mr. Lo( 'icERo. No, sir, he did not.
Seiuitor Kennedy. They employed him as a labor relations counsel,
so-called, but you don't know anything al)out anything that lie did?
Mr. LoCiCERo. No, sii*.
Senator Kennedy. The only point I want to make, and it seems
clear to me from the testimony this afternoon, and you are not able
to shed any light on it. your testimony only is that Mr. Hoft'a attended
the meeting, this matter of the 5-(hiv week was the basic matter of
dispute between you and Mr. Litwak, and there was a pavotf made
in order to get an agreement which did not gi-ant the 5-d;>,y week in
this contract, and that Mr. Holfa attended the meeting.
AVe have heard the ])resum])tions of the othei' witnesses. I \ ;»uld
think that Mi'. Hotl'a would have to indicate quite clearly in his testi-
mony to the committee the reasons that he received the money from
Mr. Holtzman were entirely unrelated to this contract agi*eement.
I am hopeful that he will make that statement and give evidence to
that.
(At this point. Senator Mundt entered the hearing room. )
Mr. Kennedy. We have some further information.
Senator Church. Mr. (Miairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Church.
Senator Church. Mi*. LoCicero, you are a practicing attorney in
th^ Sta^e of Michigan ?
Mr. LoCicERo. Yes. sir, for the i^ast 25 years.
S-^na^or Cii trch. The |)ast 25 years ?
Mr. LoCirp:Ro. Yes, sir.
Senator Ciei rch. And from the competence that you liave displayed
todav on tl^-- vitiK'^*; sta^nl. I wo;dd havp little d.onb^ but ^^•hat you
.-.yf. f,-< •u_'r:\]]\- f;>n'^b"!M' wiih llu^ bnvs. witii Uie Federal l;i ws and
IMPROPf:R ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13363
Mith the laws of the State of Michi«;an. Are these laundries that
we have been (liscussin<>;, are these lanndry ojjerations, in yonr opinion,
subject to the Taft-IIaitley Act ?
Mr. LoCicp:ro. 1 believe not, sii'.
Senator Chirch. You avouIcI assume, by virtue of the fact that
they are local operations, that they would not come within the scope
of the Federal law 'i
Mr. LoCicERo. That is right, sir, I tried to hnd some authority
for it, 1 have none, but my opinion has been that it is iu)t.
Senator C^hukch. If the fact that has been ijenerally indicated
here in the course of the testimony that has been given before this
conunittee, if the fact were — assuming that the fact were — that either
all or part of the $17,500 did go to Mr. Hoii'a or to a member of the
Teamsters l^nion higher up in the Detroit area, and if the fact were
tliat the money was accepted by that union official as an inducement
for intervening and assisting in the settlement of the contract that
you were negotiating, would that, in your opinion, constitute a viola-
tion of the laws of Michigan '(
Mr. Ia)Cicero. Well, Mr. Senator, 1 really don't know. I hate to
render an ()j)inion on it. I think my best answer on that would be
that liad I known anything about this, I probably would not be
representing the institute today.
Senator Cutkch. And if they had told you that they were going
to pay any amount of money in this way, you would have advised
them against it?
Mr. LoCicKRo. Yes, sii'.
Senator Chiiuh. In fact you have just indicated that you w(udd
no longer be theii' representative, had you kr>own about it.
Mr. LoCicERo. Yes, sir.
Senator Church. I think that is a sufficient answer.
Mr. Kennedy. I want to see if 1 can't summarize this. You
were, during 11)41), responsible for negotiating the contract?
Mr. LoCicERo. Yes, sir,
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew that Holtzman or any labor con-
sultant firm had been retained, is that correct ?
Mr. LoCicero. I did not know.
Mr. Kennedy. And you never kneAv that there was a ])avment in
cash of $17,000?
Mr. LoC^iCERO. I did not. All the payments to me were by check
every month. I invoiced them each month. We have done so since
1941 until th.is date. We have received it by check.
.Mr. Kennedy. The third point is that Mr. Balkwill and Mr.
Meissner went to see Mr. Hoffa. That Avas a meeting that you kno^^^
nothing about ?
Mr. LoCicERo. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And you had not airanged that meeting?
Mr. L()( ^i('ER( ». That is right.
Ml". Kennedy. And the fourth point is that it was at the meeting
that Mr. Hoffa attended that the final points were made on the con-
tract, and it reached its culmination ?
Ml'. T/)(^(i:r(). Well, that was about the last session we had. I have
t;^uvt]int.
13364 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. The last session, all right. And that Mr. Iloffa
made a statement at that time to the ett'ect that if the contract was not
signed, he was going to take the situation over himself ?
Mr. LoCicERo. Well, in effect he said that "If you can't negotiate
it yourself, I will do it for you."'
Mr. Kennedy. And the final point is that Mr. Litwak indicated to
you at a later date that he had not invited Mr. Hotl'a to attend the
meeting ?
Mr. LoCicero. As I told you, I don't remember if it was Mr. Lit-
wak. It may have been him, it may have been someone else.
I really don't remember that.
Mr. Kennedy. You received that information, that Mr. Litwak
was upset about Mr. Hoffa coming i
Mr. LoCiCERO. I received information that he thought I had called
him in. Where I got that information, I just don't remember.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all.
The Cjiaikman. I didn't hear the earlier part of your testimony, but
from the response you gave to Senator Church a moment ago, I assume
you never knew anything about the arrangements that were made with
Mr. Iloltzman. Is that correct 'i
Mv. LoCicero. I knew nothing about it, sir.
The first time I heard anything about it was eitlier last night or
this morning in discussing it with Mr. Salinger. I think perhaps yes-
terday wiien I talked to him by telephone.
The Chairman. Had you been consulted about such an arrangement,
as I understand you, you would have advised against it i
Mr. LoCicERO. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. You would have considered it improper ;'
Mr. LoCicERO. I believe so.
The Chairman. And you would not have participated in it or know-
ingh' represented them if they were engaged in those practices^
Mr. LoCicERO. That is right. I handled my negotiations also by
myself. I need no help from anybody else. If they had hired some-
one else, and I knew about it, I would want to get out of it.
The Chairman. You were laboring under the impression, when the
contract was signed, that it was the result of your efforts when repre-
senting them?
Mr. Ix)CiCERo. Mr. Chairman, my fee has not changed since 1943.
The Chairman. I mean when you
^Ir. LoCiCERO. I am just bringing this out. Had I know any such
thing, I probably would have asked a much higher fee.
The Chairman. In other words, you did the work and he got the
pay.
Mr. LoCiCERo. I don't know who did the work. I still think that
I did the work.
The Chair3ian. You are the one that attended the negotiations.
Mr. LoCiCERo. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And drew the contract.
Mr. LoCicero. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And battled with them across the table ?
Mr. LoCuERO. That is riglit, sir.
Tlie Chairman. This fellow Holtzman was never tliere ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13365
Mr. LoCicERO. Not to my knowledge. He was never there when
I was there.
The Chairman. He was never visibly present ?
Mr. LoCicERO. No, sir.
The Chairman. You don't know where his influence was, or what
was happening to that ?
Mr. L/(^CiCERo. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. I can well appreciate an attorney's embarrassment
we will call it, or his surprise, at least, when he thought he was render-
ing a good service and accomplishing something for his client, and
then finding out that somebody else was paid to sit behind the scenes
to get the results that he thought he was getting in the use of proper ef-
forts in the exercise of his professional talents.
Mr. LoCicero. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all.
Mr. LoCicERO. Thank you, sir.
(At this point Senator Kennedy withdrew from the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call Mr. Holtzman's
partner who attended the first meeting, and see what light he can throw
on it.
Mr. Bushkin.
The Chairman. Mr, Bushkin, come forward, please.
Mr. Bushkin, be sworn.
You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, tlie whole truth, and notliing but
the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Bushkin. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JACK BUSHKIN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
JAMES E. HAGGERTY
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your
business or occupation, please, sir.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Bushkin. My name is Jack Bushkin. I live at 1890 Cherry-
lawn Avenue, Detroit, Mich.
The Chairman. And what is your business or occupation, please,
sir?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. I see. Will you answer this question for me, then.
Do you have counsel present ?
Mr. Bushkin. Yes.
The Chairman. Counsel, identify yourself for the record, please,
Mr. Haggerty. My name is James E. Haggerty, an attorney at law,
Detroit, Mich.
The Chairman, Proceed.
Mr. Haggerty, is that correct ?
Mr. Haggerty. I have identified myself. Senator.
The Chairman. I did not hear you. Did I get your name correctly ?
21243— 58— pt. 36 7
13366 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Haggertt. James E. Haggerty.
Senator Ives. Your middle initial is E ?
Mr. Haggerty. Yes.
Senator Ives. Not C ?
Mr. Haggerty. No, E.
The Chairman. Mr. Kennedy, proceed with the witness.
Mr. Kennedy. ]\Ir. Bushkin, yon have been in the labor consulting
business for a number of years, have you not ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself i
(At this point, Senator Church Avithdrew from the hearing room.)
The Chairman. Mr. Bushkin, let tlie Chair ask you: Do you hon-
estly believe that if you answered that question truthfully as to whether
you have been engaged in management-labor relations consultant
business for a period of years, a truthful answer to that question
might tend to incriminate you (^
Mr. Bushkin. I honestly believe that if I am forced to answer the
question, 1 will be forced to be a witness against myself in violation
of my rights under the iifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
INIr. Kennedy. According to the testimony we have had before this
committee, INIr. Bushkin, you were present at a luncheon at which it
was arranged for Mr. Holtzman, supposedly, to take over these dis-
cussions of negotiations and make an approach to a higher official
of the Teamsters Union. Could you tell us about that luncheon?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And that the $17,500 was paid in cash for that pur-
pose. Could you tell us about that ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You and Mr. Hoffa have always been veiy close,
have you, Mr. Bushkin ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fiftli amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a Avitness against myself.
The Chairman. Let me ask you : Did a'ou make Mr. Hoffa a loan
of $5,000?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a Avitness against myself.
The Chairman. Mr. Hoffa has so testified. Now, do you honestly
believe that if you admitted his testimony Avas true, and that you
did make him a loan for $5,000, that to state that as the truth and a
fact Avould tend to incriminate you ?
Mr. Bushkin. I honestly believe that if I am forced to answer the
question I Avill be forced to be a Avitness against myself in violation
of my rights under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13367
The Chairman. Are yoii sincere in that statement?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. Can't you just say "Yes" or "No" ?
Senator I\t.s. Mr. Chairman ^
The Chairman. Let him answer the question.
I said, are you sincere in that statement ?
Mr. BusiiKiN. I honestly believe that if I am forced to answer the
question I will be forced to be a witness against myself in violation
of my rights under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions ?
Senator Ives.
Senator Ives. I would like to inquire of our counsel, Mr. Kennedy,
whether this witness is under indictment.
Mr. Kennedy. I don't believe so. No.
Senator Ives. Has he been convicted of anything ? Is he awaiting
sentence ?
Mr. Kennedy. No, sir.
Senator Ives. That is all I wanted to know. I was trying to find
out what his reason was.
Mr. Kennedy. I might say he has probably one of the most effective
and successful labor-management consultant firms in the Detroit area.
Isn't that correct, Mr. Bushkin ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Ives. Do you mean to tell me he is supposed to be an expert
in the labor-management field ?
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct ; he is.
Senator Ives. May I ask him that question ?
Are you an expert in the labor-management field?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Ives. I though that was the field you were in.
The Chairman. Let me ask the witness: This is pretty serious.^
There is testimony here that reflects upon people. There is testimony
here from whence there certainly can be conclusions drawn that
something improper and illegal went on, something reprehensible took
place in connection with this money, this $17,500.
In taking this position and assuming that attitude you are not only
giving indirectly, at least, if not directly, credence to some assumptions
that may well be arrived at from the record being made here, but I
think you oAve it to your friend, James R. Hoffa, to come up here like
a man, under oath, and state tlie truth, and if he is not involved in
this in any way, say so under oath. That could not incriminate you, if
it is a fact. Will you change your mind now and change your attitude
and answer definitely whether any of this money went to Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully clecline to answer the question and ex-
ercise my privilege under the' fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. You are not going to be cooperative, helpful in any
way, are you ?
13368 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why you made the loan, you and
Mr. Holtzman both made the alleged loan, to Mr. Hoffa in cash,
$5,000 apiece?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex-
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Many of the stores that you represent, Mr. Bushkin,
are the chainstores, are they not?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex-
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And the union that deals with them primarily was
the retail clerks, was it not ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex-
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And the headquarters of that union was, up until last
year, in the headquarters of the Teamsters Union, was it not?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witiiess a<2"ainst myself.
Mr, Kennedy. And your brother, Herman Bushkin, was on the
payroll of the retail clerks ; was he not ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my ]Drivilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. As well as getting many of the chainstores in De-
troit, you have also been able to get your coin-operated machines into
those stores; have you not?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the market vending company ; is it not, Mr.
Bushkin?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You received, for instance, from the Big Bear Mar-
ket, from 1951 through 1956, this $118,480. Could you tell us what you
did for them ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You received from Cunningham's Drugstore over
that period of 1952 to 1956, $31,500. Can you tell us what you did
for them as far as labor relations were concerned ?
Mr. Bushkin, I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13369
Mr. Kenxedy. And then Fintex, you received from 1954: to 1956,
$19,1250 from them ; did you not ?
Mr. BusHKix. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privileo;e under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness a(»:ainst myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And then the biggest one has been the ACF Wrig-
ley's. Inc. ; has it not? From 1951 to 1956, you received $123,510 from
them.
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And Food Fair, you received $18,780 in the last
3 years from them. Is that right?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. May I ask Mr. Bellino to put the total in?
The Chairman. Mr. Bellino has been sworn.
You have examined the record and can give the information. You
may give the totals.
Mr. Belling. The total from 1951 through 1956 is $528,795.
The Chairman. How much ?
Mr. Bellino. $528,795.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what you did to earn that amount
of money ?
^ Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You are very close and have been very close to Mr.
Ben Dranow, of the Thomas Department Store in Minneapolis, have
you not, Mr. Bushkin ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You played an active role, did you not, in the
Teamsters advancing to the Thomas Department Store some $1,200,-
000?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bushkin, among the people that we find that you
are close to, or maybe you will tell us about that, are such as Mr. Jerry
Connelly, from the Minneapolis local of Teamsters, who used to be in
that local and is now in prison, is that right ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. What about Mr. Milton Holt, who was a close friend
of Johnny Dio's, in New York ?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
13370 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Abe Lew, of the Retail Clerks, who was close to
Mr. Sheffermaji ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy, Mr, Turk Prujanski, were you close to him also?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Vincent Meli ?
Were you also close to him ?
Mr, BusHKiN, I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself,
Mr, Kennedy, Could you tell us if you have ever been out to Las
Vegas, Mr. Bushkin?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
My. Kennedy. Do you remember when Mr. Ben Dranow was out
at Las Vegas?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you identify these three checks for the com-
mittee, please ?
The Chairman. The Chair presents to you photostatic copies of
three checks : One in the amount of $500, dated March 15, 1955 ; the
other in the amount of $1,100, dated March 15, 1955; and the other in
the amount of $1,500, dated March 15, 1955. These checks appear to
be signed by the same person — do they ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir.
The Chair]man. They appear to be signed by the same person. The
first one I read is made payable to cash. In fact, all three of them are
made payable to cash.
]\Ir. Kennedy, The Hotel Flamingo was the endorser on the one for
$1,100.
The Chairman. Wlio is the author ?
Mr. Kennedy, Benjamin Dranow, The Desert Inn is the one on
the other two.
The Chairman, I present you these checks and ask you to examine
them and state if you identify them, please, sir.
(Documents handed to the witness.)
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. You have looked at the checks? They are lying
before you. You see them, do you not ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Senator Iyes. Mr. Chairman, I protest.
The witness is not answering. A nod of the head is not an answer.
The Chairman. I could not see him nod his head.
Mr. Bushkin. I didn't hear the question.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13371
The Chairman. The question is: You have looked at the checks,
have you ?
Mr. BusiiKiN". I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. The Chair orders and directs you to lo6k at those
checks spread on the table right in front of you.
Now, you have looked at them, have you not?
Mr. BusHKiN. Yes, I have looked at them.
The Chairman. All right. Thank you.
Have you ever seen them before ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Did you handle those checks, the originals?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to ansAver the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The CiiAHiMAN. Did you get the money from them ?
Mr, Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. What did you do with the money you got?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Could I liave the checks back ?
Mr. (^hairman, these are 3 checks, 1 of $1,100, 1 of $1,500, and 1 of
$500. The $1,100 is to the Hotel Flamingo, and the $1,500 to the
Desert Inn and the other $500 to the Desert Inn. The checks were
stopped, and Mr. Drano had an account there where he had passed
these bad checks.
The information that Ave have is that Mr. Bushkin then came along
and made these checks good and paid the account of Mr. Drano at
these hotels.
Is that correct?
Mr. Bushkin. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. The checks about which the witness has been in-
terrogated, and Avhich were exhibited to him, and which he looked at,
may be made exhibit No. 5-A, B, and C.
(Material referred to was marked "Exhibits 5-A, B, and C" for
reference and will be found in the appendix on pp. 13711-13713.)
Mr. Kennedy. May I ask Mr. Salinger if he has examined the
records at the Desert Inn to determine who made good on Mr. Drano's
account ?
Mr. Salinger. I have.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us what happened ?
Mr. S^ALiNGER. The checks were made good by Mr. Bushkin.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us why you did that ?
13372 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privileo;e under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also receive some merchandise, two fur
pieces, from Mr. Ben Drano ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And those fur pieces cost some $4,430, that is right,
two of them ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us what happened to those two fur
pieces?
jSIr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. I am sorry. I did not describe them correctly.
They are mink coats ; is that right ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. We will go into that with another witness, I guess,
Mr. Chairman.
There are just a couple of other matters that I want to make sure
about.
Also, a large customer of yours in Detroit has been the Kinsel Drug-
store ; is that right ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Then you have also been in business in the Gantz Co. ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And in that company, you were a partner, were you
not, of Herbert Grosberg, who is the accountant for the Teamsters?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And you sell your products to the various grocery
chains in Detroit ; do you not ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And you also had an interest, and have an interest,
in the Globe Linen Supply Co. ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And that evidently went out of business in 1957.
Your partner in that company was Danny Litwak, who is the son
of Isaac Litwak, the head of the Teamsters local, is he not?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13373
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the LTnited States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr, Kennedy. And you were put in that business when you bought
out the interest of Mr, Moe Dalitz in that company, were you not?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectively decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United
States Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr, Kennedy. Another individual that you were close to is Mr.
Mike Rubino, is that right ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And you wouldn't tell us anything now about your
financial arrangements with Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth r.mendment of the United
States Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You have had this close working relationship with
individuals who are very close to Mr. Hotfa, you have advanced him
some money, according to his own testimony, and your partner, Mr.
Holtzman, and advanced him some money. You had your brother on
the payroll of the Retail Clerks w^hile it was in the Teamster head-
quarters. With all of these things, can you tell us anything more
about your relationship with Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
(At this point. Senator Ervin entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss this payoff from the Detroit Insti-
tute of Laundry with Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Have you testified or will you state whether you
and Mr. Holtzman were partners ?
Mr. BusiiKiN. I respectfully decline to ansAver the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the IJnited States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you know anyone that you will admit know-
ing, on the basis that it would not incriminate you ?
jNIr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you Imow Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr, BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Are you an American citizen ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. With the approval of the committee, the Chair
orders and directs you to answer the question.
13374 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Are you an American citizen ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr, BusHKiN. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Are you married ?
(The witness conferred with his counseL)
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Ervin. You will probably have to answer that to your
wife wlien you get home.
Mr. BusHKiN. It could be.
The Chairman. Do you have any children? I mean legitimate
children?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness againts myself.
The Chairman. Will you enlighten us and all others who may read
this record and who may hear you on how you honestly believe that
it could possibl}^ tend to incriminate you to state whether or not you
are married ?
Mr. BusiiKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Will you tell this committee and enlighten it and
others who may hear you or read this record how you can state that
you honestly believe that if you answered the question truthfully,
whether or not you have children, that a truthful answer to that ques-
tion miglit tend to incriminate you ?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you consider yourself a loyal American ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. BrsHKiN. Yes. sir.
The Chairman. Will you help your country and cooperate with
this committee, its duly constituted agency and authority to inquire
into the practices in labor-management relations?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. You honestly believe that if you cooperated with
this committee and gave it the information you have, that it needs and
desires as the representative of your Government, do you honestly
believe that that information might tend to incriminate you ?
Mr. BusHKTN. I honestly believe that if I am forced to answer the
question, I will be forced to be a witness against myself in violation
of my rights under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution.
The Chairman. Have you done anything, do you know anything,
that you can tell us about, that might not tend to incriminate you ?
Mr. BusHKiN, I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Is there any further questioning ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13375
Senator Kennedy?
Senator Kennedy. You are a labor relations counselor now?
Mr. BusHKiN. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Kennedy. Under the Taft-Hartley Act, there is no obliga-
tion for you to make reports of any legitimate activities that you
carry out. It seems to me that your refusal to testify, the fact that
your partner and you were involved in improper financial arrange-
ments involving payments to union officials for employers and other
arrangements we have heard described today, indicates the necessity
for legislation which will make it a matter of public record, all money
you receive from employers, and all payments you make to unions or
representatives of unions.
I am hopeful, after hearing your testimony today, that it will be
possible for the Congress to enact legislation in this field, in spite
of the fact that the Teamsters organization opposes the legislation.
I am hopeful for the legislation passed by the Senate which will put
you on record every year, both you and your late partner, with all of
these activities.
I am hopeful, after listening to you today, more than ever, that that
legislation will pass the Congress this year.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions ?
This witness will remain under his present subpena. He will be
subject to recall at such time as the committee may desire further
testimony from him.
Will you recognize that recognizance ?
Mr. BusHKiN. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And agree to it, then, for further interrogation
upon reasonable notice ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Bushkin. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
It appears the committee has continued these hearings this after-
noon about as long as we can. The hour is now almost 5 o'clock.
The Chair will have to be a little late in the morning. Otherwise,
we would convene at 10 o'clock. I will have to make it 10 : 30 in the
morning.
The committee stands in recess until that time.
(Members present at the taking of the recess were: Senators
McClellan, Kennedy, Cinlis, and Ervin.)
(Thereupon, at 5 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at
10 : 30 a. m., Wednesday, August 6, 1958.)
'^OA jn^i
IIWESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1958
United States Senate,
Select Committee on Improper Activities
IN the Labor or Management Field,
Washington^ D. C.
, , The select committee met at 10 : 30 a. m., pursuant to recess in the
caucus room, Senate Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan
(chaii-man of the select committee) presiding.
Present: Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Senator
John F. Kennedy, Democrat, Massachusetts; Senator Sam J.
Ervin, Jr., Democrat, North Carolina ; Senator Frank Church, Demo-
crat, Idaho ; Senator Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York ; Senator
Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Senator Carl T, Curtis,
Republican, Nebraska.
Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Paul Tierney,
assistant counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; Carmine S.
Bellino, accountant; Pierre E. Salinger, investigator; Leo C. Nulty,
investigator; James P. Kelly, investigator; James Mundie, investi-
gator. Treasury Department; John Flanagan, investigator, GAO;
Alfred Vitarelli, investigator, GAO ; Ruth Y. Watt, chief clerk.
(At the convening of the session, the following members were pres-
ent: Senators McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Kennedy, Curtis, and Church.)
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Counsel, you have a matter to place in the record ; have you ?
Mr, Kennedy. Yes, Senator.
The Chairman. You may proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. In the interim report of the Senate Select Commit-
tee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field, there
is contained the following statement on page 218, and I quote:
Although the charter (of local 102 of the UAW-AFL) was in the name of one
Sam Zaknian, a former Communist Party functionary, the committee had what
it considered clear proof that Berger, Dorfman, Previant, and Doria knew that
Dio was the man who was actually going to acquire the charter and run the local.
The reference to Previant in this statement is to Mr. David
Previant, of Milwaukee, Wis., attorney for the Central States' Con-
ference of Teamsters and other labor unions. Mr. Previant objected
to his inclusion on this point.
The Chairman. He filed objection with the committee ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes; that he had no knowledge whatever that
Johnny Dioguardi was going to get the charter for local 102. He
stated that his role in this matter was to arrange a meeting for Sam
Berger, an official of the International Ladies' Garment Workers'
13377
13378 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Union, with Mr. Anthony Doria, secretary-treasurer of the UAW-
AFL, for which Mr. Pi-eviant acted as general counseL
After consuhations with the staff, Mr. Previant submitted a sworn
affidavit in wliich he cateoorically denied that he knew Mr. Dio was
going to have anything to do with local 102.
The connnittee adopted the conclusion that Mr. Previant had knowl-
edge of Mr. Dio's connection Avitli the local as a logical inference from
the testimony which it heard. The committee still feels there is no
doubt that Sam Berger, Paul Dorfman, and Anthony Doria knew
of John Dio's involvement in this charter.
In the case of ]Mr. Previant, however, the committee believes it
should accept at face value his sworn affidavit that he had no knowl-
edge of Dio's interest in this charter.
The ChaiUman. In fairness to Mr. Previant, we feel that the record
should be cleared up, and whenever the committee makes an error,
and if we make tliem we want to correct them, and without objection
the affidavit of Mr. Previant will be placed in the record. I think it
conforms to the rules of the committee and I think that he is entitled
to have liis statement about it which, as far as we know now, is truth-
ful, and have it placed in the record.
Without objection, it is so ordered.
(The affidavit is as follows :)
State of Wisconsin,
Milwaukee County, ss:
David Previant being first duly sworn, on oath, deposes and says, that he is
a practicing attorney having his offices at 212 West Wisconsin Avenue, in the
city of Milwaukee, Wis., and at 2550 Guardian Building in the city of Detroit,
Mich. ; that he has been admitted to the bar of the State of Wisconsin, the State
of Michigan, and of the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as the bar
of a number of lower Federal courts and administrative agencies.
That affiant was admitted to the practice of law in the State of Wisconsin
in 1935 and has been associated with the law offices of Padway, Goldberg &
Previant of Milwaukee, Wis., since 1936, first as an employee, and subsequently
as a partner ; that this ofiice has specialized in the law of trade unions for over
45 years.
That this affidavit is made in answer to, and in contravention of, a statement
appearing at page 218 of the interim report of the Select Committee on Improper
Activities in the Labor or Management Field, United States Senate, to the
effect that the acquisition of a charter from the United Automobile Woiivers
of America, AFL (hereinafter referred to as UAW-AFL) by one John Dio-
guardi was "facilitated" by your affiant, and that your affiant knew that the
aforesaid John Dioguardi was the man who was actully going to acquire the
charter and run the local.
That your affiant and the law firm with which he is associated has been general
counsel for the UAW-AFL since 1939 ; that, during such entire period of time,
neither your affiant nor any member of the firm with which he is associated has
ever been called upon to recommend the issuance of a charter, nor have they ever
recommended the issuance of a charter, to any person or group of persons.
That, late in August or early in September of 1950, your affiant received a
telephone call at his office in Milwaukee from one Paul Dorfman, then an officer of
an A. F. of L. Federal Labor Union in Chicago, whom your affiant had met in
connection with trade-union matters ; that the aforesaid Paul Dorfman, knowing
your affiant was general counsel for the UAW-AFL, and that its headquarters
were in Milwaukee, inquired whether affiant would arrange an appointment for
some unnamed persons residing in New York who were then or had recently
b°en officers of a labor union affiliated with the CIO, and who were desii'ous of
changing such affiliation to the UAW-AFL; that, as an accommodation to both
Mr. Dorfman and the UAW-AFL, your affiant called Anthony Doria, its secretary-
treasurer, and Lester Washburn, its president, and arranged such an appointment.
That your affiant was present at the headquarters offices of the UAW-AFL at
the time when such appointment was kept by its officers and the aforesaid Paul
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD . 13379
Dorf man and one Sam Berber ; that said Sam Berger was introduced and identi-
fied as the business manager of a h:»cal miion afiiliated with tlie International
Ladies' Garment Workers Union, AFL : that your affiant liad never met nor heard
of the aforesaid Sam Berger before such meeting.
That the aforesaid Sam Berger stated that he was speaking on behalf of a
group of organized workingmen in the city of New York whose jurisdiction fell
within the jurisdiction of the UAW-AFL. and who had been dissatisfied with their
representation by both UAW-CIO and independent unions ; that, during the entire
time that your affiant was present at the meeting between the persons mentioned
above, neither the aforesaid Paul Dorfman nor the aforesaid Sam Berger nor any
other person mentioned the name of John Dioguardi nor described him in any
way, nor did they indicate in any manner that the requested charter would
go to any person or persons other than bona fiide workingmen employed within
the jurisdiction of the UAW-AFL.
That, while your affiant was present at siich meeting, the officers of the UAW-
AFL described in detail the steps which would be required for the issuance of
a charter to the persons involved, and arranged to provide the aforesaid Sam
Berger with the application blanks and necessary materials.
That at such meeting your affiant was not asked for his opinions or recom-
mendations, nor did he offer them, with respect to any of the matters discussed.
That, at the time of such meeting and for a very long period thereafter, your
affiant did not know John Dioguardi or any of the persons elected as officers or
hired as employees of the New York local unions.
That, after leaving such meeting, your affiant did not participate in, or receive
any further knowledge or information with res]Dect to, the issuance of such
charter.
That thereafter your aflBant had no connection with any New York local
unions which were chartered by the UAW-AFL until more than a year later,
at which time, in his capacity as general counsel for the international union,
he was called upon to advise with the officers of the international union and
the local unions concerning legal problems which arise in connection with the
requested certification of collective-bargaining representatives in New York
State Labor Board and National Labor Relations Board elections and in con-
nection with court proceedings involving the trusteeship of a local union in New
York.
That, at all times in connection with the aforementioned matters, your affiant
acted only in his capacity as general counsel for the international union, and
had no pei'sonal interest in the persons or the unions involved.
Further affiant sayeth not.
(Signed) David Previant.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of April 1958.
(Signed) David Leo Uelmen,
Notary Puhlic, Milwaukee County, Wis.
My commission expires November 30, 1958.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES R. HOTTA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWARD BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD, AND
DAVID PREVIANT— Resumed
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, before the interrogation begins to-
day, I should like to register with the committee an objection to the
procedure that is being followed. I would like to state my reasons
after making the objection.
The Chairmax. You may.
Mr. Williams. Senator, I know you to be a very fine lawyer, and
in my dealings with you you have always been eminently fair, and
I want to appeal to your sense of fair play as I make this objection.
I object, Mr. Chairman, to the procedure that is being followed,
whereby this witness is put on the stand and interrogated for a short
time, and then withdrawn from the stand and rebuttal witnesses are
13380 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
put on in juxtaposition to him. I object to this for two reasons, Mr.
Chairman.
I feel that the effect of this procedure is to create what we know in
the law to be a legislative trial in its most ignominious sense. By
way of illustrating it, I just want to state as my reasons for this ob-
jection wliat occurred here yesterday. This witness took the stand,
and he was interrogated about a matter which took place almost a
decade ago. He was then temporarily excused and 7 witnesses were
called in juxtaposition to him, plus 2 committee members who testified
briefly.
The Chairman. Those were staff members,
Mr. WiLLiAiMS. I am sorry ; they were staff members.
Now, the effect of that was to create the impression in the context
of the testimony that was given either that the witness had perjured
himself or that some member of this union had taken a payoff. Now,
as the testimony unfolded during the day, seven witnesses took the
stand, and each of them was permitted to speculate and conjecture
and make assumptions on an alleged payoff. There was no one wit-
ness, and there isn't a line of testimony in this record, and I searched
it carefully last night; no witness testified to a single fact concerning
any moneys received by any member of the International Brother-
hood of Teamsters, Warehousemen, Chauffeurs, and Helpers. Yet
each of them did speculate and conjecture.
Now, when they speculated adversely to the union, counsel for the
committee summarized their testimony. When they did not specu-
late adversely to the union, they were reminded, as I read the record,
that tliey were under oath, and an attempt was made to refresh their
recollection that they had speculated at some previous date adversely
to the union, and then one of the staff members was brought around in
front of the table and sworn and testified to this speculation.
So that we had, if the Chair please, hearsay, rumor, assumptions,
and speculations on this subject, which struck at the very heart of the
integrity of the members of this union who were involved in the
negotiations in effect.
I was not able, and as I read the rules of the committee I am not
able, to cross-examine effectively any of these witnesses. I feel that
the net effect of this, Mr. Chairman, is a legislative trial wherein
rumor, speculation, goes into the record without the advantage of
cross-examination. The witness is interrogated preliminarily, and
he is not apprised of the nature of the charge against him, although
there is, obviously, a charge against him from the way that the hear-
ing is being conducted.
Now, the second effect of this procedure, Mr. Chairman, I think, is
one of manifest unfairness to the witness. I read the record carefully
last night, and there are almost 250 pages of testimony taken here
yesterday. We sat here for about 5 hours. I have been advised by
counsel for the committee that he expects this witness to remain here
under the mandate of the subpena of this committee for about 3 weeks.
He was on the stand for approximately 30 minutes of the 5 hours, and
he testified for 27 pages out of 250.
Now, I think that is harassment, of which this committee should
certainly not want to be culpable, to hold him here and put him on in
what amounts, I submit, respectfully, to a legislative trial, and put
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13381
testimony on in juxtaposition, and to suggest either that he has testi-
fied perjuriously or he has been guilty of some wrongdoing about
which the future rebuttal witnesses are going to speculate and make
assumptions.
So, I respectfully ask, Mr. Chairman, that this witness be per-
mitted to give his testimony that is being called for, helpful to a
legislative purpose, and give it with continuity through to a con-
clusion, either now or at the end of the hearings, when all of the otJier
witnesses have testified, so that he may give his testimony and have it
over with, and so that he may be about his business as president of this
union.
I ask that he be permitted to do it at the outset now and go through
to a conclusion, or, if the committee prefers, that after all of the other
evidence is heard adverse to the union that he come in and answer it,
but that he be permitted to do it with continuity.
I suggest to the Chair that, certainly, the legislative function and
purpose of this committee could otfer no reason for not having the
testimony conducted in this fashion.
The Chairman. May the Chair say this: I certainly cannot sub-
scribe to the fact that this is a legislative trial. I do not think that
this committee has the authority, and I do not think it is its function,
to conduct a legislative trial. Its duty is to inquire into practices,
activities, and policies in labor-management relations that may or
may not be improper, but to ascertain the propriety of those practices.
I think counsel will agree that this committee has one of the most
difficult tasks ever assigned a legislative investigating committee. As
we move into these areas where collusion and bribery and violence and
brutality and vandalism exist, in those areas where those acts have
occurred and where there can be no doubt that they have occurred,
we are met with obstruction after obstruction. Witnesses exercise a
privilege that may be their right, and I am not questioning that, of
taking the fifth amendment, refusing to cooperate with their Govern-
ment and refusing to help us get this information. Certainly, no
witness was interrogated yesterday about any fact that was not
pertinent to this inquiry.
The strongest point you have, Counsel, in my judgment, is that
what you say is hearsay would not be admissible in a trial with a
charge, if a criminal charge were pending against either your client
or anyone else. But, traditionally, I know of no investigating com-
mittee that has simply adhered solely to the procedure established
for the prosecution of one charged with crime. We frequently take
opinion, and we have to. That is a legislative function, to get these
views.
I want to say that, so far as I am concerned, Mr. Hoffa, as Mr. Hoffa,
is not on trial. But these practices and these activities that are so
reprehensible that they cry out to the Congress of the United States
for corrective action are on trial. We are trying to find out exactly
what they are, and in wliat areas. It is incumbent on the Congress
to legislate to try to remedy those conditions.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ervin, Church, and Kennedy.)
The Chairman. As to the procedure to which you object here,
regarding having your client present when there is derogatory testi-
21243— 58— pt. 36 8
13382 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
mony being received, and other derogatory testimony anticipated, and
as to calling him from time to time to give his explanation and refute
it, I will be perfectly happy to submit that to the committee in execu-
tive session. I thought, and maybe I am wrong, that that was the
fairest way in wliich to do it. If you think difl'erently, we will take
it under consideration.
I know no fairer way than to have him present, and, as we put on
the testimony, to let him refute it or explain it. If I get your posi-
tion correctly, you would let us go ahead here for 5 weeks putting on
all this testimony and then have him come in.
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. That is your position.
Mr. Williams. Yes. sir.
The Chairman. But there are times when we do need to try to get
his viewpoint first, to get him to state what he did or did not do at a
given time, and then to try to relate other testimony to it.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Otherwise, you will say that we are indulging
assumptions and spending 3 or 4 weeks here smearing your client with-
out giving him an opportunity to be heard. We have had just the
opposite confront us here in the course of these hearings. That is,
when we start along and build it up, then we have the objection; we
have had that, the objection of "all you are doing is not giving him
a chance to answer. You are keeping him sitting back there for a
week or two and just building up and smearing this man."
I think counsel can agree with me that we get criticized either way
we go.
Mr. Williams. Well, you wouldn't get criticized from me, Mr.
Chairman, if you adopt the practice that I earnestly implore you to
adopt; namely, that you go through with the interrogation of this
witness to a conclusion at this point, or that you suspend his examina-
tion now until j'ou have heard all of what you have described as a
derogatory or adverse testimony, and then let us return and answer
it without having what I conceive to be — and I say this respectfully
to you, Mr. Chairman — what I conceive to be a series of legislative
trials during the course of these hearings.
The Chairman. Mr. Williams, I have great respect for you as a
lawyer, and, so far as my limited acquaintance and associations with
you are concerned, a high regard for you as a man. I know you have
ability as an attorney. I think, if you could just reverse the thing
and place yourself in our position, charged with the duty that this
committee is charged with, and if you are familiar, and you probably
are, with the difficulties I have pointed out to you, you would realize
that this committee cannot and will not be able to please your client
or others who may be the subject of inquiry or whose activities may
be the subject of inquiry.
We cannot expect commendation from them. On the contrary,
we not only expect, but we are receiving, their condemnation for
everything we are trying to do.
I may say, and this is not in any spirit of anger or offense, those criti-
cisms are not going to deter this committee from doing what it con-
ceives to be its duty. So you may bear that in mind as we proceed, I
do want to be fair. We will proceed this morning. During the noon
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13383
hour or before we reassemble this afternoon, I will submit your request
to the committee and we will consider it, I trust, impartially, in line
with what we conceive to be our duty.
Mr. Williams. Thank you, sir.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I think probably it is fair that I
go on record a little bit in regard to this. I yield absolutely to the
Chair in the right to determine the order of witnesses and the conduct
of this investigation.
It is a matter that depends upon certain research and procedure.
Someone has to run the committee, and that is why we have a chairman.
I think at the present time the chairman has stated ample reason for
the procedure of taking testimony and then having the witness step
aside and take any conflicting testimony. I think the chairman has
a good case for that. I do want to say something about the rules of
evidence followed. This is certainly no criticism of anyone involved,
either the chairman, the committee, or the staff, in any way. As the
chairman has stated, this has been one of the most difficult investiga-
tions that has ever been undertaken by a congressional committee.
The country is crying out for legislation. Everyone who has
studied the matter and who is interested in our economy and in the
rights of people realize that we must have legislation, and I believe
that every fact and idea that has been ofl'ered here throughout the
months does make a contribution to legislative purposes.
I would say this in regard to the evidence, and again I remind you
that this is not criticism of anyone — we have a big job, w^e have to
move rapidly, there are many witnesses to interview — I think insofar
as possible in future conduct we should, as nearly as we can, follow
the rule of the best evidence available.
I would not favor following a rule that barred hearsay and opinion
testimony. I think for legislative purposes that if a proper founda-
tion is laid, and wdiat a person actually heard and saw, even though
it is hearsay, it may have a very valuable legislative purpose. Now
as to opinions that speculate on guilt of a particular individual, it is
my feeling that if that opinion w\as possessed at the time the acts were
performed, that the witness should be able to tell what his understand-
ing of w^hat took place is. I think probably it should stop there. One
of my reasons for saying that is that to go further into it is unnecessary.
Just let the witnesses tell what happened, give their opinion as to
what they understood was taking place, tell what they heard, if it is
direct and specific, and then, I believe, Mr. Chairman, w^e w^ill have a
stronger record for legislative purposes and for all other purposes
for anybody that reads it as if Ave go a little beyond that in permitting
witnesses to speculate and conjecture. But I certainly would be
opposed to this committee binding themselves to absolutely bar opinion
evidence and hearsay if it is somewhat circumscribed.
Again, Mr. Chairman, please understand me, that this is not criti-
cism of anyone. I did not bring up the subject.
It was being discussed, and as one member I wanted to express my
opinion on it.
The Chairman. Thank you. Senator Curtis.
13384 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chair stated that we will have an executive session, at which
time all members may feel free to discuss it. If the witness prefers
to have the other procedure, I don't know just to what extent at the
moment we can accommodate him, but maybe we can accommodate him
sufficiently. However, I certainly want the record to stand that
whenever we do it the other way, it is being done at the request of
counsel representing the witness, and my judgment is that it will be
less fair to tlie witness than the procedure we are now following,
giving him the day by day opportunity — I say day by day, not neces-
sarily every day, but as the things are presented — to give him the
opportunity to refute them or to explain them, as the case may be.
However, gentlemen, I will arrange later with you as to the time,
and we will have an executive session during the noon hour. In the
meantime, we will proceed. Are there any other comments?
Senator Ervin. Except, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say this:
I don't think people know or realize the difficulty under which this
committee functions. We have, and this is not applying particularly
to the Teamsters, but generally, summoned witnesses, the committee
subpenas witnesses, and the witnesses after their subpena, or after their
interviews, on several occasions, have received threats from anonymous
sources. We had on one occasion a witness subpenaed who cooperated,,
with the committee. He had his place of business burned.
We have a situation in which witnesses make statements of one-
nature to the investigators, and then when they come to testify, I
wouldn't say frequently but on occasion, they change their testimony
from direct testimony to heai-say testimony, as we witnessed an
example yesterday. We have situations where nobody on earth, sa
far as I know, connected with this committee, has any idea of who was
responsible for it, but a situation like this occurred in the case of Frank
Kierdorf . It happened during the pendency of the hearing.
Witnesses are subject constantly to a species of psychological
coercion and duress. Who is responsible for these things, I don't
have the slightest idea, and I certainly don't intimate that the man
who is now the witness is the man responsible.
But those are the circumstances under which this committee has
to conduct its hearings. I am astounded. We have men who are
supposed to have been honest labor leaders, exercising authority over
their fellow Americans, coming here before this committee man after
man and when they are asked about their conduct as officials of
unions, they take the fifth amendment, which is a privilege of every
American to take, if he honestly believes that what he would say would
tend to incriminate him. I realize that sometimes an innocent man
can invoke the privileges of the fifth amendment.
I also know from long experience as a lawyer that those occasions
are rare, indeed. But either the guilty or the innocent are entitled
to invoke it. If I was the head of a labor union and discovered an
officer who could not make a full, frank and truthful disclosure about
his activities as a union officer without incriminating himself, if I had
the authority he would not remain an officer until the sun went down —
if I had the authority to remove him. I don't think men that invoke
the fifth amendment are privileged to exercise authority over other
Americans.
They may, as an individual, have a right to hide individual acts
behind the fifth amendment but not their official acts, and when
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13385
rhey invoke it to hide their official actvS they ought to be forthwith
removed from their positions.
The OiiAiRMAN. Are there any further comments ? The Chair will
say this about the fifth amendment. I don't want any misunder-
standing with respect to my position about it. 1 think any witness
has the right to invoke it if he honestly believes that if he gave a
truthful answer to tlie question that a truthful answer might tend
to incriminate him.
But I do not think he has the right to take the fifth amendment
because a truthful answer might incriminate another. I know the
rule with respect to the fifth amendment, and I know the rule of
presumption of innocence that attends everyone charged with a crime.
But there is no court and there is no rule that can keep the human
mind from forming its own oj)inion and conclusion with respect to
the character of those who do invoke the fifth amendment under
circumstances where tlie^^ owe an obligation and duty not only to
their country but to those whom they rejjresent and serve to tell
the truth about their activities, particularly those activities that are
I'elated to the obligation that they have assumed, and particularly in
respect to stewardship.
All right, we will proceed.
Mr. Kennedy, proceed with your interrogation.
- Mr. Williams. Yesterday I promised Senator Curtis that I would
produce here a copy of the consent order about which we talked, and
I have copies of it for everyone.
The Chairman, You may sul)mit them, Mr. Counsel.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, the testimony that was given yesterday
morning and yesterday afternoon, did that serve to refresh your
recollection at all regarding your relationship Avith the Detroit Insti-
tute of Laundry ?
Mr. HoFFA. I made it my business during the noon recess to call
Detroit and talk to Isaac Litwak to find out whether or not I had
attended a meeting in the Detroit Leland Hotel. I believe it was the
Leland.
In any event I did attend one meeting, and I dropped in at the one
meeting of the negotiating committee. I may say also, Mr. Chairman,
if I may, to clear the record, so there will be no questions as to what
happened in that meeting, tliat I have here a prepared statement
from the files and records of local 285 concerning the New Method
Laundry and concerning the questions of increases and contract con-
'Cessions that were made during those negotiations.
For the committee's information, and for legislative purposes, it
might be well if you Avould know what those were, with your
permission.
The Chairman. Do you have a statement that you wish to read ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir; I do.
The Chairman. Has it been submitted?
Mr. Kennedy. I haven't seen it.
Mr. HoFFA. It was in answer to questions yesterday and that is
wliv I didn't file it as a statement to the committee.
The Chairman. Is it a brief statement?
Mr. HoFFA. It is.
13386 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairiman. I think that there is no objection. We have a rule
here where testimony that is going to be read should be submitted.
We will waive that rule. Proceed.
Mr. HoFFA. People signing application cards at New Method
Laundry.
The Chairman. Do yon have extra copies ?
Mr. HoFFA. I would be happy to leave this with you.
The Chairman. I thought we might follow you better.
Mr. HoFFA (reading). Edward H. Grooms joined the union June 2,
1948; Edward Supkask, July 22, 1945; George Gray, December 5,
1948 ; Perry Mirk, September 1942 ; Frank J. Greenmiller, August 30,
1947; Israel W. Dunbar, 1946; Alfred Leo Coleman, November 5,
1948 ; and Nick Hurghis, June 6, 1943.
New Method Laundry signed an individual contract and the con-
tract was effective the 28th day of February 1949. It was signed by
Irvine: Miller and Casimer Miholzozah, or something of tliat nature,
and the same time there was an association contract signed by mem-
bers of the association, and on that contract appears the signature of
Irving Miller, signed on the 27th day of June 1949. Contract bene-
fits— and this may be of interest concerning some assertions that it was
a "sweetheart" agreement. It is the highest rated contract in the
United States, to the best of our research department's infonnation.
All drivers receiving a base pay of less than $15 per week shall be increased
to $15. B. All drivers receiving less than 15 percent increase receive an increase
of (a) one-half of 1 percent, effective February 28, 1040; (b) an additional one-
half of 1 percent effective August 28, 1958. These drivers worked on a per dollar
sales volume.
Drivers were increased from $50 to $55 mininnim weekly guaranty. Wholesale
drivers receiAed an increase from $()0 plus 4 percent over $500 per week business,
to $62.50 plus 4 percent over $500 \yor week business.
Effective August 28, 1950, the drivers would receive $65 per week, plus 4 percent
of all business over $500. Helpers receiving an increase from $35 phis 1 percent
for all business over $1,000 per week, to $40 per week plus 1 percent for all busi-
ness over $1,000 per week. Commercial drivers received an increase as follows :
Fifty dollars base pay, plus 5 percent over $500 to $52.50 plus 5 percent over
$500, effective February 28. $55 base pay plus $500 per week for base pay, plus
5 percent per week, effective August 28, 1950. New drivers are to receive
minimum weekly guaranty base pay from $35 to $40 after the first week proba-
tionary period. Apprentice relief drivers from $50 to $55. Relay drivers from
$55 to $60.
There is also a provision in the contract for reopening the contract after Sep-
tember 1, 1951. in order to reconsider the changing or converting from 6-day
week to 5-day week. This contract was supplemented on the 2d day of January
1953, converting from a 6-day week to a 5-day week, with 3 months grace period
with which to convert. Note, and this is important : The New Method Laundry
re-signed a contract on the 27th day of February 1946 with William H. Miller,
and also the-e is a health and welfare program calling for $2 per week in this
particular agreement at that time. That has been increased since.
"VVlien thev made statements yesterday concerning "sweetheart"
agreements, if you take time to check, for legislative purposes, the
balance of the contracts in the United States, you will find that this
doesn't take second to any contract in the United States in language
or cost value.
The Chaieman. Mr. Hoffa, I do not recall that any witness who
testified referred to it as a "sweetheart" contract,
Mr. HoFFA. The committee insinuated that it was such.
The Chairman. On the contrary, they were referring to the harsh-
ness of the contract and their desire to keep it from being made more
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13387
oppressive from their standpoint. I am not saying it is. But to keep
it from being made more oppressive or to avoid a strike, the payoff
was made or arrangements were made to have you intervene, accord-
ing to their testimony, you or someone higher up, higher than the
president of the locaL
I don't recall, and I think I am right about it, and I don't recall
anyone maintained it was a "sweetheart" contract. The benefits that
may have gone to the worker from the contract may be very good and
very commendable. I don't question that, and I do like to see men
get increases where it can be justified. But the issue here was that
after long negotiations, and after they had made these concessions,
still they were unable to get a contract and were threatened with a
strike, and therefore they had to resort, from their viewpoint, and T
don't say they had to, but from their viewpoint, from the testimony
that they gave, they finally had to resort to going to a higher author-
ity in the Teamsters Union.
Now, let me just say this, while I am talking about it : Again this
is not a trial, but here are circumstances that have been sworn to
about this particular negotiation that went on, the length of time of
it, and concessions they claim they had made, and they still couldn't
get a contract. The industry was under threat of a strike. They
went to some source higher up, and there is no question about that.
At the final test there is evidence to indicate that you are the one who
stepped in, and when you stepped in, then they were able to proceed
to negotiate a contract.
It was substantially, according to the testimony, on the same terms
that the management or the laundry institute had been ofl'ering.
There is no doubt, and I don't think you would even challenge the
fact, that they did raise $17,500 and paid it to one who from every
indication now was close to you, and from a circumstance which you
testified to yourself, one from whom you could borrow $5,000 and from
his partner another $5,000 without note, and without interest, and with-
out security, and of which you kept no record, and from which you
can only testify now from what an accountant reported to you from
sources yet unknown, so far as I know, as to where he got his informa-
tion, because there is no record for him to get it from, with respect
to your having paid the loan back.
Now those are things that I tliink call for explanation, if any fur-
ther explanation can be given. I think this committee would be dere-
lict in its duty, and it would show lack of moral courage if on the face
of those circumstances it didn't try to search for the final answer and
the truth.
Again I think in giving you this opportunity, as we develop these
tilings, we are being fair to you. If you think that is unfair, and if
you want to let these things go on here for 3 or 4 weeks and then come
in, I am going to submit it to the committee.
Let me ask you this question : Can you give any better explanation
than you gave yesterday, after hearing this testimony, about your
connection with this contract and with these two men who were your
friends, and who interceded and who got the money, and from whom
you borrowed money ?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I will give you an explanation concerning my
activities as president of the joint council 43, and I will let my record
13388 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
speak for itself. I am not interested in havin<»: strikes for tlie benefit
or tjlorification of certain people. I am interested in our members
and the contracts will speak for themselves, because in Michigan we
have the highest contracts in the United States, and they are going to
be higher. But the question is, sir, as president of the joint coun-
cil 43 when there is a strike takes place in the city of Detroit, it l^ecomes
my strike and not the local union's strike. Because under our rules I
must assume the responsibility of seeing that that strike is won by
using the economic forces of our organization on a combined basis for
the benefit of au}^ one individual local union.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Me-'
Clellan, Ives, Church, Ervin, Kennedy, and Curtis.)
Mr. HoFFA. I am not about to let any local union go on strike when
there is no reason to go on sti'ike. I vetoed many strikes and I will
continue to do so.
If I think they are wrong, I will continue to intervene in contracts
fis long as I am president of the joint council, or as long as I am presi-
dent of this international union. Where I think there is a fair offer
made, or I think for self-glorification somebody wants to call a strike,
I will intervene and see that the strike isn't called, if possible, when
there is a contract already negotiated beneficial to our members. And
if they have a strike, and they are striking simply because of language
or because of some particular provision that I can foresee we can
get in a reasonable period of time in the future without a strike, I
will not advocate a strike.
Insofar as my friendship with Holtzman and Bushkin, I have
friendship with hundreds of labor relations men. I have friendships
with hundreds of lawyers who deal for employers in handling con-
tracts. I find that it is hard to deal with an enemy, but sometimes it is
easy to deal with a person you know a little bit better than a stranger.
Tlierefore, I do intervene in these contracts, and I did intervene in
this contract. I am very happy, and I think the record speaks for
itself, that my suggestion, whatever it may have been at that time,
was the better of the two suggestions because there was no strike, and
they still got, in a reasonable period of time, everything they were at-
tempting to strike for.
Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, may I break in here ?
The Chairman. Senator Ives.
Senator I^xs. I would like to ask Mr. Hoffa a question about Mr.
Bushkin who appeared yesterday. I believe, Mr. Hoffa, j^ou stated
that Mr. Bushkin is a friend of yours.
Mr. Hoffa. That is right, sir.
Senator Ives. Of long standing ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right, sir.
Senator Ives. One you value very highly ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't say I value him highly, but he is a friend of
mine, a friendly acquaintance.
Senator Ives. Value him the way you want to. I w^ould like to ask
you this. Do you know why he took the fifth amendment yesterday ?
So far as we could ascertain, there was no reason for doing it, unless
he was shielding somebody.
Mr. Hoffa. I don't know, Senator, but I had an opportunity to get
from my lawyer a copy of the Supreme Court's latest decision con-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13389
cerning: people's right to take the fifth amendment. I would like to
read it to you
Senator Ives. Wait a minute. I am not questionino- anybody's right
to take the fifth amendment. I am asking you if you knew why he took
it.
Mr. HoFFA. You are insinuating — he has a right vuider the Supreme
Court's decision that I have here in front of me, even if he is innocent,
to take it.
Senator Ives. On that basis, anybody that comes before us can take
the fifth amendment all the way through, before any legislative com-
mittee.
Mr. HoFFA. Why don't you let him take it and leave him alone ^
Senator Ives. Where would we learn anything so we can legislate?
Mr. HoFFA. I can only answer for myself. I cannot answer for
somebody who desires to take the fifth.
Senator Ives. I am asking if you know why he took the fifth.
Mr. HoFFA. I cannot answer between that person taking the fifth
and myself.
Senator Ives. I am not asking about yourself.
Mr. HoFFA. That is what you are insinuating.
Senator I^^i;s. Not at all.
You don't choose to take the fifth. You talk around it another way.
Mr. HoFFA. I answer the question to the best of my recollection. I
am not here to commit perjury.
Senator Ives. You don't seem to know what you are talking about
half the time.
Mr. HoFFA. That is your opinion.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Ives. What are you talking about ?
The Chairman. Just a moment. Let's ask questions and have the
witness answer.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, I want to register an objection to
anyone shouting at this witnesss. It isn't necessary that he be shouted
at. I think the procedure will go along a lot more orderly if it is con-
ducted in a courteous way.
I don't think it is necessary for any member of the committee to cas-
tigate the witness. We are not here for moral judgments on anybody.
I think any questions directed at him as to the motivations of someone
else is grossly improper. There is no way that this witness would
know why some other man sought to invoke his constitutional privi-
lege.
The Chairman. Well, let the Chair answer you now. In this ordeal
that we are going through sometimes it is difficult to restrain our emo-
tions. I find it difficult myself at times. But I think it is quite proper,
in view of the friendship and in view of the transactions, to ask Mr.
HofFa if he can give us any reason or knows any reason why his friend
takes the fifth amendment when asked what he did with the money,
in view of the implications that are certainly present in the testimony
before lis. Mr. Hoffa can say he has no reason why. We need not
argue about his right to take it. I have expressed my view with re-
spect to that.
I don't think he has a right to take the fifth amendment unless he
honestly believes that the testimony he would give, truthful testimony,
13390 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
would tend to incriminate him. When they take it on the basis that
they are taking it simply because they are apprehensive or because they
know their testimony would incriminate another, I think it is a dis-
tortion of the fifth amendment. I think it is a flagrant travesty of
justice. We are concerned about it, and I think it poses a real problem
for the Congress and for the American people if this practice can be
indulged and if a witness can simply choose to take the fifth amend-
ment rather than give testimony against another. The fifth amend-
ment as it is today, and if it is to operate that way, can undermine law
enforcement and decency and justice throughout the land.
Now let's proceed to ask questions.
Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I would like to comment a little bit on
what the counselor said about my shouting. It so happens I have a
voice of considerable volume. We have these microphones in front of
us so that what is said will be heard. I can just as well fill this room
without this microphone, except it would not be carried on the televi-
sion or anything else. I am not going to whisper here just for your
sake, Mr. Counselor, I can tell you that.
Mr. Willia:sis. I did not think we were conducting this hearing for
television. Senator.
Senator Ives. '\^niat?
Mr. Williams. I did not think we were conducting this for televi-
sion. I thought we were conducting this so we can get information
helpful to this committee.
Senator Im3s. I can get information just as well if I shout as if I
don't. It does not bother me in getting information.
Tlie Chairman. Let's proceed.
Senator ER^^N. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question ?
The Chairman. Senator Ervin.
Senator Erv^n. You stated that this witness was a friend of yours,
who took the fifth yesterday ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Senator ER\^N. Did you ask your friend whether or not he would
not give testimony in exoneration of you ?
I believe it was asked concerning whether you had participated in
this matter ; was it not ?
I was not here all dscj.
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir ; they did.
Senator Ervin. Did you ask your friend if he would give testimony
tending to sustain your innocence rather than — your innocence of any
receipt of this money — rather than take the fifth amendment?
Mr. HoFFA. Frankly, I did not care what he said. Senator, because
it could not affect me.
Senator Ervin. It just occurred to me that if I had a friend who
knew something which would tend to corroborate my testimony, I
believe I would make that request of him.
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I would not.
Senator Ervin. Well, we have different opinions on that point,
apparently.
The Chairman. May the Chair ask 1 or 2 questions in view of the
comment of the witness a moment ago.
Are we to assume that from your remarks and from your testimony,
that in securing benefits and improving the condition and welfare of
IMPROPER ACTIVITIEIS IN THE LABOR FIELD 13391
the union members wliom yon represent, that as you point to the gains
and advances you make for them in contracts, their increase in wages
and so forth, are we to assume from your remarks as you made them
tliat you feel the end justifies the means, and if it takes criminals and
thugs and crooks and violence and bribery to accomplish those ends,
that they are justified ?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I did not say that, and I don't believe that, and
I don't mean that.
The Chairman. You Inaow that is tlie big problem that this com-
mittee has today, in what we are inquiring into. You know that is
true. When you were before this committee before you said you were
going to clean up some of these things. We are going to inquire into
that.
I am not going into it at the moment, but your statement that you
are going to clean them up, and your actions will liave to be weighed
against each other. All right, Mr. Kennedy, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did you intervene in this contract ?
Mr. HoFFA. It was brought to my attention that there was a pending
strike. I was desirous, as president of the joint council and a vice
president of the area, or in charge of central conference — I don't guess
I was a vice president at that time — of not having a strike.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you intervene at all times when there is about to
be a strike ?
Mr. HoFFA. I reserve the right to intervene in every contract.
Mr. Kennedy. There is a situation in this case where, according to
the sworn testimony, no hearsay wdiatsoever but the sw^orn testimony
of yesterday, there was a payment made of $17,500, a payoff, in order
to get an intervention from a higher-up in the Teamsters Union.
Then you intervened. Can you give us
Mr. HoFFA. What does that mean ?
Mr. Kennedy. Can you give us any more explanation of that ?
Mr. HoFFA. What does that mean? That I got the $17,500? Is
that what you are insinuating? If you do, I did not get it.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not get that money ?
Mr. HoFFA. And I deny under oath that I got it.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not get any of the money i
Mr. HoFFA. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. You have always had a very close relationship with
employers, have you not, Mr. Hoff a ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have very good relationship with the employers I do
business with, and I am proud to say that that relationship resulted
in the finest contracts there is in this country and has prevented strikes
in this country, which I hope that is what you are here for.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't intervene every time there is going to be
a strike. We had some testimony last week where there was a strike
called, pickets appeared before the company that was owned by a
brother of a man who was involved in a labor dispute.
Mr. HoFFA. Where ?
Mr. Kennedy. In Detroit?
Mr.HoFFA. What?
Mr. Kennedy. Hanley Dawson Chevrolet.
13392 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. For your information, I was interested in that strike.
For your information, I was conversant with everythino; that took
place concernino- the picketing; of that particuhir operation.
Mr, Kennedy. Why were the picket lines allowed to continue there ?
Mr. HoFFA. Because Hanley Dawson would not recognize our union.
And for your information, further, Mr. Kennedy, and edification of
the whole committee, if you would correct the Taft-Hartley law as
you are trying to do, you would not have areas where employers can
duck behind the "no man's land'' and refuse to deal with the union
when the employers" employees want the union.
Senator Kennp:dy. I am glad you brought that up. The bill tliat
passed the Senate, as you know, makes it compulsory for the National
Labor Relations Board to assume its jurisdiction over the full Fed-
eral area. I understand that the Teamsters oppose this bill and you do.
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, we oppose it, because that was not the only thing
you had in the bill.
Senator Kennedy. What is it you object to in the bill ^ To having
j)rohibition of reporting middlemen or payoffs? What were your
objections to the bill ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't care to discuss the bill. Senator, because to dis-
cuss that bill, I will have to discuss it with our lawyers and our de-
partment that deals with that, and I am not fully familiar, except I
did read a memorandum we submitted. But I say to you that you.
the Senators of the United States, left a "no man's land*' where a
certain group of employers decided to refuse to deal with unions even
though their employees wanted a union.
And they were not hesitant very much, and I don't see you bringing
them in, wasn't hesitant about hiring lawyers who resorted to every
tactic in this country to refuse to recognize our union.
That is what created the strike.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, in the bill that passed the Senate,
there is an attempt to deal with the "no man's land" problem which
you have brought up this morning, and you are opposed to the bill.
Tell lis the explanation of that.
Mr. HoFFA. It don't deal with it. I have been advised by our peo-
ple that it don't deal with the "no man's land.'"
Senator Kennedy. Why doesn't it deal with it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know.
Senator Kennedy. You brought it up ?
Mr. HoFFA. So I am going to keep on bringing it up.
Senator Kennedy. Can't you give an explanation as to why you
brought it up ?
Mr. HoFFA. I submitted a brief and you can read the brief.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, you don't know, do you. Mr.
Hoffa, what the language provides in the bill you are opposed to?
Mr. Hoffa. I read the brief and discussed it with our people, but
I am not in a position at this moment without refreshing myself
exactly as to what the legal reasons were we objected to it.
Senator Kennedy. I understand you don't know the legal reasons
yet you are criticizing the Members of the Senate about not dealing
with this problem of the "No man's land" and yet we have attempted
to deal with the problem and you are opposed to the bill The only
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13393
;Li,roiips opposed to it are the NAM, the chambers of commerce, and
the Teamsters.
Mr HopTA. Well, the NAM and the chambers of commerce are not
affiliates of the Teamsters, but the Teamsters will continue to oppose
any legislation they don't believe is right for the benefits of the mem-
bers.
Senator Kennedy. You can't tell me what it is in the bill you are
opposed to ^
Mr. HoFFA. You have our brief, if you take time to read it, you will
know what it is.
Senator Kennedy. Can you tell me ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I am not going to take time to tell you, because I
haven't the brief in front of me.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. I want to get the information on the strike that you
say you know about. Do you know the situation as far as the Dawson
Taylor strike 'i
Mr. HoFFA. I know some of the details of it, and we authorized
tlie strike.
Mr. Kennedy. And the picket line also, according to the sworn
testimony before the committee, appeared before the companies that
were owned by Mr. Dawson Taylor, his brother, Mr. Hanley Taylor.
He liad nothing to do with it and there was no effort to organize his
employees. Can you explain that to us ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe that the statement is true, and I am
.going on assumptions as other witnesses have here. I am going on
the assumption that our organization has attempted to organize every
automobile dealer agency in the city of Detroit, and I personally have
attended mass meetings, trying to get the individuals into our union,
and for oi/^ years we have had nothing but continuous trouble and
interference of every sort there is without anybody worrying about
the salesman who is starving to death, working and trying to sell
automobiles.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, all I am saying is that you did intervene
in this situation involvinc' the Detroit Institute of Laundry, that there
was a payoff' made of $17,500 to get the intervention of a higher-up.
You did intervene.
You say, "Well, I intervened to stop strikes."
We had a situation that was developed last week before the com-
mittee where there was an attempt to organize one brother and there
was no attempt to organize another brother who ran some companies,
but yet picket lines appeared in front of his place of business. Obvi-
ously, the picket lines lasted for some weeks and you did not intervene
in that.
Mr. HoFFA. I recognized the fact in that particular instance of my
inability to do anything other than picket employers who consistently
refuse to recognize the law of the land, and I did not see anybody inter-
vening to help me.
The Chairman. Let me ask you a question at that point. Where
the workers themselves do not want a union, do you think you have
tlie right, and you may have under existing law, do you w^ant the right
13394 IMPROPER ACTn^ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
to coerce and compel them to join a union by the power, economic
power, of a strike, of a picket line ?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I will answer that question by saying this to
you: That each unoroanized individual in any particular craft or
industry is a jeopardy to the organized worker in the particular same
business. I believe that it is our responsibility as an organization to
advertise wherever unfair slavery wages exist below the standards of
union people in a hope and a desire that the general public will not
patronize that particular concern but will recognize that the American
worker is entitled to a decent wage scale and decent conditions.
The Chairmax. You go further than that, don't you, Mr. Hoffa?
You withhold supplies from that place of business.
Mr. HoFFA. I believe that every member belonging to any organiza-
tion as an American citizen has a perfect right, whether it is passed
by legislation or otherwise, but an inborn right, to decide whether or
not he will be a party to destroying the conditions that he is able to
give to his wife, his children, for the benefits of a union contract, and
thereby recognizing and supporting any placard that announces an
employer is unfair.
The Chairman. What you are saying and what you mean and what
you practice is that you believe in forcing them into the union whether
they want to come in or not.
Mr. HoFFA. An employer necessarily does not have to join the union
to remove a picket line advertising unfair conditions in his plant. All
he has to do is put into effect decent, honorable union wages, and the
picket line then does not affect his employees.
The CiiAiRMAx. The great mass of testimony before us completely
refutes everything you are saying.
Mr. HoFFA. Show us the case of the Teamsters where you are talk-
ing about it.
The Chairman. I can show it to you in the record. Just read the
record.
Mr. Hoffa. I have read every bit of it.
The Chairmax. There is plenty of it. That is what you have been
doing. That is one of the improper and evil practices we are looking
into. It is a practice, I think, which must be corrected by legislation.
Mr. HoFFA. Then you will destroy the unions and have nothing but
back to 1932 wages, because you will allow the employer who refuses
to sit down and honorably deal with the union, but hide behind skill-
ful lawyers, to refuse to deal v.itli the unions, to be able to pay his
employees less money, working more hours, no fringe benefits, and
thereby destroy the union benefits of the union workers.
The Chairman. Nobody wants to destroy the unions.
Mr. HoFFA. That is what you will be doing.
The Chairmax'^. We are not going to permit, if we can prevent it,
unions, and some union leaders, destroying the liberty and freedom of
the American people guaranteed to them under the Constitution.
Mr. HoFFA. I think they are entitled also, Senator, under the Amer-
ican Constitution, to expect the rights of being able to organize and
being able to go into their employer and get benefits without being
destroyed from employers who are nonunion.
The Chairman. Just a minute. TYlien I talk, you are going to
listen. I want you to get that straight. We are not going to permit^
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13395
if I can prevent it, by law, compulsion that makes people join a union
and bow down to a force that tends and is trying to be bigger than
government itself.
I want that understood.
I was a laboring man. I do not want to destroy unions. But I
do not want your union or you as the head of it, to become above and
beyond the law of the land.
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I — excuse me.
The Chairman. I am not going to permit it if I can help it.
Mr. HoFFA. In response to what you have said concerning our
activities, Senator, if you will look around certain sections of this
country, you will find that there is less than average wages paid in
those particular areas to our type of member, our type of potential
member, where there is nothing except harassment by State law,
harassment by courts, to where when a person does want to join the
union voluntarily, he finds himself in the position of losing his job.
That is the thing we are here to prevent.
The Chairman. I don't believe in them losing their job because
they join a union, but I don't believe in their losing their job either
because they decline to join the union.
Mr. HoFFA. Well, there is a strike in your country, sir, that has
been going on for a considerable time, where the people all joined
the union, are all on the picket line, and this employer wouldn't
recognize them.
The Chairman. "We have a law to protect you in that.
Mr. HoFFA. Where is it ?
The Chairman. You have your power of force, your economic
force, and you know it.
Mr. HoFFA. There is no such law.
The Chairman. You can call a strike, and that may be wholly
justified if an employer will not Becognize the union where his em-
ployees, a majority of them, belong to it and ask for a union. We
have provided the remedy and you have it. A^'liat I am objecting
to, what the American people are objecting to, is when you have a
remedy, when you have not met the conditions, the precedents, to
exercise that remedy, then you choose to take other means, the means
of force to compel.
(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.)
The Chairman. That is my objection to it.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask tlie witness one
question.
This is not confined to cases already heard by the committee.
Have the Teamsters Union offered a contract that has meant a
reduction in wages for employees in order to have the Teamsters
Union recognized ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know of any particular instance where that has
happened. But in your particular State, Senator, people are working
below substandard wages of the entire Middle West because of the
laws you have been able to pass to restrict unions to the tune of about
40 cents.
(At this point. Senator Mundt entered the hearing room. )
Senator Curtis. I am not going to enter into an argument on that.
13396 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
That is not within the purview of this investigation, to fix wages.
But I wanted to know whether or not the Teamsters have offered
contracts that meant a reduction in wages in order tliat they miglit
be recognized as tlie bargaining agent.
Mr. HorrA. If such a contract exists, I would be more than happy
to know, so that I can persona ll}^ intervene in tlie next negotiation
and adjust tlie wages comparable to the locality of the contract. If
you are talking about the intrastate carriers in Nebraska, then I can
give you a history of that particular incident which has been goin^
on for 3 long years, and many a dollar spent on both sides, to try and
get decent wages. It is true, so we will understand each other, it is
true. Senator, that in some instances where people were working on
a flat rate for unlimited numbers of hours, that when we signed a
union contract and the hours became limited before overtime, their
employers saw fit to reduce the number of hours they worked, thereby
in some instances reducing the take-home pay they originally had.
But that is being corrected as we perfect our organization in
Nebraska to where we will raise the hourly rates sufficiently high that
it will more than take care of the loss of hours that the employer
saw lit to take away from them.
Senator Curtis. Then it is true that some contracts have been
offered that have reduced the pay of employees if the Teamsters
Union is recognized as the bargaining agent 'i
Mr. HoFFA. Only to the extent that the employer, instead of work-
ing them 100 hours a week, now works them 40 hours a week, and the
em})ioyee has not been able j-et to get his wage scale up to compensate
him for the long hours he used to work at substandard wages.
But that will be corrected, Senator. And the hourly rates are much
higher currently than they were, sir.
Senator Curtis. I don't know of anybody working 100 hours a
week. But I am interested in knowing whether or not Teamsters
admit or deny that they offer contracts which call for a reduction in
the income of their workers in order to gain recognition and collect
dues.
Mr. HoFFA. I deny that we offer any contract, to my knowledge,
to workers of a lesser hourly rate or less fringe benefits than they
previously had.
And also the workers vote on the contract before accepting it.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoft'a, you did intervene in this contract. Wlio
suggested that you go to the meeting ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am not quite sure.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. Mr. Tom Lo Cicero said yesterday that he did not, and
I assume maybe that Holtzeman did ask me to attend the meeting.
I don't remember.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Holtzman discuss the matter with you ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not to my recollection, but he may have.
Mr. Kennedy. Yesterday, you could not remember anything about
it. Today, through the hearing we have had, you have been able to
refresh your recollection a little bit, and I am happy about that.
Mr. HoFFA. That isn't true. I refreshed my recollection by calling
my office in Detroit.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 13397
Mr. KJENNEDT. Wliat was the purpose of going to the meeting, Mr.
Hoffa?
Mr. HoFFA. My purpose of going into any meeting is attempting
to get the contract signed without a strike, and attempting to get for
the workers the best wages, hours, and conditions that can possibly
be got, recognizing the cost factor of an individual who goes out on
strike for any extended period of time, and recognizing the differ-
ence between what we are asking, what we think we can get by a
strike, and what a strike will cost the worker.
Mr. Kennedy. So you were going to go in there and discuss these
negotiations with them ; is that right ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did go in, from what I find out now.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlio accompanied you to that meeting?
Mr. HoFFA. I understand nobody did. From what I can gather
from my office, I appeared there alone.
Mr. Kennedy. On page 43 yesterday, you were asked the question :
Would it refresh your recollection that you told Mr. Litwak at the meeting
that if he did not sign a contract, that you were going to take over the negotia-
tions and settle these problems yourself?
That is what we had in testimony yesterday. That was, I believe,
Mr. Lo Cicero who made a statement to that effect. Can you tell us
anything about that 'f Does that refresh your recollection as to what
you stated at the meeting ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Hoffa. I talked to Litwak yesterday, who happens to be a very
personal friend of mine for twenty-some-odd years standing.
Mr, Kennedy. Did you make such a statement ?
Mr. HoFFA. Litwak doesn't recall it.
Mr. Kennedy. I am asking you.
Mr. HoFFA. I am telling you what he told me, and he can't recall it.
Mr. Kennedy. Just answer the question.
Mr. HoFFA. I do not recall what I said in that particular meeting,
but as I said yesterday, I have never told any business agent that I
would take over the negotiations.
Mr. Kennedy. You can't remember that ?
Mr. Hoffa. Well, it isn't a question of "can't remember," and I
never told any business agent I would take over negotiations in any
contract.
Mr. Kennedy. You stated here further on, on page 43, you never
said anything like that, Mr. Hoffa. Just a moment.
You asked me whether I said I would take over negotiations and I had no
authority as president of the council at that time or president of my own local
union to take any such action.
Now you say in your testimony today you do have such authority.
Mr. Hoffa. I have authority as president of our council to inter-
vene, I said, in any contract. That doesn't mean taking over, and it
means intervening.
Mr, Kennedy. But you cannot intervene ?
Mr. Hoffa. I have a perfect right to intervene.
Mr, Kennedy, When you intervene, Mr. Hoffa, certainly that is
tantamount to taking over the negotiations ?
Mr. HoFFA, It is absolutely not correct, because it may be only an
advisory intervention,
21243— 58— pt. 36 9
13398 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. And that is what this was ?
Mr. HoFFA, That is right.
Mr, Kennedy. Just advisory ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Hoffa, you said you did not receive any
of this money ; is that right ?
Mr. Hoffa. I said I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what the money is that you de-
clare on your income tax each year, what you call "collections,-' and
what are you collecting from ?
Mr. Hoffa. Gambling games.
Mr. Kennedy. Gambling games ?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat kind ?
The Chairman. Are teamsters in gambling operations?
Mr. Hoffa. No; the teamsters are not in gambling, sir, but there-
is racetracks in Detroit, and my partner has some horses, and my
business associate in Detroit has some horses, and he places some bete
and we are fortunate to win some money.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any records on that?
Mr. Hoffa. Mr. Owen B. Brennan keeps the records, and I don't
do the betting and I don't keep the records.
Mr. Kennedy. I would like to call Mr. Brennan around and see if
we cannot get this cleared up right away.
The Chairman. Is Mr. Brennan here ?
Mr. Williams. I want to repeat my objection to this procedure
whereby this witness is yanked on and off the witness stand, and
other witnesses are called in juxtaposition to him.
The Chairman. "Well, this procedure has been followed.
Come around here, please. This procedure has been followed by
the committee continuously, and I think it keeps it in proper perspec-
tive. Come around, please.
Mr. Hoffa. Are we excused ?
The Chairman. Not for the present. You may sit right here.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Could we sit here, Your Honor ?
The Chairman. If you want him to sit there, I have no objection.
You may sit there and, Counsel, you may sit next to him or you may
sit right behind him, Mr. Hoffa, if it will make everybody more com-
fortable.
Will you be sworn ?
You do solemnly swear that the evidence given before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Brennan. I do.
TESTIMONY OF OWEN B. BRENNAN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
GEORGE FITZGERALD
The Chairman. ^\^1 you state your name and your place of resi-
dence, and your business or occupation ?
Mr. Brennan. Owen Bernard Brennan, 41801 Wilcox Road-
Plymouth. Mich. I am vice j^resident of tlie International Brother-
hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stablemen, and Warehousemen of
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13399
America, and president of local No. 337 of the Teamsters Union in
Detroit.
The Chairman. All right. Thank you.
You have counsel. Counsel, identify yourself .
Mr. Fitzgerald. George Fitzgerald, an attorney in Detroit, Mich.
The Chairman. All right ; we will proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. We are going into many things with Mr. Bren-
nan at this time. This is a matter that is of some interest about these
moneys that appear on Mr. Hoffa's income-tax returns, and the
source of the moneys in view of the testimony that we had yesterday,
and in view of some of the things we expect to go into. I would like to
have Mr. Brennan tell the committee what the source of this money
is that Mr. Hoffa has.
Mr. Fitzgerald. May I address the Chair very briefly?
Mr. Brennan appeared as a witness in September of last year. I
made a statement to the committee at that time and stated that Mi\
Brennan, if asked questions or interrogated, would exercise his privi-
lege under the fifth amendment of the United States Constitution.
After Mr. Brennan, or after I was advised that Mr. Brennan would
be called before the committee, I told the committee counsel that Mr.
Brennan, if called, would again exercise his privilege imder the fifth
amendment to the Constitution. I stated that there was no change in
circumstances that he could find or Mr. Brennan could find that
would change his mind.
I told the counsel further, and I would like to repeat it to the com-
mittee, that I am advised by Mr. Brennan, he has made the decision
to exercise his privilege under the fifth amendment not to be a witness
against himself, and I believe that it would serve no legitimate legis-
lative purpose to interrogate Mr. Brennan under those particular cir-
cumstances. We are advising you of that at this time, because he is
going to exercise the privilege, and, therefore, any interrogation of
him, since it will elicit nothing, and he desires to exercise that privilege,
would accomplish nothing as far as the purposes of this particular
committee are concerned.
Senator Mundt. I would like to ask Mr. Fitzgerald whether or not
the witness is under indictment or there is some special reason why he
is pleading the fifth amendment. I do not know what you told the
counsel, but the implication is that the witness must be involved in
some legal situation wliich would make it difficult for him to testify.
Now, is that the case, or is he being prosecuted for something, or is
he under indictment, or is there some special reason why this highly
unusual request of yours should be granted ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. In the first place, the witness is not presently under
indictment, but the witness is presently under an internal-revenue in-
vestigation by both the internal revenue agents, and by the special
agents of the Internal Revenue Department.
Senator Mundt. I suppose we are all under internal-revenue inspec-
tion all of the time.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Not specifically.
Senator Mundt. That would open up a pretty big field, and is there
something special about this investigation ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. There is something special about it when they are
knocking on our door, and when they are waiting until he gets through
13400 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
with this committee problem to continue their investigation and inter-
rogation of Mr. Brennan.
Senator Mundt. Then I assume from what you say, Mr. Fitzgerald,
that your witness would take the fifth amendment for that reason on
questions only dealing with fiscal matters?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Senator Mundt, I suppose I am the average coun-
try lawyer, but I wouldn't attempt to sit here under the problem of
advising my witness on the fifth amendment to draAv any liairlines.
The Supreme Court has not sufficiently cleared it up, and finer law-
yers than myself on this have warned all of us ordinary lawyers that
we cannot draw any line of demarcation.
So my advice to him has to be, and it has been, that if he desires to
take the fifth amendment, that even reluctantly he must take the fifth
amendment to all matters upon which he is interrogated in order to
properly protect himself, because he is, as he has advised me, in fear of
apprehension, and of the future consequences.
Senator Mundt. As one member of the committee, may I say, Mr.
Chairman, we have sufficient difficulty with this fifth amendment pro-
cedure. I do not think that we should grant the request of the counsel
because if we start showing s]:)ecial consideration to fifth amendment
cases in advance, and not ask them questions, we are just about dead
as a committee.
Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, as a country lawyer, I would like to
put a question to Mr. Fitzgerald, who professes he is a country lawyer,
in the hope of increasing this country lawyer's knowledge of law.
Is it a criminal oifense in the State of Michigan to bet on horse
races ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No ; I don't know of any.
Senator Ervin. That is all.
Mr. Fitzgerald. At least they do it at the tracks, and we get quite
a bit of money for the State, I understand, from it.
The Chairman. The Chair will have to make this observation, and
then we will proceed.
If the committee should gi-ant this request, we would set a precedent
so that every time anyone or any witness that we wanted to interro-
gate, all he would have to do would be to advise his counsel he is going
to take the fifth amendment and in turn the counsel would advise the
committee and then we would not hear the witness. I do not know
what others think, and again I say that the fifth amendment can be
properly used and it may be properly used in this instance, I do not
know, but we have no alternative except to ask the Avitness and we
would be derelict in our duty if we did not pursue it. The witness, of
course, can exercise his privilege. But if we let a record stand like
this, without pursuing our duty, we would be subject to and deserve
criticism and condemnation.
Whether the witness will deserve criticism or condemnation in ex-
ercising his privilege may become a matter of individual opinion, on
which opinions may differ.
Mr. Fitzgerald. May I say one word so that the committee will be
acquainted with it ?
Mr. Brennan is the president of local 337 in the city of Detroit, and
that is local 337 of the Teamsters. From the first time a year ago
when the committee investigators called upon the local for the pro-
I]\IPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13401
duction of all union books and records, those union books and records
of local 337, or any other unit of the Teamsters over which Mr. Bren-
nan has any supervisory control, were turned over to the committee
staff and they have constantly been checking those records.
The Chairman. All right, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out on page
5480 and the preceding page, that Mr. Fitzgerald, who appeared with
Mr. Brennan at the last hearing, stated that, although he might have
to take the fifth amendment, and I quote him :
If this questioning of Mr. Brennan is deferred, it is quite likely that Mr. Bren-
nan could come before this committee at a later date, subsequent to the 15th of
October, and then answer the questions.
Now^ lie is being recalled at the present time. He took the fifth
amendment before, but he was made a vice president of the Teamsters
after he appeared before the committee and took the fifth amendment.
He was elevated in rank. He has been called before the committee to
give a vejy important explanation as to where this money came from
that appears on Mr. Hoff'a's income tax returns under the category
of "collections."
Now, could you tell us that ?
Mr. Hoffa testifies that you have the answer to it. Could you tell
us about it ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa says this comes from gambling games.
How can you continuously win at gambling games over a period of 8
years, Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. The Chair will make this observation, and give the
witness, with the approval of the committee, my assurances with
respect to your winnings. We will ask you nothing with respect to
your personal finances at this time. Mr. Hoffa has said you could
give the answer. Now, you can corroborate him without in any way,
so far as I can observe, incriminating yourself.
If you received money for Mr. Hoffa and made bets and turned over
the proceeds or winnings to him, you can give that testimony without
any self-incrimination and it would corroborate Mr. Hoffa. We leave
these things dangling, and we get to the proper man. One will say
the other has the answer and we bring him up here, and then he takes
the fifth amendment.
Now, what are intelligent people to assume, and what are they to
judge, and how are they to judge such actions ?
I am asking you to be helpful to Mr. Hoffa, and I will ask the com-
mittee not to ask you any questions at this time, and I cannot promise
later, and at a later time you can judge then whether you take the fifth
amendment or not.
But at this time I will ask you to open up here and tell us what you
know with respect to this transaction insofar as Mr. Hoffa is concerned.
Mr. Brennan. May I speak to my counsel, Mr. Chairman ?
13402 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. You may,
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Brennan, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Senator, in my judgment, it
would be very difficult for me to differentiate between myself and Mr.
Hoffa, and I therefore must respectfully decline to answer the question
and exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United
States Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. All right ; proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. I would like to call Mr. Bellino to put the figures
into the record as to what the income-tax returns of Mr. Hoffa show.
The Chairman. Come around.
Senator MuNDT. I would like to ask Mr. Brennan a question. Did I
understand that you are the vice president of the International
Teamsters ?
Mr. Brennan. One of them, sir.
Senator Mundt. Is that the same union of which Mr. Hoffa is the
president ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes, sir.
Senator Mundt. You heard Mr. Hoffa, did you not, say to our com-
mittee this morning that you were the man who could tell us what
these financial transactions were, and did you hear him make that
statement ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Mundt. Well, everybody else in the room heard him make
it, anyhow, Mr. Brennan, and so I think it is clear in the record that
he did make it.
I think the chairman made you a very fair and sporting proposi-
tion; that we would not ask you any questions involving your personal
transactions, but here Mr. Hoffa, through no prodding of the com-
mittee, brought your name into the hearing and said you were his
financial agent, as it were, in this connection, and that you knew how
this money was made, and suggested that we ask you questions about
it. Now, you cannot escape the fact that, after Mr. Hoffa brings you
in as a character witness as to the financial justification of these state-
ments that he has been making, you take the fifth amendment. I
think you are leaving Mr. Hoffa pretty badly in the lurch. Wliat good
is a character witness who will not talk ?
I just think that you should accept that from one member of the
committee, my pledge not to ask you any questions about your own
financial transactions, and to limit it exactly to the testimony to which
you were publicly assigned by Mr. Hoffa. If the other members of
the committee will do that, it seems to me then that you are free from
any complications about the fifth amendment, and you can answer
those questions and leave the stand, and you cannot get involved be-
cause you have, by answering one question, perhaps opened the door
to answering of others.
Is that not a fair proposition ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Brennan. Do you want me to answer you ?
Senator Mundt. That is why I asked you the question.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13403
Mr. Brennan. I am sorry. I respectfully decline to answer the
•question, and exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the
United States Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Let us proceed.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ervin, Kennedy, Mundt, and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bellino.
The Chairman. Mr. Bellino has been previously sworn.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us w^hat the records of Mr. Hoffa's
income tax show, which were provided by him ?
Mr. Bellino. The income-tax returns for the years for which we
have information extend from 1948 to 1956.
Senator Curtis. Whose income-tax returns ?
Mr. Bellino. James R. Hoffa. I understand he has not filed his
1957 income-tax return as yet.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa has not filed his 1957 income-tax return?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. What about Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Bellino. I understand he has not filed his, either.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the accountant for the union ?
Mr. Bellino. I understand he has not filed his, either.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Grosberg ?
Mr. Bellino. Mr. Grosberg and, also, Mr. Fitzgerald.
Mr. Kennedy. Four of them have not filed ?
Mr. Bellino. That is right.
Senator Curtis. Has any extension been granted ?
Mr. Bellino. I understand it has been granted j yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Bellino. The total amount shown as either gambling gains or
miscellaneous income or collections received during this period was
$60,322.30. Breaking them down by years : In 1948, $3,000, shown as
gambling gains; 1949, $1,500, miscellaneous earnings; 1950, $2,095.80,
miscellaneous; 1951, $5,500, miscellaneous income; 1952, $5,535, collec-
tions received ; 1953, $10,505, collections received ; 1954, $7,700, collec-
tions received; 1955, $13,799.50, collections received; 1956, $10,682,
wagering ; making a total of $60,322.30.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the last item ?
Mr. Bellino. Wagering.
Mr. Kennedy. How^ much was involved ?
Mr. Bellino. $10,682.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us about that, Mr. Brennan ?
The Chairman. You are asking Mr. Brennan because Mr. Hoffa
stated that Mr. Brennan could give the answer to it ?
Mr. Kennedy. Correct it.
Mr. Brennan, Do you want me to answer you ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr, Brennan is one of the vice presidents of
the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.
13404 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. When did you become vice president of the Inter-
national Teamsters, Mr. Brennan ?
(The witness conferred with his coimseL)
Mr. Brennan. At the last convention, sir.
The Chairman. What was that date? I don't recall exactly.
Mr. Brennan. It was in October of 1957.
The Chairman. October of 1957?
Mr. Brennan. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Was that after you testified before this committee
or declined to testify, rather?
( The witness conferred with his counsel. )
Mr. Brennan. It was afterwards, sir. Unanimously, sir.
The Chairman. Yes, sir. I understand how it was made unanimous.
Senator Mundt. That does not prove anything. That is the same
thing with Khrushchev, so we don't pay much attention to that.
Mr. Brennan. Well, I don't put myself in
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bellino, the figures that you give don't include
the monies that Mr. Hoffa receives and has received from various
trucking companies in which he has had an interest?
Mr. Belling. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Such as the Test Fleet Co. ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have the figures on that ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, it might be well, as long as we are
talking about the relationship of ISIr. Hoffa, and certain employers,
and the situation that developed yesterday, we might put in some
other figures on the earnings that came from certain trucking com-
panies to Mr. Hoffa.
The Chairman. In the meantime, may I ask you, Mr. Bellino, is the
taking of the fifth amendment one of the prerequisite qualifications
for advancement to vice presidency?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Brennan. Do you want me to answer you, sir?
The Chairman. I believe so.
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed with Mr. Bellino.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bellino, I wanted to ask you about the Test Fleet
Co. That was set up when ?
Mr. Bellino. About March 1949.
Mr. Kennedy. And that was set up with the help of the Commercial
Carriers ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. The officials of the Commercial Carriers?
Mr. Belling. Mr. Bert Beveridge.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bert Beveridge of Commercial Carriers?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir, and also through the Matheson Bros.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlio were they?
Mr. Belling. Carney Matheson and Albert Matheson.
Mr. Kennedy. Do they represent the trucking companies in con-
tract neo-otiations with the Teamsters Union ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13405
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And this was set up by Commercial Carriers at
approximately the same time they were having some trouble with the
local of the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Belling. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy, That was the time that Mr. Hoffa intervened in that
strike and settled it, is that right ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And was the company set up in Mr. Hoffa's own
name?
Mr. Belling. No, sir. The stock was issued in the names of the
wives of both Mr. Holfa and Mr. Brennan, or Josephine Poszywak
and Alice Johnson.
Mr. Kennedy. We had some figures on this at the last hearing,
which I believe were incorrect or not complete.
Would you put the figures of earnings of that company into the
record ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir. The gross equipment records, the gross
earnings, of the company, for the period from the time it was or-
ganized to March 31, 1958, was $1,008,057.89. The gross profit was
$263,730.01, or 26 percent of the gross equipment rentals.
Senator Curtis. At that point, would you define gross profit, that
is the gross profit from a business before personal exemptions are
granted ?
Mr. Belling. Gross profit in this case is after operating expenses
and before administrative expenses, and before profit, before there
are dividends and so on.
Senator Curtis. Before administrative expenses?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Senator Mundt. Have you the net profit figures ?
Mr. Belling. The net income is $155,092.04, or 15.38 percent earn-
ings of gross income.
Mr. Kennedy. "VYliat was the investment of Mr. Hoffa and Mr.
Brennan in that company?
Mr. Belling. I believe it was $4,000.
Mr. Kennedy. And is it correct also that from the testimony that
was developed last year, the Commercial Carriers placed their own
attorney in this company?
Mr. Belling. They handled the whole transaction. In fact, their
wives had nothing to do with the operation of the business.
It was all done
Mr. Kennedy. By officials of Commercial Carriers ?
Mr. Belling. That is right.
Mr, Kennedy. They received the income from it ?
Mr. Belling. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. This was set up by them and their lawyers in Mrs.
Hoffa and Mrs. Brennan's maiden names ?
Mr. Belling. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And officials of Commercial Carriers ran the entire
operation ?
Mr. Belling. They ran the entire operation.
Mr. Kennedy. And this was a trucking company which had a
contract with the Teamsters ?
13406 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir, in fact, they were associated in possibly a
dozen different trucking companies.
Mr. Kennedy. I will read you from page 131 of the Hoffman hear-
ing. Mr. Biedler — what was Mr. Biedler's connection ?
Mr. Belling. He was the accountant.
Mr. Kennedy. He was asked, talking about Bert Beveridge —
Did he at that time tell you in substance "I am going to put some friends of
mine in business, and I want you to handle the account"? —
and Mr. Biedler's answer to that question was —
That is true.
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. That was not the only trucking company of Mr.
Hoft'a and Mr. Brennan's ?
Mr. Belijng. Xo, sir. They started off* initiallj'^ with J & H Sales
& Equipment Co., two trucks. Then they went into National Equip-
ment Co. with 10 trucks.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us how the trucks of National Equip-
ment were purchased ? This is something we did not know last year.
Mr. Belling. The trucks of National Equipment were purchased
through Mr. Bert Beveridge and Albert Matheson.
Mr. Kennedy. This, again, is the owner of a trucking company and
the attorney for the negotiating committee of the truckers ?
Mr. Belling. That is correct. In other words, neither Mrs. Hoffa
nor Mrs. Brennan nor Mr. Hoffa nor Mr. Brennan had anything to do
with the arranging for the acquiring of these trucks.
Mr. Kennedy. Was any money advanced by Mr. Beveridge in con-
nection with this ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. How much was advanced ?
Mr. Belling. They advanced $5,000.
Mr. Kennedy. $5,000 or $20,000 altogether, initially ?
Mr. Belling. The loan from the bank was
Mr. Kennedy. He advanced $5,000 ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Was any interest paid on that loan ?
Mr. Belling. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. It was outstanding for how long ?
Mr. Belling. That was outstanding for 1 month.
Biedler arranged for a personal loan from his own bank and was
reimbursed.
Mr. Kennedy. That was in addition ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. How much was the loan from the bank ?
Mr. Belling. Approximately $35,000 or $36,000.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you make any comment on that, Mr. Brennan ?
Your relationship with these employers and Bert Beveridge and the
formation of these trucking companies ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you explain briefly, Mr. Bellino, what their
business was ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13407
Mr. Belling. As I understand it, they were carriers, transporting
Cadillac cars and other automobiles out of Detroit.
Mr. Kennedy. The three companies, J. & H. Sales, National Equip-
ment, and Test Fleet ; is that right ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that correct, Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 20 p. m. the hearing recessed, to reconvene at
2 p. m. of the same day, with the following members present : Senators
McClellan, Ervin, Kennedy, Curtis, and Mundt.)
afternoon session
(At the reconvening of the session, the following members were
present: Senators McClellan, Ives, Church, Kennedy, and Curtis.)
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES E. HOFFA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWAKD BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD, AND
DAVID PREVIANT— Resumed
The Chairman. During the session this morning, counsel for Mr.
Hoffa made a request of tlie committee, after stating an objection to
some parts of the committee's procedure. The Chair announced at
that time that he would call a meeting of the committee in executive
session during the noon hour to consider the request of counsel.
The committee met in executive session with six members present.
The matter was discussed, and those who were present unanimously
agreed upon what the Chair is about to announce. In the first place,
this committee retains jurisdiction, and in no way surrenders its pre-
rogatives or its discretion. From time to time as situations arise, the
committee will have to make, and has in the past made, decisions.
No one in the course of a proceeding of this kind, nor even in a
judicial proceeding, can necessarily always foresee and anticipate
developments. The Chair believed that we were proceeding in a way
that gave the greatest advantage to the witness in that he was being
given an opportunity, practically at each instance, where testimony
was received about which we believed him to have information, and
about which he would be very much concerned, to give him the oppor-
tunity to explain or refute or comment upon such testimony.
In the past, the committee has been criticized, or we have had just
the opposite objection or complaint from that which was interposed
this morning, because, as I stated earlier, it was felt that we were
unduly prolonging or taking testimony without giving the party
involved the opportunity to appear at the same time or immediately
afterward, and make his explanation, on the theory that the story
goes out today, and the story tomorrow or 2 or 3 weeks later doesn't
overtake it.
Now we find ourselves trying to handle it this way and find objec-
tion to it. Again I say that the committee will retain not only
jurisdiction but discretion and the right to act from time to time
as the situations arise.
13408 IMPROPER ACTRTTIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
In the meantime, the request will be granted to this extent : The
committee will not require Mr. Hoffa to remain present in the chamber
at all times. If he desires not to be here, he may be wherever he
cares to be, except available subject to call.
The committee will not find and has not found it proper or advisable
to hear some 2 or 3 weeks' testimony here and then call Mr. Hoffa.
As we conclude each phase of the hearings from other witnesses,
and if at the conclusion of that phase of the hearings Mr. Hoffa's
testimony is desired in connection with that aspect of the inquiry,
he will be called to the witness stand and interrogated about it. That
will not, of course, require his presence here at all times.
But he will be subject to call and will appear upon reasonable notice
of the call. Fortuuately for him and for us, I think his headquarters
here are very convenient, and very little delay would be incurred.
The committee will always try to grant reasonable requests, insofar
as they can do so, without impairing in any way its function and its
ability to perform that function.
So Mr. Hoffa Avill be recalled this afternoon and possibly tomorrow.
As I stated, we will continue today as we are, because I know you will
be recalled this afternoon, or anticipate you will be, at least. After
today, if ]Mr. Hoft'a does not want to be present, he understands, I
am sure, that he is invited to be present at all times, but if he chooses
not to be present, just so he remains available here in the city where
we can reach him when we may need him, it would be all right.
I think Avith that reservation, based upon the information we have
and the procedures that we have in mind, Mr. Hoffa will be needed
occasionally at least, if not from time to time, during the course of
these hearings.
There will come a time, I am contemplating, when Mr. Hoffa may
be interrogated about things beyond what will be developed by others.
I believe I have stated this, gentlemen, as correctly as I understood it.
Is there any comment about what I have said ?
Senator Curtis. I have no comment.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, I think so we will all have a com-
plete understanding, that I should say for the record that if I under-
stand your ruling correctly, sir, that does not meet the objection which
I lodged this morning, the suggested procedure. The objection that
I lodged, Mr. Chairman, and maybe I don't understand your ruling,
and perhaps it does meet it but you can clarify it if I am wrong, the
objection which we lodged was to have this witness testify to certain
facets of his activities over the year, and then having rebuttal wit-
nesses or adverse witnesses, if you will, called in juxtaposition to his
testimony, and then having him recalled to testify to another facet.
The reason that we objected to that, Mr. Chairman, is because we
felt that it constituted a legislative trial. If what we believe to be a
legislative trial is going to continue, then, of course, the defendant
would want to hear the testimony against him which he would be
called upon to meet, unless he were given an opportunity to read the
record before he were called.
If your ruling contemplates that there will be a sufficient time
hiatus for him to familiarize himself by reading the record as to the
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13409
testimony that is offered by adverse witnesses, then that would be
meeting our objection. Otherwise, I
The Chairman. Let the Chair say this : I see the pomt counsel is
making.
This is public business, of course. I don't want to impose any im-
position upon anyone. But I do not feel that the committee would
be called upon to recess its hearings until someone could read the
record, when certainly your client is present or at least invited to be
present and hear the testimony.
But I have in mind that this is not unqualified. It is subject to the
committee's determining from time to time and from circumstance to
circumstance what is the best course for it to pursue, keeping in mind
always the purpose to be fair but also effective.
Now, generally, and I do not tell you that there will be no excep-
tion, but generally, we expect, as I have indicated, to develop a case
or circumstance or a phase of the inquiry and then, if we feel that it
is proper and well for the committee to call Mr. Hoffa in at that in-
terval and interrogate him further, we shall do so.
Whether there will be any exception where we may want to call
him ahead, I cannot say now. But generally I have stated how we will
proceed.
I may say this: We are spending taxpayer's money. I have al-
ways confessed when being accused of being conservative, I have
readily plead guilty. But in spending taxpayer's money, I feel an
obligation, and I know every member of the committee does, to do the
job and do it as economically as we can.
You can see the circumstances developed liere this morning. Sup-
pose we had not asked Mr. Hoffa about this financial matter, and he
says "Well, ask Mr. Brennan." Well, we had already heard Bremian,
and Brennan had gone back.
Again, we would have to subpena him or keep him under subpena,
and pay his expenses. That comes out of taxpayers' money. I am
going to be careful to do this as economically as we can, without being
unfair or causing any imposition to fall on one unjustly.
So I believe that we have resolved this aspect as best we can at the
moment. I hope it will be satisfactory. Again, Mr. Hoffa, of course,
and anyone else — when I say him, it is just because you as his counsel
raised the question — any of those who may be involved, directly or
indirectly in the investigation, of course, are welcome to be present.
I am sure even when Mr. Hoffa is not present, counsel, wise counsel
that he is, will see that someone is here to follow the proceedings.
Is there anything further ?
If not, thank you very much.
Mr. Hoffa, you may stand aside for the present.
Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. The next witness will not be too long.
The Chairman. All right. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Herbert Grosberg.
The Chairman. Be sworn, please, sir.
You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Grosberg. I do.
13410 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
TESTIMONY OF HERBERT L. GROSBERG, ACCOMPANIED BY
COUNSEL, BELEORD V. LAWSON, JR., AND GEORGE FITZGERALD
The CHAiRMAisr. Mr. Grosberg, state your name, your place of resi-
dence, and your business or occupation, please, sir,
Mr. Grosberg. My name is Herbert L. Grosberg. I live in Hunt-
ington Woods, Mich. I am a certified public accountant.
The Chairman. Thank you, sir. You have counsel present ?
Mr. Grosberg. I do.
The Chairman. Counsel, identify yourself for the record.
Mr. Lawson. Belford V. Lawson of the bar of the District of Co-
lumbia, and Mr. George Fitzgerald, of the Detroit bar, is associated
with me in this representation.
The Chairman. All right. The record will so show.
Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Grosberg, you have been an accountant for how
long?
Mr. Grosberg. I have been a certified public acountant since 1952,
and I have been in accounting since 1945 or 1946.
Mr. Kennedy. You handled the books and records of local 299 of
the Teamsters ?
Mr. Grosberg. I do.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the local of Mr. James Hoffa ; is that correct ?
Mr, Grosberg, That is correct,
Mr, Kennedy- And you also handle the books and records of local
237?
Mr. Grosberg. I do.
Mr, Kennedy. That is the local of Mr, Owen Brennan,
Mr, Grosberg. That is correct.
Mr, Kennedy. And you also handle, do you not, the personal books
and records of ISIr. Hoffa and Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Grosberg, I do.
Mr. Kennedy, We have had some testimony this morning about the
records or the source of income that appear on the tax returns of Mr.
Hoffa from the year of 1948 to 1956. I would like to ask you what
books and records you maintain for Mr, Hoffa that we could examine
to determine the source of money that he reports on his income tax,
Mr, Grosberg. I have no books and records for Mr, Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy, You don't have any books and records ?
Mr, Grosberg, No ; I don't,
Mr, Kennedy, Don't you keep the books and records of Mr, Hoffa ?
Mr, Grosberg. There are no records. The only thing I had of Mr.
Hoffa which I gave to Mr. Bellino were copies of the income-tax
returns.
Mr, Kennedy, How can you draw up his income-tax return without
any papers of any kind ?
Mr, Grosberg, Well, Mr, Hoffa submits to me the information on
his tax return, and from that point on it becomes a matter of
computation.
Mr, Kennedy, "Wliat kind of documents does he submit to you ?
Mr, Grosberg, "V\n^iat do you mean what kind of documents ?
Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat kind of documents does he submit to you that
you make up his tax return ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13411
Mr. Grosberg. It would be the copy of the W-2 that the local union
and international would give him, the 1099 regarding the dividend,
and then he gives me the information regarding the wagering.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have some worksheets that you figure out
his tax from ?
Mr. Grosberg. No; the computation is done on a sheet of paper.
Mr. Kennedy. What has happened to those sheets of paper ?
Mr. Grosberg. After I am through computing it, what do I need
them for ?
Mr. Kennedy. What have you done with them ?
Mr. Grosberg. Will you please repeat the question ?
Mr. Kennedy. What have you done with the sheets of paper on
which you compute Mr. Hoff a's tax returns ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't keep the sheet of paper.
Mr. Kennedy. What do you do with them ?
Mr. Grosberg. Probably just throw them away in the wastebasket.
Mr. Kennedy. You just destroy them, is that all ?
Mr. Grosberg. I wouldn't say I just destroy them. I would say I
just throw them away in the wastebasket.
Mr. Kennedy. That is another way of saying destroy. How can
you figure out, Mr. Grosberg, where he has a number of sources of in-
come ? Who keeps those records for him ?
Mr. Grosberg. There are no records, as far as the
Mr. Kennedy. There are no what ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't understand your question.
Mr. Kennedy. It is not very difficult. Where he has a number of
different sources of income, how are you able to keep those records
straight, or how are you able to compute his tax without examining
some records ?
Mr. Grosberg. What records would I have to examine in order to
prepare his tax ?
Mr. Kennedy. Now he has the Test Fleet Co. Do you examine
those?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. How is it figured out what his earnings are for Test
Fleet?
Mr. Grosberg. There is a 1099 which shows the dividend.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the rent ? Doesn't he have some income
from rent that he receives ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't think so.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, he reports it on his income tax return.
Mr. Grosberg. Are you talking about Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't remember.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't Iniow anything about that ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't remember. Mr. Bellino has the returns.
Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, while these data are being looked up,
I would like to ask the witness a question.
The Chairman. Senator Ives.
Senator Ives. Is that the way you treat all income tax returns that
you make up, or is this the only one you make up for a client ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I make up several income taxes.
Senator Ives. You make up several ?
13412 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. Yes ; I do.
Senator Ives. You have no worksheets for any of them that you
keep ?
Mr. Grosberg. No : there is
Senator Ives. You throw them all in the wastebasket ?
Mr. Grosberg. He asked me about computations.
Senator Ives. I am not asking you about computations. You said
you threw away all the worksheets, everything connected with it that
you received.
Mr. Grosberg. May I talk to counsel, please ?
Senator Ives. Except for the copy of the return, in this instance,
which the counsel now has. Yes, you can talk to him. I would like
to find out how j^ou do treat these matters.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Grosberg. Senator, are you talking about individual returns,
corporation returns, or
Senator Ives. I am talking about any kind of returns you make up.
You say you threw away the worksheets that you received, or any
other sheets that you received, containing information which was
necessary to the compilation of this return of Mr. Hoffa^ — ^you threw
those in the wastebasket. Is that the way you treat all income tax re-
turns that you make up ?
Mr. Grosberg. I think we would have to discuss each category of
return.
Senator I^-es. There is no such thing as a category of return.
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon, sir, there is.
Senator I\tes. Aren't you a CPA ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, I am.
Senator Ives. Where did you get your CPA ? Here in the District ?
Mr. Grosberg. No. In Michigan.
Senator Ives. ISIichigan is a very reputable State and they have very
high standards. You know that as well as I do. I am very sure as
a CPA you are not throwing away those records. Are you ?
Mr. Grosberg. I was not throwing away any records. Senator.
Senator Ives. You said you did.
Mr. Grosberg. I did not.
Senator Ives. What did you call those matters that you threw in
the wastebasket, that had the information concerning the return of
Mr.Hoffa?
Mr. Grosberg. I said that I threw in the wastebasket the sheets on
which I computed the tax return. It was just merely a computation,
and multiplication.
Senator I\^s. You didn't keep any of the worksheets ?
Mr. Grosberg. I had no worksheets.
Senator Ives. I make out my own returns and I know something
about this business. I have to keep some record of it and you have
to keep a record of your worksheet. You have to keep those and a
record of all of the information that go in the returns.
Mr. Grosberg. I had no worksheets for Mr. HofFa, I am sorry.
Senator Ives. You had no worksheets for Mr. Hoff a ?
Mr. Grosberg, No, sir.
Senator Imss. I thought you just said you threw them in the waste-
basket ?
IIMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13413
Mr. Grosberg. If you are going to call a computation a worksheet,
then I threw the computation in the wastebasket.
Senator Ives. That is a worksheet in my book.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't think so, sir.
Senator Ives. I don't care ; you have no record, then, and you kept
no records on this return at all ?
Mr. Grosberg. I had no records, Senator.
Senator Ives. Who did keep them ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know who kept records, and I have no records.
Senator Ives. In other words, if the Internal Revenue Service came
after you and wanted to know certain facts, you couldn't tell them a
thing, and you would have to rely on Mr. Holla's memory ?
Mr. Grosberg. May I talk to counsel, please ?
(Witness consulted with counsel. ) ' ^
Mr. Grosberg. Senator, I think perhaps you and I are trying to dis-
cuss the same thing, but using two different definitions. I think a
worksheet is going to be a substantiation of information, whereas a
computation is just going to take the figures upon the return and com-
pute the tax necessary for the payment of the tax on that return.
Now, the information for the return was submitted to me, and that
was placed upon the return, and after everything is on that return it
is added or subtracted, whichever the case may be, and then the multi-
plications are done for the computation. I think it could be done on
a sheet of paper like this.
Senator Ives. You don't keep that sheet of paper ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Ives. I do. That is a difference in our bookkeeping. You
don't keep any of the other records that you receive ; is that right ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon.
Senator Ives. You don't keep any of the other records that you re-
ceived, and you are talking about the information you get from which
the computation is made up — you don't keep any of that ; is that right ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon. The information that I had
Mr. Bellino was given.
Senator Ives. I am not talking about this particular return. I am
talking about all returns you make up, and this applies also to Mr.
Hoffa in his case.
Mr. Grosberg. The computations I do not keep.
Senator I\t:s. I am not talking about computations; I am talking
about the information you receive from which you derive the com-
putation.
Mr. Grosberg. On corporations, or labor returns, I keep worksheets ;
yes. But on individuals they are generally not worksheets ; they are
W-2's, that could be constituted as part of a worksheet, and Mr. Bellino
has those.
Senator I^'l:s. You keep your W-2's, don't you ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Senator Ives. Is that all you ever make up returns from, W-2's ?
Mr. Grosberg. Well, if a W-2 is submitted, I would have to use it.
Senator Ives. I asked you if that was all you ever made up returns
from,W-2's.
Mr. Grosberg. I make up returns, Senator, from the information
that is submitted to me.
21243— 58— pt. 36 10
13414 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Ives. And you don't keep that information; you throw
away the information ?
Mr. Grosberg. Senator, that information is not thrown away; it
is put on the return. I don't understand what you are trying to
drive at.
Senator Ives, I am trying to drive at the information — counsel,
where is he ? I don't want to shout.
The Chairman. Let us proceed.
Senator I\t:s. I am trying to find out what you do with the informa-
tion that you receive from w^hich you make up the return. You talk
about computations. That is something in itself, and you throw that
in the wastebasket ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is rigjit.
Senator Ives. That is all right, and then you say you put all of the
information you receive on the return, and that is that. Wlien you are
all through, you have nothing to show for anything except somebody's
recollection ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ; I have the tax return.
Senator Ives. I am trying to find out something. I overlooked one
thing in this connection in asking for this information. Perhaps you
don't receive this information in writing. Do you receive it orally,
any of it?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes ; quite a bit, I would say.
Senator Ives. Well, then, that answers the question. Naturally,
you have no written record of that except what you have on the return,
unless you write it down ?
Mr. Grosberg. On the return, I write it down.
Senator Ives. In other words, you make out a return as this infor-
mation is given to you orally ; is that right ?
ISIr. Grosberg. That is right.
Senator Ives. You must be a wizard. I never heard of anybody
being able to make out income-tax returns by that process. Go ahead ;
I have asked all of the questions I want to ask.
Senator Curtis. It might be helpful if you would tell us what
services you do render for Mr. Hoffa. By that I mean you periodi-
cally audit his records, and do you supervise his books and records,
and do you maintain them, or what services do you perform for Mr.
Hoffa?
Mr. Grosberg. Do you mean Mr. Hoffa as an individual or Mr.
Hoffa in the labor movement ?
Senator Curtis. As an individual.
Mr. Grosberg. I perform no services for Mr. Hoffa as an individual
except his preparation of his income-tax return.
Senator Curtis. You are not his accountant in the sense that you
set up a set of books for him and direct him how or supervise Mr.
Hoffa or anyone else in keeping them ?
Mr. Grosberg. I have answered that one, Senator.
Senator Curtis. Do you assume any responsibility for the main-
tenance of day-to-day and month-to-month records for Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. Grosberg. I have answered that one, too, Senator.
Senator Curtis. I am trying to get the record here to see what
area you are familiar with.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13415
Mr. Grosberg. I just prepare his Federal tax return each year.
That is the services I render to Mr. Hoffa as an individuaL
Senator Curtis. You have no responsibility beyond that ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I don't.
Senator Curtis. You prepare that information or that tax on the
basis of the information that Mr. Hoffa brings to you, which is made
up of forms provided by employer and forms provided by companies,
plus what you elicit in questions and answers from Mr. Hoffa? Is
that the size of it ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct, Senator.
Senator Curtis. So, in a sense, you are not Mr. Hoffa's accountant,
but you are the individual who prepares his tax return ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Ives. Will the Senator yield ?
Senator Curtis. I didn't want to put words in your mouth, but
I wanted to understand what area of the facts you are competent
to testify about.
Senator Ives. Will the Senator yield on that ? He told me he made
up his return from the data that you are talking about, plus the
verbal information, or oral information you received from Mr. Hoffa,
and I take it you sit right down there as Mr. Hoffa tells you these
things, and you fix up the return ; don't you ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Ives. You have Mr. Hoffa right at your elbow telling you
what to put down ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't have Mr. Hoffa at my elbow telling me what
to put down.
Senator Ives. Who does tell you ?
Mr. Grosberg. I ask Mr. Hoffa some questions regarding various
aspects on the tax return, and then he, perhaps, will answer those
questions and, from the information he gives me, I put it down where
I think it is proper.
Senator Ives. What do you put it down on first? Do you carry
all of that in your mind ?
Mr. Grosberg. I put it down on the tax return.
Senator Ives. You carry it all in your mind until you get around
to making the tax return up ; is that right ?
Mr. Grosberg. No, Senator ; you misunderstood me.
Senator Ives. You do 1 of 2 things, and you do it with Mr. Hoffa
there to tell you what to do and put it down while he is there, or
you do it someplace else and put it dow^n some place else first. You
can't carry that all in your mind ; can you ?
Mr. Grosberg. If you would have let me finish. Senator
Senator Ives. Pardon me ; I didn't mean to block you off.
Mr. Grosberg. I started to tell you; as I am asking these questions
and he is answering them, I put them on the return in what I think
would be the proper place.
Senator Ives. That is exactly the question he raised; perhaps he
wasn't at your elbow; perhaps he stood somewhere else, but that is
the expression I applied to that, and you said, "No."
In other words, you do it in such a way that there is no record any-
where except the income-tax return ; is that right?
13416 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Ives. Thank you.
The Chairman. Let me ask you : As I understand your testimony^
you keep no records after you make out the return, except a copy of
the return ?
Mr. Grosberg. The tax return, Mr. Chairman, and the W-2 forms,
the 1099, whatever forms are submitted to me.
The Chairman. They are forms of tax returns, aren't they ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ?
The Chairman. Are those tax returns that show what he may have
received from this corporation or that one ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
The Chairman. Now, the question is, you are a certified public
accountant, and let us assume that the Internal Revenue Service
became interested in a return and came to you and said, ""WHiere did
you get this figure, and how did you arrive at that?*' and what records
have you to fortify and support the return which you submitted?
jNIr. Grosberg. The tax return in itself. Senator.
The Chairman. The tax return itself doesn't support itself. I am
talking about what will support it.
Mr. Grosberg. As far as the payroll is concerned, or his pay. the
local union would be the substantiating factor.
The Chairman. I am not talking about that ; I am talking about
other things. For instance, he lists $10,000 of collections and miscel-
laneous income or wager income. What records do you have to sub-
stantiate that?
Mr. Grosberg. ]May I talk to my counsel a moment ?
The Chairman. Yes ; perhaps he can tell you.
(The witness consulted with counsel.)
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Grosberg. May I see a copy of the tax return ?
The Chairman. Oh, yes : you may.
(A document was handed to the witness.)
Mr. Grosberg. Do you wish me to go over it with you ?
The Chairman. I didn't ask you to go over it.
Mr. Grosberg. ^"^Hiat is it 3^011 would like to know ?
The Chairman. I want to know what supporting documents you
have for the figures and information you provided in that return.
Mr. Grosberg. The supporting documents I would have would be
the W-2's, the 1099's, and the information that Mr. Hoffa himself
submitted to me.
The Chairman. Did he submit information to you in the form of
documents ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
The Chairman. Well, then, you don't have a document then ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I don't.
The Chairman. What you have is nothing except his word: he
said, "I won so much gambling'' ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is right.
The Chairman. And you just put it down ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is right.
(At this point, tlie following members were prer-ent : Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Kennedy, and Curtis.)
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13417
The Chairman. You have no documents to substantiate it ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I don't.
The Chairman. Do you keep anything other than the naked copy of
the tax return you prepare for him ?
Mr. Grosberg. Nothing other than the tax return and the W-2's
and 1099's.
The Chairivian. Do you treat all of your clients that way ? Is that
the kind of service you give to all of them ?
Mr. Grosberg. As individuals, now, Senator ?
The Chairman. Yes ; collectively or otherwise.
Mr. Grosberg. Wlien an individual gets income from wages or from
wagering, it is one matter. When a man is in a business as an indi-
vidual, as a sole proprietorship, you would have to list on his schedule
C the total receipts, total expenses, depreciation, and what have you.
Then I would have more records. But Mr. Hoffa, through his tax
return, is not in a business. As far as his income is concerned from
dividends and from wages, they can be easily substantiated. As far as
his income from wagering is concerned, that, Mr. Hoffa submits to me.
The Chairman. Do you have any record of his rents ?
Mr. Grosberg. I still don't remember the rents.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Grosberg. This is an item of $62 on a land contract. In fact,
I paid this myself for Mr. Hoffa, and he reimburses me for it. The
party with whom he had this land contract paid 1 item of $62 in rent,
and that was the last bit of information that we had.
The Chairman. You don't have any documents supporting the de-
ductions of expenses ?
Mr. Grosberg. As far as the tax
The Chairman. That is, claimed as business expense ?
Mr. Grosberg. As far as the taxes and the interest, yes ; I have the
deductions in my own records.
The Chairman. You have those in your own records ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. What do you have in that connection ?
Mr. Grosberg. I have the principal payments, the interest payments,
and the taxes that I paid.
The Chairman. You have those ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ?
The Chairman. You say now you have those ?
Mr. Grosberg. In fact, Mr. Bellino has them.
The Chairman. I thought you said a moment ago all you had was
these forms that came in.
Mr. Grosberg. You misunderstood me. You misunderstood me,
Senator. I said I have these in my own personal records on this $62
rent ; not as far as the client is concerned, but in my own personal rec-
ords, and Mr. Bellino has them.
The Chairman. That is the thought here. I am not a certified pub-
lic accountant, but I think most of us have learned from experience
that it is very wise to keep the supporting evidence of what we certify
in an income-tax return.
Mr. Grosberg. The supporting evidence is kept, Senator.
The Chairman. The what ?
Mr. Grosberg. The evidence is kept.
13418 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. I have not been able to find it. We have been trying
to find where the supporting evidence is.
Mr. Grosberg. I have the information on the $62, on the interest
and on the taxes.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the collections ?
Mr. Grosberg. That I don't have. Thatis just oral information sup-
plied to me.
The Chairman. You have no record of these collections ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Tlie Chairman. You don't know the source of them ?
Mr. Grosberg. Other than the fact I have been told.
The Chairman. Other than he said. Well, where it says miscella-
neous, I think we had some here this morning which said miscellaneous
income ; did you show the source of that ?
Mr. Grosberg. He told me. That was it.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. For instance, here in the 1956 one, you have collec-
tions received under the title "Collections Received," then MCT
$10,000. What is that ?
Mr. Grosberg. May I see that, please?
Mr. Kennedy. Michigan Conference of Teamsters, I expect. MCT ?
Was that a bonus ?
Mr. Grosberg. May I see it, please ?
Mr. Lawson. This is 1954 that we have.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
IMr. Grosberg. l^Hiich item are you asking about ?
Mr. Kennedy. The Michigan Conference of Teamsters, $10,000?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. That you would obtain from what? How would
you get that information ?
Mr. Grosberg. There is a 1099 included with this copy that I gave
Mr. Bellino showing $10,000 from the Michigan Conference of Team-
sters payable to James R. Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. T^Hiat is the next item under that ?
Mr. Grosberg. Wagering.
Mr. Kennedy. How mucli is there ?
Mr. Grosberg. $10,682.
Mr. Kennedy. Where did you get that information ?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa say that he just received that on that
day, $10,682?
Mr. Grosberg. Did he receive it on that day ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't think he received it on that day.
Mr. Kennedy. He could not possibly remember over a period of a
year that he received $10,682. He must have written that down some-
where. Didn't he show you any documents at all ?
Mr. Grosberg. Maybe he had it written down and then told me what
the information was.
Mr. Kennedy. He says he does not have any documents, either.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know, but he told me it was $10,682.
Mr. Kennedy. He must have a fantastic memory that he can remem-
ber that figure.
IIMPROPER ACTH'ITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 13419
Mr. Grosberg. This isn't for 1 day. This is a period of a year, Mr.
Kennedy.
Mr. Kexxedt. How did he know that that was the amount that he
collected over a period of a year i
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know.
Mr. Kexxedt. Didn't you ask him to verify this, to substantiate it ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kexxedy. You did not?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kexx'edt. You are a certified public accountant and you just
put that figure down ?
Mr. Grosberg. I did not swear to the return, Mr. Kennedy.
]\Ir. Kex'xedt. "\Miat is the figure under that ?
Mr. Grosberg. Expenses.
Mr. Kex-^xedy. "What is the figure ?
Mr. Grosberg. $4,813.97.
Mr. Kexx-^edy. $4,000 — would you read that again ?
Mr. Grosberg. $4,813.97.
Mr. Kexxedt. A^liat verification did he give you for that ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Grosberg. These were the expenses from the international
union.
Mr. Kex'X'edy. The what ?
Mr. Grosberg. The expenses from the international union.
Mr. Kex'^x'edt. Have you got some verification on that ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't remember if I saw a letter regarding it or if
there was a 1099 regarding it.
I really don't.
Mr. Kex'X'edt. This is what he declares as income?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ?
Mr. Kexx'edt. This is what he declares as income on that ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is what I suggested he declare as expenses for
1956.
Mr. Kex'X'edy. Did you sign this tax return ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes : I do.
Mr. Kennedy. "\Mien you sign the tax return, don't you take some
responsibility for what is on the tax return ?
Mr. Grosberg. No : I don't.
Mr. Kex'x-^edy. You don't take any responsibility ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kex'x-edy. Tliis states here — you say you don't take any respon-
sibility for the tax return as a certified public accountant?
Mr. Grosberg. I am pretty sure I don't have a responsibility on the
tax return.
Mr. Kex'X'edy, It says here :
I declare under the penalties of perjury that this return, including any accom-
panying schedules and statements, has been examined by me and to the best of
my knowledge and belief is a true, correct, and complete form.
Mr. Grosberg. May I talk to counsel, please ?
Mr. Kex'xedy. I don't see why you have to keep talking to Mr.
Fitzgerald, who is Mr. Hoffa's attorney. This is a question of fact,
this is something that you dealt with.
Mr. Grosberg. I am talking to Mr. Lawson.
13420 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. The witness has a right to consult counsel respect-
ing his legal rights. I hope counsel is observing and respecting the
rule of the committee.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you answer that ?
Mr. Grosberg. I actually certify only to the information that is
given to me.
Mr. I^NNEDY. When you certify and put your name down on a tax
return, you have to have some information on which you base this
tax return. You are not going to put down some $10,000 that the tax-
payer said he received and not have any documentation on it whatso-
ever.
Mr. Grosberg. I am not going to use my imagination, Mr. Kennedy,
as far as the $10,000 is concerned. If that is the figure that is given
to me, that is the figure that I am going to put down.
Mr. Kennedy. I'V^iat good does it do j^ou putting your name down to
this thing?
Mr. Grosberg. Actually, I think it is a matter of identification.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you make up the tax returns of ISIr. Owen Bert
Brennan ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you keep documents on his ?
Mr. Grosberg. Dot?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't keep any ?
Mr. Grosberg. Other than tlie tax returns.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't have any documents on either Mr. Bren-
nan or Mr. Hoila, Mr. Grosberg ?
Mr. Grosberg. I do not.
Mr. Kennedy. Let me ask you this.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that the statement says, "I
declare under the penalties of perjury that this is a true, correct, and
complete return."
Mr. Grosberg. Doesn't it say a little more than that ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes. As I read it before, "I declare under the penal-
ties of perjury that this return, including any accompanying schedules
and statements has been examined by me and to the best of my knowl-
edge and belief is a true, correct, and complete return."
Mr. Grosberg. That is the answer, Mr. Kennedy, to the best of my
knowledge and belief. Mr. Hoffa had $10,682 income from wagering,
and I don't think there is any better source as to the information,
really, than Mr. Hoffa himself.
Mr. Kennedy. Except any documentation he might have.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know about any documentation.
Mr. Kennedy. I think that most certified public accountants when
they are going to sign a tax return like this, would demand documenta-
tion. I have never heard of a certified public accountant who had
not.
Mr. Grosberg. I asked Mr. Hoffa and he said he had not.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did he say ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13421
Mr. Grosberg. That he had not.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ask Mr. Brennan if he had any documenta-
tion on the things he reported on his tax return ?
Mr. Grosberg. I probably did.
Mr. Kennedy. What did he say ?
Mr. Grosberg. May 1 1 alk to my counsel ?
Mr. Kennedy. What did he say ?
That is not a legal question. I don't see that that is a legal ques-
tion.
Mr. Grosberg. May I talk to my counsel ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Brennan has records.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you examine those records ?
Mr. Grosberg. Actually, I did not examine them, but I have seen
them.
Mr. Kenendy. What records does he have to indicate or show that
Mr. Hoff a made this money from gambling ?
Mr. Grosberg. That I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you look at them for that purpose ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. "VVliat did Mr. Hoffa say was the source of this
money ?
Mr, Grosberg. He said Mr. Brennan was the source.
Mr. Kennedy. When you examined his books, did you find this
money ?
Mr. Grosberg. I did not examine his books. He gave me the in-
formation also.
Mr. Kennedy. And you never tried to verify the information he
gave you, either ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I don't think I have to verify the information.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the loans that Mr. Hoffa received ?
Did you keep records on the loans he was getting ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I did not keep records on the loans.
Mr. Kennedy. How could he keep all of that in his mind, Mr.
Grosberg ?
Mr. Grosberg. You are going back now some period of time.
Mr. Kennedy. Yes. I want to know how he was able to come be-
fore the committee last year and give us a list of the loans.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. You have not any idea ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. He has the most fabulous memory of anybody that
ever lived.
Mr. Grosberg. I guess he has.
The Chairman. The question for this witness is: Even though
Mr. Hoffa keeps no records, that may not be your fault. But when
you go to certifying to income tax returns, I think, just as a matter
of self-assurance, wanting to know that what you are certifying to is
correct insofar as you can verify it, you would want some records,
some documentary evidence, something, especially where you got the
opportunity, when he says "I got this money from Mr. Brennan,"
that you would want to check those records to verify it.
13422 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. I asked for the information, Senator. The infor-
mation was given to me orally. There was nothing written. If the
man does not have it, that I cannot help.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hofl'a yesterday, talking on page 49, stated
in regard to the loan that he received from Mr. Holtzman, he said,
"I had my accountant try to straighten out some of these answers
since the last time. My accountant shows here money was borrowed
in the latter half of 1951 and was paid back in 1953, according to the
records that he has been able to reconstruct."
The accountant that he is talking about there ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, I am.
Senator Kennedy. "Wliat are the records that you reconstructed ?
Mr. Grosberg. There are actually no records. What I did was I
called Mr. Bushkin, because I think Mr. Hoffa also testified that he
borrowed money from Mr. Bushkin.
Senator Kennedy. That is correct. When did you call Mr. Bush-
Mn?
Mr. Grosberg. I think it was Monday.
Senator Kennedy. Monday ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Do you mean Monday of this week ?
Mr. Grosberg. Either Saturday or Monday. I think it was Mon-
day of this week.
Senator Kennedy. What did Mr. Bushkin tell you ?
Mr. Grosberg. I asked him when he had loaned the monev to Mr.
Hoffa.
Senator Kennedy. What did he say ?
Mr. Grosberg. He said the end of 1951.
Senator Kennedy. He loaned how much ?
Mr. Grosberg. $5,000.
Senator Kennedy. He loaned $5,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. And Mr. Holtzman likewise loaned $5,000 at the
same time.
Senator Kennedy. Those are the records you had ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is the information I had.
Senator Kennedy. But Mr. Hoffa stated, "According to his records
that he has been able to reconstruct." That is the quote :
My accountant shows here money was borrowed in the latter half of 1951 and
was paid back in 1953.
"VAHiere did you show it ?
Where?
Mr. Grosberg. I think actually there is an exchange of words there.
I think Mr. Hoffa is using records instead of information.
Senator Kennedy. That is an entirely different type of word,
though.
Mr. Grosberg. No; I don't know if it is an entirely different type
of word ; no, sir.
Senator Kennedy. You don't think it is ?
Mr. Grosberg. No, sir.
Senator Kennedy. By records, I assume it is something in writing.
That is the general meaning of the word "records." Do you have
anything in writing of this, except your conversation with Mr. Bush-
kin on the phone ? Where did you reach him ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13423
Mr. Grosberg. At his office.
Senator Kennedy. Where ?
Mr. Grosberg. Where did I reach Mr. Bushkin?
Senator Kennedy. That is right ; Monday.
Mr. Grosberg. In his office on Grand Kiver Avenue.
Senator Kennedy. You called him at his office ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. And he told you on the phone he gave $5,000
and when it was paid back.
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ?
Senator Kennedy. What ?
Mr. Grosberg. He told me he gave him $5,000.
Senator Ejennedy. Did he tell you he had any record of the loan
when it was made or any record of the payment back?
Mr. Grosberg. I did not ask him. I just asked him when he loaned
it and when he got it back.
Senator Kennedy. All right. To your information, are there any
records that you know of when Mr. Bushkin loaned him the money,
$5,000 in cash, without interest, if there was any exchange in writing
to certify that it was a loan and not a payment ?
Mr. Grosberg. For that, you will have to ask Mr. Bushkin.
Senator Kennedy. We asked Mr. Bushkin, and he has taken the fifth
amendment, as you know. The other party involved is Mr. Holtz-
man, and he is dead, Mr. Grosberg, so that the two people involved, one
is unable to talk and one will not talk, so we come to you who has,
according to Mr. Hoffa, reconstructed the records. All you tell us is
you talked to Mr. Bushkin. That is the only record you have; is that
correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is the information I have. Senator; that is
correct.
Senator Kennedy. I would say it is an entirely different impres-
sion, then, from what Mr. Hofl'a gave yesterday about the records,
about his accountant reconstructing it.
Mr. Grosberg. I think it is a matter of seipantics, Mr. Senator.
Senator Kennedy. It states, "I said I tried to have them recon-
structed. He talked to people." Who were the people you talked to ?
It was only one person, wasn't it, not people ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. Who else?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Keeshin.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Keeshin ? Who is Mr. Keeshin ?
Mr. Grosberg. Another individual who loaned Mr. Hoffa some
money.
Senator Kennedy. When did you talk to him ?
Mr. Grosberg. Monday.
Senator Kennedy, Wlio is he ?
Mr. Grosberg. He is a gentleman in Chicago.
Senator Ivennedy. What does he do ?
Mr. Grosberg. I am not too sure of what he does.
Senator Kennedy. Where did you get him ?
Mr. Grosberg. I think he was in Wisconsin, actually.
Senator Ivennedy, You got him on the phone ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
13424 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Kennedy. You don't remember where ?
Mr. Grosberg. In Wisconsin. I don't remember the city.
Senator Kennedy. What does he do ?
Mr. Grosberg. I am not too sure what he was.
Senator Kennedy. What did he give a loan to Mr. HofFa for ? You
don't know why ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know why.
Senator Kennedy. How much was it ?
Mr. Grosberg. $5,000.
Senator Kennedy. Cash ?
Mr. Grosberg. I did not ask him.
Senator Kennedy. What did you call him for ?
Mr. Grosberg. To find out when.
Senator Kennedy. What did lie tell you ?
Mr. Grosberg. It was either 1950 or 1951, September.
Senator Kennedy. Who told you to call him ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ?
Senator Kennedy. Who told you to call him ?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Hoffa.
Senator Kennedy. Is he a truckowner ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know. He might be.
Senator Kennedy. I don't think that is a very good reconstruction
of events, if you are not able to give us any more precise information.
You might as well have taken Mr. Hoffa's word for it.
Mr. Grosberg. Wlien I called to find out the information on the
phone, actually, I am not trying to find out what the man does for
a living or anything else.
Senator Kennedy. I don't really see any value in your participating
in this at all. All we have is what you said Mr. Bushkin said, and
we have no evidence from Mr. Bushkin, and Mr. Holtzman is not
around, and the other gentleman is somebody you talked to, and you
don't know who he was or why he gave the loan or you have Ho
records of it.
Mr. Grosberg. I have no rex^ords.
Senator Kennedy. You are a certified public accountant, which im-
plies that you have some degree of responsibility to the people of
Michigan. I hope the State of Michigan will examine this transcript
to see if you are meeting that responsibility as a certified public ac-
countant. I hope the Internal Revenue Service will, too. Will you
tell us where you placed that call on Monday from ?
Mr. Grosberg. The call was placed from Mr. Fitzsimmons' office.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Fitzsimmons ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Who is he ?
Mr. Grosberg. A vice president, I believe, of local 299,
Senator Kennedy. It was placed from his office in Detroit ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know at the time that Mr. Hoffa had bor-
rowed this money from Mr. Keeshin ?
Mr. Grosberg. Did I know at one time ?
Mr. Kennedy. In 1950 or 1951 ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know that Mr. Keeshin is a major truck-
owner in the United States ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13425
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You do not know that ?
Mr. Grosberg. I did not know that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know what Mr. Hoffa borrowed the money
for?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know he was borrowing the money from the
business agents of the Teamsters' Union ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I didn't.
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew during 1952 or 1953 he was sup-
posed to be borrowing money from the business agents ?
Mr. Grosberg. In 1953 1 knew.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know that then ?
Mr. Grosberg. During the Hoffman committee.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know prior to that ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. He never told you anything about it ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you reconstruct the list of the loans that he had
received that he used at the last hearing back last year ?
Mr. Grosberg. That list was reconstructed, actually, I think, from
the testimony of the Hoffman committee.
Mr. Kennedy. He also stated that, supposedly, he had paid those
loans back, and where was that information obtained from ?
Mr. Grosberg. What do you mean ?
Mr. Kennedy. With the paying of the loans back, the ones, for in-
stance, to Mr. Keeshin and Mr. Bushkin ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know where that came from, and he had the
information.
Mr. Kennedy. How could he remember that ? He couldn't remem-
ber anything last year.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know ; you will have to ask him, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know that he had the cash in his possession
during 1952 and 1953 ? *
Mr. Grosberg. What cash ?
Mr. Kennedy. The cash that came from these various sources.
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I didn't.
Mr. Kennedy. Now just let me ask you this : You keep the books of
the joint council 43 also ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes ; I do.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you been a partner of Mr. Bushkin in any enter-
prise ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What is the name of the business ?
Mr. Grosberg. Dave Gantz, food broker and sales representative, or
something like that.
Mr. Kennedy. What do you do, or what does Dave Gantz Co. do ?
Mr. Grosberg. It is a food-brokerage company.
Mr. Kennedy. You and Mr. Bushkin are partners together ?
Mr. Grosberg. With Mr. Gantz.
Mr. Kennedy. The three of you ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did your uncle have any interest in any of the chain-
stores in Detroit ?
13426 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What company?
Mr. Grosberg. A. C. F. Wrigley.
Mr. Kennedy. What was his name?
Mr. Grosberg. Charles Grosberg.
JNIr, Kennedy. Does he still have an interest ?
Mr. Grosberg. I imagine he does.
Mr. Kennedy. That is one of the biggest clients of Bushkin, is it
not, in his labor-relations consultants?
Mr. Grosberg. I believe he is.
Mr. Kennedy. TAHiat about your father, and does he have an in-
terest in any business or any chainstores ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; he does not.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you received any loans from the union ?
Mr. Grosberg, Yes, sir: I have.
Mr. Kennedy. What loans have you received ?
Mr. Grosberg. I received a loan from local 299 of $37,500.
Mr. Kennedy. What is that?
Mr. Grosberg. $37,500.
Mr. Kennedy. From local 299?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. T^Hien was that?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't remember the date, and I think it "was Septem-
ber or October of 1955.
Mr. Kennedy. Go ahead.
Mr. Grosberg. And local 337, $37,500, but these moneys were not
loaned directly to me.
Mr. Kennedy. To whom were they loaned ?
Mr. Grosberg. To Marberry Construction Co.
Mr. Kennedy. Is Mr. Fitzgerald in that company with you ?
]\Ir. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
]Mr. Kennedy. You and Mr. Fitzgerald?
^Ir. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, have you received any other moneys from the
union ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What other moneys?
Mr. Grosberg. Not from the union.
]Mr. Kennedy. From whom ?
Mr. Grosberg. From the welfare fund.
Mr. Kennedy. How much have vou received from the welfare
tund?
Mr. Grosberg. We received $100,000 for the Marberry Construction
Co., and that is after we paid off the $75,000 to the other 2 locals, and
then we received $135,000.
Mr. Kennedy. $135,000 from the welfare fund? When did vou
get that?
Mr. Grosberg. I believe it was in June or July of 1957.
Senator Curtis. Would you yield at that point, ]Mr. Counsel ? T
am interested, so far as the regulations of welfare funds and their
preservation is concerned. ^^Hiat security, if anything, was given for
that, for those loans?
Mr. Grosberg. Four homes, a note from my father, vested right?
were given for that $135,000.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13427
Senator Curtis. Will you elaborate on what you mean by "vested
rights" ?
Mr. Grosberg. From an insurance company on commissions on
policies.
Senator Curtis. Future commissions already earned, or on sales to*
be made in the future ?
Mr, Grosberg. Earned. I wouldn't say they are sales to be made
in the future, and they are already in existence, and they are, actually,
I would call them earned.
Senator Curtis. What was the full title of the debtor in these
loans ? You said some construction company, and I did not get it.
Mr. Grosberg. You are talking about two different loans now.
Senator Curtis. I am talking about the loans made by the welfare
fund. Who borrowed that money ?
Mr. Grosberg. Marberry Construction Co.
Senator Curtis. And where are they located ?
Mr. Grosberg. In Detroit.
Senator Curtis. What is their business ?
Mr. Grosberg. Building, home building.
Senator Curtis. Home building ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Who are the principal stockholders ?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Silberg, my father, and myself.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Fitzgerald is the man that is connected with
one of the unions ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes ; that is correct.
Senator Curtis. Who is the other one ?
Mr. Grosberg. My father.
Senator Curtis. And who else ?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Silberg. He is the builder.
Senator Curtis. He is the builder ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Is he in any way connected with the union ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Curtis. And that is all ; is that right ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Now, what security was given by the construction
company ?
Mr. Grosberg. We did not get this money directly. This money
was given to the Abstract & Title Guaranty Co. and placed in a revolv-
ing fund, and the first mortgages would be given for this money when
we would present waivers to the Abstract Co., which is the normal pro-
cedure which any building company would get construction loans from
a bank or from a mortgage company.
Senator Curtis. These were loans made after a portion or all of the
construction was completed; that you would borrow money pending
the sale of the property ; is that the type of loan ?
Mr. Grosberg. It is that type of loan, yes.
Senator Curtis. Well now, would the title company part with any
of the money prior to the delivery of the first mortgages ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Curtis. To what extent of the actual building costs would
the mortgages be made, the full amount of the building costs?
13428 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. No, the maximum, Senator, that they would give on
each house was $15,000, and the houses were houses that were selling
for around $30,000.
Senator Curtis. Now, this construction company had one member at
least directly connected with the union, which in turn may have had
some interest in the welfare fund. There were two people, rather, who
examined the transactions or what lawyer for the welfare fund?
Mr. Grosberg. The lawyer for the welfare fund.
Senator Curtis. Wlio were those ?
Mr. Grosberg. I answered you, and I said the lawyer for the welfare
fund.
Senator Curtis. Who is that ?
Mr, Grosberg. Well, I understand from Mr. Fitzgerald, the commit-
tee has the record, but Mr. Fitzgerald had checked it through with the
lawyer from the abstract company.
Senator Curtis. What rate of interest do these mortgages bear?
Mr. Grosberg. Six percent.
Senator Curtis. Have they all been paid ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ?
Senator Curtis. Has all of this indebtedness been paid back to the
welfare fund ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Curtis. What is the total amount that was borrowed?
Mr. Grosberg. $100,000.
Senator Curtis. That is $100,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. I thought there was also another one of $135,000.
]\Ir. Grosberg. That is a different one.
Senator Curtis. I am talking about the total from the welfare fund,
and what was the total ?
Mr. Grosberg. $235,000.
Senator Curtis. How much of that remains outstanding ?
Mr. Grosberg. Just a moment. We paid back $52,000 on the $100,-
000 loan, and we paid back roughly twelve to fifteen thousand dollars
on tlie otlier loan, plus interest.
Senator Curtis. How many homes were mortgaged to secure these
two loans to the welfare fund ?
Mr. Grosberg. You are talking about two different loans here?
Senator Curtis. I am talking about both of them.
Mr. Grosberg. We can't discuss both of them together.
Senator Curtis. Were they not both made to the same person, or the
same entity ?
Mr. Grosberg. No, they were not.
Senator Curtis. Were they not both made to the same construction
company ?
Mr. Grosberg. No, they were not.
Senator Curtis. All right, to whom was the $100,000 loan made?
Mr. Grosberg. To the Marberry Construction Co., and that is the
one I have been discussing with you.
Senator Curtis. How many homes were mortgaged to secure that
one?
Mr. Grosberg. For each $15,000 that we would take out of the
abstract company, a first mortgage was given. If the abstract com-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13429
pany held any money, we didn't have to present a first mortgage
because we didn't have possession of that money, nor did we have the
right to take it. So as we took $15,000 we presented or we gave a
first mortgage.
Senator Curtis. I understand that, and now how many first mort-
gages on homes did you execute and deliver for that $100,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't remember offhand, but we did build around
19 homes.
Senator Curtis. How many of those homes have been sold?
Mr. Grosberg. All but three.
Senator (Curtis. All but three ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. And you still owe $46,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. We still have a lot of building to do, too.
Senator Curtis. Some of them are not completed 'I
Mr. Grosberg. No, actually a construction loan is a loan that is
given in process of construction. As you reach certain stages, like
m any mortgage institution, or a banking institution, according to
the laws of the State of Michigan, you are allowed to draw so much
funds. As you go into certain other stages, you are allowed to draw
so many more funds until you reach a certain limit, and we completed
that in complete accordance with the abstract company and the laws
of Michigan ; that is the way we have been drawing it.
Senator Curtis. This is a revolving fund ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, it is.
Senator Curtis. How many mortgages do tliey have novr I
Mr. Grosberg. Three.
Senator Curtis. Three mortgages for n total of $48,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. I am sorry, it is $45,000. I thought it was ^^^48,000.
Senator Curtis. There are three mortgages ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. And to what degi*ee of completion aro tliose tlu-ee
homes ?
Mr. Grosberg. About 96 percent completed, and actually the only
thing incomplete is just the painting on the inside.
Senator Curtis. Now, to whom was the $135,000 loan made ?
Mr. Grosberg. That was made to my father.
Senator Curtis. As an individual ?
Mr. Grosberg. As an individual.
Senator Curtis. Wliat rate of interest ?
Mr. Grosberg. Six percent.
Senator Curtis. What security was given ?
Mr. Grosberg. Four residence homes, plus a note from my father,
and the vested rights in future commissions, as I was discussing with
you before.
Senator Curtis. That is vested rights on continuing insurance ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is right, it is about $300,000 worth, Senator.
Senator Curtis. What type of insurance is that, life insurance or
group insurance or is it insurance written to the union or for the
union ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; there was no Teamster insurance on that. The
whole vested rights were not Teamster insurance.
Senator Curtis. Was it all with one insurance company ?
21243 — 58— -pt. 36 11
13430 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, it is.
Senator Curtis. What is the name of that insurance company ?
Mr. Grosberg. Union Labor Life Insurance Co.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Ives,,
Kennedy, and Curtis.)
Senator Curtis. It is insurance written in connection with labor
organizations but not Teamsters ; is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct. Senator.
Senator Curtis. And some of that loan has been paid ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes. We pay $1,100 a month plus interest on that
loan.
Senator Curtis. Is there any delinquency on either of these loans ?
Mr. Grosberg. No; I don't believe there is any delinquency.
I think they are all paid up.
Senator Curtis. Who are the trustees of the welfare fund that mad&
these loans ?
Mr. Grosberg. There are four trustees.
Senator Curtis. Who are they ?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Holmes and Mr. Fitzsimmons, from the labor
side, and Mr. Minick and Mr. Dady, from the management side.
Senator Curtis. Is it Mr. Fitzsimmons who was a trustee of the
fund the same Mr. Fitzsimmons who was one of the borrowers?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Fitzsinmions was not a borrower. It was Fitz-
gerald.
Senator Curtis. I beg your pardon. I have my "Fitz" mixed up. I
beg your pardon.
Do you happen to know whether the trustees of the welfare fund
have complete authority to make loans of any size without a vote of
the membership ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't think there is a membership in a welfare
fund. They do have authority to make loans ; yes.
Senator Curtis. Are you the accountant for the welfare fund?
Mr. Grosberg. I am, yes.
Senator Curtis. Are reports made of the investments and loans
made by the welfare fund, made to the beneficiaries thereof ?
(At this point. Senator Ervin entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Grosberg. I assume so.
They are always available, Senator. Keports are made up.
Senator Curtis. Reports are made that are available to the union
members who are the beneficiaries, is that correct ?
IMr. Grosberg. I believe so, yes.
Senator Curtis. How often are they made ?
Mr. Grosberg. We make quarterly audits.
(At this point, Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.)
Senator Curtis. That is all.
Senator Ives. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. As I understand it, would you tell me how much
money you invested, you and the other three participants in this
arrangement ?
Mr. Grosberg. Marbury Construction Co. — well, Mr. Bellino has
the records.
Senator Kennedy. Have you any idea how much you, Mr. Fitz-
gerald and the other two gentlemen invested in this construction
company ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13431
Mr. Grosbeeg. Well, there are $18,000 of stock.
Senator Kennedy. $18,000. How much did you invest ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon ?
Senator Kjennedy. Do you mean that you invested $18,000, the
4 of you ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, plus the land. We owned the land.
Senator Kennedy. How much is that worth ?
■ Mr. Grosberg. The land?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. Well, about $5,000 a lot.
Senator Kennedy. How much did you put in of that $23,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. Of the $18,000?
Senator Kennedy. Yes. It is $23,000 now in assets of this company ;
is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon.
Senator Kennedy. Then we will start again, $18,000 for the 4 of
you, is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. How much did you put in ?
( The witness conferred with his counsel. )
Mr. Grosberg. I put in $9,000.
Senator Kennedy. How much ?
Mr. Grosberg. $9,000.
Senator Kennedy. $9,000?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Where did you get the $9,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. I had the money, some of which I borrowed.
Senator Kennedy. Did you borrow some of that from the union ?
Mr. Grosberg. No, I did not, I beg your pardon, I borrowed it from
the bank. Mr. Bellino has the record on that.
Senator Kjennedy. You put in $9,000, none of which you secured
from the union ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Ivennedy. Part your own and part you borrowed. Wliat
did you put up for your security for the money you borrowed ?
Mr. Grosberg. From the bank ; do you mean ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. My signature.
Senator Kennedy. You did not put up any equity ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. Wliat bank ?
Mr. Grosberg. The Bank of Commerce.
Senator Kennedy. Do the Teamsters have any money there ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. The rest of the other $9,000 was put up by the
other three gentlemen, is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Kennedy. Who owned the land for $5,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. Actually, the land was bought. We bought the land
from an individual, Mr. Grosville, and the company now owns it
and we have a contract against it.
Senator Kennedy. The 4 of you bought the $5,000 worth of land,
is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. The land cost more than $5,000.
13432 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD '
Senator Kjennedt. I thought you said it was worth $5,000.
Mr. Grosberg. I said it was worth $5,000 a lot.
Senator Ivennedy. How much is the land totally worth ?
Mr. Grosberg. How much is it worth ?
Senator Kennedy. How much is your investment in the lands?
None, is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. We have an investment of
Senator Kennedy. How much did you personally? I know you
may have put some of the money that you borrowed from the pension
and welfare plan into it. How much did you personally start this
proposition off with before you borrowed money either from the union
or the pension and welfare fund ?
You told me $18,000, of which you ]mt in $9,000; is that a correct
statement ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Kennedy. Therefore, you had an equity of $18,000 in it.
Then you borrowed $37,000?
Mr. Grosberg. We borrowed $37,000.
Senator Kennedy. You did, personally ?
Mr. Grosberg. Just a moment, please. May I talk to my counsel ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. The Chair is being very indulgent about this con-
sulting counsel. You can only consult counsel with respect to your
legal rights. Of course, if counsel can rpfresh your memory, I'm not
going to stop him, if that is what he is doing, but it seems to me that
many of these questions are peculiarly within your own knowledge,
primarily. I am just giving you a little suggestion. I want to be
tolerant, but if I find this committee is being im])osed on, there will
be a different attitude on the part of the Chair and the committee.
Senator Kennedy. Before we get to the 37, would you tell me how
much George Fitzgerald put in of the 18? We know you put in nine.
How much did he put in ?
Mr. Grosberg. He put in $3,000.
Senator Kennedy. He put in three. All right. That leaves six.
Did each of the other 2 gentlemen put in 3 ?
Mr. Grosberg. My father put in three.
Senator Kennedy. That is $18,000. Then you borrowed $37,000
from the union ; is that correct?
$37,500?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Kennedy. That was not from the pension fund ; that was
from what?
Mr. Grosberg. That was from the local union, and that was given to
the Abstract & Title Co. under exactly the same terms upon which
I explained to Senator Curtis when we borrowed the funds from the
welfare.
Senator Kennedy. "\Y1io is the head of that union ?
Mr. Grosberg. Well, $37,500 came from local 299 and $37,500 came
from local 337.
Senator Kennedy. Who are the presidents of those locals?
Mr. Grosberg. 299, Mr. Hoffa, and 337, Mr. Brennan.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Brennan and Mr. Hoffa then loaned vou
$37^500. Was it the Marbury Co. or you personally ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13433
Mr. Grosberg. Marbury, to the Abstract & Title Guarantee-
Senator Kexnedy. I understaJid. Then you secured a loan from the
pension and welfare fund of what? Wliat fund, of the two unions or
that one local ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; the health and welfare fund.
Senator Kennedy. Of which, 299 ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; the health and welfare fund covers the entire
State?
Senator Kennedy. The what ?
Mr. Grosberg. It would be the health and welfare fund covering
tlie entire State.
Senator Kennedy. For all the teamsters of the State of Michigan?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Kennedy. How much did you receive from the health and
pension fund?
Mr. Grosberg. Not the health and pension, just the health and
welfare.
Senator Kennedy. All right. How much?
Mr. Grosberg. $100,000.
Senator Kennedy. You used the $100,000 to pay off first the two
loans of $37,500, or not?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. Wliat did you do with it ?
Mr. Grosberg. That went to the Abstract Co,
Senator Kennedy. So you had $175,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. No. The other loans were paid off.
Senator Kennedy. What did you use to pay them off ?
Mr. Grosberg. I borrowed money from another source.
Senator Kennedy. Wait a minute. You got $175,000 from the
union and the health and welfare, the two locals plus the State of
Michigan of the Teamsters health and welfare; is that correct,
$175,000?
Mr. Grosbero. You are basically correct, but you are putting it, I
think, improperly.
Senator Kennedy. Tell me how.
Mr. Grosberg. We did get the $75,000, but that was paid off.
Senator Kennedy. That is right, from two locals.
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct.
Senator Kennedy. Then you got the $100,000 from the health and
welfare fund of the Teamsters of Michigan ; is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. After the other two loans were paid off.
Senator Kennedy. "VVliat did you use to pay off the other two loans ?
Mr. Grosberg. I borrowed money from another source.
Senator Kennedy. What source was that ?
Mr. Grosberg. My uncle.
Senator Kennedy. Wliy didn't you get it from him in the first
place instead of the union ?
Mr. Grosberg. I didn't think of it at the time.
Senator Kennedy. "Wliat ?
Mr. Grosberg. I didn't think of it at the time.
Senator Kennedy. You didn't think of it ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. Then you thought of it. What does he do?
1^434 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. It is a short-term loan. We only borrowed the
money for around 60 days.
Senator Kennedy. Wliat does he do ?
Mr. Grosberg. Actually, I think he is retired.
Senator Kennedy. What did he do ?
That is a substantial sum of money. A^Hiat did he do ?
Mr. Grosberg. He was an executive in the Wrigley Co., ACF
Wrigley.
Senator Kennedy. And you got the loan from him and you put up
what in the way of security for that?
Mr. Grosberg. Just a note.
Senator Kennedy. On your own signature ?
Mr. Grosberg. Mine and Mr. Fitzgerald.
Senator Kennedy. Then you had the $100,000 from the health and
welfare fund. You got $75,000 from your uncle which you used to
pay back to Mr. Brennan's and Mr. Hoila's locals; is that correct?
Mr. Grosberg. To the two locals ; yes.
Senator Kennedy. 'VAHiat other money did vou get?
Mr. Grosberg. $135,000.
Senator Kennedy. In addition. Wliere did you get that?
Mr. Grosberg. From the welfare fund.
Senator Kennedy. The $100,000 is from the health and welfare; is
that correct?
Mr. Grosberg. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. Is there a distinction ?
Mr. Grosberg. It is the same health and welfare.
Senator Kennedy. First you got $100,000 and then you got $135,000 ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. $235,000. That was a loan to the Marbury Co. ;
is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. Where does that go ?
Mr. Grosberg. The loan was given to my father.
Senator Kennedy. This loan was given to your father ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. What did he put up for it ? What security did
he put up for it ?
Mr. Grosberg. Well, Mr. Fitzgerald and myself, and a Mr. Wolf-
gang, we borrowed the money. We wanted to borrow the money.
But actually we thought it would be better if we went through my
father because his collateral, his signature, and his worth would be
much greater than either Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Wolfgang, or mine.
Senator Kennedy. Who is Mr. Wolfgang ?
Mr. Grosberg. He is a lawyer in Detroit.
Senator Kennedy. "\Y1io is he a lawyer for ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know who he is a lawyer for.
Senator Kennedy. He is not a lawyer for the Teamsters ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. Is he associated with Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. Wliat does his wife do ?
Mr. Grosberg. She is connected with — I don't know the full name
of the union.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13435
Mr. Kennedy. Hotel and Restaurant Workers.
Mr. Grosberg. Is that it ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. All right.
Senator Kennedy. You got the money. Your father signed the note
for the extra $135,000?
Mr. Grosberg. But we signed over our homes to my father who
signed them over to the welfare fund.
Senator Kennedy. I could not hear that. You did what ?
Mr. Grosberg. We signed our homes.
Senator Kennedy. Your personal ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is correct"
Senator Kennedy. You and Mr. Fitzgerald did?
Mr. Grosberg. I signed my home, Mr. Fitzgerald his home, and
Mr. Wolfgang his home.
Senator Kennedy. How much were they valued at ?
Mr. Grosberg. Well, my home is valued
Senator Kennedy. You signed them over to your father; is that
correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. My father ; yes.
Senator Kennedy. All right.
Mr. Grosberg. Then he in turn signed them over to the welfare
fund.
Senator Kennedy. Wlio is that attorney for the welfare fund ?
Mr. Grosberg. Who is the attorney ?
Senator Kennedy. Does Mr. Fitzgerald have any connection with
the welfare fund ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. What is his connection ?
Mr. Grosberg. I imagine he would be called one of the attorneys for
the welfare fund.
Senator Kennedy. And what is you connection? You are the ac-
countant for the welfare fund ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. Well, now, if that is not conspiring money with
with an investment of practically nothing of your own. As I under-
stand, it was $4,000 of your own and you borrowed the other from the
bank on your signature without putting up any equity ?
Mr. Grosberg. If I borrow money and I sign for it, I think I have
the responsibility, and if something goes wrong, I have to meet it, and
I think that could be considered. Senator, as an investment.
Senator Kennedy. I will say to you that we have had voluminous
hearings in the pension and welfare committee in the labor committee,
and I consider this highly improper. For Mr. Fitzgerald to use his
position as an attorney for this pension and welfare fund, and you the
accountant, you being involved in the use of that money for your own
and Mr. Fitzgerald's benefit in a construction company, that isn't where
pension and welfare funds are supposed to be invested.
They are supposed to be invested in a secure investment so that those
who are dependent on those investments will be sure they will receive
them when they need them.
I do not consider that Mr. Fitzgerald exercised good judgment at
all, in fact quite the reverse, or you, holding a position of responsi-
13436 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
bility with the fund, and at the same time receiving money in loans
from the fund, particularly with the small amount of equity that you
and Mr. Fitzgerald put into this.
Mr. Grosberg. These loans were secured, the interest payments were
6 percent, there was enough collateral to cover the loans in case some-
thing should go wrong. So I don't know why one would say these
were insecure.
Senator Kennedy. Well, now, why didn't you go to a bank and
get it?
Mr. Grosberg. "Wliy didn't we go to a bank ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes. "Wliy did you go to the pension and welfare
fund?
Mr. Grosberg. At the same time that I went and borrowed the money
from the welfare fund for the Marbury Construction Co., we did bor-
row money from a bank, too.
Senator Kennedy. How much ?
Mr. Grosberg. I think it came to — it was either $30,000 or $45,000.
Senator Kennedy. What did you put up for equity for that ?
Mr. Grosberg. The same thing, construction loans.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, Mr. Fitzgerald, your partner
and you went to see you and Mr. Fitzgerald, representing the health
and welfare fund, and secured the loan ; is that correct ?
Mr. Grosberg. That is incorrect.
Senator Kennedy. Wlio else did you see ?
Mr, Grosberg. They have the trustees.
Senator Kennedy. Did you talk to Mr. Hoffa about it ?
Mr. Grosberg. I may have talked to Mr. Hoffa about it.
Senator Kennedy. Did he agree to it ?
Mr. Grosberg. If we have the proper collateral and proper security.
Senator Kennedy. I am not asking you if . Did he agree to it ?
Mr. Grosberg. If we had the proper collateral and proper security
we can make application to the welfare fund.
Senator Kennedy. He saw nothing improper in the attorney and
accountant for this welfare and pension plan using funds of the wel-
fare and pension plan, a quarter of a million dollars, in order to make
money on their own ? He saw nothing improper in that ?
Mr. Grosberg. If they were properly secured.
Senator Kennedy. I am asking you. Don't put the "if" in. This is
1958. Wliat was his judgment, that it was properly secured ?
Mr, Grosberg. I imagine they are properly secured, I am sure
they are.
Senator Kennedy, I am asking you what his judgment was.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know what his judgment would be. Senator.
Senator Kennedy. Did he agree to give you the money ?
Mr. Grosberg. He actually could not agree to give me the money.
He has nothing to do with the welfare fund.
Senator Kennedy. He has something to do with 299. Did you talk
to him ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. And Mr. Brennan agreed to do it ?
Mr. Grosberg. On behalf of 237.
Senator Kennedy. T^^ien you went to the State fund, did you talk
to Mr. Hoffa at that time about it ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13437
Mr. Grosberg. No. We made an application to the welfare fund.
Senator Kennedy. You and Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes.
Senator I^jennedy. Do you charge Mr. Hoffa for filling out his
income tax ?
Mr. Grosberg. Do I charge hun ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Senator Kennedy. I wouldn't think you would.
The Chairman. The Chair presents to you four checks, each of
which is made payable to Sam Marroso. The fii'st one is dated March
17, 1956, in the amount of $250 ; the second is dated March 17, 1956, in
the amount of $50 ; the third is dated April 16, 1956, in the amount of
$300, and the fourth is dated January 29, 1957, in the amount of
$208.17. Apparently these checks are all drawn on your regular
printed checks and signed by you.
I ask you to examine these checks and state if you identify them.
(The documents were handed to the witness.)
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. Are those your checks ?
Mr. Grosberg. They are.
The Chairman. They may be made exhibits Nos. 6, A, B, C, and D.
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. 6A, B,
C, and D" for reference and will be found in the appendix on pp.
13714-13717.)
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. What was that money for ?
Mr. Grosberg. A group of us had made a wild excursion into a
tomato venture in Florida, and Mr. Marroso had a piece of it.
Mr. Kennedy. Who is Mr. Marroso ?
Mr. Grosberg. He at one time was a business agent for local 247.
Mr. Kennedy. Local what ?
Mr. Grosberg. 247.
Mr. Kennedy. Where is that located ?
Mr. Grosberg. In Detroit.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlio else was in this venture ? A number of union
officials ?
Mr. Grosberg. There were a number of people.
Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Brennan in this ?
Mr. Grosberg. No ; he was not.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes ; he was.
Mr. Kennedy. Had Mr. Marroso been in the penitentiary ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Grosberg. I am not sure if he was in a penitentiary or not.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he in jail ?
Mr. Grosberg. I think he was in jail.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that for receiving money from employers?
Mr. Grosberg, I don't know what the story was.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he have anything to do with this Marbury Con-
struction Co. that you mentioned ?
Mr. Grosberg. Well, we used to go to him once in a while for a
little bit of advice. Actually, I didn't know some of the people in
13438 IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
the trades, and he would help us contact some of the people in the
construction trades.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he paid a salary while he was with the Marbury
Construction Co. ?
Mr. Grosberg. No; I don't think so. Maybe Mr. Fitzgerald can
tell me.
Mr. Kennedy. Maybe we should swear Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Chair-
man, if he has the answer to this.
Mr. Grosberg. No ; I don't think he was paid any money.
Mr. Kennedy. lie was not paid any money ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know that to be a fact that he received no
money from the Marbury Construction Co. ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't think he received any money from Marbury.
If he did I certainly don't know it.
Mr. Kennedy. Who retained him to perform these services or who
decided you should consult witli liim ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't think it would be a matter of actually retain-
ing him. If we ran into a problem, I would call him myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, he filed a statement with the parole board, and
I would like to give a little background. He was convicted of extor-
tion and sent to jail. He was involved with three other men, Mr. Lin-
teau, Mr. Keating, and Mr. Nicolett, and while he was in jail his wife
received his salary. After he got out of jail, he had to report to the
parole officer, and he reported that he was working for the Marbury
Construction Co.
Can you explain that to us ? And he said he was receiving $700 a
month.
Mr. Grosberg. May I see that, please ?
The Chairman. Let us get the record straight now. Has the state-
ment of counsel been sworn to, or is that information we have regard-
ing the man's background ?
Mr. Kennedy. I believe it has been sworn to and it is already in the
record.
The Chairman. It is in the record, or do you have that informa-
tion?
Mr. Kennedy. That is right.
The Chairman. The statement of counsel will be a statement for
information upon which to predicate interrogation.
Mr. Kennedy. I think Mr. Fitzgerald might be the best one to
answer these questions about Mr. Marroso, because we have some other
questions about their relationship that I would like to ask Mr. Fitz-
gerald, and maybe he would come up, too.
Mr. Grosberg. I think on this matter of Marbury perhaps I could
answer it better. Could I see that ?
Mr. Kennedy. I doubt if you would be able to identify the reports
at the parole board. I understand Mr. Fitzgerald has some conversa-
tions with the parole officer ; isn't that correct ? Do you know about
those?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. He states in these reports to the parole officer that
he worked for the Marbury Construction Co. between November of
1955 and January of 1957 and he received on the average $700 a month.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13439
a total of $9,000 from the Marbury Construction Co., and this was
shortly after he got out of the penitentiary.
Mr. Grosberg. I don't understand it.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if he did any work for Mr. Fitzgerald
during this period of time ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Could we ask Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Chairman?
The Chairman. Mr. Fitzgerald, do you want to answer ?
Mr. Lawson. May I say, Mr. Chairman
The Chairman. Just a moment. Do you want to testify, or do you
want to give any information you have before it ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't want anything left in any mystery.
The Chairman. I thought you wouldn't.
Do you solemnly swear that the evidence given before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I do.
TESTIMONY OF GEORGE FITZGERALD
The Chairman. Mr. Fitzgerald has been identified in the record
heretofore and you may proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzgerald, you are the attorney for local 337?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
The Chairman. The Chair didn't mean to be discourteous to coun-
sel. You started to say something ?
Mr. Lawson. I was going to say, Mr. Chairman, that while I had
talked to Mr. Fitzgerald, and I knew he was willing to testify, I think
it is sort of unusual to call counsel who is not under subpena in this
fashion. It is part of the procedure that Mr. Williams was talking
about this morning.
The Chairman. All right. Mr. Fitzgerald, if he wants a subpena,
of course, we can provide it.
Mr. Kennedy. I told Mr. Fitzgerald that he was going to be a wit-
ness during these hearings. He was notified and he has had books
subpenaed ; isn't that correct ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. You didn't tell me I was going to be a witness, but
I have no hesitancy about testifying.
The Chairman. I am sure you don't.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzgerald, you are the attorney for local 337?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And you are the attorney for local 299 ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And for Joint Council 43 ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And also for the health and welfare fund ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes ; I am one of the attorneys.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Marroso ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us if you have had any business deal-
ings with Mr. Marroso ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Well, Mr. Marroso was a business agent for local
247. ^
13440 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Where is 247 located ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. In the city of Detroit, and it performs certain
functions in the drivers field and in the building field. I think it is
building-supply materials or construction drivers.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he get into any difficulty, and was indicted ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. He got into difficulty, and he was indicted some time
back.
The Chairman. Give us the record on that as near as you can.
We may have it here.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I represented along with other counsel, Mr.
Marroso and some of the other people charged with a conspiracy.
The Chairman. In what year ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That I don't know.
Mr. KJENNEDY. It is September, I believe, he was indicted on Sep-
tember 9, 1953; and tried in 1954. The charges were (1) conspiracy
to request and accept gifts, gratuities, and commissions, to act in a
particular manner in relation to their employer's or principal's busi-
ness, the union ; and (2) requesting and accepting gifts, gratuities,
and commissions to act in a particular manner in relation to their em-
ployer's or principal's business; and (3) conspiracy to extort money;
and (4) extortion.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Mr. Marroso plead guilty to, I think, conspiracy
to violate the so-called commercial bribery statute and the other counts
were dismissed. He was sentenced from 6 months to 5 years.
The Chairman. Can you tell us how long he served ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Pie served about 8 months. Did I participate
in the case, did you ask me ? I participated in the preliminary exami-
nation which we have in Michigan instead of a grand jury presen-
tation.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you participate in the trial at all ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. There was no trial. He pleaded guilty.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you participate in all of the matters that led
up to that ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And who paid your legal bills for that matter ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Well, I was paid a portion of the fee, and I worked
for Mr. Haggerty part of the time.
Mr. Ivennedy. Wlio is he ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. He was one of the attorneys who represented the
group.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you receive money from Mr. Haggerty ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. How much did you receive ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlio was Mr. Haggerty paid by ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Mr. Haggerty was paid by the union.
Mr. Kennedy. So you received your money indirectly from the
union?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I received my money and there was no "indirectly."
1 was paid our regular legal fee and it was all a matter of record,
and Mr. Haggerty recorded it and I recorded it.
The Chairman. The only issue here is the union actually paid for
lesral counsel's services ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13441
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes, under authority of the locaL I believe it was
submitted to the membership, and the local unions or the joint council
were authorized by the members to pay the legal fees growing out of
certain grand jury indictments, and this was one of them.
Senator I\Tas. They were paid to Mr. James E. Haggerty ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know what his middle initial is, Senator.
Senator I'srES. I don't know, but it has some significance here in
Washington.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know what the initial of the James Hag-
erty at the White House is. Is that James C. 1
Senator Ives, That is James C.
Mr. Kennedy. Then he went to jail, did he ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And his salary continued while he was in jail ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Now you are asking me to testify as to hearsay,
and do you want me to start assuming like these people did yesterday ?
I don't know.
Mr, Kennedy. You don't know that ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No ; I don't know of my own knowledge.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you told that ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I heard it, and I wasn't told it, but I heard it.
The Chairman. Of course, the records will show.
Mr. Fitzgerald. We turned over all of the records to you, Mr.
Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. The records show that he was paid while in jail. Go
ahead. Did you have any more interest in him after that ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes. I discussed this matter with the parole
board, or some of the members, and they said they would not parole
him if he was going to go back to work for a union.
Mr. Kennedy. You must have been shocked at what he had done
and plead guilty, extorting money from employers ?
Mr. Fitzgerald, I am a lawyer, now just a moment,
Mr, Kennedy, You wouldn't want the union to have anything more
to do with him, would you ?
Mr, Fitzgerald, I am not going to answer that type of a question,
because what is in my mind is one thing, and I don't think that this
partakes of a brainwashing, Mr. Kennedy, as far as what I think about
things,
I will testify to the facts, and I have my own ideas about a lot of
things, as you have, and I don't think that they would have any proba-
tive value as far as this committee is concerned,
Mr. Kennedy, I think it is very interesting, what the attitude of the
union and union officials is toward people who have extorted money
from employers and betrayed their membership.
Mr. Fitzgerald, Do you think it is proper to ask an attorney who
represented a man in a criminal case, what his condition of mind was
with respect to the defendant?
Mr, Kennedy, I am not asking you that. I am asking you as the
attorney for the union and this is the attorney for the union. After
Mr, Marroso got out of jail, did you have anything more to do with
him?
13442 IMPROPER ACTPV^ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. The question would be directed as to wliether you
had anything to do with him as an official or representative of the
union or if the union as such did ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know. I had something to do with him.
I know Mr. Marroso. We discussed, and I don't know, about getting
some doors when dooi-s were hard to handle, or doors for these houses,
and we w^ere tiying to find where we could buy doors, and I know he
did a lot of running around on that for the Marbury Construction Co.
Mr. Kenxedy. Did he receive any money for that ''.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know, and I couldn't tell you. I don't
know whether he was paid or not, of my own knowledge. The books
of the Marbury Construction Co. would be the best evidence. You
have seen those, or they were available to you.
]\Ir. Kennedy. That is the Marbury Construction Co. to which the
union had loaned all of this money ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
I don't know wliether he was paid any money or not, and I know he
did some work, as Mr. Grosberg said, and wliat work he did I don't
know, because I never had anything to do with the operation of the
Marbury Construction Co.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to the parole officer about Mr. Marroso ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Only once, I believe, or maybe twice.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you go back to the parole officer and request
permission for Mr. Marroso to go back to work for the union ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes; and I think sometime after that Mr. Marroso
came to me and told me he was having a hard time of it and he had
paid his penalty, and he thought he should be allowed to go back to
work for the union, and I think I wrote a letter.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, was he receiving any money from the union
during this period ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. According to the records
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is what you had better find out about, and we
gave you those records.
Mr. Kennedy. I am trying to find out what you know about it.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know, and you know, and I gave you the
records.
Mr. Kennedy. We are trying to get some help from tlie union.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Without subpena I gave you the records and you
tell me what the records show.
Mr. Kennedy. I am going to try to help you, if you don't know.
Mr. Fitzgerald. You don't have to help me. I have been helping
you for 2 years.
The Chairman. Let us proceed. All the committee wants is help.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I am sorry.
Mr. Kennedy. In order to assist and refresh Mr. Fitzgerald's
recollection
The Chairman. You may put the records in and if there is any
explanation of them, if Mr. Fitzgerald has any knowledge about it,
you may interrogate him about it.
Put the records in at this time, if we have them. The real crux
of the thing here, as I see it, is the policy or practice, and this is not
an isolated case, of the union dues being taken out of the treasury to
EMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13443
pay for the legal expenses and costs incurred in defending men for
crime, and paying them a salary, either directly or indirectly, while
they are serving their sentence, and even further, immediately upon
their release taking them back under the wing of the union and em-
ploying them again in responsible positions, or otherwise aiding them
financially.
It is a practice that is to be condemned irrevocably and without quali-
fication. That is the real crux of this particular inquiry.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I think the history behind this is that we look at
this because unions are strong and unions are wealthy. But I go back
to the days when I represented a union and I am not trying to be
heroic about it and they didn't have money to pay me.
The Chairman. I have represented people that didn't have money
to pay me.
Mr. Fitzgerald. At that time there was a lot of prejudices against
unions and union agents, and there were a lot of agents of unions in the
old days charged with crime unjustly. I think perhaps judges and
prosecutors were following what they thought was good conscience,
but they were motivated by prejudice against unions.
Now naturally the feeling was at that time that a lot of these people
got in these troubles because of their connections with unions. As
time has gone on, the union has become strong, and the union has
become powerful, and financially and otherwise, and now union busi-
ness agents who go out on the sti-eet in organization work and things of
that kind are subject to a lot of risk as far as criminal prosecutions
are concerned.
I think you are going to find generally that union people and union
members, and union officials who have gone through the haid days
of trying to organize unions and take a lot of raps on the hend, I tliink
naturally a feeling that any union person who becoiites i-ivolved in
something growing out of his union activities, it is the feeling on the
part of all union people that he should be supported as far as his legal
defense is concerned, and hiring of lawyers for them.
(At this point the following members were present: Senatois ]Me-
Clellan, Ives, Ervin, Curtis, and Kennedy.)
Mr. Fitzgerald. There have been cases growing out of this same
grand jury where men were charged with a crime, and the union voted
to pay the expenses. That went on for weeks, and the expenses were
enormous, and the men were actually acquitted. The mere fact that
the man is charged with a crime, if I may say this, as we all know,
does not necessarily mean that man is guilty. Now we have partici-
pated, and had a lot of criminal prosecutions in Michigan and in 99 —
I think in all of the cases we found men acquitted, either by juries
or by courts.
Now, if you passed a rule where a union agent charged with a
crime could not be supported financially by the union, you would
strip that man of any help he might expect to get, and he would have
to be insane to go to work for a union and take tlie element of risk
that there is involved in it.
It so happens in this case, Senator— —
The Chairman. Mr. Fitzgerald.
Mr. Fitzgerald. May I say this: It so happens in this case, and I
was going to end here, that there were 2 cases that grew out of this 1
13444 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
grand jury. In the one case it went to trial and they were acquitted
before a jury.
In this case, after the trial had started, they entered a plea of guilty.
I don't think it relieved the union of the obligation as long as it was
properly authorized, which I understand this was.
Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. The Chair wants to make this observation. I said
this is not an isolated case. And the practice we have found, and I
am not talking about where there is some charge about doing some-
thing on a picket line, necessarily, or something like that. But I am
talking about where they have actually betrayed the membership by
taking bribes, payoffs, or entering into collusion and conspiracy with
management, or using the power of the union to extort.
I just cannot see any moral justification, and I think it should be
made illegal for the union dues to be used for those purposes.
I just express my own view. Senator Ervin.
Senator Ervin. I can understand the human appeal involved in
defending a man in trouble. But for the life of me I cannot compre-
hend how any union as powerful as the Teamsters would make a busi-
ness agent of a man who was sentenced to prison twice, one time to
the Federal penitentiary at Fort Leavenworth, for falsely impersonat-
ing a Federal officer, and the second time to the State penitentiary of
Ohio on conviction for armed robbery. Armed robbery is an offense
which involves the offense of stealing, stealing by force or by intimi-
dation. Yet the evidence before this committee is that tiiis man who
was convicted of armed robbery, and who was sentenced to a State
prison for not less than 10 nor more than 25 years, comes out of the
prison nnd is given a position as a business manager of a local in the
Teamsters almost immediately after his discharge from prison where
he was detained for one of the most serious offenses known to our law.
The evidence before this committee is that he continued to hold that
office in the Teamsters Union until the day before he came before this
committee last week and testified as a witness.
Also it appears before this committee that his nephew, who was also
involved and sent to prison for crimes of somewhat similar nature,
was, upon his release from prison, given a position as a business agent
of another local union of the teamsters.
So far as the record discloses, he is still the occupant of that office.
I can understand why a union or anybody else, out of the kindness of
their heart, might want to defend a man in court, even though the act
of the man did not arise out of the course of his employment, because
certainly the union doesn't authorize men to go out and commit com-
mercial bribery. But to take men of that character and give them posi-
tions of authority over other Americans immediately after their re-
lease from prison and before they have given any evidence of repent-
ance, is something which I cannot comprehend.
That is all.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. I think in this matter of using union money to de-
fend officers and agents and members of the union for criminal acts,
probably we should draw a distinction between those acts which arise
directly out of the labor controversy going on. During the investiga-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13445
tion of the Kohler strike by the UAW, and in reference to Mr. Reu-
ther's testimony, I was very critical of the use of union funds in cases
such as the attack by Vincent on Van Ouwerkerk, which occurred in a
tavern far removed from the strike scene, tlie pickets, and so on ; the
use of union funds to defend and resist extradition by Gunaca, which
occurred likewise far removed from the strike.
There was another agent, or two, where union funds were used to
defend an individual and a woman involved in some sort of disorderly
conduct charge, that had no connection to the economic struggle going
on.
I can appreciate what counsel has said about the historical back-
ground of unions defending their agents in regard to this, but I do
think we should draw a distinction between those things that arise di-
rectly out of the lawful carrying out of the objectives of the union.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bellino, would you tell us what the records show
as to the receipt of money by Mr. Marroso ^
Mr. Belling. The records of Joint Council 43 reflect payments to
Mrs. Sam Marroso during the period from November 1, 1954, to
December 10, 1956. There was a total of $17,614 paid to her.
The Chairman. How much ?
Mr. Belling. $17,614.
Mr. Kennedy. So it would appear that Mr. Marroso was paid not
only while he was in jail, but he was paid after he got out of jail ? He
continued on the union payroll, is that correct ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Does that cover the same period of time, or any
part of the time that he was reporting to the parole officer that he
was getting around $700 a month from tliis company ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Wliat are the dates? Let's get it in the record
while we have it here.
Do you have the parole report, Mr. Bellino ?
Show what period of time there was duplication of payment from
the company and also from the union.
Mr. Adlerman, do you solemnly sw^ear the evidence you shall give
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Adlerman. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JEROME S. ADLERMAN
The Chairman. Mr. Adlerman, you are a staff member, assistant
counsel, to the committee?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Have you made an examination of the parole rec-
ords of this Marroso ?
Mr. Adlerman. Samuel J. Marroso.
The Chairman. And also of the records of the union and of the
company, this construction company, with respect to payments made
to Marroso ?
Mr. Adlerman. I have only examined the parole records.
Mr. Bellino. We have done that on the construction company.
21243— 58— pt. 36 12
13446 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. You have examined the parole records?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right, sir.
The Chairman. What does it show he was reporting to the parole
oflSicer with respect to his income over what period of time?
Mr. Adlerman. He was paroled on November 26, 1956, and the
first month he worked for the J. E. Bejin Cartage Co. as a road
checker at $400 a month. The second month — that is August 16,
1955 — he worked for S. J. Groves at $700 a month.
The Chairman. Well, you can shorten it.
Just as to this construction company.
Mr. Adler:\ian. Starting November 15, 1955, until December 18,
1956, he worked for the Marbury Construction Co., and his usual
salary amounted to $700 a month in accordance with the monthly
parole records or reports that he filed with the parole board.
The Chairman. In other words, he was reporting he was getting
about $700 a month ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, sir. There is a slight variation. In 1 month
he shows $1,500 and in another month he shows $1,100, another month
$1,500. But most of the months are $700. It might be that he had
nuide additional fees. There is 1 month, in December 1955, when he
listed his employment as Fitzgerald & Grosberg, $700 a month.
That is in that same period of time.
The Chairman. All I am trying to determine here, and that is all
that is pertinent, is what period of those months where he was re-
porting and receiving pay from other sources, was the union paying
him?
Mr. Belling. The wife was paid up to December 10, 1956 ; in the
same period of time, he reported he was working for other companies.
The Chairman. In other words, his salary continued to go to the
family during this period of time ?
Mr. Belling. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. So he was getting paid, according to his reports,
working for the Marbury Construction Co., and Mr. Fitzgerald and
Mr. Grosberg say he was not being paid by them — he was being paid
by the union for the work that he was doing for the Marbury Con-
struction Co. over that 2-year period ?
Mr. Belling. To his wife.
Mr. Kennedy. To his wife.
The Chairman. Is that correct ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No ; that is not correct.
You will have to depend, Mr. Chairman, upon the records of the
Marbury Construction Co. to show if he was paid anything. I don't
know.
But I do know — I don't know about Fitzgerald and Grosberg. I
know I never paid any money to Mr. Marroso, according to my records.
You have my records. You have had Mr. Grosberg's records, so you
can run that down, too. We gave them to you voluntarily. Wliat
work he did for us, I think, was best described by Mr. Grosberg.
Mr. Kennedy. Why was he on the union payroll ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I don't know he was on tlie union payroll. You
see, Mr. Kennedy, I can only answer your questions by making a com-
ment. You take all the records that we turned over to you and then
you check them, and then when you ge" through checking them you
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13447
Teach a conclusion and you make a very unfair statement that he was
being paid by the union for work that he was doing for Marbury
Construction Co. We gave you all this data.
I think if there was anything wrong about it, we have never even
been questioned on this, but I am telling you now, that this, as far as
the payment of the union is concerned, was not for any work he did for
Marbury Construction Co.
Mr. Kennedy. That doesn't answer the question. TVliy was he
being paid, this man who plead guilty of extortion, which amounts to
betraying his membership, why was he receiving money during this
period of time while he was working for the Marbury Construction
Mr. Fitzgerald. That I don't know, except I can see the reason why
a union would pay him. If a man put a lot of years in in the union and
in the union business and takes the abuse that they have had to take
for the last 30 years, now they are beginning to see the light, if they
have to ta]:e that abuse, if a man goes to jail, what do you want the
union to do ^ Let the wife and child suffer ?
Mr. Kennedy. This is not working for the union. This is working
against the union.
Mr. FiTzoERALD. Until a man gets rehabilitated, I think it is a perfect
right. If I was a union member I would vote for it.
Ml'. Kennedy. I think it is the most shocking thing to use union
funds for tliis purpose, for a man who betrayed the union purpose. It
could not be worse.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I would like to take you before the imion involved
and you pi'esent your side and I will present mine, and I guarantee
you that my side Avould prevail overwhelmingly.
Mr. Kennedy. Was this ever put to the membership ?
Mr. P^rrzGERAED, It was put, as I understand it, to the joint council
of union representatives who represent the different locals.
Mr. Kennedy. There is nothing in the minutes indicating that.
Who was the head of the joint council ?
]SIr. Fitzgerald. ]Mr. Hoffa. But does that make it wrong ?
The Chairman. Let's proceed.
Senator Ervin. Mr. Fitzgerald, I assume that your duties to the
imion were of a legal nature rather than a bookeeping nature ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I can't hear you.
Senator Ervin. I assume that your relation to the union was that
■of counsel and client?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
Senator Ervin. And you would not have anything to do with keep-
ing the records or making payments on behalf of the union ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No ; that is right.
Senator Ervin. You stated to us a moment ago, as I recall, that
y'ou had no personal knowledge about that matter at all, with refer-
ence to whether he was or was not paid by the union.
Mr. Fitzgerald. When I say I had personal knowledge, maybe I
should amend it. As counsel I did, because I know that it was sub-
mitted. If I am not mistaken, it was submitted before those payments
were made. I don't want to absolve myself of responsibility, because
I was counsel for the union, and the union agents were taking our
■counsel. If we had said to the union agent, "That is illegal," or that
13448 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
is something, I know that the union agents, including Mr. HofFa, would
not have done it.
Senator Ervin. The extent of your knowledge with reference to
that particular matter was your knoweldge that it had been authorized
by the council ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I think we were consulted about it, and I think
we advised them it was perfectly all right and not in violation of any
statute.
The Chairman. All right, proceed.
Are there any further questions of Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzgerald, have you received any other loans
from the union other than the ones described here ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I think those are the only loans I have received.
Mr. Kennedy. Those are the only loans you have received?
Mr. FiTZGERi\LD. Yes. I am positive. The records will reflect it,
but you mean from locals or anything like that ?
Mr. Kennedy. Locals or joint councils.
Mr. Fitzgerald. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You have not ?
Mr. FlTZGEIL\LD. No.
Mr. Kennedy. No other money ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Or any company with which you have had a busi-
ness interest, have they received any money other than the ones de-
scribed ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. None at all ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No .
Mr. Kennedy. Either the locals or welfare funds ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, I have one other question for Mr. Grosberg.
Mr. Grosberg, were you the accountant also for Holtzman and
Bushkin ?
TESTIMONY OF HEEBERT GROSBEEG— Resumed
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You have been the accountant for them ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. How long were you accountant for Holtzman and
Bushkin ?
Mr. Grosberg. When did they begin ? You have the records, and
if you could tell me when they began, perhaps I could help you.
Mr. Kennedy. You do not know how long you were the accountant
for them ?
Mr. Grosberg. I couldn't tell you that. It was for a number of
years.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it during the 1950's or 1940's ?
Mr. Grosberg. Let us say it was about 1950 or 1951, whenever they
began.
Mr. Kennedy. To the best of your knowledge, they began in 1950
or 1951 ?
Mr. Grosberg. Something like that ; yes.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13449
Mr. Kennedy. From an examination of those books and records,
was Mr. Holtzman or Mr. Bushkin making any purchases for Mr.
Hoffa or Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't remember that.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember ?
Mr. Grosberg. I could find out and I could check the records.
Mr. Kennedy. From an examination of the books. You do not
remember any purchases that they might have made for Mr. Hoffa
or Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you see anj^ evidence of any loans that he made
to Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You never saw any evidence of any loans ?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
Do you mean in the books ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Grosberg. In the company books ; no.
Mr. KJENNEDT. You did not?
Mr. Grosberg. No.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions ?
Mr. Ivennedy. I have one other question.
Did you make up a net- worth statement for Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Grosberg. A net-worth statement was made up a number of
years ago.
Mr. Kennedy. How many years ago ?
Mr. Grosberg. To tell you the truth, I don't remember how many
years ago.
Mr. Kennedy. What happened to it, and where is it now ?
Mr. Grosberg. I don't have it any more.
Mr. Kennedy. Where is it ?
Mr. Grosberg. Actually, when we were being checked by the In-
ternal Revenue, Mr. Fitzgerald and I were handling it and on the
advice of Mr. Fitzgerald, since we were not going to present it, it
made no difference.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you do with it ?
Mr. Grosberg. I destroyed it.
Mr. Kennedy. You destroyed the net- worth statement ?
Mr. Grosberg. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. On the instructions of Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Grosberg. I wouldn't say the instructions of Mr. Fitzgerald.
Mr. Kennedy. Or the suggestion of Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Grosberg. I said perhaps on advice of counsel.
Mr. Kennedy. That was Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Grosberg. Mr. Fitzgerald and I.
Mr. Kennedy. During the period of time Mr. Hoffa was under
investigation by the Internal Revenue Service ?
Mr. Grosberg. No, it was before he was under investigation.
Mr. Kennedy. I thought you said he was beginning to be under
investigation.
Mr. Grosberg. I beg your pardon.
Mr. Kennedy. You just stated that he was under investigation.
13450 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Grosberg. I said before he was under investigation, and we
don't have to submit a net-worth statement to the Internal Revenue
Department.
Mr. Kennedy. Didn't you tell Mr. Bellino that you turned the net-
worth statement over to Mr. Fitzgerald ?
Mr. Grosberg. I told Mr. Bellmo that I may have, and I wasn't too-
sure, and since I had spoken to Mr. Bellino I did talk to Mr. Fitzgerald-
Mr. Kennedy. Why would it be necessary to destroy this document ?
Mr. Grosberg. What is the sense of keeping it ?
Mr. Kennedy. It is the only record that you have whatsoever and
the only record that you state you have and you destroy that ?
Mr. Grosberg. What is the sense of keeping it ?
Mr. Kennedy. It is a net- worth statement and a record, and why
destroy it, Mr. Grosberg ?
Mr. Grosberg. It is no record actually.
Mr. Kennedy. Excuse me.
Mr. Grosberg. It is not a record.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
Mr. Lawson. Mr. Chairman, may I just say this one sentence, im-
plicit in what I understand Senator Curtis to have said and Mr. Fitz-
gerald, I think I would like to say this, because it is part of the function
of this committee :
We have heard a lot of talk here today and some of it properly about
what Mr. Justice Brandeis used to call the tyranny of labor. Here
we have a piece of legislation, and I refer to the Ives-Kennedy bill,,
for which there seems to me to be a compelling necessity. I raise a
question about the tyranny of capital.
The Chairman. That is out of order for the moment. My goodness^
make a speech somewhere else.
The committee will stand in recess until 10 o'clock in the morning.
( Wliereupon, at 4 : 35 p. m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at
10 a. m., Thursday. August 7, 1958.)
INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
THURSDAY, AUGUST 7, 1958
United States Senate,
Select Committee on Improper Activities in
the Labor or Management Field,
Washington, D. C.
The select committee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to recess, in the
caucus room. Senate Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan
(chairman of the select committee) presiding.
Present: Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Sen-
ator Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York; Senator John F. Ken-
nedy, Democrat, Massachusetts ; Senator Sam J. Ervin, Jr., Democrat,
North Carolina; Senator Frank Church, Democrat, Idaho; Senator
Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota ; Senator Carl T. Curtis,
Republican, Nebraska.
Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Paul Tierney,
assistant counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; Carmine S.
Bellino, accountant; Pierre E. Salinger, investigator; Leo C. Nulty,
investigator; James P. Kelly, investigator; James Mundie, investi-
gator, Treasury Department; John Flanagan, investigator, GAO;
Alfred Vitarelli, investigator, GAO.
The Chairman. The committee will please come to order.
(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session
were : Senators McClellan, Ives, Ervin, and Curtis. )
The Chairman. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Yesterday afternoon we were discussing the Marbury
Construction Co. and the loans of over $200,000 that were made to that
company that was owned by George Fitzgerald, the attorney for the
Teamsters in Detroit, and for Mr. Grosberg, who was the accountant
for the Teamsters in Detroit. We then developed the fact that Mr.
Marroso had informed his parole officer that he was on the payroll of
the Marbury Construction Co., while, in fact, he was receiving his
money through Joint Council 43 in Detroit.
We had Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. Grosberg as witnesses, and we
weren't able to cast too much light on it, and we are now going to
call Mr. Marroso in connection with that.
The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ?
Do you solemnly swear that the evidence given before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Marroso. I do.
13451
13452 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL J. MARROSO; ACCOMPANIED BY HIS
COUNSEL, HARRY C. ALLDER
The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and
your business or occupation.
Mr. Marroso. My name is Samuel J. Marroso, and I live at Utica,
Mich.
The Chairman. What is your business or occupation, please, sir?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilet^e under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness a^jainst myself.
The Chairman. Do you honestly believe that you would be testify-
in o^ against yourself if you told what your occupation is ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself, as I lionestly believe my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You lia ve counsel present ?
Mr. Marroso. I do.
The Chairman. Will you identify yourself ?
Mr. Allder. My name is Harry Cliil'ord Allder, member of the
District of Columbia Bar.
The Chairman. The Chair asked you if you have counsel and he
can advise you about it. The Chair asked you if you honestly believe
that if you answered truthfully the question, what is your business or
occupation, that a truthful answer thereto might tend to incriminate
you.
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself as I honestly believe my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. The Chair, Avith the approval of the committee,
orders and directs you to answer the question, do you honestly believe
that if you gave a truthful answer to the question, what is your busi-
ness or occupation, that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate
you.
Mr. IMarroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself as I honestly believe my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, make note of this witness' testimony
and proceed with it as you have under instructions with others.
You may proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Marroso, were you a business agent for local 247
of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my pi-ivilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And you had worked for local 614 in Pontiac, Mich.,
isn't that correct, in 1950 ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mike Nicoletti, was president of local 247, and
you and he were involved in the extortion of monev from employers,
isn't that right?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You received a total of $7,825 from truckers and
construction companies ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13453
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Did you keep all of that money or did you split it
with others ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully submit that in view
of the constitutional provisions no man can be put twice in jeopardy
for the same offense, and no man can invoke the privilege of the fifth
amendment when he is asked with respect to his prior convictions of
criminal ofi'enses when he has been convicted.
The Chairman. Ask the questions, Mr. Counsel.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you convicted for the extortion of money from
certain employers during 1954 ?
Mr. IMarrgso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. With the approval of the committee, the Chair
orders and directs the witness to answer the question.
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. You were convicted ; were you not ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. You pleaded guilty ; didn't you ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege mider the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. You did commit the offense ; didn't you ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, according to the information from an ex-
amination of the files, Mr. Chairman, between Marroso and Nicoletti,
they made additional demands for $11,500; is that correct?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And, Mr. Chairman
The Chairman. Were you representing the Teamsters Union at
the time of this offense ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Is that a part of the policy of the Teamsters Union
in your area, to commit these offenses and then cover up with the
fifth amendment ?
Mr. IVIarroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Acocrding to the parole officer whom we have inter-
viewed, Mr. Marroso indicated that he was forced to kick back some
of this money to certain other individuals, and I would like to find
out from Mr. Marroso if that is correct. Is that correct ?
Mr. Allder. Would you state the question? I think that you made
a statement and not a question.
13454 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The CHAiRMAiSr. He made a statement and asked the witness if it
was correct. You may restate the question so that the witness may
understand.
Mr. Kennedy. According to our interviews with the parole officer,
Mr. Marroso told him that he had to kick back certain of these moneys
to certain other individuals, and I want to ask you, Mr. Marroso, if
that is correct ? Did you tell the parole officer that ?
Mr. IVIarroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you in fact kick back any of this money to other
union officials ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Is it for that reason, Mr, Marroso, that the union
paid for your legal fees and continued your salary while you were in
]ail, and continued your salary for a period of approximately 2 years
after j^ou were in jail ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. Is it because you had information on other higher
union officials ? Is that why this was done ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert m}' privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself 'L
jNIr. Kennedy. Can you tell us how you were able to get your job
as business agent in the fii*st place, Mr. Marroso.
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You had a criminal record, did you not? You had
been arrested a number of times as a youth, and you were convicted
of grand larceny in 1934 and received 2 years' probation?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it a prerequisite to have a criminal record to
work or to be an officer in tlie locals around Detroit ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. I arrived a bit late. Are you currently employed ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. All right, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us, Mr. Marroso, why Mr. George Fitz-
gerald would write to your parole officer on December 1, 1955, and make
a request that you be allowed or permitted to go to work for the Team-
sters after you had betrayed the membership ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and,
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, could Mr. Adlerman identify this
letter?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13455
Could we have it put in as an exhibit ?
The first document, Mr. Chairman, is a conditional parole that he
was not to go to work for the Teamsters.
The Chairman. Has this document been put into the record ?
Mr. Kennedy. No. I would like to put both of those in.
The Chairman. Mr. Adlerman, have you been previously sworn?
Mr. Adlerman. I have.
The Chairman. I hand you here a document and ask you to examine
it and state what it is.
Mr. Adlerman. This is a State of Michigan Parole Board report
dated April 26, 1955. Under the term of special instructions to the
parole officer, the terms and conditions of parole, it is a statement :
To parole oflScer: Attorney for A. F. of L., George Fitzgerald, assures us that
this man will not work for the A. F. of L.
At that time the Teamsters Union was in the A. F. of L.
The Chairman. The document may be printed in full in the record
at this point for reference.
State of Michigan
parole board hearing
Inmate : Samuel J. Marroso, No. 87767D.
Place : Lansing — Executive session.
Date: 4-26-55.
Present : A. Ross Pasco, Fred C. Sanborn, John A. Trudell, Roy H. Nelson.
Reason for hearing : Passed over.
Order: Parole balance of maximum, May 26, 1955 (afd) to Detroit, subject
to home and employment.
Special conditions : None.
Special instructions to parole officer: Attorney for A. F. of L., George Fitz-
gerald, assures us that this man will not work for the A. F. of L.
EXAMINATION OF INMATE
Action taken in executive session. Plans to return to his wife, Lillian, at
46801 Van Dyke, Utica. Attorney George Fitzgerald, 2550 Guardian Michigan
Building, Detroit, Woodward 5-4900, will get him a job — he is not going to work
for the union.
Attest: LW.
Lois Wellman, Acting Reporter.
The Chairman. Where did you obtain this document?
Mr. Adlerman. This document was obtained from the official files
of the parole board for the Michigan State Board of Parole.
The Chairman. All right.
I present to you now a — what is the date of that first document ?
Mrs. Watt. April 26, 1955.
The Chairman. I present to you now a letter and ask you to iden-
tify it and state where you obtained it.
Mr. Adlerman. This is a letter under the stationery of George
Fitzgerald, bearing the signature of George Fitzgerald, to Charles
McCarty, Michigan State Board of Parole, Mount Clemens, Mich.,
dated December 1, 1955. This letter was taken from the files, official
files, the State board of parole.
The Chairman. The letter may be printed in full in the record at
this point. Pertinent excerpts from it may be referred to, Mr. Coun-
sel, if you desire.
13456 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Law Offices, George S. B^tzgerald,
Detroit, Mich., December 1, 1955.
Mr. Charles McCarty,
Michigan State Parole Board,
Count]) Building, Mount Clemens, Mich.
Dear Mr. McCarthy : In pursuit of our telephone conversation of yesterday, I
respectfully request permission on the part of my client, Teamsters Union Joint
Council No. 43, to employ Sam Marosso who is now on parole under your super-
vision. Mr. Marroso will be given duties within certain prescribed limits in ac-
cordance with the items we discu.ssed on the telephone. These duties will be such
as to negative any possibility of his getting into trouble, particularly by accident
or coincidence. We are making this request of you and of your superiors in the
best interest not only of our union, lint also Mr. Marroso nnd his l":nni!.v.
Mr. Marroso performed very valuable work for the union and its employees
in the past and is fully equipped by experience and ability to do fine work.
Because of his long record of union activities, it is almost impossible for Mr.
Marroso to find employment elsewhere that would suit his talents. Therefore, we
believe that his future lies in the trade-union movement and that he will fully
justify the faith that we have in him and that I think you have in him if given
an opportunity to work along lines of administration and liaison work in the
union.
It is respectfully asked that you advise us at your convenience as to your deci-
sion in this matter. We hope that it will be favorable. We will be happy to ac-
cept any suggestions from you or your office in regard to Mr. Marroso's matter
since we have no desire except to cooperate.
Very truly yours,
George S. Fitzger^vld.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us, Mr. Marroso, why the Teamsters,,
through their attorney, were so anxious to take care of you after you
had betrayed the membership of the local ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. How long had you been out on parole when the
letter was written ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. May I ask the staff. Do we have any record of the
date he was released on parole? I assume it is the date of that last
document.
Mr. Kennedy. I will check it.
He was paroled, Mr. Chairman, 5-20-55, May 20, 1955.
Mr. Adlerman. He was discharged from parole on June 27, 1958^
4 months in advance of the time of his parole, of the end of his parole.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. A good deal of the arrangement that you had with
the employers was collusion, was it not, Mr. Marroso, rather than
just shaking them down ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. One of the people you received money from was
Louie Garavaglia, but I notice you went to work for him in 1958, and
he put you on his payroll in 1958, Can you explain that to the
committee ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege mider the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And he was paying you during the first 5 months
of 1958, $600 a month ; isn't that correct?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13457
Mr. Kennedy. Also we find that in 1957 you worked for the Corn-
stock Corp. ? Could you tell us what the Comstock Corp. was ?
Mr. Markoso. I assert my privilege imder the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You were supposedly getting some $750 to $950 a
month from the Comstock Corp. Is that correct ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege imder the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that the Comstock Corp. was a cor-
poration that was formed to build, erect, a gambling casino in Las
Vegas, Nev. ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And isn't it correct that your position in that Corn-
stock Corp. was to get the financing from the welfare funds of the
Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why the Teamsters would be in-
terested in investing welfare funds in the gambling casino in Las
A'ecns, Nev. ^
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege mider the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kf.xnedy. Will you tell us anything about the Comstock Corp. ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
(lecline to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that this scheme fell through shortly
after 1957 when this committee came into existence?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to })e a witness against myself.
]Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us of your conversations with Mr.
Hoffa about this investment?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions ?
Senator Ervin. What office did you hold in the union at the time
you were charged with this crime ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Senator Ervin. You do not claim that you were authorized by the
union to go out and commit this crime ; do you ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
Senator Ervin. Did you commit this crime for the union's benefit
or for your own financial benefit?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. I don't know whether you committed it for the
union or not, or with their approval or under their instructions, but
if they paid your salary and paid your defense fees, from my viewpoint
they condoned your act.
Do you want to explain it ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
13458 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. They certainly were in on this situation as far as
the Marbury Construction Co. You were telling the parole officer
that you were working for the Marbury Construction Co., that you
were receiving your salary from them, when, in fact, you were getting
your money from the union, and the union was financing the Marbury
Construction Co.
Isn't that correct ?
Mr. Marroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness agamst myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Were these statements that you filed with the parole
officer correct ?
Mr. ISIarroso. I assert my privilege under the fifth amendment and
decline to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. The witness will remain under his present subpena,
subject to being recalled by the committee at such time as the com-
mittee may desire to further interrogate him.
If you will acknowledge that recognizance, we can then have an
understanding about it. Reasonable notice will be given to you. Do
you acknowledge that recognizance ?
(The witness confeiTed with his counsel.)
Mr. Marroso. Yes ; I do.
The Chairman. You agree to it ?
Mr. Marroso. Yes.
Senator Ervin. At long last we got a question answered by the
witness.
The Chairman. All right. You may stand aside.
Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the next witness will be Mr. Embrel
Davidson.
The Chairman. Come forward, Mr. Davidson.
Be sworn, please.
Hold up your right hand. You do solemnly swear the evidence you
shall give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the
whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Davidson. I do.
TESTIMONY OF EMBREL DAVIDSON
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your
business or occupation.
Mr. Davidson. My name is Embrel Davidson. I reside in Youngs-
town, Ohio, 526 Belmont. I am with the maintenance department
of the Jewish Community Center; also a musician; ex-prizefighter.
The Chairman. Ex-prizefighter?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you waive counsel, Mr. Davidson ?
Mr. Davidson. I beg your pardon.
The Chairman. You waive counsel ? You do not have an attorney
to represent you.
Mr. Davidson. No ; I don't.
The Chairman. Do you feel the need of counsel ?
]Mr. Davidson. No.
The Chairman. All right. Thank you. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13459
' Mr. Kp^nnedy. Mr. Davidson, can you tell the committee a little of
your background, where you come from ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, originally I was born in East St. Louis, 111.,
May 16, 1929. I left there when I was about a year old, with my
mother, and as a kid I was brought up in Chicago, and I later
went to Columbus, Ohio, after my mother's mother died. She moved
to Columbus and I was there with her until I joined the service.
After 3 years in the service, I was discharged with a dependency dis-
charge, and I started boxing, amateur, and after amateur career, I
turned profassional. Upon turning professional, I went to Detroit,
Mich.
Mr. Kennedy. When did you become an amateur hgliter ?
Mr. Davidson. Wliile waiting for a dependency discharge in the
service in 1948.
Mr. Kennedy. When did you become a professional fighter ?
Mr. Davidson. In March 1949.
Mr. Kennedy. That was in Detroit ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You were a heavyweight, were you ^
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was your manager back in 1948, 1949, and 1950 ?
Mr. Davidson. The first manager I had was a fellow out of Colum-
bus, Ohio, named Frank Jiinco; he taken me to Detroit and put me
under the wing of Mr. John White, coowner of the Gotham Hotel.
Another fellow in Detroit became interested in me named Mr. Frank
Loftus. He, through some negotiations, bought the contract from
Mr. Junco.
Mr. Kennedy. So Mr. Frank Loftus was your manager in Detroit
in 1950; is that right?
Mr. Davidson. He was my manager in the latter part of 1949.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he have a partner — Mr. Loftus — in his manage
ing of you ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, not at the time. He was doing some business
with Mr. John Roxburgh, who used to be manager of Joe Louis. He
said, "Well, maybe you can get the guy some fights for me." So he
agreed to do what he could do to get us some fights.
Mr. Kennedy. Who agreed to it?
Mr. Davidson. Mr. Roxburgh, at the time. That was in 1949.
Mr. Kennedy. Did then Mr. Louis himself come in and become a
partner?
Mr. Davidson. Joe Louis was only a partner to the extent where he
would use his connections with the IBC to get us some fights, and
Mr. Loftus would furnish the other expense money, and so forth.
Mr. Kennedy. I see.
You went along with Mr. Loftus for a while; could you telL us
about your relationship with him ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, he and I got along pretty fair, up to the point
where he was — he was a temperamental fellow, and seemed to get ex-
cited. I guess he was interested in the money that he could make out
of the fight racket.
So there were occasions where he would get mad at me and say,
'""Well, you don't want to fight, so get you another manager."
13460 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
So I would have to do the best I could until he would cool down. He
went along with me until 1952.
Mr. Kennedy. What was his main source of income, as you under-
stood it, in Detroit ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, he had some investments, I understood. It is
on record in Detroit that he has been mixed in with some illegitimate
business.
Mr. Kennedy. He was one of the numbers rackets, in the numbers
rackets out there, was he not ? I think that has been established.
Mr. Davidson. I understand it is.
Mr. Kennedy. And he kept you until 1952 ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Ivennedy. Was he getting any assistance during that period of
time in getting fights ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, there was a fellow named Willie DeMingus.
He was a promoter. That is all he was. He would promote fights.
Mr. Loftus told me that he was financing the fights, we fought some
fights in Grand Rapids. Some of the fights was fought in Windsor,
Ontario. I understand that he was putting up most of the money
for the matchmaking and the booking of the fights. That assistance
I know of him having, because Mr. DeMingus was the
Mr. Kennedy. Was there a Mr. Sam Finazzo? Was he also get-
ting some fights for you ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, Sam, I know, because he was around the gym,
and I would see him.
Mr. Kennedy. F-i-n-a-z-z-o?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I couldn't swear to how he spelled his last
name. But he would be around the gym. Everybody around the
gym had the idea that well, he owned the gymnasium.
I know he had quite a bit of influence in getting fights for different
fighters. Wliat he received from it, I don't know. I never inquired.
Mr. Kennedy. You stayed with Mr. Loftus until about 1952.
Could you tell us what happened ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, in 1952, I became disgusted with Mr. Loftus
because of the fact that he was not getting me any fights. There ceased
to be fights for me. I mean, too, I didn't appreciate his way of talking
to me at some times. So I wanted to get away from him.
Mr. Kennedy. T^Hiiat kind of fights was he getting you ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, there would be some 10-round fights where I
would receive as low as $150 or $200. I don't call that making money
in the fight game, because I was in there to make a decent living and
to get out. So he would give me those types of fights. Then, too, as
I say, I did not appreciate his way of wording things toward me. His
obscene^literature, I know that every man will use obscene literature.
Mr. Kennedy. You mean obscene statements ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. So you wanted to get away from liim ?
Mr. Davidson. Definitely.
(At this point, members of tlie committee present were: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Ervin, and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. And he did get you a fight with Clarence Henry,
or was that Sam Finazzo ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13461
Mr. Davidson, From what I understand, Mr. Lof tus had had some
kind of row with people out in Detroit, and he was stating that
Detroit Olympia was trying to boycott his fighters, and so there is
a match made for me with Marty Marshall in order to prove that
they weren't trying to boycott his fighters, and so I fought Marshall
and beat him. Then I went to Columbus, Ohio, on a vacation and I
was there about a week, and I had a call to return back to Detroit to
fight Clarence Henry.
Of course, I lost to Henry, and then later on seemingly there was
somebody that had something against Mr. Loftus, and so they called
me back to fight Archie Moore. There we won't have to go into the
outcome of it.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, so in 1952 you were dissatisfied with Mr. Loftus
from these various ways he was handling you and the kind of fights
that he was obtaining, and the statements that he was making to you
and to your family at that time ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. So did you have discussions about getting some other
manager ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, not with him. You see I had a lot of con-
fidence in Sam.
Mr. Kennedy. That is Sam Finazzo?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, and I didn't know his background and I wasn't
certain of his background and that wasn't any interest to me at all.
I knew I would see him around the gym and so naturally I took for
gi-anted he is in the fight game, and so I confided in him to the extent
that I wished I could find me a decent manager where I could make
some money.
So after talking to him, he said he would see what he could do for
me.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did he report back then ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, he told me one day at the gym, he said, "I could
maybe let you talk to a fellow that might be able to do you some good
and would be a fairly good manager for you," and so I agreed.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he refer to him as a good friend of his ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was that?
Mr. Davidson. He was speaking of Mr. Bert Brennan.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us if you met Mr. Brennan, then ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, I did. I had the opportunity to meet Mr.
Brennan and I talked to him.
Mr. Kennedy. Where did you go to meet him ?
Mr. Davidson. I went to the Teamsters Union on Trumbull Avenue
to meet him, and he was a very nice fellow, and he treated me nicely,
and he told me that he would be interested in managing me and would
do the best he could for me. So I agreed and we went on from there.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there anybody else in it as well as Mr. Brennan?
Mr. Davidson. Well, the only thing that I know of
Mr. Kennedy. Was anyone else present at the time that you met
Mr. Brennan?
Mr. Davidson. At the time I met Mr. Brennan there was nobody
else in the office but him at that time when I met him.
21243—58 — ^pt. 36 13
13462 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently was there?
Mr. Davidson. Well, now
Mr. Kennedy. Did you meet anyone else that was going to be
interested in you?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I can imagine who you are referring to and
really I am not trying to be funny.
Mr. Kennedy. I know that, Mr. Davidson.
Mr. Davidson. And I assume tliat you are referring to Mr. Hoffa.
I have had occasions to meet him and talk to liim, and he has treated
me l(K) percent, as I have told you, and I only know that he and Mr.
Brennan were associates, and what happened between them was none
of my business and I didn't inquire about it. I know that I would
meet him and, as I say, I would see Mr. Hoffa maybe once a month,
or once every 6 weeks, and it was, "Hello, April, how are you coming
along in training?'-, and so forth, and that was all.
]Mr. Kennedy. Xow, did Mr. Brennan introduce you to Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. DA^^DSON. Yes, he did.
Mr. Kjennedy. Did you have any conversations with him at tliat
time ?
Mr. Davidson. No more than he said, "Well, April, I would like
you to meet," and it was not formal, "I would like you to meet Jimmy,
Mr. James Hoffa," and I went through the regular procedures of the
introduction.
Mr. Kennedy. There was no further conversation ?
Mr. Da\t[dson. No; no more than, "This is Jimmy Hoffa," and tliat
he was his friend and his associate in business, I assumed.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he say anything about the fact that he would
be beliind us also?
JNIr. DA\^DS0N. Well-
Mr. Kennedy. Was that subsequently ?
Mr. DA\^DSON. Maybe something was mentioned like that, not from
the professional stand])oint or from the financial standpoint, I don't
think, because, as I say, there were occasions when Mr. Hoffa would
say, "When are you fighting?", and I would tell him, and he would
say, "Well, do the best you can, because we are behind you, and we
would lilce to see you win." And so I guess everybody, a lot of peo-
ple were behind me in Detroit, and I guess there are a lot that weren't.
But I would take it from that standpoint of saying, "Well, we are
pulling for you."
]Mr. Kennedy. Now, did you go with ]Mr. Brennan to see anyone
at the ^Michigan Boxing Commission ?
]Mr. Davidson. Well, naturally, I had to, because there was a con-
tract that had to be drawn up between Mr. Brennan and I, and we
went down and talked to Commissioner Ford Stevens. Naturally,
before he could proceed as my manager, there would have to be a
contract filed with the Michigan State Athletic Board of Control.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us your conversation down there,
wlien you went to see the commissioner ?
Mv. Davidson. Well, there was some doubt in Mr. Brennan 's mind
at the time because Mv. Loftus liad had a contract on me wliich was a
5-year contract, that had me under peonage, and the commission
stated then that they did not recognize 5-year contracts, and also they
did not recognize contracts that weren't filed with his office, and so
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13463
that a 5-year contract was not filed with his office, and it was a 5-year
contract.
Mr. Kexnedy, Did Mr. Brennan say to you anything after visiting
the commissioner's office of the Michigan State Boxing Commission ?
JNIr, DAviDSoisr. Well, after the contract was drawn up, and they
were in the office, and I wasn't in on everything, the conversations
there, but coming out he said, "You don't have to worry, everything
will be O. K. now, and you can go ahead and fight."
Mr. Kennedy. What else did he say to you ^
Mr. Davidson. Well, no more tlian, "I put a little money his way,
and everythhig is O. K."
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Brennan said that?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. After visiting the State boxing commissioner's office ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he arrange for you to fight in New York?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Brennan did ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir; and there was a fighter in Detroit named
Bob Johnson and he was to fight Charley Riggs at Yankee Stadium,
but he was on parole and so his parole board wouldn't let him go, and
so he asked me if I wanted to go. So naturally every fighter wants
to get a chance to go to New York.
Mr. Kennedy. So you went to New York ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr, Kennedy. Who went to New York with you ?
Mr. Davidson. Who went with me ?
Mr. Kennedy. Who made the arrangements when you were in New
Yorlv or who did you meet with in New York ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I went to New York with my trainer, Harry
Raskins, and the ticket was given to me b}^ Sam Finazzo, and he told
me what hotel I was to stay at. Wait a minute, I am sorry, I will
retract that. I remember now; we drove to New York with Harry
Raskins, and he was my trainer, and we drove to New York and
checked in at I think it w^as the Capitol Hotel.
Mr. Kennedy. Just you and your trainer ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't go by plane to New York ?
Mr. Davidson. No, I remember now, w^e did not. I have flown to
New York a couple of times, but I was confused with the first time I
went to New York, in 1952. We drove to New York, Harry Raskins,
in his automobile.
]Mr. Kennedy. Who was in New York and whom did you meet in
New York when you got there ?
Mv. Davidson. Well, the first person I met in New York and was
introduced to was Whitey Memskin. He is a trainer, and I had to go
by the commission's office, and I was in New York about a week before
the fight and I had to go by the commissioner's office for a different
examination.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us when you went thei'e what the
conversation was at the commissioner's office ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I didn't meet the commissioner when I first
got to New York, and the only time I talked with Mr. Christenberry
13464 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
was the day of the fight, and that was at the weighing and he asked mo
or he had a letter there from Mr. Lof tus back in Youngstown, I mean
from Detroit. He said that the letter read that Mr. Loftiis had a
5-year contract on me, and he demanded that I didn't fight for anybody
else but him.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was the conversation, what did Mr. Brennan
say?
Mr. Davidson. He asked Mr. Brennan if he knew about the con-
tract, and Mr. Brennan said, "Yes, that Mr. Loftus was a numbers
racketeer," and so he in turn tore the letter up and threw it in the
wastebasket, and he said, "You go ahead and fight," and I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Brennan said that they shouldn't have anything
to do with Loftus because he was in the numbers ?
Mr. Davidson. He didn't say that you shouldn't have anything to
do with him; he just said he was a numbers racketeer, and he had
somewhat dominated me and so he tore the contract up.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the date of that fight in New York ?
Mr. Davidson. If I recall correctly, it was in July, around the 27th
or 28th of July, in Yankee Stadium.
Mr. Kennedy. That was in 1952 ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. That was the night that Rocky Marciano was fighting
on the main event ?
Mr. Davidson. He was fighting Harry "Kid"' Matthews, of Seattle.
Mr. Kennedy. What was your purse out of that ?
Mr. Davidson. $625.
Mr. Kennedy. And how much did Mr. Brennan give you from that?
Mr.DA^^DSON. $500.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have an agreement or a contract with Mr.
Brennan as to how much money you were to receive ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, all of the commission contracts are drawn up,
331/3 and 66% split.
Mr. Kennedy. You are supposed to get 66% ?
Mr. Davidson. That is right, but under agreements between fighters
and managers, so the fighters doesn't have to worry about different
expenses, traveling expenses, and training expenses, and sparring
partners, we usually agree on a 50-50 split, and the manager takes care
of the expenses.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that your arrangement with Brennan ?
Mr. DA^^DS0N. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. It was to be 50-50 ?
Mr. Da\^dson. Yes; and it has to be that way in the boxing com-
missioner's office, and it has to be on file that way, and they don't care
what agreement you make between the manager and the fighter after-
ward.
Mr. Kennedy. All of the fighters ha^e the agreements that they get
66%, but actually you only get about 50 percent 5
Mr. Da\^dson. I don't know about different States, and I know in
some cases it is better for the fighter to split it 50-50 with the manager,
and he takes care of the expenses, because of the fact that you don't
have to worry about paying sparring partners, because in some cases
sparring partners run more than actually what you can afford to pay.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13465
Mr, Kennedy. Now, tell me, did Mr. Brennan or Mr, Loftus have
any conversation with you about your finances and your expenses from
day to day or your salary, or living expenses ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, no ; they didn't say anything. I mentioned it
first because I was in the fnce of how I was going to live from day
to day when there weren't any fights. And so I asked Mr, Brennan
for a job and he told me first he would see what he could do. Natu-
rally as the weeks went by, I w^as more interested, and so I men-
tioned it to him again, about a job. And so he asked he how much
would it take for me to live a week, and I said, I exaggerated there, and
I said, "$100 a week," and so he said he would give me $75.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you put on a payroll for $75 a week ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. What payroll ?
Mr. Davidson, Well, I would pick my checks up at the union, and
the tax was deducted from me, and the city tax and State tax, and
social security, and I would get my checks from the welfare fund in
the basement,
Mr, Kennedy, From the welfare fund of the union ?
Mr, Davidson, Yes ; that is what was on the check,
Mr, Kennedy, Is that the Michigan Conference of the Teamsters'
welfare fund ?
Mr. Davidson, Well, now I couldn't swear to that, because I didn't
pay that much attention to the checks, and maybe I should have.
Mr, Kennedy, Did you talk to Mr, Hoffa about what you were to
be doing ^
Mr. Davidson. No ; I talked to Mr. Brennan.
Mr. Kennedy, Did you talk to Mr, Hoffa at all about it?
Mr. Davidson. I talked to Mr. Brennan about it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did j^ou ask Mr. Holf a about what your duties were
to be as an employee of the welfare fund ?
Mr, Davidson, No ; I asked Mr, Brennan,
Mr, Kennedy, What conversations did you have with Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Davidson. I asked him what job could I do, and so he said,
"Well, you will be a claims investigator."
Mr, Kennedy. Did you talk to Mr. Hoffa about being a claims
investigator ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, at the time I was talking to Mr. Brennan, Mr.
Hoffa was in the office.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you do as a claims investigator ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, it was explained to me that a claims investi-
gator would go, if one of the union members would call in sick, or
report off, it was supposed to be my job to go and see if he was really
sick and make a report on it.
Mr, Kennedy, Did you ever do that ?
Mr, Davidson, No,
Mr, Kennedy, Did you ever do any work ?
Mr, Davidson, Well, I did do some work for Mr, Brennan, such
as when I was training for different fights, he would suggest that
I stay on his farm because of the fact that it was an excellent place
for a fighter to do his training, roadwork, and receiving the right
type of fresh air, and get good meals. And so I had occasion to
13466 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
sometimes mow the lawn, and do little odd jobs around the house,
and I guess everybody knows that he has an interest in some trotters,
because it was in the paper, and so I am not saying anything that
you don't know. And so I would take feed on the pickup truck or
go with him to tlie track, and being tliere I was interested in seeing
how horses were taken care of, and so I would take feed back, oats,
and hay, and stulf of that sort.
Mr. Kennedy. But you worked around the track for Mr. Brennan,
but you never did any work as a claims investigator itself, did you?
Mr. Davidson. No; and don't be confused with working around the
track as a day to day thing.
Mr. Kennedy. It was j ust occasionally ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. AVhen you were out at his home ?
Mr. Davidson. He was nice to me and so when he needed help, if
he needed any help naturally I would do him that favor.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever talk to Mr. Hoff'a or Mr. Brennan about
the work you were supposed to be doing as claims investigator?
Mr. Davidson. I only mentioned it once to Mv. Brennan as to when
I was supposed to start to Avork, and he said, "don't worry about it,"
and that is all.
(At this ]:)oint. Senator Church entered the hearing room.)
Senator Curtis. This work that you did around Mr. Brennan's
farm, cutting grass and occasionally hauling feed for the race horses,
was that work performed by reason of the pay you got from the wel-
fare fund or was that work that you were performing for your board
and room at the farm ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I don't know. It never was stated and never
was mentioned.
Senator Curtis. Did you receive your board and room at the farm?
Mr. Davidson. I received rooms, and sometimes I would eat, and
sometimes I would go home. You see, at that time I was married, and
I would go home sometimes. My wife worked as a waitress in a
restaurant, and sometimes I would go home and fix my own meals and
sometimes she was off and I would go home and she would fix them.
Senator Curtis. But there was no payment from you to Mr. Brennan
for your room or what meals you did get ?
Mr. Davidson, You mean from me, paying him for staying there ?
Senator Curtis. Yes.
Mr. DA^^DS0N. No ; I didn't have to pay him.
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy, Did these payments to you have to be approved by
anybody ? Did you learn about that ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I don't know if they had to be approved by
anybody. I was told that I would pick up my check every Friday,
and that I did, and the check was made out in my name and I picked
it up, and I cashed it and just like if I get a check from where I work
now, the deductions were made, and I filed income tax on it.
Mr, Kennedy, What was the relationship between Mr, Iloffa and
Mr, Brennan as you saw it, Mr. Davidson, regarding this matter?
Mr, Davidson. Well, let me see now, I don't understand what you
mean. Will you explain ?
Mr. Kennedy. What was the relationship regarding your work that
you were doing, as between Mr. Hoff'a and Mr. Brennan ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13467
Mr. DAviDSOisr. Well, I will explain that the way I understand it.
That is Mr. Brennan was my manager and Mr. Hoffa and Mr.
Brennan, as I say, I guess were business associates. I don't know,
and then I didn't know, and I didn't know up until last year what
Mr. Hoffa's job was. Maybe I am speaking of, or maybe I am con-
fused because the question has got me a little bit confused.
Mr. Kennedy. You are doing fine.
Mr. Davidson. But Mr. Hotl'a, as I say, I think his only interest
in me was only from boxing and that professional standpoint. I
never received any money from him, and I never entei-ed into any
business conversations with him, and I don't know what he was
doing, and I still don't know what he is doing, and it is no concern
of mine as to what he is doing, and I would see him as I say occa-
sionally, and it was always a "Hello," and "How are you doing, and
how are you coming along in training?'' He treated me like a man,
and I in turn treated him like a man.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Church, Kennedy, and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. Did he ever ask you how you were coming along as
claims investigator for the welfare fund ?
Mr. Davidson. No ; he ncA^er asked me such questions.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any discussions with him about
it?
Mr. Davidson. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any discussions with him about
the fact you were not doing any work as claims investigator?
Mr. Davidson. No; I told you I had that discussion with Mr.
Brennan.
Mr. Kennedy. But he was in the office when Mr. Brennan spoke
to you originally about putting you on the payroll, was he not?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, the one time.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us how the relationship broke off ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I was training for a fight. I fought this par-
ticular fight with Toxey Hall. It was on short notice. I won the
fight, which isn't important, and I was to fight him again. During
training, I got my nose hurt and as a result there was a deviating
acceptance reported by my personal physician. Dr. Robert C. Bennett,
and he, in turn, suggested I go see the commission physician, and I
did.
The commission physician wrote a letter stating that I could not
go through with the fight because of the fact that my nose was in-
jured. So I, in turn, went back and told JMr. Piazza, who was the
promoter of the Motor City fights, and he said "Well, we will just
have to suspend vou, if you are not going to go through with the
fight." ^ . ^ .
I in turn went and talked with Mr. Brennan, and I told him that
I got the letter from the commissioner, and I showed it to him, and
that is it. I could not go through with the fight.
Mr. Kennedy. What did Mr. Brennan say ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, he didn't like the idea, too much, I know, be-
cause he said "Well, it seems like you just don't want to fight."
He said, "You could beat this guy and he would never hit you in
the nose."
13468 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
I think that was highly impossible, because even though I did beat
him the first time, everybody is going to get hit. So he said "Well,
I am kind of tired of handling prize fighters anyway. You can get
yourself another manager."
Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to him about his horses, make some
statement about that ?
Mr. Davidson. I was trying to compare the two. I think that I am
a little bit better than a horse. Of course, maybe he was receiving
more from the horses than he was me. I think he would be because
I was not making that much fighting, but I only mentioned that "Well,
supposing one of your horses would pull a muscle before a race, what
would you do?"
He said, "I would pull him out." I said "Well, what about me?"
He said, "Well, that is different."
I could see there that maybe he was telling the truth, that he wasn't
interested any more in fighters.
Mr. Kennedy. So you broke with him in 1954 ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Then you fought for a while after that, did you ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, I tried to make some connections. He gave me
my contract, as he said he would. He didn't hold back on it. I went
on to be connected with a fellow who is a jeweler, Mr. Jerry Mosley,
in Detroit. He tried to do the best he could to get me some fights.
He wasn't very successful.
Mr. Kennedy. During this period, did you know a man by the
name of Jimmie Q. or Jimmie Quasarano ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, there is a picture that I had seen of this fellow.
He is a fellow that I know would be around the gym. I never knew
his 1 ast name. We only referred to him as Jimmie.
The Chairman. Do you think you would recognize the picture of
him?
Mr. Davidson. If it is him, I would.
The Chairman. I don't know whether this is him or not. Take a
look at it and tell us what you think of it.
(Photograph handed to the witness.)
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The picture may be made exhibit No. 7.
(The document referred to was* marked "Exhibit No. 7" for refer-
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.)
Mr. Kennedy. Is that Jimmie Q, the Jimmie as you knew him?
Mr. Davidson. Jimmie, as I knew him.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he around Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Davidson. I never saw him around Mr. Brennan, only maybe
when Mr. Brennan would come by the gym, and that would be very
seldom that he would come by the gym.
Maybe he would go into the office discussing possible fights for
me. Of course, as I say, this fellow, the picture that you showed me,
he was associated with Mr. Piazza and also Mr. Finazzo, so what went
on in the office I don't know anything about.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Finazzo indicate to you that he had some
close ties with Mr. Carbo, Frank Carbo ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, everybody that was in Detroit in the fight
racket knew that he was a friend of his. How close, I don't know.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13469
Mr. Kennedy. Did he make statements that he was close to Frankie
•Carbo?
Mr. Davidson. Well, he just said that he was his friend, and he was
his buddy.
Mr. Kennedy. How did he refer to Frankie Carbo ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, as "my man, Frank.''
Mr. Kennedy. What do you do now, in addition to your community
•center work?
Mr. Davidson. I am a musician, or attempting to be.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat kind of instrument do you play ?
Mr. DAvrosoN. WbII, some people refer to is as the xylophone, but
it is really the vibraharp. That is the instrument that I play.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a group of your own ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, yes. I am sorry to say that we are not getting
much work because of the fact that we are not very known. But we
are known around Youngstown. I have a 5-piece combo which con-
sists of 3 rhythms, base, piano, drums, a tenor-sax player who doubles
■on flute, and myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you studying music while you were boxing ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, I was always interested in music. I was inter-
ested in studying music before I knew any of these fellows existed.
Mr. Kennedy. How many fights did you have as a hea\^ weight
professional ?
Mr. Davidson. Forty-two professional.
Mr. Kennedy. How many did you win ?
Mr. Davidson. I lost 6, won 21 by knockouts, and the rest were deci-
sions.
Mr. Kennedy. Twenty-one were knockouts ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes,
Mr. Kennedy. How long were you drawing this money on the wel-
fare fund ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, from the time that it started in 1952 imtil the
time that Mr. Brennan and I split as fighter and manager.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that ?
Mr. Davidson. In 1954. I can't remember the exact date or what
month. It was in 1954, but it started in 1952.
Mr, Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, could I call Mr. Bellino and put the
figures into the record ?
The Chairman. It was something near 2 years ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, just about.
The Chairman. I think we have the record here.
Mr. Bellino, have you examined the records regarding the payment
of welfare funds from this union to this witness Davidson ?
Mr. Bellino. We have examined the records which were produced,
Senator, beginning in 1953, We do not have the records prior to
1953.
The Chairman. Well, beginning in 1953, from the time you have the
records. What date do you begin with ?
Mr. Bellino. It shows here, starting August 8, 1953, to April 9,
1954, Embrel Davidson was receiving $75 a week, and during that
period received a total of $2,475.
The Chairman. That is for a period of how many months ?
13470 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Belling. That is from August 1953 to April 1954. It is about
8 months, approximately.
The Chairman. Apparently, then, his employment was terminated
on April 9, 1954 ^
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Is that about correct, according to your recollec-
tion ?
Mr. Davidson. Just about.
The Chairman. That is about correct.
Mr. Davidson. Whenever we split as fighter and manager, that is
when it was over.
The Chairman. Would that be, according to your judgment, about
the right time ?
Mr. DxVviDSON. As much as I can recall, yes.
The Chairman. Why do we not have the other records prior to that
date?
Mr. Belling. As I understand, they are not available.
The Chairman. You have never been able to procure them ?
Mr. Belling. A good number of the records of the welfare fund
prior to 1953 have not been produced.
The Chairman. Do you remember what time in 1952 you started?
Mr. Davidson. I had my first fight for Mr. Brennan under the super-
vision of Mr. Brennan in July. I was in training before that. So it
started maybe about a month before the fight in July that I had.
The Chairman. While you were in training, were you receiving
this $75 a week?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
The Chairman. So it started prior to July 1952 ?
Mr. DA^'IDSGN. Yes.
The Chairman. And continued, then, until April 9, 1954 ?
Mr. DA^^DSGN. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. I would like to ask Mr. Bellino a question.
From your examination, did you ascertain w-ho has authority to
pay out money from the welfare fund ?
Mr. Belling. The trustees are the ones that have the authority. I
might say in Detroit, there is no question but Mr. Hoffa can tell the
trustees what to do.
Senator Curtis. Who are the trustees ?
]Mr. Belling. Mr. Fitzsimmons, Mr. Holmes, and Mr. Minick. I
believe there may be another one. Two employers, I think, and two
union.
Senator Curtis. Who signs the checks ?
Mr. Belling. Holmes, I believe, is one. I don't recall the other
one. I think it is Mr. Minick.
Senator Curtis. Did you find that the trustees examined the re-
ceipts and disbursements periodically ?
Mr. Belling. Well, they have auditors. Just what they do, I do
not know.
Senator Curtis. Then do the trusteees have to sign the checks?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
(At this point. Senator Church withdrew from the hearing room.)
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13471
Senator Curtis. All trustees ?
Mr. Belling. No. The names I recall offhand are Mr. Minick and
Mr. Holmes. Mr. Fitzsimmons may have occasion to sign also.
Senator Curtis. By whom were Mr. Minick and Mr. Holmes and
Mr. Fitzsimmons nominated ?
By management ?
Mr. Bellino. Holmes and Fitzsimmons would be labor and Minick
w^ould be management. There is another one, but I don't recall his
name.
Senator Curtis. Did Minick sign any of these checks to Davidson ?
Mr. Belling. I believe he did, but I can't say for certain. I
looked at these checks a long time ago.
Senator Curtis. Do j^ou have a contract arrangement— — -
Mr. Belling. I might say on the payroll checks, we never did get
the payroll checks. This was from the payroll book. We did not
actually see the payroll checks in this case.
Senator Curtis. Do you have in your possession the contract be-
tween management and the union for the setting up of this welfare
fund and its operation ?
Mr. Belling. We have copies of the welfare fund plan, with the
Union Casualty Co. which carries the insurance, sir.
Senator Curtis. That carries the insurance ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. But the payments made into the fund, are they
paid direct to the insurance company?
Mr. Belling. No, the payments are made to a bank and a copy of
their deposits go to insurance welfare fund office.
Senator Curtis. Do all of the receipts go then into the insurance ?
Mr. Belling. The premium payments go to the insurance company.
Tlie balance is used for administration and added to surplus funds
of their own.
Senator Clutis. Who makes the payments into the fund ?
Mr. Belling. The employers.
Senator Curtis. Do the employees pay anything ?
Mr. Belling. Not in tlie welfare fund ; no, sir.
Senator Curtis. What benefits are provided by the Avelfare fund?
Mr. Belling. There are various benefits. I couldn't tell you off-
hand. There are various benefits for the employees as well as de-
pendents and they vary from time to time.
Senator Curtis. Health and accident ?
Mr. Belling. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Any unemployment benefits ?
Mr. Belling. I don't think so.
Senator Curtis. All the money comes from management?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Are audits of that fund ever submitted to the
payers into the fund ?
Mr. Belling. They are submitted to the trustees. "\^niether they are
distributed to all the employers, I do not know.
Senator Curtis. Who are those two management trustees ?
Mr. Belling. Mr. Minick is one, and possibly Mr. Hoffa could tell
us the other one. I don't recall him.
Senator Curtis. "Wlio is Mr. Minick?
13472 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Belling. He is connected with the Red Star Transit Co.
of Detroit.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
The Chairman. As I understand the way this welfare fund is han-
dled, the employer pays the fund into the union ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And they have a welfare fund. The union, in turn,
buys the protection from the insurance company, who agrees to meet
the obligation under the welfare plan.
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Therefore, out of this fund a premium is paid to
some insurance company who takes the coverage ?
Mr. Belling. That is right.
The Chairman. On that basis, what I am trying to ascertain is:
When w^ould the union ever need to employ a claim investigator in
that fund, because the responsibility shifts, I think to the insurance
company that gives the insurance to service the policy.
Mr. Belling. We have tried to obtain some of the reports submit-
ted by alleged claim investigators, but we have not seen any. There
is another one on the payroll also, which may come out later on. In
that case he was employed directly by Mr. Hoffa, reported only to
Mr. Hoffa. No reports of any kind went to the welfare fund.
The Chairman. If I understand the arrangement, and maybe I
don't, but the insurance company when they pay it a premium, it
issues a policy by which it undertakes to meet the obligations that the
welfare plan provides.
Mr. Belling. That is correct.
The Chairman. Therefore, it services the plan, using its own claim
investigators to ascertain whether a false claim is being made ; is that
not correct ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Davidson, you were hired as a claim investi-
gator ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Were you ever directed to investigate any claim
whatsoever during the time you drew this money ?
Mr. Davidsgn. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever go see the sick ?
Mr. Davidson. No.
The Chairman. Did you ever make a report ?
Mr. Davidsgn. No.
The Chairman. You did nothing at all for the union, as such?
Mr. Davidsgn. No.
The Chairman, You performed no service for the welfare fund
or the welfare plan ?
Mr. Davidson. No.
The Chairman. Such services as you performed were personal to
Mr. Brennan, around his house and feeding his race horses ? Carry-
ing the feed out to the racetracks ?
Mr. Davidson. Yes.
The Chairman. In other words, that is all of the work you did,
except your training for your fights ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
13473
Mr. Davidson. That is right.
The Chairman. Did you realize at the time that this money was
being paid out of funds that had been paid in for the benefit of the
working people ?
Mr. Davidson. No, sir; I did not. I did not know where it was
coming from and I did not inquire.
The Chairman. You made no inquiry ?
Mr. Davidson. No, sir.
The Chairman. But you are positive you did nothing for the union,
no service connected with the welfare program ?
Mr. Davidson. No ; I did not.
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. I would like to ask about this, Mr. Bellino. Are
benefit payments made by the fund in addition to or separate and apart
from those benefit claims paid by the insurance company.
Mr. Belling. The only payments that I know about are the insur-
ance companies. There are on benefits paid out of the fmid directly.
Senator Curtis. How large is the fund that is in the hands of the
trustees in addition to their payments to the insurance company ?
Mr, Bellino. I don't have the figures before me, but my recollection
goes into the millions.
Senator Curtis. Then into the millions ? Where do they keep the
money ?
Mr. Bellino. Mostly in banks in Detroit. A good deal of it is
invested, such as the investments that we heard from Mr. Grosberg
yesterday.
Senator Curtis. Do you know what the annual or monthly income
to the welfare fund is, including the amount that is paid to the insur-
ance company ?
Mr. Bellino. I could not tell you, offhand. Senator. My records
are downstairs, and I was not prepared for that.
The Chairman. The Chair would suggest during the recess, if you
will pardon me. Senator — during the recess hour, if you can get us
the approximate figures, get them and submit them and let them go
into the record at this point. I think that is pertinent information,
and it may be inserted when he presents it in the record at this point.
(The information referred to follows :)
Michigan Conference of Teamsters Welfare Fund
Summary of em^ployer contributions and payments for group insurance
Period
Employer
contributions
Payments for
group
insurance
Aug. 31, 1949-Mar. 31, 1950
Apr. 1, 1950-Mar. 31, 1951..
Apr. 1, 1951-Mar. 31, 1952..
Apr. 1, 1952-Mar. 31, 1953 .
Apr. 1, 1953-Mar. 31, 1954..
Apr. 1, 1954-Mar. 31, 1955..
Apr. 1, 1955-Mar. 31, 1956..
Apr. 1, 195&-Mar. 31, 1957..
Total.-
$247, 985. 56
926, 879. 27
1, 699, 161. 86
2, 807, 943. 08
3, 547, 105. 95
3, 788, 465. 12
4, 489, 609. 36
4, 975, 615. 57
22, 482, 765. 77
$110, 970. 68
784, 828. 85
1, 496, 706. 70
2, 407, 867. 75
2, 924, 394. 73
3, 184, 534. 41
3, 707, 923. 58
4, 489, 871. 33
19, 107, 098. 03
13474 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. Who is the insurance carrier?
Mr. Belling. It is now known as the Northeastern Life Insurance
Co., I believe. It was Union Casualty, originally, and then it changed
to ]\Iount Vernon, but it is all the same company.
Senator Curtis. Where is it located ?
Mr. Belling. Mount Vernon, N. Y.
Senator Curtis. Plas that been a company long in existence?
Mr. Belling. It has been since they obtained the insurance. It
was not in existence — that is, there was not much to the company be-
fore they obtained the insurance for the Michigan Conference of
Teamsters and the Central States, which is another Teamsters. But
I believe we are going to go into that. Senator, later on, to cover that
whole phase.
Senator Curtis. Does Central States have the same company?
]\Ir. Belling. The same com})any ; yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question?
The ChxVIRman. Senator Ervin.
Senator Ervin. How many fights did you engage in while Mr.
Brennan was acting as your manager ?
Mr. Davidson. I couldn't give you an exact amount, but approxi-
mately 7 or 8.
Senator Ervin. How did von and he divide the net profits from
the fight?
Mr. Davidson. Well, as I said, we would split 50-50, and he would
take care of the expenses.
(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.)
Senator Ervin. Do you know about how much you got in the fights,
or how much Mr. B'^»n"!T"'s share was of the fights that you fought,
while he was your manager ?
Mr. Davidson. The total amount of his ?
Senator Ervin. Yes.
Mr. Davidson. No ; I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Approximately how much each fight ?
Mr. Davidson. There were some fights that I would get say, $250.
That was around the Motor City Arena. When I fought for the
State title, I think I got $735. I got 50 percent of that. We had
agreed that we split that way because of the expenses that were
paid.
Senator Ervin. I want to say to you that it is certainly refreshing
to find a witness whose memory functions and who does not have to
hide behind the fifth amendment. If the fifth amendment did not
have a lot of constitutional and legal virility, it would have been
worn plumb out in the hearings this week. I just want to thank you,
on behalf of the committee and on behalf of the country, for your
coming here and making a frank disclosure of the matters within your
knowledge to this committee. You are to be thanked and commended
for doing that.
Mr. Davidson. Well, I would like to say, sir, that the law is some-
thing that I don't know too much about. You ask me about boxing,
as far as defending yourself, and I think I am capable of taking care of
myself. I don't know anything about subpenas, the law, as a lawyer.
I don't know too much about acquiring counsel. But, as I have said.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13475
what I say is the truth. I am not trying to involve anybody or liarm
anybody. ' I don't want anybody to harm me. As far as I can, I am
going to stand up for myself and protect myself to anyone.
Senator Ervin. In acting as you have acted, coming and coop-
erating with the committee, and giving evidence which has all the
ring of sincerity and truth, you are not only defending yourself, but
you are assisting in defending the best interests of your country. You
deserve the thanks of this committee, for so doing.
The Chairman, Are there any other questions?
Senator Curtis. Yes; I have a question.
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Did you perform any fighting, other than in the
ring and training therefor, for the Teamsters' Union ?
Mr. Davidson. Any fighting.
Senator Curtis. Yes.
Mr. Davidson. Any fight?
Senator Curtis. Yes.
Mr. Davidson. I have given the honest truth about things. I don't
consider myself the smartest man in the world and I don't consider
myself the dumbest man in the world. I think I know just about what
you are referring to. I had nothing whatsoever to do with many
strikes or anything that the unions had. I don't even know about
them. In fact, I don't know anything about any of the unions' busi-
ness. I had no other fights no more than inside the 4 posts and the 3
ropes.
Senator Curtis. Your talents, then, were not used in any strike or
labor difficulties of any kind ?
Mr. Davidson. None whatsoever. It was never even mentioned.
Senator Curtis. Thank you.
The Chairman. Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. I want to refer you to the testimony on page 5017, in
which Mr. Hoffa, when he testified, was asked — and this was last year,
part 13 — Mr. HofFa was asked :
Have you been in any other projects with Brennan ?
Mr. Hoffa. WeU, let's see. Yes, we Iiad a prizefigliter in 1952.
Question: What was his name?
Mr. Hofta. Embrel Davidson.
Question : How long did that last?
Mr. HoFFA. It says we discontinued in 1955, from 1952 to 1953.
Question: Davidson?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Question: Where did he fight, primarily out of where?
Mr. HoFFA. Primarily out of Detroit, and wliere else he would go.
Question : Were some of the Teamster funds used in connection with him at
all?
Mr. Hoffa. Not with him.
The Chairman. You say that isn't true, that they did pay you $75
a week out of the welfare fund ?
Mr. Davidson. Just like I said before. I received a check every
week from the welfare fund. It is filed with the Internal Revenue.
The fellow that came to see me and talked to me, knew more about me
than I knew myself.
In other words, I am saying that to say I am not telling you any-
thing that you are not already familiar with, that you already don't
know.
13476 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. As Senator Ervin lias said, you are not telling us
anything that we did not know, particularly with respect to records,
what records show. You have not told us anything in that regard
that we did not know.
But it is not only refreshing, it is almost inspiring to have a wit-
ness come before us, as you have, and say, "I am not smart, nor am I
dumb. I don't know any law. I just know how to fight."
But you also know how to tell the truth and you have the courage
and the good, genuine American system and love of your country to
come here and tell the truth.
You are not only a credit to your race, but you are a credit to every
good citizen in this country who wants law and order and decency.
You make some of these witnesses who have come up here, who smirk
behind the fifth amendment, you have made them look like the lack
of quality that they really are.
You are to be commended and I commend you highly. I think you
will find that the American people approve of what you are doing,
what you have done, and they are earnestly solicitous that others will
have the same courage and the same honesty and the same integrity
and the same loyalty to country, and follow your example.
(At this point Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.)
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
Senator Kennedy. Did you fight most of the time at the Motor
City Arena ?
Mr, Davidson. Well, not most of the time. I fought a large per-
centage of my fights at Motor City. I fought a total of four fights
in New York.
Senator Kennedy. After Mr. Brennan had you, did you fight most
of the time in the Motor City Arena ?
Mr. Davidson. At the Motor City Arena, the Fairgrounds.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there any reason? Did you protest about
fighting in the Motor City Arena ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, to an extent I was interested, as I say, in
making some money, making a living. I suppose every prizefighter
has his dreams on making some money. Mine was to make enough
money to invest it and eventually get out of the fight game.
Mr. Kennedy. You weren't making very much fighting there,
were you ?
Mr. Da\tdson. No, nobody makes much.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you speak to Brennan about fighting some place
else other than Motor City Arena ?
Mr. Da\t:dson. Naturally, I brought it up.
Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat did he say to you ?
Mr. Davidson. He said the fellows at Motor City Arena were doing
a favor to get us back started on the fight game and we owed them a
favor.
Mr. Kennedy. That is Finazzo.
Mr. Davidson. Well, him and everybody else who was concerned.
Mr, Kennedy. Did he say anything about the amount of money that
you would make at the Motor City Arena as compared to what you
would make some place else ?
Mr, DA^^DS0N, Well, I think it was more so a figure of speech, onl}-
to the exent that you suppose by chance we could get a fight maybe
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13477
someplace else for four or five thousand dollars, and if we were asked
to fight at Motor City for $400 or something like that, that we should
fight there first because of the fact that they have given us the chance
could have been the case.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa or Mr. Brennan speak to you or tell
you anything about Sam Finazzo, their relationship with Sam^
Finazzo?
Mr. Davidson. No; only Mr. Brennan said once that lie knew Fi-
nazzo, and he did not think very highly of him. But I suppose he
went along with him because of the fact that Mr. Brennan, I assume,
did not have much time to put in in getting me fignts because of his
job. He had to take care of his fights.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he say anything that he had been on their pay-
roll at one time and they had gotten rid of him ?
Mr. Davidson. Well, maybe it was something to that extent. I don't
know.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you remember the conversation ?
Mr. Davidson, It was something to the extent that he knew him,
that maybe he had done some work for him or something. I don't
know, maybe it was just a 1-day thing. And that he did not think
too much of him. That is all.
The Chairman. Is there anything else ?
Again, you have the thanks of the committee. We appreciate your
cooperation and the assistance you have given us.
I think your testimony has clearly indicated that Mr. Hoffa and
Mr. Brennan owe the welfare fund something in the neighborhood of
$8,000. I hope the membership will insist that they reimburse the
fund, with interest, for the money they paid you for doing nothing
for the union or for the welfare fund. I think that is the very least
they can do. I think it is a debt that ought to be settled promptly.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the next witness we have to request
that no pictures be taken of him. He is from the Bureau of Narcotics,,
and the Commissioner of Narcotics has requested that no pictures be
taken of him.
The Chairman. That request will be granted. That includes
movies, television, snapshots, everything else used to make pictures.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. O'Carroll.
The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ?
You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Sen-
ate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the timth, so help you God ?
Mr. O'Carroll. I do, sir.
TESTIMONY OF PATRICK P. O'CAREOLL
The Chairman. I may say with respect to this order regarding
pictures that it applies anywhere in this building, while this witness
is here, and in the approach to it. I think the Senate has that juris-
diction, certainly, to protect those who appear as witnesses before one.
of its committees.
21243— 58— pt. 36 14
13478 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
That order will stand. Any violation of the appropriate action.
State your name, your place of residence, and your business or oc-
cupation.
Mr. O'Carroll. My name is Patrick P. O'CarroU. I live at 5614
Hamilton Manor Drive, Hyattsville, Md. I am employed by the
United States Treasury Department, in the Bureau of Narcotics, as a
narcotics agent.
The Chairman. How long have you been in the service ?
Mr. O'Carroll. Since 1048, sir.
The Chairman. 1948?
Mr. O'Carroll. 1948 ; yes, sir.
The Chairman. You waive counsel, of course?
Mr. O'Carroll. Yes, sir.
The <^HAiR:NrAN. All right, Mr. Kennedy, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. O'Carroll, you have made an examination of
some of the records of the Bureau of Narcotics prepared by some of
your agents?
Mr. O'CxVRROLL. Yes, sir ; I have.
Mr. Kennedy. And specifically the Bureau of Narcotics had been
interested in the activities of Mr. Eaffaele Quasarano and Mr. Jimmie
Finazzo ; is that correct ?
Mr. O'Carroll. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have some reports dealing with their activi-
ties in 1952 ?
Mr. O'Carroll. Yes, sir ; I have.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have those reports with you ?
Mr. O'Carroll. Yes, sir ; I have.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you give the committee what those reports
contain ?
Mr. O'Carroll. I have one report from the Bureau of Narcotics.
It is a memorandum report from district No. 2 — district No. 2 is the
territory comprised of New York and part of New Jersey — in the
Bureau of Narcotics. The general file title is Antonino Battaglia.
This report was made in New York City on February 11, 1953.
The report was made by Narcotic Agent K. P. Gross, and the sub-
ject of the memorandum is an "Investigation of Antonino Battaglia
and Eaffaele Quasarano, suspected major violators."
It reads as follows :
Reference is made to a letter dated January 28, 195.3, from District Super-
visor Irwin Greenfield, Detroit, Mich., relative to Raffaele Quasarano, sub-
scriber of TE 1-3877, a Detroit, Mich., telephone number, found in the premises
leased by Antonino Battaglia, at 451.5 46th Street, Long Island City, Long
Island, N. Y. Further investigation discloses that Raffaele Quasarano, 830 St.
Clair Street. Grosse Point, Mich., and Jimmie Finazzo, 781 Lakewood Avenue,
Detroit, Mich., registered at the Hotel Lexington, New York City, on June 28,
1952, and checked out on June 29, 1952.
Toll calls were made as follows : Quasarano.
These are telephone calls, telephone tolls of Mr. Quasarano from
the Hotel Lexington.
He called Tuxedo 1-9258, Detroit, Mich.
There is no listing on this particular number.
Tlie next number he called was TR 7-6175. This number is listed
to the A B & S Sportswear, 176 East 106th Street, New York City,
which is allegedly operated by Antonino Battaglia. Plaza 5-5900,
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13479
listed to the Hotel Barclay, 111 East 48tli Street. JU-C)-()400, to be
reported. IL 7-0580, listed to John Ormento, our international list
number 253, which is a Bureau list of major suspects, who lives at
5819 79th Street, Elmhurst, Long Island. It should be noted that
Ormento was arrested and sentenced in 1951 as reported in special
enforcement 226.
Mr. Kennedy. Let me interrupt there. John Ormento attended
the meeting in Apalachin, did he not ?
Mr. O'Carroll. That is right, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And he is also a fugitive from justice at the present
time?
Mr. O'Carroll. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. On a narcotics charge ?
Mr. O'Carroll. Eight, sir.
CI 6-1680, listed to Anthony Vitale, M. D., 7512 12th Avenue,
Brooklyn, N. Y., identified as Quasarano's brother-in-law.
We now have toll calls made by Jimmie Finazzo. Peconia, N. Y.,
4-6234, to be reported. CI 6-5000, listed to the Hotel Edison, 47th and
Broadway, New York City.
The next paragraph reads —
It was also learned that Finazzo purchased three railroad tickets to Detroit,
Mich., for the sum of $11()..31, indieatina: that Quasarauo, Finazzo, and 3 other
unidentified persons returned to Detroit, Mich.
The next paragraph reads :
Raffaele Quasarano a??ain registered at the Hotel Lexington on .July 27, 1952,
and checked out July 29, 19.52. A person identified as B. Brennan, residing at
2741 TurnbuU Avenue, Detroit, Mich., accompanied Quasarano and occupied the
same room.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to interrupt there ; 2741
Turnbull Avenue in Detroit is the headquarters of the Teamsters.
Mr. O'Carroll. Toll calls were made as follows :
Quasarano: AP 7-0433, listed to John Bonaventure, 115 Cleveland
Street, Brooklyn, N. Y. This office has no record of this person.
However, a discreet investigation will be made to ascertain the ex-
tent of his association with Quasarano.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I might interrupt again. This
Bonaventure was also at Apalachin.
The Chairman. Is that correct, so far as your knowledge?
Mr. O'Carroll. I understand that is the same person.
The Chairman. Do we have that proof? It is already in the
record ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir.
Mr. O'Carroll. CI 6-5252, listed to the Hotel Forrest, 224 West
49th Street, New York City ; PL 5-5900, listed to the Hotel Barclay,
111 East 48th Street, New York City, also called by Quasarano on
June 28, 1952, from the Hotel Lexington.
LE 4-4522, listed to Jennie Bra ceo (Battaglia), 225 East 107th
Street, New York City. Battaglia's wife resided at this address be-
fore her marriage, and they still maintain the apartment. Battaglia
has been seen at this location on numerous occasions, and it is believed
that he conducts his numerous activities at this location.
CI 6-1680, listed to Anthony Vitale, M. D., 7512 12th Avenue,
Brooklyn, N. Y.
13480 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
This man has been identified as Quasarano's brother-in-law.
CI 6-4398, listed to Michaelangelo Vitale, 1357 85th Street, Brooklyn,
N. Y. This man has also been identified as a brother-in-law of Kaf-
faele Quasarano and is not mentioned in the files of this office.
Coming to the next paragraph, it is calls made by B. Brennan on
the same date at the Hotel Lexington.
The CiiAiRMAX. Where is that call made from ?
Mr. O'Carroll. All calls were made from the Hotel Lexington,
Senator.
Mr. IvENNEDY. The point is that they registered at the hotel and
Qnasarano and Brennan were staying together in the same room ; is
that correct?
Mr. O'Carroll. That is correct.
Mr. Kexnedy. There were certain calls made by Quasarano, and
now you are going to give tlie calls made by Brennan,
Mr. Chairman, this was the night before the fight of Mr. Embrel
Davidson in New York, that he testified about earlier.
Go ahead.
Mr. O'Carroll. Calls made by B. Brennan :
Temple 1-3883, Detroit, Mich.
Olinville 2-1496, Olinville, N. Y. To be reported.
CI 6-5252, listed to the Hotel Forrest, 224 West 49th Street, New
York Citv. Also called by Quasarano on this date.
PE 6-t895. Listed to'B. Wollman & Sons Co., 352 7th Avenue,
New York City. This is a retail clothing concern, and is not men-
tioned in the files of this office.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct, and let me interrupt, B. Wollman &
Sons is the place that is owned by a man called "Hyney the Mink*'?
Mr. O'Carroll. I don't know, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. We will have some testimony on that man, who is
now under indictment in connection with fixing fights in New York.
Mr. O'Carroll. CI 5-8100, listed to Al Weill, International Boxing
Club, New York City. Also called by Quasarano from his Detroit
home on December 13, 1952, and December 26, 1952.
Following are four numbers that were not reported
Mr. Kennedy. I don't think it is necessary to give those.
Mr. O'Carroll. The next paragraph is Kaffaele Quasarano again
checked in at the Hotel Lexington on October 18, 1952, and checked
out the following day. Toll cals were made as follows :
CI 6-4239, to be reported.
AP 7-0433, listed to John Bona ventre, 115 Cleveland Street, Brook-
lyn, N. Y. This office has no record of this person, but an investigation
will be made to determine his association with Quasarano.
CI 6-1680, listed to Quasarano's brother-in-law, Anthony Vitale,
M. D., 7512 12th Avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y. No record of this person
in this office.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Finazzo and Mr. Quasarano have been identified
in connection with the narcotics traffic, have they not, by your agency ?
Mr. O'Carroll. I understand Mr. Quasarano, and I am not certain
of Mr. Finazzo.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I think that will be all for this wit-
ness, and I would like to give a summary of Mr. Finazzo's background
that we have in addition to that.
The Chairman. Do you have a witness ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13481
Mr. Kennedy. One of our staflf investigators.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. O'Carroll.
If you find the order violated in anyway, you will report it, please.
TESTIMONY OF PIERRE E. Gt. SALINGER— Resumed
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Salinger has been sworn.
Could you tell us, Mr. Salinger, if you have the background infor-
mation on Mr. Finazzo and Mr. Quasarano ?
Mr. Salinger. I have.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you give that to us in brief.
Mr. Salinger. This information is provided to us by several Federal
agencies, and first with reference to Raffaele Quasarano : Raffaele
Quasarano was born in Pennsylvania in 1910. As a small infant he
was taken to Sicily by his mother who had become widowed. He
returned to the Detroit area on an unknown date, but they can estab-
lish him in Detroit on March 1, 1931, because that was his first arrest
there. Mr. Quasarano has been arrested on five occasions.
Now, according to reports of Narcotics Bureau, Mr. Quasarano has
l)een active in the narcotics traffic and in March of 1952 he was indicted
by the Italian Government in absentia as a conspirator in the case
which involved the shipping of 6 kilograms of heroin to the United
States. Among the others who were indicted with him at that time
are three other Detroit figures, Poppa John Prizzola, Paul Comina,
and Pietro Gardino, and the narcotics were being shipped to them for
Mr. Giuseppi Chamino of Sicily.
Following Mr. Quasarano's release from the service — he served in
the Army for 3 years — he married the daughter of Vito Vitali, who
is reputedly an internatioi^al gangster, smuggler, and leader of the
Mafia in Sicily.
Mr. Kennedy. The father is, you mean ?
Mr. Salinger. Yes. He became a partner in the operation of the
Motor City Arena Gymnasium, 4647 Woodward Avenue, Detroit, with
Sam Finazzo, and Julius Piazzo, and he and his partner promoted
boxing matches and managed fighters.
He is known by the Narcotics Bureau to have made a number of
trips to Italy and Sicily in recent years. He has been connected with
at least two figures at the Appalachian meeting, and he received tele-
phone calls from Joseph Barbaro, at whose home the Appalachian
meeting was held, and he also received telephone calls from John
Ormento, who is considered a major trafficker of narcotics and cur-
rently a fugitive from an indictment in the southern district of New
York, in which Vito Genovese, of Atlantic Highlands, N. J., is a
codefendant.
Kaff aele Quasarano is also known as Jimmie Quasarano, and Jimmie
Queer.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the man that Mr. Brennan was with and in
whose room Mr. Brennan stayed the night of the fight ; is that right ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Of Mr. Davidson's fight in New York ?
Mr. Salinger. We have the record here from Nat Fleischer's Ring
Record Book and Boxing Encyclopedia in 1936, which shows that
Embrel Davidson fought Charley Riggs, of New York, in New York,
13482 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
on July 28, which is one of the days he was at the Hotel Lexington
with Raffaele Quasarano,
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Brennan made several telephone calls while he
was at the hotel ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. There was a call to B. Wollman & Son?
Mr. Salinger. The call was made to B. Wollman & Sons, and this
is the firm operated by Hymey the Mink Wolman, who is currently
under indictment in New York for the fixino; of prize fights.
He also made a call to Al Weill, who at that time was manager of
Rocky Marciano, and who just last month was barred as a manager
in the State of California as a result of his association with Frank
Carbo, who is a notorious underworld figure connected with the fight
business.
Mr. Kennedy. We have already had testimony that Mr. Davidson
and Mr. Finazzo referred to Frankie Carbo as "My boy, Frankie."
Mr. Salinger. He did.
AVith reference to Sam Finazzo, he was born in St. Louis, Mo., in
1908, and he has records with both the FBI and the Detroit Police
Department, and it is a rather lengthy record, and shows 29 arrests
and 4 convictions. One of the most significant cases Mr. Finazzo was
involved in was the murder of James G. Hays, a Cleveland and Toledo
gambling operator, murdered in Detroit, Mich., on October 4, 1934.
He was indicted for this murder along with Tony Bate, and the prose-
cution witnesses against him were Scarface Joe Bomorette and Joe
Massie, important racket figures in the Detroit area. They refused to
testify at the trial and were given contempt sentences and sent to jail
for their refusal and as a result of their refusal, the judge ordered a
directed verdict of acquittal against Mr. Finazzo and Mr. Bate. We
have had testimony about Mr. ISIassie and his influence in the Detroit
area and his operations out of Miami, Fla.
"Scarface"' Bomorette is still a fugitive from this committee on a
subpena we have had out for him for a month.
]Mr. Finazzo was an operator of the Motor City Arena along with
Quasarano, and Julius Piazzo.
Mr. Kennedy. We had some testimony last year with reference to
a man by the name of "Little Sammy."
Mr. Salinger. We did, and there was a teleplione conversation be-
tween Anthony Tony "Ducks'' Corallo and Al Reiger, in which they
discussed a union problem, and it was suggested by Mr. Corallo to Mr.
Reiger in this telephone conversation, a part of the record of this
committee, that he contact Mr. Hoffa in Detroit. When Mr. Reiger
protested he didn't know Mr. HofFa, Mr. Corallo told him to call Mr.
iHoffa and tell him he was a friend of "Little Sammy," from Detroit.
INIr. Kennedy. Mr. Finazzo is known as "Little Sammy" ?
Mr. Salinger. Yes ; he is known as "Little Sammy."
Mr. Kennedy. That is all.
The Chairman. Is there anything further?
Senator Curtis. How many of these individuals referred to by Mr.
Pat O'Carroll of the Bui-eau of Narcotics, are connected with any
labor union ?
Mr. Salinger. How many of the individuals mentioned by Mr.
O'Cfirroll are connected with labor unions? The only individual is
Mr. Brennan.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13483
Senator Curtis. The only one is Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. So that we have this wliole situation: From the
testimony of Mr. Embrel Davidson, we determined that Mr. Finazzo
and Mr. Brennan were close together ; isn't that correct ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Finazzo and Mr. Quasarano w^ent to New
York together and registered at the hotel together ?
Mr. Salinger. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently, just before Davidson fought, Mr.
Quasarano, the narcotics figure, and Mr. Brennan, both registered at
the liotel togetlier, and Mr. Brennan, wliile lie was in New York in
connection with this matter, made telephone calls to some of the im-
portant gangsters and hoodlums throughout the United States.
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. To, namely, "Hymie the Mink''; is that correct?
Mr. Salinger. Yes.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
Mr. Kennedy. And tlie union funds were used to finance the activi-
ties of Mr. Embrel Davidson during this period of time?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Quasarano and Mr. Finazzo.
The Chairman. Do you and each of you, solemnly swear that the
evidence you shall give before this Senate select committee shall be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Mr. Finazzo. I do.
Mr. Quasarano. I do.
TESTIMONY OF SAM FINAZZO AND RAFFAELE QUASARANO, ACCOM-
PANIED BY THEIR COUNSEL, CHRISTOPHER J. MULLE
The Chairman. Beginning on my left, identify yourself by stating
your name, your residence, and your place of business, please.
Mr. Mulle. Mr. Chairman, if I may interrupt at this point.
The Chairman. I always try to get the witnesses identified, and
then permit counsel to make statement.
Mr. Mulle. I appreciate that very much.
Mr. Chairman, it so happens that Mr. Quasarano is not extremely
familiar with the English language, and under the tension of the cir-
cumstances, I am sure that you can agree he would not be able to
Understand your questions and answer them in the English language
as readily as he should. Therefore, I am going to ask your kind per-
mission to be permitted to act as counsel for Mr. Quasarano and also
to act as, in a sort of way, interpreter, so I can give him the questions
as presented to him by your honorable committee.
The Chairman. All right. Are you an attorney ?
Mr. Mulle. Yes; my name is Christopher Mulle, my address is
20183 Mack Avenue, Grosse Point Woods, Mich., and I am an attor-
ney in Detroit, Mich,
The Chairman. You are licensed under Michigan statute ?
Mr. Mulle. Yes.
The Chairman. The Chair is not going to swear you as an inter-
preter, and we are going to rely upon your standing at the bar and
13484 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
jour obligation as a lawyer to interpret in such interpretations as you
make, to interpret them both correctly to the witness and also to the
•committee.
Do you feel that you can interpret and you understand his lan-
guage well enough that you can convey to him the questions and in
turn interpret his answers to the committee in English ?
Mr. MuLLE. I feel that I can, Your Honor, and I expressly wish
to thank you for this courtesy and cooperation.
The Chairman. I respect your position in the bar, and I will not
swear you as an interpreter.
All right, now my question to the witness on my left sitting next
to you, Mr. Counsel, is please state your name, and your residence,
and your business or occupation.
Mr. QuASARANO. My name is Raffaele Quasarano, 190327 Esther
Williams Court, Grosse Point.
The Chairman. Your occupation, please, or your business ?
Mr. Quasarano. My business is mostly barber supplies.
Mr. MuLLE. He is a partner in the so-called Motor City Barber
Supply & Beauty Supply Co.
The Chairman. Now, the one on my right; will you state your
name, and your place of residence, and your business or occupation.
Mr. Finazzo. Sam Finazzo, 2502 Newport, and I am in the salvage
business.
The Chairman. Thank you. And the attorney here, Mr. Mulle.
Mr. Mulle. I shall at this point present myself as an attorney for
Mr. Finazzo.
The Chairman. All right. You may proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Finazzo, could you tell us when you were born ?
Mr. Finazzo. 1906.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliere?
Mr. Finazzo. Italy.
Mr. Kennedy. You were born in Italy ?
Mr. Finazzo. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And are you an American citizen now ?
Mr. Finazzo. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. When did you get your American citizenship ?
Mr. Finazzo. Through my father.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlien did you come to the United States ?
Mr. Finazzo. When I was 4 years old.
Mr. Kennedy. Now Mr. Finazzo, have you an interest in any boxers
or professional fightei*s ?
Mr. Finazzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Specifically, could you tell me what your relation-
ship was with Mr. Embrel Davidson ?
Mr. Finazzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And could you tell us what arrangements you made
on behalf of Mr. Bert Brennan for Mr. Embrel Davidson ?
Mr. Finazzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and
exercise my privilege imder the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13485
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Bert Brennan ?
Mr. FiNAZzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. I^NNEDY. Do you know Mr. James Hoff a ?
Mr. FiNAZzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kjjnnedy. Could you tell us how many times you have been
arrested, Mr. Finazzo ?
Mr. Finazzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us how many times you have been
convicted ?
Mr. Finazzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and
exercise my privilege not to answer this question.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why Mr. Bert Brennan and Mr.
Hoff a would be dealing with you ?
Mr. Finazzo. I respectfully decline to answer this question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. The testimony that we have had regarding your
visit to New York ; is that correct ?
Mr. Finazzo. I respectfully decline to answ^er this question and
exercise my privelege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask some questions of
Mr. Quasarano.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Quasarano, could you tell the committee where
you were born ?
Mr. Qxtasarano. In Pennsylvania State.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlien did you move to Detroit ?
Mr. Quasarano. In 1929.
Mr. Ivennedy. Do you have anything to do with professional fight-
ing now, Mr. Quasarano ?
Mr. Mulle. Mr. Chairman, if I may interrupt, at this particular
point, Mr. Quasarano is going to assert the fifth amendment, and as
such he is not going to try to be a witness against himself, and as a
result, he is going to ask to decline to answer these questions.
The Chairman. We will let him answer it in his language and you
tell us that that is what he said.
Mr. Mulle. Very good.
The Chairman. All right.
If he doesn't understand the question, you make sure he understands
it and let tlie witness answer. Here is the thing about it : We can't
accept the invoking of the fifth amendment by proxy. We are sure he
intends to do it, but intending to do it doesn't put it on the record.
Doing it makes it a matter of record.
Mr. Mulle. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. I merely wanted to
tell the committee that he was going to do so, and under the circum-
stances, Mr. Kennedy, would you grant me the courtesy of repeating
the question.
13486 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have anything to do with professional
fighters or professional boxing?
Mr. QuASARANO (tlirough Mr. MuUe). I respectfully decline to
answer this question and exercise my privilege under the fifth amend-
ment of the United States Constitution not to be a witness against
myself.
Mr. Kennedy. He can say what he says to you out loud, anyway.
Mr. MuLLE. Oh, yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What did he say to you ; will you repeat that ? You
just interpret it for us, if that is necessary.
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness.
The Chairman, The Chair won't hold him to exact language, and if
he says, ''I refuse to be a witness against myself," that is sufficient in
his case. The Chair will accept that, if he just says, "I refuse to be a
witness against myself,'' or "I decline.''
I am not trying to belabor this, but after all, we will make a record,
and you can make a shabby one or you can make one that has some
meaning.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Quasarano, you have been identified before
this committee in the hearings we held approximately a month ago
as a recipient of telephone calls from John Ormento, who is a notorious
trafficker in narcotics. Could you tell us about that ?
Mr, Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr, Kennedy. Now, this was just about the time of the meeting
at Apalacliin. Could you tell us what you know about the meeting
at Apalachin?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Quasarano, we also identified you as a
recipient of a telephone call from Mr. Joseph Barbara, who was the
host at the meeting at Apalachin.
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what you discussed with him ?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You were identified here by a Bureau of Narcotics
representative, about a month ago, as one of the leading traffickers in
narcotics yourself in the Detroit area. Could you tell us about
whether you do deal in narcotics?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And whether you import and distribute narcotics
throughout the United States?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee, and t will repeat my
question, whether you have been in or are now in professional boxing?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us or the committee why, with this
background, Mr. Bert Brennan of the Teamsters' Union would be
staving with you in New York City ?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also have an interest in Mr. Embrel David-
son, together with Mr. Brennan and Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. James Hoffa ?
Mr. Quasarano. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13487
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what you did for Mr. Embrel
Davidson on behalf of Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. QuASAR/VNO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why Mr. Brennan would be calling
on the telephone Himey "the Mink" Wollman ?
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you present when the telephone call took place ?
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what connection you have had with
any other Teamster Union officials, in Detroit'?
Mr. QiTASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
INIr. Kennedy. Now, could you tell us what you have had to do
with the LaSalle Distributors, at 9018 12th Street, in Detroit, Mich?
Mr. QuASARiVNO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you explain why it was that the Teamsters
began organizational drive of the LaSalle Distributors, and that they
then got in touch with you and that the organizational drive was then
called olf ?
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why the LaSalle Distributors have
sold over 1,000 watches that have been distributed to union officials?
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Does that have anything to do with the organiza-
tional drive of the Teamsters being called off?
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You have nothing to say about that, Mr. Quasarano ?
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Are you a labor management consultant?
Mr. QuASAR.\NO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that why employers would come to you to consult
about their labor problems ?
(Witness consulted with his counsel.)
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us anything about your relationship
with Mr. Hoffa, Mr. Brennan, or other Teamster officials ?
Mr. QuASARANO. I refuse to be a w^itness against myself.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
These two witnesses will remain under their present subpena sub-
ject to being recalled by the committee for further interrogation.
Will you acknowledge that recognizance ?
Mr. MuELE. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I plead ignorance at this point,
and I would like to ask a question. Does that mean that they have to
stay within the jurisdiction of Washington?
The Chairman. No, just stay within the jurisdiction of the United
States, and should we need them again, I don't want to have to go
through the process of subpenaing them. Upon their accepting this
recognizance it will not be necessary to do so, and they would be ex-
pected to return upon reasonable notice to them of the time and place
where the committee desires to hear them.
Would you give your address? I don't know whether you did or
not.
Mr. MuLLE. My address is 20183 Mack Avenue, Grosse Point Woods,
Mich. That is my office address.
13488 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. All right, if there is nothing further, I think that
you are excused. You may stand aside.
Mr. Brennan, will you come around, please?
TESTIMONY OF OWEN B. BRENNAN, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS
COUNSEL, GEORGE FITZGERALD— Resumed
The Chairman. Mr. Brennan, you have been previously sworn, and
will you just have a seat ? You will remain under the same oath, and
proceed, Mr. Counsel.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee, Mr. Brennan, about
your relationship with Embrel Davidson?
The Chairman. Let the record show Mr. Fitzgerald appears also
as counsel.
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. IvENNEDT. Would you tell the committee why you as a teamster
official and recently made vice president of the International Brother-
hood of Teamsters would be dealing with Mr. Quasarano and Mr.
Finazzo ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to tea witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know when you were working with Mr.
Finazzo he had been arrested some 26 times ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. When you stayed with Mr. Quasarano in New York
did you know he was one of the major traffickers in narcotics in the
United States ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
]Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee why you put Embrel
Davidson on the payroll of the welfare fund where he did no work on
behalf of the welfare fund ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. According to the testimony we have had, the only
work he did was training for his fights and some work that he did
at your home ; is that correct ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You used him to feed your horses: is that correct?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you consider that the money of the welfare fund
and the union are to be used by you and Mr. Hoffa for whatever pur-
pose you see fit to help you and your friends ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13489
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the questions, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And these funds should be used to help you and
help Mr. George Fitzgerald and help Mr. Herbert Grosberg, is that
the purpose of the fund ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the questions, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you feel that it is an advantage to have someone
around you working for the Teamsters or be working with someone
who lias a criminal record, Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the questions, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. I have something I want to show Mr. Brennan.
Senator Mundt. When you made this trip to New York City with
Mr. Quasarano to attend the prize fights, did you charge your expenses
to the Teamsters Union, or did you pay for those expenses yourself?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and ex-
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Mundt. Not being a lawyer, could you explain to me how
answering that question by saying, "I paid those expenses myself,
could incriminate you ?
Mr. Brennan. AVell sir, without getting into the area of losing my
privileges, I understand and have been advised by my attorneys that
answermg any question w^ould lose me my privileges. Under those
circumstances naturally I have to decline to answer any of the questions
regardless of how they are put with an unlimited imagination. So I
have to respectfully decline to answer the question, and exercise my
privileges under the fifth amendment, sir, of the United States Con-
stitution.
Senator Mundt. Could you have your attorney tell you, so that
you could tell me, the precedent for this decision that you say he men-
tioned to you; that, by answering one question, you would lose all
immunity ?
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. Fitzgerald. May I address the Chair ?
The Chairman. Yes ; you may.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I will answer Senator Mundt. I don't believe
Senator Mundt is a lawyer, are you ?
Senator Mundt. I said I was not.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I wasn't sure. Well, there is a confusion in the
law or case law on the question of this fifth amendment, and there is
a very serious question among lawyers who have very closely analyzed
the Supreme Court decisions on the subject regarding a witness when
he exercises his privilege, when he can draw a line of demarcation be-
tween what he should and what he can't answ^er without waiving his
privilege. Now, that has been the subject of some very learned
treatises by Dean Griswold, of Harvard, and other writers. The
feeling among lawyers, if I may just finish
Senator Mundt. I am aware there have been a lot of treatises, and
there are a lot of learned people who have pontificated on the subject,
13490 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
and my question tliroiioh Mr. Brennan to you, and I would just as
soon ask it to 3'OU directly, is whether or not there is a Supreme Court
decision which holds that to answer one question waives immunity
for all?
(At this point, the following members were present : Senators
McClellan, Kennedy, and Mundt.)
Mr. Fitzgerald. There are Supreme Court decisions which hold
that, if a person answers the hrst in a chain of questions, it may
constitute a waiver of his privileg'e that he has already asserted. We
are proceeding on that theory. That is the only way I can advise
Mr. Brennan at the present time, in view of the situation on the case
law.
Senator Mundt. Inasmuch as the whole area of Supreme Court
jurisdiction is a matter presently before the Senate of the United
States, and inasmuch as legislation has come from the Judiciary
Committee of the Senate trying to clarify the position of Congress
from the standpoint of its ability to elicit information from witnesses
and to cite witnesses for contempt, if you have, as you say you have,
a decision or a series of decisions, upon which you now base your
advice to the witness that he cannot answer one question witliout
waiving immunity to all, would you be good enougli to prepare a
short statement or a brief to put into the record at this point, listing
those cases and designating them I
Mr, Fitzgerald. Well, I will do it, but I am not going to do it
right now. I can't.
Senator Mundt. I mean for the record.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I will be very happy. I furnished a lot of other
things to the counsel, and I will be very happy to do that, also.
Senator jMundt. This is an important point. If your fear is based,
in fact, it would certainly imply tliat something the Supreme Court
had done had stultified entirely the capacity of the people of America,
acting through Congress, to get the information required in a situa-
tion like this to legislate properly. For that reason, I would like
to have you list those, so that we can analyze them. You may be
correct. I don't know. But at least I want something more than
just a treatise by a learned lawyer on which to base this disclaimer
now being utilized by your witness.
]Mr. Fitzgerald. As soon as I have the opportunity, Senator, I
will be glad to furnish that to you and anyone else who is interested.
The Chairman. This should properly be made an exhibit. You
could write indefinitely on this. You could write almost a book on
it, I suppose.
Senator Mundt. I am not asking, Mr. Chairman, for Mr. Fitz-
gerald's opinion. I am asking if he would be good enough, because
he has obviously made a study of this in preparing for these hearings,
to list the precedents and the cases, so that we can have them definitely
before us.
The Chairman. Mr. Fitzgerald, if you will simply submit citations,
there would be no objection to them going into the record at this
point. But I did not want to open u\) the record to a long disserta-
tion.
Senator Mundt. No; I was not asking this, that he do it, and
I would not be interested in having; Dean Griswold's treatise or
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13491
Fitzgerald's treatise. I want the citations. Any comment you wish
to make, of course, you are privileged to make.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Thank you.
(The document referred to was requested several times and never
received.
The Chairman. Mr. Brennan, you and Mr. Hoffa, according to his
testimony, had an interest in this fighter, Davidson. Mr. Ploffa so
testified previously. Mr. Davidson has come on the stand and testi-
fied that, during the time he was under your management as a fighter,
he received $75 a week from the welfare fund of the union; that he
did no work for the union. The only thing he did was train and,
occasionally, do some personal work for you.
In round numbers, according to the records, according to his testi-
mony, there was expended out of the welfare fund of the union
approximately $8,000, a little more or a little less, during nearly a
2-year period of time, as payments to him, weekly payments, $75 a
week, for performing no services for the union or for the welfare
fund. Do you feel that you should reimburse the welfare fund of
your members for the money that was so expended with your approval
and with your knowledge ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you intend now to pay this money back to the
welfare fund?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question, and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you regard and w^ll you concede that such
action, if you do not make restitution, constitutes embezzlement, and
embezzlement, as you know, is a form of theft ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
(At this point. Senator Ives entered the hearing room.)
The Chairman. I am very hopeful that the monitors appointed by
the court, a part of whose duty, I understood, was to supervise the
cleanup of the Teamsters Union, the corruption in it, ancl other im-
proper practices, that they will make some expression about this, and
if they have it within their power, that they will try to see that this
welfare fund is reimbursed by you and Mr. Hoffa for the money you
took out of it, for any legal purposes so far as the union is concerned
in the welfare fund, and for your own personal gain and profit so far
as you and Mr, Hoffa are concerned. I am hopeful they will do that.
In the meantime, I hand you a photograph and ask you to examine
it. State if you can identify any person in it.
(The photograph handed to the witness.)
(The witness conferred with counsel.)
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Look at No. 50083. See if you recognize him.
13492 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. As you look at it, can you not imagine yourself
looking in a mirror ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Name some of the buddies there with you.
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
Senator Mundt. Yes. I would like to know who the buddies are.
Perhaps somebody from the staff can tell us who is in the picture.
The Chairman. The picture will be made exhibit No. 8.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 8" for
reference and may be found in the files of the select committee.)
The Chairman. Now you may interrogate him about it.
Senator Mundt. There is no use to interrogate him, but somebody
else might be able to identify them. I think we should have them in
the record by name.
The Chairman. Mr. Bellino.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Bellino, may I ask you to identify the other
individuals in the picture insofar as you are able to do so ?
The Chairman. I may say, Senator, they are all identified on the
picture.
Mr. Bellino. This is a photograph obtained from the Detroit police.
It is called Truck Bombers.
Tlie names are from the left : Raffaele Bennett, Samuel Hurst, Rus-
sell Gregory, Bernard Brennan, Eugene Schnitzler, George King,
Harry Apers, and John Floria.
Senator Mundt. You do know Bernard Brennan ; do you not ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Mundt. Have you any information about these people
whose names you read other than the fact that they were bombing
trucks ?
Mr. Bellino. We have information in our files. We could get it,
Senator.
Senator Mundt. I think it would be well, if you can, now that
you have put the names into the record, to insert the information
describing them a little bit more adequately.
My. Kennedy. We think we have some information about several
of them. Mr. Bennett — wasn't he a Teamster official?
Mr. Bellino. Mr. Bennett was a Teamster official. I believe he was
top man before Mr. Hoffa, if he is the correct one that I recall.
Samuel Hurst is a Teamster official.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Bellino, is that the same Mr. Bennett whose
name was brought into the hearings previously involving some kind
of a fight in Detroit ?
Mr. Kennedy. That was Harry Bennett.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13493
Mr. Belling. Harry Bennett from the Ford Co,
Senator Mundt. A different Bennett.
Mr. Kennedy. Don't the records sliow that Mr. Brennan liad been
arrested about 3 times or approximately 3 times, during this period
of time 1935-36, in connection with bombing trvicks and places of
business ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there an organized group that was going
around bombing people, homes, buildings, truck establislunents, and
companies, Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United
States Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you a member of that group, Mr. Brennan?
Mr. Brennan. I respectfully decline to answer the question and
exercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
The Chair will make this observation before we recess: With the
approval of the committee, I shall direct that the transcript of these
hearings this morning, particularly, and the record, if it has not
already gone to the Justice Department, of Mr. Hoffa's testimony
when he appeared before the committee before, be referred to the
Justice Department for ascertaining who has committed perjury.
Definitely there is such a conflict of testimony here that there could
hardly be any mismiderstanding. ]\Ir. Hoffa testified that no union
funds went to pay this prizefighter.
Now he comes on this morning and says that he was paid $75 a
week out of welfare funds; that he did no work. Of course, if he
did no work, Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Brennan definitely knew about it.
The records, in part, as far as we have been able to get the records,
further corroborate and substantiate the testimony of Mr. Davidson.
Again, it gives us concern, very deep concern, about our work here as
we try to get the truth. We run into, as I stated, and as everyone
has observed, the fifth-amendment device being used and being im-
properly used, in my judgment, to prevent or to escape giving testi-
mony against others, not self-incriminating testimony.
Then we run into these conflicts of testimony where somebody is
imposing on this committee and on their Government by committing
perjury.
This committee has no authority to prosecute; it can only expose.
But there are other agencies of Government who have a duty to per-
form after this committee has performed its function.
I think this record should go there immediately. Again I express
the hope that the monitors will exercise such power as they have in
the court, to see that these funds are replaced, this money is replaced
in the fund, from which it came, for the benefit of the workers of the
Teamsters Union, for whose welfare it was paid into that fund by
employers.
Senator Ives.
Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman, I think there is a possible conflict in
Mr. Hoffa's own testimony. As I recall, and I have not checked the
record in this respect, though it ought to be checked, the day before
21243—58 — pt. 36 15
13494 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
yesterday Mr, Hoffa testified that he did not have authority to inter-
cede in local contracting negotiations; whereas yesterday he says he
stopped a number of strikes.
There is possibly no conflict there at all, and possibly there is. I
think that matter ought to be checked.
The Chairman. Of course, wherever there is conflict the testimony
is whether there is Avillful falsehood. Sometimes language may be
susceptible of different interpretations. But again we have such a
conflict here that you cannot dissolve it, as I see it, where both were
telling the truth. Either Davidson has perjured himself or Mr. Hoffa.
did not tell the truth when he testified before. I said a moment ago
all this committee can do is expose. I just used that in relation to a
prosecution.
Of course, this committee's primary function is to expose these
evils, develop the information, so that Congress can legislate to remedy,
to prohibit, and to regulate or direct.
As I repeatedly stated, there is no doubt in anyone's mind that the
disclosures that have been made in the course of these hearings cry
out for legislation in many areas so as to give protection to the work-
ing people of this country and so as to protect our society and our
economy from the character assaults being made upon it in some
instances.
Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. I hope that the monitors will examine their
authority to see whether they could take action with regard to Mr.
Brennan, not only because of his refusal to give the committee infor-
mation to which I believe it is entitled, but also because of his associa-
tion with gangsters and criminals; particularly in view of his position
of authority within the Teamster organization at the present time
as one of the chief officers in charge of the whole Teamster Union in
the United States. He is the seventh international vice president.
In view of his disregard for the responsibility of the union funds,
his tieup with criminals and gangsters, his gambling, which he re-
fused to give us very much information about, but which must have
been considerable if Mr. Hoffa is telling us the truth, I would think
that his position should certainly be studied by the monitors as to
whether he should not be removed.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
If not, the committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12 : 35 p. m. a recess was taken until 2 p. m. of the
same day, with the following members present : Senators McClellan,
Ives, Kennedy, Mundt.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
(Members of the select committee present at this point: Senators
McClellan, Ives, and Curtis.)
The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy, call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa. Mr. James Hoffa.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13495
TESTIMONY OF JAMES E. HOFEA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWAED BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEOEGE EITZGEEALD, AND
DAVID PEEVIANT— Eesumed
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr, Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Holi'a, are you planning to take steps to reim-
burse the union for the money that was used from the pension and wel-
fare fund for Mr. Embrel Davidson ?
Mr. Williams. Before we begin the interrogation of the witness,
Mr. Chairman, may I say for the record that this morning I was called
at 9 : 35 a. m. by one of your stall' members, Mr. Paul Tierney, and he
told me that Mr. Kennedy had asked him to call me to advise me that
]\Ir. Hoffa's presence would not be required during the morning ses-
sion, but that it would be required during the afternoon. I told Mr.
Tierney tliat this did not meet the thrust of the objection which I
had lodged with the Chair yesterday morning, in which I complained
about putting the witness on and then having him stand aside for
rebuttal testimony, and then recalling him.
I want to renew my objection, ]\Ir. Chairman, and point out for the
purpose of the record that at the direction of the connnittee, we were
here present throughout yesterday afternoon, altliough the witness was
not called to the stand to testify yesterday afternoon. We did come
here voluntarily this morning, because I felt that if testimony was
going in which the witness Vv'ould be required to respond to, immedi-
ately, this afternoon, that he should have the benefit of hearing it,
since the record would not be prepared in time for him to read it.
So I must renew my objection, Mr. Chairman, the same objection
that I made yesterday, wherein I said to the Chair that the calling and
recalling of this witness for an hour or an hour and a half a day with
rebuttal witnesses placed in juxtaposition to him, constitutes a legisla-
tive trial, in which he is not given a right to cross-examine the adverse
witnesses against him. I would like that objection renewed.
I again ask the Chair to allow the witness to testify through to a
conclusion, or to excuse him until the end of all the other testimony,
and allow him to return and testify through to a conclusion without
these interruptions.
The Chairman. The objections, I believe, are the same as you inter-
posed yesterday, upon which the Chair made a ruling after an execu-
tive session of the committee.
I may repeat that we do not order or direct Mr. Hoffa to remain
present at all times during the taking of testimony.
But as I stated yesterday, the committee felt that as it somewhat
concludes each phase of the case, Mr. Hoffa should be given the op-
portunity to comment upon it, and be interrogated about it. Insofar
as we can, as I said yesterday, we are going to permit Mr. Hoffa to be
absent, if he desires to do so, to continue with his own enterprises,
whatever his pleasure is. But, as the Chair said yesterday, from time
to time he will be called in the course of these hearings, and he should
stay available for response to the committee's calling. We have just
13496 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
concluded one part of these hearings, and I think pretty serious testi-
mony has been given, as I indicated this morning. There have been
a number of witnesses on the stand since Mr. Hoffa appeared, and
there are some questions that we have to ask him about these matters.
He should be given, I think — and I don't know what is so disturbing
about this — given the opportunity to answer or refute charges that
are made.
The principal complaint that the Chair agreed with you on yester-
day, is that part of your objection to the committee which I thought
you were right about, instead of putting him on and then immediately
putting on the witnesses where he hadn't had the opportunity to hear
them before we interrogate him, and question him about it, I think
there was some validity in that objection.
But to say that you object to us putting liim on after he has heard
the testimony with respect to some activities of his, until we get through
here 2 or 3 weeks later and then putting him on, I don't see any validity
in that.
To tell you the truth, it seems to me that in this way he is given the
opportunity, almost simultaneously witli the development of this in-
formation, given the opportunity to get his version in the record along
with that that may have been testified to by other witnesses. I just
don't see the validity of it. I know in the past when we didn't give the
opportunity to witnesses who came up here, we were criticized for not
doing it.
]Mr. Williams. One of the bases, if I may state, Mr. Chairman, of
my objection yesterday, was that it requires the witness to remain here
present for several weeks in order to give several hours of testimony.
I think this is a harrassment, and I said this to you yesterday, because
I must advise this witness, as I did this morning, after I received Mr.
Tierney's call, I must advise him in his own interest to be here present
when testimony of the character that went in this morning is being of-
fered. I think he must be here present in the interest of self-preserva-
tion when that kind of testimony goes in, so that he may hear it and
then respond to it, unless he were given the opportunity, sir, to read the
record before being interrogated on this subject.
The only way that I knew of, and I suggested this to the Chair yes-
terday, wherein this end could be accomplished, would be to allow him
to come in and testify after all of the so-called adverse witnesses have
concluded their testimony, and when he has had an opportunity to
read the evidence that has been offered here against him..
So I say, Mr. Chairman, that it does not meet the real thrust of my
objection, which is that he is being required to remain here, really
out of self-preservation, throughout the life of an investigation in or-
der that he may give only several hours or several days testimony.
I say, Mr. Chairman, most respectfully to you, sir, that I believe
that this constitutes a legislative trial in which he is the defendant,
and that the sole concession that was made by the ruling of the Chair
is that the defendant, who is on trial, maj^ be absent, when, of course,
his absence would be the most detrimental and harmful thing to him
if he is to defend himself and his reputation before this committee.
I again implore you, Mr. Chairman, to reconsider the objection that
I lodged yesterday, and I urge you most respectfully to allow this
witness, either to testify through to a conclusion, or to return here at
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13497
the end of this inquiry and testify with continuity instead of being
put on the stand for an hour a day and then pulled off the stand while
witnesses testify in juxtaposition to his testimony on each given sub-
ject.
The Chairman , Mr. Williams, of course, I can appreciate that your
client may need to be present most any time during the course of these
hearings. I am not going to require him to be present, except at such
times as we may desire to interrogate him. But I know you realize
we are dealing with some pretty serious matters, serious from the
standpoint of this Congress and the American people. I want this
record to be as clear and concise as it can be made, and made fairly
to all parties, under oath. I am trying to keep this record as much
under oath as it is possible to do.
Occasionally some remark or statement get in. I have repeatedly
said such statements are not evidence. They may be stated as the
basis upon which to predicate a question, if we have information to
that effect, but not as evidence.
We are going to proceed this afternoon. Insofar as the Chair and
committee can grant your request with respect to not placing Mr.
Hott'a on tlie witness stand any more often than we feel is necessary
to the proper functioning of the committee, we will grant the request.
But as I advised yesterday, we would try to wind up a phase of the
testimou}^, and when we felt that was completed, then Mr. Hoffa would
be called, given the opportunity to explain or refute.
I did agree, and I think you were right about it, that instead of
putting Mr. Hoft'a on and asking him a few questions about something
where testimony had not been developed, and then developing the
testimony, I thought possibly you wei-e right about it. But that is
going to be the ruling of the Chair, and we are going to proceed
accordingly.
But I can see no valid objection whatsoever, as we conclude one
hearing or one phase of this particular series of hearings, for Mr.
Hoff'a to be given an opportunity to testify, and the committee will
want him to do so.
I shall undertake, however, not to do that any more often than the
committee feels that it should be done that way.
Your judgment and your advice will prevail, I am sure, with Mr.
Hoffa as to whether he remains here at all times. The committee will
not impose that requirement on him, of course.
But I think when testimony like that is being presented, being de-
veloped here, I think he should want to be present.
We will proceed.
Mr. Wii^iAMS. Mr. Chairman, for the record, and I will state this
in 10 seconds, may it be understood that the witness' continued pres-
ence here as of now is not a waiver of the objection that I have made
yesterday and today.
The Chairman. No, sir. I would not so construe it. His presence
here is by direction of the committee, and there is no waiver of any
right that counsel seeks to protect for him.
Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, are you going to reimburse the welfare
fund for the services of Mr. Embrel Davidson ?
Mr. Hoffa. Mr. Chairman, may I consult with my lawyer ?
13498 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Yes, sir.
(The witness conferred with his counseL)
Mr. HoFFA. In listening to testimony this morning, I can state to
the Chair and to the record, that any money that was paid to Davidson,
which I had no knowledge of, if it had any part of the fighting, fight
promotion, which I was a partner of Brennan of, I firmly believe the
money should be immediately returned to the health and welfare fund.
Mr. Kennedy. Therefore, you will take steps to return your por-
tion of that money ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Davidson said you were present at the time the
arrangements were made to place him on the payroll. Were you
present at that meeting with Mr. Davidson ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have met Davidson in the office. I don't rex^all any
such discussion. It may have been in the office. It is a large office.
I may have been busy on the phone, or something else.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember ?
Mr. HoFFA. I do not recall any conversation as such.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know at all that Mr. Davidson was on the
payroll, Mr. Hoff a?
Mr. HoFFA. I do not know exactly who is on the payroll of the wel-
fare fund from time to time, and I did not know that Mr. Davidson
was on the fund. To the best of my knowledge, it may have been
brought to my attention — I don't know — but I don't recall him ever
being on the fund.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember that at all ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. And you don't remember being present at the time
that he was placed on the payroll of the pension fund; is that right?
Mr. HoFFA. I say that I may have been in the office, but I may have
been occupied doing something else.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't have any recollection about this at all?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall it.
Mr, Kennedy. You don't recall it ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken steps to place anybody else on the
payroll of the fund, pension fund ?
Mr. HoFFA. Are you talking about employees ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. I may have from time to time recommended somebody
for a position.
Mr. Kennedy. "Who else have you placed on that?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't tell you at this moment. It isn't of that much
importance to remember the names.
Mr. Kennedy. It might not be important to you, but it is important
to us. Could you tell us who else you placed on the payroll ?
Mr. HoFFA. Offhand, I can't recall, and I can't even recall who is on
the payroll.
Mr. Kennedy. You can't remember anybody ?
Mr. HoFFA. I know some on the payroll.
Mr. Kennedy. Just give us the names of some of the people that
you recommended be j^laced on the payroll.
Mr. HoFFA. Well, that I can't do.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13499
Mr. Kennedy, Why not?
Mr. HoFFA. Because I don't recall who I may have recommended,
and it may have been brought to my attention by somebody else, and
they may have asked my opinion, and I may have made a comment
about it, but I just don't remember.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. DeLamalier, did you take steps to put him on
the payroll ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, I think that I recommended DeLamalier.
Mr. Kennedy. Now that I refreshed your recollection, you remem-
ber that ?
Mr. HoFTA. I recommended DeLamalier,
Mr. Kennedy. What is his role on the payroll, and what does he
do?
Mr, HoFFA, He is an investigator.
Mr. Kennedy. Who does he investigate, Mr. HofFa?
Mr. HoFFA. Wliatever the fund has him do.
Mr, Kennedy. Do you give him instructions to investigate anvone,
Mr.Hoifa?
Mr. HoFFA. Just a moment, please.
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. I would think that being a participant in a fund, and
if I requested them to do something, he would carry out the orders.
Mr. Kennedy. So you have him investigate certain things that you
are interested in ?
Mr. HoFFA. I would, if I thought it was necessary.
Mr, Kennedy, Do you have him investigate only in the interests
of the fund?
Mr. HoFFA. Not necessarily.
Mr. Kennedy. Some of the matters that you are personally in-
terested in ?
Mr. HoFFA. He could investigate anything I asked him to.
Mr. Kennedy. So he does that, and if there are any personal
charges against you, for instance, any criminal charges against you,
Mr. DeLamalier is often called upon to investigate that, is that right?
Mr. HoFFA. DeLamalier would investigate what he was told to
investigate.
Mr. Kennedy. And he can be told by you, is that right ?
Mr. HoFFA. I could suggest it, yes.
Mr, Kennedy. And he is paid by welfare fund?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. "\Yliat about Mr. Patrick ?
Mr, HoFFA, Wl-io is that ?
Mr, Kennedy, Mr, Patrick.
Mr. H^FFA. Mr. Patrick is an old man and he is on the payroll of
the welfare fund and he is very ill. and he does have little work but
occasionally I understand he does do some investigation, and I don't
know how much.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you give him instructions to do any investi-
gations ?
^ Mr. HoFFA, I may have asked Pat to do something from time to
time,
Mr, Kennedy, Is this always to deal with the welfare fund ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not necessarily, no.
13500 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr, Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, do you consider these welfare funds as
funds that you can use for your own personal purposes, to put people
on the payroll ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe that the trustees of the fund have the final word
in the operation of the fund, but I reserve the right, being a participant
in the fund to make recommendations from time to time, and also since
individuals who are working there I know, I wouldn't hesitate to ask
them to do things outside of the fund.
Mr. Kennedy. So you consider that this is a payroll that is available
in case you want to place someone on there to do some work for you
personally, is that right ?
Mr. PIoFFA. I do not consider any such thing.
Mr. Kennedy. You placed Mr. DeLamalier on there, on your recom-
mendation, and he does personal investigations for you.
Mr. HoFFA. Mr. DeLamalier primarily works for the welfare fund,
but I reserve the right and I have asked him from time to time to make
investigations for me.
Mr. Kennedy. Well ; there is one individual that has been placed on
the payroll, and he does personal investigations for you. What was
Mr, DeLamalier's position prior to the time that he was placed on the
payroll ?
Mr. PIoFFA. DeLamalier was, I believe, and I don't want to get held
to this, I believe DeLamalier was on the payroll of the insurance fund
for local 876. I am quite sure that is right.
Mr. Kennedy. What is that, the Retail Clerks ?
Mr, HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that the Retail Clerks in your own headquar-
ters?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you take steps or did you recommend him for
that position ?
Mr. HoFFA, Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. For his position with the Retail Clerks ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir ; I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Where did he work prior to that time ?
Mr, HoFFA. Detroit Police Department.
Mr. Kennedy. And
Mr. HoFFA. Just a moment, he didn't work for the Detroit Police
Department immediately prior to going on there, and he had retired,
and he had been in other business, and I think running a bar and I
don't know what else he did, and I think selling some real estate. But
primarily and principally his occupation had been during his life
a police officer.
Mr. Kennedy. Charges had been made against him just prior to his
resignation from the police department?
Mr. Hoffa. There had been some statements, and I don't believe
that the trial board found him guilty.
Mr. Kennedy. But he was requested to resign, was he ?
Mr. Hoffa. I wouldn't know that, and I don't believe it is true, but
I wouldn't want to state yes or no.
Mr. Kennedy. Who defended him before the trial board, the police
department ?
Mr. Hoffa. Just a moment, and I can find out for you.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13501
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. George Fitzgerald.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that during the period of time that he was
supposed to be investigating or in charge of the investigation of the
shooting of Walter Reuther ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe that was one of his assignments.
Mr. Kennedy. And the charge was that he had close relationship
with Mr. Santo Perrone, one of those who was alleged to be responsible
for the shooting of Walter Reuther.
Mr. HoFFA. I am not familiar with the charges enough to be able
to discuss those with you.
Mr. Kennedy. Does that sound reasonably correct, though, Mr.
Hoffa?
Mr. HoFFA. I would rather not discuss something I am not positive
about, after what happened here this morning.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Hoffa, are you going to take any steps
against Mr. Owen Bert Brennan for his role in this situation ?
Mr. Hoffa. Mr. Brennan will be requested to refund any moneys
concerning Davidson.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all ?
Mr. Hoffa. And the other charges will be discussed.
Mr. Kennedy, Well, you were here while the testimony developed,
and are you going to take some steps against Mr. Brennan yourself,
as international president of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Hoffa. I will discuss that.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all you are going to say ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is all I am going to say.
Mr. Kennedy. Are you going to make any recommendation that
charges be made against Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Hoffa. I will discuss the question and make my own decision,
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Mr. Finazza yourself?
Mr. Hoffa. I know Sam Finazza.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known Sam Finazza ?
Mr. Hoffa. Probably 10 or more years.
Mr. Kennedy. How about Quasarano?
Mr. Hoffa. I know Jimmy for about the same time.
Mr. Kennedy. And you say that you will discuss or consider charges
against Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Hoffa. I said that I will discuss it, and I will then make a deci-
sion after I have had time to analyze it and decide what to do.
Mr. Kennedy. Who will you discuss it with ?
Mr. Hoffa. The necessary ofRcials'of our union.
Mr. Kenendy. Who would they be ?
Mr. Hoffa. Various individual members of our executive board.
Mr. Kennedy. Is Mr. Owen Bert Brennan on your executive board ?
Mr. Hoffa. He is, indeed.
Mr. Kennedy. When you were here last time, Mr. Hoffa, you make
a statement in answer to a question of the chairman, and also in
answer to the question of Senator Ives, that you were going to make
an investigation of various individuals with criminal backgrounds
and criminal records, and I would like to ask you about that. Have
you made any investigation, for instance, of Owen Bert Brennan prior
to this time ?
13502 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA, I have known Owen Bert Brennan since I was a young
fellow, and I don't need to make any investigation of Bert Brennan,
because I know liim probably better than his own wife knows him.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Then you knew about his participation in the bomb-
ings during the 1930's ?
Mr. HoFFA. I know he was found innocent by a jury.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know of his arrests in comiection with tlie
bombings during the 1930's ?
Mr. HoFFA. 1 know he was accused but never indicted nor con-
victed, to the best of my knowledge, in any of those incidents.
Mr. Ivj:nnedy. And isn't it correct that lie was alleged at that time
to have received his instructions for those bombings from you ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. Kennedy. Now
Mr. HoFFA. Just a moment; I would like to have you state where
such information originated from, if you wnll, so we can be able to
answer the questions.
Mr. Kennedy. I just asked you a question. We have a report here
that you and he were the ones responsible for the bombings, and also
involved in the bombings was Mr. Herman Kierdorf . How long have
you known him?
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, I think in the interest of fairness,
if a charge like that is going to be mouthed in public, in this hearing
room, that the counsel include what the origin of this report is, and on
what information it is based. I don't think that a reckless charge
should be made unless Mr. Kennedy can support it by stating whom
he got the information from, and on what facts it was based.
Unless that is done, I think it should be stricken.
Mr. Kennedy. You say it is a reckless charge, and you don't know
that, Mr. Williams.
Mr. Williams. If it isn't, you can clear it up right away.
The Chairman. Just a moment. If counsel has information and
the committee does not want to reveal it at the moment, he may not
give it. But instead of saying that he has information, just ask the
question, did you do so and so, and did you know so and so, without
stating you have the information.
Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known Mr. Herman Kierdorf ?
Mr. HoFFA. I told you for a considerable number of years.
Mr. Kennedy. How long?
Mr. HoFFA. Better than 10 ; I will put it that way.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know him during the 1930's ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think so.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he arrested with Owen Bert Brennan in con-
nection with these bombings ?
Mr. HoFFA. There was a series of arrests at one time, and where a
large group, or a large number of teamsters w^ere arrested and quite
a few headlines, but I don't remember anything coming out of the
headlines or out of the arrests, and I think they were all released.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, would you answer the question, whether Mr.
Herman Kierdorf was involved in that ?
Mr. HoFFA. He could have been, and it is a long time ago, and I
don't remember who was picked up.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13503
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember that ?
Mr. HoFFA. No; you probably have the information from the
Detroit Police Department.
Mr. Kennedy. Was he known then as Mr. Herman Eichards?
Mr. HoFFA. Was who known ?
Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Herman Kierdorf known at that tune as
Mr. Herman Richards ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall him being called Herman Richards.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made
Mr. HoFFA. I have never called him that.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, have you made an investigation since
your last appearance when you stated on page 5240 and 5241 :
I said I would not turn my back on people, but I would make investigations
just for the sake of making a statement so I will make an investigation as I
stated and what I told Senator Ives will happen to determine whether I do or not.
I think when I say something that I keep my word.
Did you make an investigation of Mr. Herman Kierdorf?
Mr. Hoffa. I knew something of Kierdorf 's background, and Kier-
dorf has now resigned from the Teamsters Union, and he no longer
is affiliated with or on the payroll of the Teamsters Union, after the
first of this month.
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't answer the question, Mr. Hoffa. Did
you make an investigation of Mr. Herman Kierdorf?
Mr. Hoffa. I knew something of his background.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make an investigation of him ?
Mr. Hoffa. In my own mind, I analyzed the situation concerning
Kierdorf, and Mr. Kierdorf had a few more months — excuse me.
The Chairman. The question is. Did you make an investigation of
him ? and the point would be. Have you made an investigation of him
since you gave that testimony ?
Mr. Hoffa. No.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you request that he resign from the union?
Mr. Hoffa. Herman Kierdorf submitted his resignation at a sug-
gestion from myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, how did it happen that Mr. Herman
Kierdorf came into the Teamsters Union in the first place ? He had
been convicted in 1932 or 1933, and he spent some time in Leavenworth
prison, and then in 1940, after the arrest for bombing in connection
with Owen Bert Brennan, he was convicted for armed robbery. How
did it happen that he then ended up on the payroll of the Teamsters
Union ?
Mr. Hoffa. If I remember correctly, this is from memory quite a
while back, Herman Kierdorf worked for the CIO. The CIO had
the petroleum or cylinder gas drivers organized. A group of them
came over with us and to the best of my recollection, Kierdorf came
over with that group, if I remember correctly.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, he was in the penitentiary for armed robbery,
and he stated that he came to work for you within a short time after
coming out of the penitentiary ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is a different time.
Mr. Kennedy. Excuse me.
13504 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. I think that you will find the record that he worked for
us and left us and then came back.
Mr. Kennedy. He came to work for you after he spent some time in
Leavenworth for impersonating an officer, is that right I
Mr. HoFFA. When was that?
Mr. Kennedy. In 1932.
Mr. HoFFA. I would think that you are right.
Mr. Kennedy. So he came to work for you after that, then went
back to the penitentiary in 1941, was convicted of armed robbery,
and he got out of the penitentiary and then came to work for you again ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you explain to the committee why you were
so anxious to have somebody like Mr. Herman Kierdorf working as
a business agent and officer of the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. HoFFA. Mr. Kierdorf was a good organizer, and he did organiz-
ing, and I used Kierdorf for organizing pur])oses.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, there are a lot of people in Detroit tliat could
perform that service, are there not, Mr. Hoffa^ Those that do not
have this extensive criminal record, that you could have obtained for
that position ?
Mr. HoFFA. A lot of people who are available for any position, and
Mr. Kierdorf was an experienced organizer, and he was placed on the
payroll for that purpose
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Cfellan, Ives, Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. He had been arrested at least a dozen times. He had
been in the penitentiary twice. Don't you think you could have found
some better person to control the individuals that worked in your
union ?
]\Ir. HoFFA. We don't have anybody controlling anybody. Mr. Kier-
dorf's position was not controlling anybody. It was organizing.
Mr. Kennedy. As an officer, he was in charge of strikes on occasion.
He had some control over the members of the union. Isn't there any-
body that you could get in Detroit better than Mr. Herman Kierdorf
for that position ?
Mr. HoFFA. The fact is that I hired Kierdorf.
Mr. Kennedy. You can't give us any better explanation as to why
you hired him?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know of any better explanation.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you arrange with the penitentiary for him to
come to work for you ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe that I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you did ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know whether I did or not. I don't know
whether he wrote me a letter and asked whether there was a position
open or not. I cannot recall that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell the penitentiary that you could put him
to work ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think I was ever in touch with him. I don't re-
call that I was.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you were ?
Mr. Williams. If we are going to allow that type of question, Mr.
Chairman, you can't get in touch with the penitentiary, you have to
get in touch with responsible officers of the State in charge of prisoners.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13505
I think we are going to button down a question like that by asking the
witness if he is going to deny something, in the interest of fairness
counsel should direct his attention to what person he is alleged to
have communicated with, with respect to Kierdorf .
The Chairman. The Chair feels that the question can be better
framed when you ask about the penitentiary. Of course, it is a little
technical to say the officers of the penitentiary. But he may ask in
that way : Did you get in touch with the officers of the penitentiary
and request Mr. Kierdoi'f's release or make arrangements with them
for his release on the promise or with the understanding that you
would give him a job ?
It all comes down to the same thing. I will ask the question. Did
you get in touch with any officials of the penitentiary, or others,
responsible officers, and make arrangements with them to have Mr.
Kierdorf released from the penitentiary so that he might come to
work for you ?
Mr. Williams. What year was that, sir ?
The Chaieman. Give us the year, Mr. Kennedy,
Mr. Kennedy. The year that Mr. Kierdorf came to work for Mr.
Hoffa.
Mr. Williams. What year was that, sir ?
Mr. Kennedy. 1949.
I think Mr. Hoffa knows the answer.
The Chairman. 1949 or 1952, whatever the year was.
Mr. HoFFA. That is 12 years ago, 10 years ago if it was 1948. If I
would have been requested by anybody to intercede for him, I would
have, but I do not recall doing it.
The Chairman. Now, then, Mr. Kennedy, ask him the question, if
you have the officer there, ask him if he contacted that particular
person.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you contact anybody from the division of par-
dons and paroles in connection with Mr. Kierdorf coming to work for
the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't believe that I did. I may have. I don't know.
The Chairman. Ask him specifically, if you have the name of the
one that he did contact.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any conversations with Mr. Philip
Collins, the parole officer, at the division of pardons, paroles, and
probation, 109 State Office Building, Lansing, Mich. ?
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, this is what I object to, you see.
After all, the purpose of this hearing isn't to set up a perjury trap
for this or any other witness. I think manifestly in the interest of
fairness, when you are asking anyone something that took place 10
years ago, you call his attention to the names and the places and
the officers with whom he is alleged to have talked, so that in the
basic interest of elementary fairness
The Chairman. The Chair has just so ruled, and the question has
been asked accordingly, giving you the name.
Mr. Williams. It was not asked that way after you ruled, Mr.
Chairman.
The Chairman. It was asked that way, the last question. Read it.
Read the last question. It is asked in that manner. I instructed
counsel to give the name of the pei^on, and he understood and did so.
(The pending question, as requested, was read by the reporter.)
13506 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. The witness may answer.
Senator Curtis. May I inquire? Is this before the release of Mr.
Kierdorf or after the release ?
Mr. HoFFA. This is after. If he is referring to Collins, may I say
for your information, sir, I believe it would have to be after, because
I believe that Collins was his probation officer.
I think it was after he was released. I don't think it occurred dur-
ing the time he was in jail.
The Chairman. We can determine that. The question is, Did you
get in touch with this party named on the parole board, or the parole
officer, regarding the release of Mr. Kierdorf ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall getting in touch with him 10 years ago,
but I may have.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Is that before or after.
Get that into the record.
Mr. Kennedy. As far as Mr. Hoffa is concerned, our experience has
been that he will answer only questions that he knows we have definite
information on. On all other questions he says 'T don't remember" or
"I can't recall." That makes it very difficult. This is an important
matter dealing with Mr. Herman Kierdorf.
The Chairman. The Chair will rule that you may ask the question
"Did you do so and so" in general terms. If the witness says tlien he
does not remember or does not recall, then pursue it and ask him the
specific question.
Mr. Kennedy. I asked him the general question at the beginning.
Obviously we get into more specific questions.
I am asking general questions as we continue.
The Chairman. You may ask the general question, even if you have
no further information. You have a right to ask a general question,
if you have reason to believe the witness has some knowledge about it.
Wliere you do have specific information, you may proceed then to ask
h'm about the specific factors involved.
All right, let's proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you contacted or did you contact the division
of pardons, paroles and probation in connection with Mr. Herman
Kierdorf while he was still in the penitentiary ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe that I did. If you say it was Mr. Col-
lins, it must have been after, to the best that I can recall.
Mr. Kennedy. The document, Mr. Chairman, is the field report
dated August 12, 1948, and it is in connection with Mr, Herman Kier-
dorf. It is a report by Philip H. Collins, parole officer, and the
reason for the report is the preparole investigation.
The Chairman. What member of the staff procured this document?
Mr. Salinger. I did, Mr. Chairman. _
The Chairman. You have been previously sworn ?
Mr. Salinger. Yes.
The Chairman. What is this document which I hand to you ?
Mr. Salinger. This document is a copy of the field report of the
Michigan, State of Michigan, Division of Pardons, Paroles, and Pro-
bation. It was obtained from the files of the State of Ohio, Bureau
of Probation and Parole, Columbus, Ohio, and is a report which the
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13507
State of Michigan Division of Pardons, Paroles, and Probation sent
to the State of Ohio, prior to the parole of Mr. Kierdorf, indicating
what plans they had made for Mr. Kierdorf when he returned to the
State of Michigan.
The Chairman. That document may be made exhibit No. 9.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 9" for refer-
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee. )
Mr. Williams. May we see the document, Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Yes, you may. You may interrogate the witness
about its contents and his knowledge of it.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
(At this point, Senator Ervin entered the hearing room.)
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
The Chairman. Proceed. Mr. Counsel, interrogate him about this
document.
Mr. Kennedy. Does that refresh your recollection now, Mr. Hoff a ?
Mr. HoFFA. Mr. Chairman, after having an opportunity to read
the documents, it very conclusively shows that I did intervene for
Herman Kierdorf. That was 1949.
Mr. Kennedy. 1948, 1 believe.
Mr, HoFFA. Well, I just got that from Attorney Williams. Well,
1948 or 1949.
Mr. Kennedy. The records show, Mr. Chairman, that he, Mr. Kier-
dorf, was paroled on October 5, 1948, into tlie custody of police offi-
cials in Michigan where he w^as to be tried for armed robbery in that
State. But during the time that he had been in the Ohio Peniten-
tiary, the witnesses against Herman Kierdorf had died, so it was
impossible to try him.
The intervention or the interest of Mr. Hoffa in Mr. Kierdorf came,
according to these records, at least as early as 8-12-48, August 12,
1948, which is some 2 months prior to the time he was paroled.
The Chairman. Do you recall now, Mr. Hoffa, that you inter-
vened prior to the time that he was released from the penitentiary,
and sought his release ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Hoffa. Apparently the letter that was given to us is a letter
wrote to the parole board after he was released, trying to get his
parole revoked, according to Attorney Williams.
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. We will go into that later. But
the documents I showed you first, the top document, is dated August
12, 1948, and involves Herman Kierdorf, and it says :
Job : Mr. Hoffa, Teamsters Union, Detroit, Mich. Conditional offer of employ-
ment has been received from Mr. Hoffa, union head of the Teamsters Union in
this area. The worli would be semiexecutive, paying $75 a week as a beginning
wage.
Then subsequently, on July 5, 1949, you wrote a letter, or it would
appear that you wrote a letter, to Mr. Klofenstein, Chief, Department
of Public Welfare, Columbus, Ohio, and the letter reads :
Dear Mb. Klofenstein : I am writing to you in an effort to enlist your consid-
eration for the cancellation of the parole of Mr. Herman Kierdorf. At a recent
election of our council hoard, Mr. Kierdorf was unanimously elected to the
board at a salary of $12,000 a year. In our opinion, this man is and can be a
13508 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
valuable addition to our executive board. But owing to the fact that his parole
will not expire until some time in lS)r>2, his confirmation has been temporarily
withheld. It is my understanding that his record while he was in your care was
very excellent, and the local parole board here would like very much to see his
name cleared.
If you will consider the cancellation of Mr. Kierdorf's parole, I will personally
vouch for him and will greatly appreciate anything you can do for him.
Yours very sincerely,
James R. Hoffa, President.
So there are two matters here.
The Chairman. I^t's deal witli the first one. It appears that in the
first one, the report of the parole officer was to the effect that you had
tendered him a job, assured his employment at a salary of $75 a week
if they would parole him, is that correct ?
Mr. HoFFA, From the record it appears so, sir.
The Chairman. From the record
JNIr. HoiTA. From the record Mr. Kennedy just read, it appears so.
The Chairman. Then thereafter, within a year's time or less
Mr. Kennedy. July 1949.
The Chairman. He was paroled when, October ?
Mr. Kennedy. October 1948.
The Chairman. In October 1948 he was paroled. In July 1949 you
were seeking- to have his parole canceled. I suppose you meant by
canceled to have him released from any further obligation under the
parole board, so that he might be made — what was the position ?
Mr. Kennedy. A member of the executive board.
The Chairman. A member of your executive board of your union
at a salary of
:Mr. Kennedy. $12,000 a year.
The Chairman. $12,000 a year. Do you recall that incident? Do
you recall the letter ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't recall it, but my signature is on the letter. I
must have sent the letter.
The Chairman. All right. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Then Mr. Kierdorf came to work for your union,
and according to the testimony we developed last week was interesting
himself in obtaining accounts for a company that was owned by Mr.
Vincent Meli and Mr. Joe I^lir in Detroit, Mich. Can you tell us?
This was drawn to your attention, according to the testimony, in
October or November of 1957. Did you take any steps against Mr.
Kierdorf at that time ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't recall in total what I did, but I think that there
was a telegram sent to me concerning the complaint of somebody losing
a stop. I discussed the matter with Kierdorf, and he said he did not
intercede in getting the stop.
Having no other way of finding out the information, there was
nothing to do about it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you call the j)eople who sent the telegram ?
Mr. Hoffa. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you get in touch with them and see what
evidence they had ?
Mr. Hoffa. I very rarely get in touch with people making com-
plaints.
Mr. Kennedy. You took this man
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13509
The Chairman, Mr. Hoffa, is it not your policy Avlien serious com-
plaints are made, to try to find out the validity of them ?
Mr. HoFFA. I tried to find out from the only man that could have
told me, Senator.
The Chairman. Well, I don't know. If someone writes in com-
plaining about something and you talk to the man complained about
and say he is the only man he knows, maybe the fellow who complained
knows, too.
Mr. HoFFA. From reading the testimony that he gave here, ap-
parently he was not positive. Senator.
The Chairman. Well, if that is the character of investigations you
make on complaints, it is no wonder — —
Mr. PIoFFA. On that type of complaint, sir.
The Chairman. Senator Ervin.
Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, it is possible Mr. Hoffa has a prece-
dent for that in the conduct of the Pennsylvania Dutchman who was
appointed a justice of the peace. The first case came up before him.
Instead of calling the witnesses for the prosecution to the stand
he looked over at the defendant and asked the defendant, "Are
you guilty or not guilty?'' The defendant said, "I am not guilty."
He said, "Well, if you are not guilty, go on home. If you are not
guilty, you have no business being here in court."
The Chairman. Senator Ives.
Senator Ives. I would like to ask Mr. Hoffa a question very pertinent
to this matter now before us. As Mr. Hoft'a undoubtedly knows, or
very likely knows, under the terms of the Kennedy-Ives bill, rehiring
or hiring in such a way as he did Mr. Kierdorf back in 1949 would
be illegal, if it had been a law at that time. A question I would like
to ask Mr. Hoffa is this : Is that one of the reasons you are opposed tO'
this bill?
Mr. Hoffa. I am opposed to any bill that deprives a man from
making a living in any occupation.
Senator Ives. I am not going to get into the bill itself. I don't
want to get into that. I want to ask you that question, and the answer
you gave is not an answer.
Mr. Hoffa. It isn't an answer ?
Senator I^^<:s. It is not.
Mr. Hoffa. Then I did not understand your question, then, Senator.
Senator Ives. I told you that under the terms of that bill, had it
been in effect in 1949, you could not have taken him back or hired
him or put him in there, in that executive capacity, in that executive
committee or executive board you were putting him on — wasn't that
what it was, at $12,000?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't think he ever reached that salary.
Senator Ives. That is what you were proposing, wasn't it ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think that was the discussion.
Senator Ives. Yes, I gathered that. All right. You could not have
done that, had that bill been a law at that time. Is that one of the
reasons you are opposed to it? It isn't just a question of earning a
living. That has nothing to do w^ith it. It is a question of being
given a job in a union of an important nature in an executive capacity.
Is that one of the reasons ?
21243— 58— pt. 36 16
13510 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFTA. One of the reasons — that is one of the reasons that I
objected, because it sets up a distinction between working for a union
and an employer.
Senator Ives. Well, I don't follow that at all. It does not follow
at all. It is a nonsequitur, entirely ; you have answered my question,
however.
That is one of the reasons, isn't it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I do not believe there are two classes of Americans,
and that is my reason. I think all Americans are equal.
Senator Ives. There are no two classes of Americans at all.
Mr. HoFFA. You are trying to make them. Senator, in my humble
opinion.
Senator Ives. That is the reason you are opposed to the bill, one
of the reasons ?
Mr. HoFFA. One of the reasons is correct.
Senator I^^Es. Because we have that provision in it ?
Mr. HoFFA. One of the reasons is correct.
Senator 1yy.s. All right. Thank you.
Mr. Kennedy. My. Hoffa, we talked about Herman Kierdorf . Wliat
about Mr. Frank Kierdorf, who was also
Senator Curtis. May I ask one question before we leave the first
Kierdorf ?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. During what period did Mr. Kierdorf, the one
we have been discussing, work for the CIO ?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, it was in the 19o0's. I can't tell you the exact
year.
Senator Curtis. It was before he was employed by the Teamsters ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right. He was in the CIO — carried a CIO book
The first time I met Kierdorf was when we took over the union.
Senator Curtis. And that was prior to his first employment ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct, sir.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, I was asking you about Mr. Frank Kier-
dorf, who was, until his death today, a business agent for local 332
up in Flint, Mich. He also, according to the testimony, was in the
penitentiary for armed robbery and came out of the penitentiaiy to
this job as a business agent of local 332. We have had some testi-
mony about him; I would like to ask you, in accordance with your
statement before the committee last year, if you made an investigation
or had made an investigation of him ?
Mr. HoFFA. Just a moment.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. I checked into Frank Kierdorf 's record. I found out
that the offense he had committed was not connected with the union.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, did you arrange for him to come to work
for local 332 after he came out of the penitentiary for armed robbery ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe, if my memory serves me right, that
he went to work for 332 right after he came out.
Did he ? You must have the records.
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. Wasn't it a couple of years later ?
Mr. Kennedy. According to the testimony of his uncle, Herman
Kierdorf, he came to work for local 332 shortly after he got out of
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13511
the penitentiary, and Mr. Herman Kierdorf further testified that he
talked to you about it and you put Mr. Frank Kierdorf to work.
Mr. HoFFA. He may have been on right after, but I thought it was
about 2 years. I say that Frank Kierdorf — we needed an opening,
needed an experienced man, and Kierdorf was recommended for the
position.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliy, Mr. Hoffa ? Wasn't there in the city of Flint,
Mich., another man that could serve the position of business agent
for the local other than someone who just came out of the peni-
tentiary?
Mr. 'Hoffa. We needed an experienced organizer in the position;
there is plenty of men in Flint, capable of handling this job.
Mr. Kennedy. Is it a good training to be serving time in the pen-
itentiary for armed robbery, to serve as a business agent for a local ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, sir ; it isn't.
Mr. Kennedy. You said you needed a good business agent.
Mr. HoFFA. I am very certain that Frank Kierdorf, working with
Herman, had experience prior to going into the penitentiary. I am
quite sure of that.
Mr. Kennedy. The only experience we can find, Mr. Hoffa, is the
experience in armed robbery.
Mr. HoFFA. Well-
Mr. Kennedy. Why did you employ him, then ?
Mr. HoFFA. I told you, sir.
The Chairman. Let me ask you, Mr. Hoffa :
Did you have any record or information that he had served as a
business agent or organizer before he went to the penitentiary ?
Mr. HoFFA. No. I believe Herman told me that he had worked
with him.
The Chairman. You were looking for experienced and competent
organizers, agents. I would just like to have the evidence, if there is
anything to substantiate it, to show that he had that experience and
was successful, was trained, was a desirable man by reason of that ex-
perience and training and his accomplishments for the position. Do
you have any such evidence ?
Mr. Hoffa. I have no such evidence, sir, except what I was told by
Kierdorf.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, we had some testimony on Mr. Kierdorf 's
activities back a year ago, in October and November of 1954, when it
was testified that he was working with Mr. George Kamenow, of the
Shefferman organization, and was shaking down small employers up
in Flint, Mich. Did you investigate or look into that ?
Mr. Hoffa. Are you talking about Frank ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Hoffa. I discussed the matter with Frank, and he flatly denied
it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make any other investigation of it ?
Mr. Hoffa. Wliat other investigation would I possibly make ?
Mr. Kennedy. Well, now, you told Senator Ives that what you did
as far as investigations were concerned of these individuals would show
whether you kept your word or not.
Mr. Hoffa. I have kept my word by the fact that I did what I
thought was necessary investigation.
13512 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr, Kennedy. You talked to Frank Kierdorf ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Let me just read to yon from page 6428, as to the ac-
tivities of Mr. Frank Kierdorf. I will ask Mr. Salinger to read it.
This is the testimony of Mr. Skaff, a small-business man in Flint,
Mich.
Mr. Salinger (reading) :
The overridins theme in the entire incident is that we were prepared to have
a vote of the employees involved from the very first day that we were ap-
proached by the Teamsters. They were unwilling to have a vote. They wanted
to organize from the top and have us sign and not have a vote of the employees.
The Chairman. Who wanted you to do that?
Mr. Skaff. The Teamster business agent, Mr. Frank Kierdorf.
The Chairman. He wanted you to sign without having a vote of the em-
ployees ?
Mr. Skaff. That is correct. So on February 22, 1956, they started picketing
our store.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that the first time you had heard from them, or had you
originally?
Mr. Skaff. No, we talked, and their demanding recognition and our refusing
recognition, all during the month of February. On February 22, the picketing
started.
Senator Mundt. Prior to that time had you told the business manager you
were willing to have a vote ?
Mr. Skaff. Many, many times we expressed our desire to have a vote.
Senator Mundt. Prior to the time of the picketing?
Mr. Skaff. Prior to the time of picketing.
Mr. Kennedy. Then it goes on to state tliat the picket line was
set up.
"Would you just read this [indicating] ?
Mr. Salinger (reading) :
Approximately on March 20, were two stink bombs thrown into the window of
my mother's home in an effort to make us succumb to their demands, at a cost
of about $1,500, and several months of misery. On March 28 or thereabouts,
the front \^indow of our store was broken and a fire was started in the store
of unknown origin.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you read over here, on page 6432 ?
Mr. Salinger (reading) :
On April 4, we had 2 men out, 1 by the name of Bill Moore, and he was standing
beside his truck waiting for direction as to where to pick up his merchandise,
and there was a vicious attack by 4 or 5 men who hit him with a sharp object,
as the doctor called it at the hospital, and knocked him to the ground. Then
they spun around the railroad station attempting to run over him and he rolled
under his truck, and when we took him up to the hospital he had 20 stitches in
his head and a very serious, brutal attack was made on him.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there any identification of the car or automobile at that
time?
Mr. Skaff. Yes, sir ; the car was recognized by railroad employees, the license
number was taken, and it was a car owned by Local 332 of the Teamsters in
Flint.
Mr. Kennedy. What investigation did you make after this testi-
mony was developed before the committee ?
Mr. HoFFA. I discussed his entire testimony with Mr. Kierdorf, and
he said it was not true.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you contact anybody, any of these small-busi-
ness men that were involved in this ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, sir ; I did not.
Mr. KJENNEDY, You did not do any of that ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13513
Mr. HoFFA. No, sir, because I do not believe Mr. Skaff would have
been very acceptable to me talking to him, since he is very antiunion.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the other businessmen ?
The Chairman. Mr. Hoffa, you say he would be antiunion ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
The Chairman. Well, one has a right to be opposed to unions. The
fact that he may be does not necessarily brand him as one unworthy
of belief. If he gets hurt, even though he may oppose a union, if he
gets hurt illegally, by acts of the union and union representatives, is
that no concern of yours ?
Do you condone and approve of such acts ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't condone or approve of it, but there is police
departments who have investigative powers in Flint, Mich.
The Chairman. So you feel no responsibility ?
Mr. Hoffa. What would I do about it, Senator ?
The Chairman. Well, if you found that your agents were lacting
that way, you could do plenty about it, and do it fast.
Mr. Hoffa. If they deny it, what could I do. Senator ?
The Chairman. You don't have to believe their denial, if the other
facts absolutely sustain the position that they did it.
You apparently seem to have no concern in these cases. If they go
out and beat them up or blow up their buildings or something, it is
all right with you, if the fellow who is supposed to have done it tells
you he didn't do it. You stop there. I can't understand it, unless
that is your policy and pliilosophy.
Mr. Hoffa. Well, it isn't my policy nor philosophy. Neither is it
to try to make people guilty who claim they are innocent, until there
is proof positive.
The Chairman, You don't seek any proof to find out whether they
are doing it or not, and attaching the blame to your miion.
It is no matter whether you favor unions or want to belong to a
union or don't want to belong to a union, people have a right to live
in peace in this country and not be subjected to assaults, vandalism,
and attacks. I can't understand your position having no concern and
no interest, and doing nothing to try and stop it.
Mr. Hoffa. I don't think there is any difference between your views
and mine. Senator.
The Chairman. There is a whole lot of difference between your
action and mine if I occupied your jDosition, I can assure you of that.
I^t's proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Then according to the report out of Michigan over
the last 24 hours, he was involved in an attempt to ignite or set on
fire some places of business of other employers, Mr. Hoffa.
Do you know anything about that ?
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, I think this is where we ought to
have the basis for that report. We are playing with a dead man's
reputation. I did not know that he died. But I understand from
counsel that he died. Now we are talking about him in terms of an
act of arson, as I understand it. If there is a report on this dead man
having committed arson, I think the dictates of decency would require
that we have what the report is based on.
The Chairman. I think it is in the press, isn't it ?
13514 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. It is, from the attorney general of the State of
Michigan.
The Chairman. He is being investigated on that basis by the attor-
ney general. The question is: Do you know anything about that
activity ?
Mr. HoFFA. Positively nothing.
Mr. I^nnedy. You did not give any instructions of any kind that
there would be any arsons committed of any of these employers ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not.
Mr. I^NNEDY. W^iat about Mr. Herman Kierdorf, who ended up,
according again to the reports in the newspapers, where he brought
a gun with a silencer on it to his neighbors' home.
Mr. HoFFA. How would I know about that ?
Mr. Kennedy. These are the people you employ. These are the
people you brought out of the penitentiary to work for you.
The Chairman. Just ask him if he knows.
Mr. KJENNEDY. These are the people whose words you take. Do
you know anything about that?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. And he also delivered some telephones, extra tele-
phones, to his neighbor's home. Do you know anything about that?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Let me ask you about another man. What about
Mr. Lawrence Welch ?
Mr. HoFFA. What about him ?
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make an investigation of Mr. Hariy Welch
after the testimony before the committee? He has been convicted of
a crime against nature.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. I discussed this matter with Welch. He told me it
happened during his time in the Army wlien he came back from the
frontlines, and he has done nothing to the contrary since he came
back. I think he was 17 years old at that time.
]Mr. Kennedy. Did you investigate his activities as they were sworn
to before this committee regarding his activitias as a business agent
of local 985 ?
Mr. HoFFA. To what degree ?
Mr. Kennedy. Did you investigate them ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I didn't know there was anything to be investi-
gated.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you read the testimony ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I didn't read the testimony.
Mr. Kennedy. You say yesterday. "I read every bit of the testi-
mony and I read it word for word." That is what you swore to
yesterday.
Mr. HoFFA. I read the testimony but not concerning any investiga-
tions, and I simply went through the testimony in each individual
case, but what was there in there that I was to investigate?
Mr. Kennedy. Did you read the testimony regarding the activities
of Mr. Lawrence Welch ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have gone through each book that has been presented
to me concerning Teamsters and I saw nothing in there unless you
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13515
can advise me now other than the incident you mentioned concerning
Welch.
Mr. IvENNEDY. The testimony before the committee is that he was
picketing and he established pickets at a place of business in order
to get business for a friend of liis name Ziggy Snyder who operated
a nonunion car-wash. He was also a business agent for your local, and
he also has a long criminal record.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think that is the testimony, and I can't recall it
offhand, but I don't think that is the testimony. I think someone made
that statement but I don't think Welch made that statement.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ask Welch about it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir, and Welch said he didn't do it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make any further investigation ?
Mr. HoFFA. Where would I investigate ?
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make any further investigation?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. The only thing you did is you went to Mr. Welch ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Senator Ervin. How did it happen that you went to Mr. Welch to
ask him about something that you swore just a moment ago that you
never heard of and it wasn't in the record ?
Mr. HoFFA. I didn't say that.
Senator Ervin. Didn't you say just a minute ago that the only thing
that reflected on Welch in the record was the fact that in his youth
he had committed a crime against nature and there was nothing else
derogatory about him in the record ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think the statement was that in the record there was
a complaint by other indviduals and not Welch, but the committee com-
plained that Welch had been involved in some situation.
Senator Ervin. Suppose you go back and let me see if I was wrong.
Wait a minute and let us read the record.
The Chairman. The crux of this particular inquiry at the moment
is that you told the committee last year that you were going to make
an effort to clean up some of these conditions we had found and that
record, of course, was public information, and I am sure that you read
the record or you had it called to your attention. The purpose of this
inquiry at the moment is to ascertain what you have done and how
you go about trying to clean up and find out what is wrong.
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I have here in front of me, while looking for
the record, to the best of our ability, a check on the individuals you
mentioned. I am trying to give it to you from this sheet of paper.
The Chairman. What is that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am trying to give it to you from this sheet of paper,
the information that you are asking for today.
The Chairman. All right; if you have any notes or memorandums
or information that will help you give the facts, proceed with them.
You may refer to anything and any note that you have or any docu-
ment or any memorandum refreshing your memory.
(Whereupon, the reporter read the previous testimony.)
Mr. HoFFA. These were people who made statements concerning
Welch, and it was not Welch himself.
13516 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Williams. Senator Ervin, there is no question that you are
right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to Mr. Welch about it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes; I talked to Mr. Welch about the situation that
was revealed at the hearing. I talked to Welch about his activities
with the union.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you talk to him about?
Mr. HoFFA. Whether or not he had been involved in anything that
was illegal in the union.
Mr. Kennedy. Specifically, what did you talk to him about?
Mr. HoFFA. T\niether or not he had been involved in anything, and
notliing specific.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss this specific thing mentioned here in
the transcript?
Mr. HoFFA. No. Specifically, was he involved in anything illegal
in the union ?
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't ask him any questions about these things
that were in the transcript ?
Mr. HoFFA. They alleged that he did certain things, of which if it
were true would probably be illegal, and so I asked him whether or
not he had done anything illegal, and he said, "No."
]\Ir. Kennedy. Did you discuss witli him specific things mentioned
in the transcript ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not specifically, but in general.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you go into any other source to find out the true
inf (M'mation on it ?
Mr. HoFFA. No: I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the total investigation that you made?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you just read the pertinent part of the
transcript there regarding activities of Mr. Harry Welch, who has
been convicted of a felony ?
Mr. Salinger. This was the testimony of Mr. Neff, manager of the
parking garage in Detroit, on page 5525—
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell u.s whether you were approached by any union
official to change the place where you were taking the cars?
Mr. Neff. I was called by Mr. Welch.
Mr. Kennedy. Identify Mr. Welch.
Mr. Neff. He is business agent for the Teamsters and I don't know what
local he is with. He called and asked me if I could send my cars.
Mr. Kennedy. Local 985?
Mr. Neff. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. That is William Buffalino's local?
Mr. Neff. I believe so.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Welch is a business agent and he came to ask you to change
the place you were sending your cars?
Mr. Neff. He said he had a friend who was starting up a car-wash, and would
like to have those cars sent over to him.
Mr. Kennedy. Where did he say he wanted you to send your cars?
Mr. Neff. He didn't say the exact name of the place, and he said it would
start up on Temple and Cass.
Mr. Kennedy. Is it the Fort Wayne Manor Auto Wash in that area?
Mr. Neff. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Wasn't it later established that a picket line was
placed in front of this other place of business, and that the place that
Mr. Welch wanted this gentleman, Mr. Neff, to send his cars was a non-
union shop ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13517
Mr. Salinger. That is right.
Mr. Kp:nnedy. Did you look into that at all ?
Mr. HoFFA. I found that you are right. I understand that you were
right, and Ziggy Snyder was nonunion.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you take disciplinary action against Mr. Welch
for doing that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. I want to ask you about another individual, Mr.
Glenn Smith, who is the president of local 515 in Chattanooga, Tenn.,
as well as president of Joint Council 87, which covers the whole State
of Tennessee and part of Kentucky.
Did you make an investigation of Mr. Glenn W. Smith ?
Mr. HoFFA. I understand there have been charges filed against
Smith, and also understand he is under indictment.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make an investigation of Mr. Glenn W.
Smith?
Mr. HoFFA. No; I didn't, because — or I said I didn't but I asked
whether he had been arrested, and I was told he had been arrested,
and I made no other investigation because he has charges now against
him, and he is now indicted.
Mr. Kennedy. You haven't taken any action against him yourself ?
Mr. HoFFA. The union will follow the regular constitutional pro-
cedures.
Mr. Kennedy. Is he still in office ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes ; I believe he is.
Mr. Kennedy. Now ; he has admitted, Mr. Hoif a, that he paid $20,-
000 of union funds for the purpose of fixing a case in which he was the
defendant. That was the $20,000 that was paid back in 1952 of
Teamsters Union funds that were paid in connection with fixing a case.
Have you taken any action against him in that matter ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I haven't, because there are charges pending against
him, which will be heard in the regular constitutional procedure of our
constitution.
Mr. Kennedy. You can remove him under the constitution?
Mr. HoFFA. I can remove him after a hearing ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You could remove him now ?
Mr. HoFFA. Only in the case of an emergency.
Mr. Kennedy. Don't you feel it is an emergency when a man admits
he has paid $20,000 of union members' dues money for the purposes
of fixing a case ? Isn't that sufficient for you, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Hoffa. There are charges filed, and as the due process takes
place under the constitution we will deal with it.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, isn't that sufficient for you to take action ?
The man admitted it under oath, and he admitted paying $20,000 of
union members' dues money? Isn't that sufficient for you to take
action, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Hoffa. I did not take action, and I will not take action until
the decision on the charges has been heard.
The Chairman Mr. Hoffa, this is almost beyond comprehension,
that a man will come in and admit that he took $20,000 of union money
and state it under oath before a legal or properly constituted tribunal,
the senate of a sovereign state, acting as a trial court on an impeach-
ment, and makes that statement, under oath, that he took union dues
money and used it to fix a criminal case against him to keep from being
13518 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
convicted or going to the penitentiary, as likely he would have had
he been convicted. Now, do you mean to say that as president of this
great international union that doesn't cause you any concern to act,
to protect your membership ?
Mr. HoFFA. Certainly it is disturbing news, but since there are
charges filed, and the due process will take care of the question of that.
The Chairman. Everyone we have asked you about here, what you
did to investigate, you said, "I asked them, and they say 'No,' and I
just accept it."
Now, when a man says, "Yes, I took $20,000 out of union dues
money to fix a case," he says, "Yes," and not when somebody else says
it, and says it under oath, will you act on that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I will act on the charges that are filed.
The Chairman. When will you act on it?
Mr. HoFFA. As they come to my ofSce, through due process of the
constitution.
The Chairman. Have any charges been started toward your office?
Mr. HoFFA. Charges, I believe
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. IToFFA. I believe what we can recall quickly, they are at the
joint council level, and the next step will be the international union.
Mr. Kennedy. But he is president of the joint council?
Mr. HoFFA. He would not be able to hear his own case, and the
vice president would take the chair and fill the vacancy.
Mr. Kennedy. He is president of local No. 515 and he is president
of the joint council at this very moment ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kenneedy. And you have the power to get rid of him, and you
haven't taken any step along those lines; is that correct?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Senator Ives. I want to interpose something there, Mr. Chairman.
I am not going to do this now, but my name has been mentioned here
this afternoon, and before this hearing is over I am going to repeat
out of the record of a year ago, or a year ago this month, when Mr.
Hoffa was before us the last time, exactly what he said and exactly
the pledge that he gave in connection with running a decent, orderly
union. Do you remember those questions I asked ?
Mr. HoFFA. I certainly do, and I believe we have a decent orderly
union.
Senator I^^:s. I don't think in this instance you have. This is a
direct violation of what we were talking about. Perhaps we didn't
understand the matter the same way, though I certainly think that
we did understand the matter the same way, but I will read it before
we get through.
Senator Curtis. My question has been partly answered in the last
colloquy, but I wanted to make sure, when Mr. Hoffa referred to
charges pending, are you referring to charges in the courts or charges
within the union?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I believe he is indicted in the courts, and also
there are charges from the union.
Senator Curtis. Tell me just briefly what are the mechanics of
bringing a charge in the union ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13519
Mr. HoFFA. Charges are filed and they first go to the local executive
board, and if it isn't adjudicated there to everybody's satisfaction,
they have appeal to the joint council, and from the joint council to
the international union and if they are not satisfied with the interna-
tional union's decision they have a right of appeal to the monitors
and before making a decision on the executive board we discuss the
matter and consult with the monitors, before malting a final decision.
Senator Curtis. To your knowledge have the monitors gone into
these cases that were presented in previous hearings, and have been
mentioned today?
Mr. HoFFA. Excuse me.
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. We are working with the monitors on it. Mr. Wil-
liams is handling the monitors from our end of the union, and Mr.
Williams is working with the monitors on these particular cases.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a copy of the constitution there?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Williams. I think that I have one.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairaian, this is page 18, section 5, entitled:
Power of general president to appoint trustees and duties and obligations of lo-
<;al unions under trusteeship.
I would like to have Mr. Salinger read that section into the record,
if I may ?
The Chairman. A copy of the constitution was furnished by the
witness or by his comisel, is that correct ?
Mr. I^JENNEDY. That is correct.
The Chairman. All right, the section may be read into the record.
Mr. Salinger (reading) :
Section 5 (a). If the general president has or receives information which
leads him to believe that any of the officers of a local union or other subordinate
bodies are dishonest or incompetent or that such organizations are not being
conducted in accordance with the constitution and laws of the international
union, or for the benefit of the membership or are being conducted on such a
manner as to jeopardize the interests of the international union, he may appoint
a temporary trustee to take charge and control of the affairs of such local union
Or other subordinate bodies : Provided, hoicever, That before the appointment
of such temporary trustee the general president shall set a time and place for
a hearing for the purpose of determining whether such temporary trustees shall
be appointed : And further provided. That where in the judgment of the general
president an emergency situation exists within the local union or other sub-
ordinant body, the temporary trustee may be appointed by or to such hearing
but such hearing shall then commence within 30 days and the decision made
within 60 days after the appointment of such temporary trustee.
Mr. Kennedy. In all of these cases, Mr. Hoffa, you could step in
and remove these officers, could you not ?
Mr. HoFFA, In an emergency ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't feel this was an emergency ?
Mr. Hoffa. The question of emergency is one that in my opinion
should not place a local union in trusteeship and involve all of the
members because of some one person. When there can be charges filed
against the person and there are charges, and when I get it from Mr.
Williams.
13520 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. It says here even without an emergency —
If the general president has or receives information wliich leads him to believe
that any of the officers of a local union or other subordinate body are dishonest
or incompetent —
and then it goes on —
that he may appoint a temporary trustee to take charge and control of the affairs
of such local union or other subordinate body : Provided, however. That before
the appointment of such temporary trustee, the general president shall set a
time and place for hearing for the purpose of determining whether such tem-
porary trustee shall be appointed : And further provided. That where in the judg-
ment of the general president an emergency situation exists within the local
union or other subordinant body.
Certainly where there was an admission of the use of union funds for
these purposes, certainly a situation has arisen that you could take and
should take such action, Mr. Hoffa ? Do you not think so ?
Mr. Hc^FFA. I believe that the action taken will clear up the situa-
tion in due time.
INfr. Kennedy. What about Mr. Boiling, H. L. Boiling, secretary of
local 515 of the Teamsters Union in Chattanooga, Tenn.? He was
convicted in 1939 of illegal transportation of alcohol, and given an
18 months' sentence, .and $200 fine.
He was indicted for conspiracy to violate the income-tax laws with
Glenn W. Smith, and he was linked with the violence in our hearings.
Have you made an investigation of him ?
Mr. HoFFA. Excuse me ; I am trying to find out something ; will you
please?
nVifiTPSS consulted with counsel.)
Mr. Hoffa. I c;in't recall but Attorney Williams and myself seem
to recall that the^-e are the same charges against Boiling as against
Smith, but we will have to check that and find out.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made any independent investigation of
him yourself ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I don't believe that I did. I think that I talked to
Boiling at the southern conference but insofar as an investigation was
concerned T don't believe that I did, because the record regarding the
money as far as the testimony was concerned was public knowledge in
your record.
ISfr. Kennedy. Did you take any steps against him ?
Mr. Hoffa. The same procedure will be handled as against Smith ?
Mr. Kennedy. Have vou preferred anv charges against H. L.
Boiling?
Mr. Hoffa. No ; I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken any steps against Mr. W. A. Smith
who hns b'^en arrested some 14 times, and who is involved or tied up
closely with the violence before the committee ? He is a business agent
of local 327 in Nashville, Tenn. Have 3'ou taken any steps against
him ?
Mr. Hoffa. I have taken no action, and he is on appeal regarding
a sente^Tce.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made an investigation of him ?
IMr. Hoffa. There was a court case.
Mr. Kennedy. PTave you made any investigation of him ?
Mr. Hoffa. And the question concerning Smith was a matter of
newspaper articles, and I read the articles, and I have talked to Smith,
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13521
if I am not mistaken, concerning it on the telephone, and since he has
been convicted there wasn't anything to investigate. If he is found
guilty he will be out.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been convicted, and he has been sentenced to
2 to 10 years.
Mr. HoFFA. He is out on appeal.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been arrested 14 times prior to that, and he
had a number of convictions, and he has just been sentenced from 2 to
10 years and he is still business agent of local 327, and you haven't
taken any steps against him ?
My. Hoffa. You are right.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made an investigation of it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think it was a matter of discussion on the phone with
Smith and I realize he is under charges, and they were waiting for the
appeal.
Mr. Kennedy. Once again I call to your attention that you said
when you appeared before the committee, how good your word was
would depend on what kind of an investigation you made.
Mr. Hoffa. I think the investigation was all that could have been
made. No matter how thoroughly you investigated, you wouldn't
have found out anything else.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Hoffa, we had a good deal of sworn testi-
mony before this committee, regarding these individuals Mr. Boiling
and Mr. Glenn W. Smith have admitted to the $20,000. Mr. W. A.
Smith has just been convicted and sentenced from 2 to 10 years, and
no steps of any kind have been taken by you.
Mr. HoFFA. I think the man has a right of appeal, to the final
highest court in the country.
The Chairman. Mr. Hoffa, from tliis testimony do you know any
other conclusions that fairminded men, impartial, can draw otlier
than the fact that you surround yourself with criminals in the course
of the administration of the affairs of the Teamsters Union, that you
keep them there, and intend to keep them there if you can have your
way about it ?
Mr. HoFFA. This situation will clear up. I am sure of that.
Senator Erwn. Is that your best answer ?
Mr. HoFFA. The situation will clear itself up, I have been president
6 months, and I have been confronted with many problems much more
serious tlian this particular problem, and I have attempted to work
them out, and as I get to these problems and I have sufficient time I
will work these problems out.
(At this point the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Ervin, Church, Kennedy, Curtis.)
Senator Ervin. Mr. Hoffa, there is one thing that I cannot under-
stand. I can understand why anybody would try to rehabilitate a
man, and I am certainly sympathetic with the idea of giving people
employment when they are released from prison.
But the thing I can't understand is your action in respect to Herman
Kierdorf, the evidence was that he 'falsely impersonated a Federal
officer, and served a term in the Federal prison at T^avenworth for
so doing. Then the evidence is that after he had done that, he was
convicted of armed robbery in Ohio, and sentenced to serve a term of
not less than 10 or more than 25 years in the State prison of Ohio.
13522 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Now, a man who commits armed robbery is a man who steals. In
otherwords, he has the heart of a thief. And a man who resorts to
armed robbery is a potential murderer, because experience has shown
that men who engage in robberies will not hesitate to kill to prevent
apprehension.
As a consequence of that, I think that virtually ever}^ State in the
American union has a statute making it murder in the first degree for
a man to kill another while perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate
a robbery. The evidence of this committee is uncontradicted about
those matters.
It appears here that before Herman Kierdorf was released from
the prison, that you offered him employment, and I would not criticize
you for offering him employment. But the thing I don't understand
is why you take a man of that character and bring him out of prison,
and not only give him employment, but ]3ut him almost innnediately
in a position to exercise authority, over honest men, members of the
union, and why a short time after his release you make him a business
agent, as I recall the testimony; then you want to put him on the
executive board at a salary of $12,000 a year to exercise authority over
honest men; and then when outsiders, people of the general public,
make a complaint to you in the form of a telegram about his conduct,
you not only do nothing about it but you don't even have the courtesy
to make a reply to the people that are protesting to you about the
conduct of one of the agents of your union.
That is something that just exceeds my comprehension. I cannot
understand how such things could be done by a man who has the tre-
mendous power and responsibility which you have as the head of the
Teamsters Union, or as head of a conference of the Teamsters Union.
I cannot understand why you have such an apparently calloused
indifference to the protests of the public about this conduct of this ex-
convict.
The evidence before this committee would seem to justify the infer-
ence that after you took him out of prison and gave him a position of
authority over other men, he practiced what the law calls extortion.
"When protest is made to you about some of his acts you pay no atten-
tion whatever to the protest and don't even reply to the protestants.
I could miderstand how a man out of the kindness of his heart would
give employment to an ex-convict, but why he takes an ex-convict, an
ex-felon, convicted of such serious crimes, and gives him a position
of authority over honest men. You suggested that you op])ose the
Kennedy-Ives bill because it prohibits the holding of union offices by
ex-convicts who had been convicted of felonies until their civil rights
are restored. I belong to the legal profession. If a man in my pro-
fession or Mr. Williams' profession, is convicted of a felon}^ he is
denied the right to practice his profession. He can't even follow his
way of making a living that he was trained for.
For the life of me, I cannot understand how a man who heads a
union of 1,500,000 dues-paying members would take a man, who has
been convicted of crimes that involve stealing, out of prison and put
him at the head of a local union to exercise authority over honest men.
Then when people of the public protest to him about the conduct of
that man, he makes no effort to investigate the alleged misconduct, and
makes no inquiry of anybody except the man accused of being guilty
of misconduct.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13523
(At this point, Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing
room. )
The Chairman. I don't think there is any justification. I don't
think any justilication can be found for taking people convicted of
felonies of the character that Herman Kierdorf was convicted of, and
giving them a position to exercise authority over honest men who,
under the union contracts, are compelled to submit themselves to his
authority in order to earn their daily bread by the sweat of their own
brow.
Senator Ia^s. I think the answer is obvious. There is only one
possible answer we can get out of all this. You want that kind of
folks, don't you ?
You want jailbirds and men like that, crooks, gangsters, racketeers,
and that kind ? Because you want tough people to make it doggone
tough on these people you are leading. Just use force against them,
if necessary. That is the kind you want. I think you are underesti-
mating the members of the Teamsters Union. The ones I know, and I
know a lot of them, are very fine people. You don't have to use force
against that type of person at all. They w-ill respond to anything
that is reasonable. The vast majority, the great majority, are honest
people.
But I want to say to Senator Ervin, I think the answer to the ques-
tion he poses is obvious.
(At this point. Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.)
Senator Ervin. I would say also I know some of the teamsters in
Xorth Carolina. They have a local at Hickory, about 20 miles from
me, and the Hickory Teamsters are good people. But they have been
kept under trusteeship. I think virtually every Teamsters local in
North Carolina until lately was kept under trusteeship and deprived
of the right to have officers of their own choice.
Mr. HoFFA. But the same officers who led them, sir, under trustee-
ship, by the majority were elected as their business agents and officers.
I also may say the only way we could build a union in North Carolina
was to have a trusteeship to where we could have supervision, funnel-
ing enough finances into that territory, because we could never have
done it out of dues, to be able to organize and gain the benefits for
the workers we have gained in Carolina. It so happens, sir, that I
negotiated the major contract in both North and South Carolina,
increasing their wages tremendously.
Senator Ervin. There was a good deal of friction in the Charlotte
local to get the trusteeship off. There was a considerable amount of
notoriety about it. That is all I will say on that subject.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, according to a statement that was written
by Mr. Mollenhoff, of Look magazine, when he asked you abou<- indi-
viduals such as Glen Smith and W. A. Smith, and why they had been
given positions of power, you replied, "We need somebody down there
to kick those hillbillies around."
Mr. Hoffa. I am not responsible for what Mr. Mollenhoff wrote.
He may have misunderstood me. But for clarification of the record,
I don't consider southerners anything other than Americans, and I
have many, many friends all over the South, and I highly respect
them. I resented the remark, but there was nothing I could do
about it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make that statement ?
13524 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. I can never recall making that statement.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you made it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe I made it.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you made it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am not going to get into a debate on the question,
because I do not even recall Mr. Mullenhoff interviewing me on such
a subject.
]Mr. Kennedy. Mr. HofFa, all I am asking you is do you deny
malving the statement ?
Mr. Williams. I think he has answered the question, and I don't
think it has any pertinency what he may have said to Mr. Mullenhoff,
writing a piece for Look magazine.
The Chairman. It does have a little pertinency in my mind, from
my viewpoint. Here is testimony that we are developing that this
man at the head of this great organization is absolutely failing to
meet the moral responsibility that is his, that he gave a pledge here
he would meet before this committee. Immediately afterward he
steps out and says he has to have men like Glen Smith, characters like
that, to kick American citizens around, whom he chooses to call hill-
billies, and the employers of whom he calls liars. You tell me that
is not pertinent when we are trying to find a way to clean up the
corruption and violence in unionism ?
Of course, it is pertinent. It goes to the very heart and crux of
the things we are inquiring into here.
American dues-paying members in imions have a right to decent
and honest administration.
Mr. Williams. I agree. I think he has answered the question, if
you rule it is pertinent.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you made such a statement?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall making such a statement.
The Chairman. Sometimes you go and say that is 10 years ago
or 8 years ago, and "I can't remember." This was last December.
Mr. HoFFA. And I have met probably 100 or more reporters and
haA^e had that many interviews since then and cannot recall it.
The Chairman. Did vou see this publication right after you said
it?
Mr. HoFFA. I did.
The Chairman. Did that not refresh your memory then ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; it did not.
The Chairman. How long was it after this interview with Mr.
Mullenhoff before it appeared in print ?
]Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall how long, but I remember the article.
I am quite sure I do.
The Chairman. You mean it did not refresh your memory then?
Mr. HoFFA. No, sir ; it did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Ploffa, you are leaving the record that you will
not deny making such a statement ?
Mr HoFFA. I will not deny under oath, we may have made some dis-
cussions on a kidding basis or some way, but I did not make any such
statement, and I do not intend to leave any impression here that I
do not respect our members in the South, North, East, or West as
American citizens.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13525
The ChairMxVN. You see, your action or your lack of action, tends
to confirm exactly the sentiments the article conveyed.
■ You kept these men down there, crooks and criminals, and you used
them to be there, and you still have them in there.
Mr. HoFFA. There are charges filed against them. It will be handled
according to the constitution.
The Chairman. But they are still there with the authority of the
official position they have in the union. They are there right now.
Mr. HoFFA. You are right to that point.
The Chairman. We are not beyond this point. We can't get beyond
it until another day comes. I say to you, sir, right now, that those
men have no right, in your hearts I believe you know it, to sit in any
official position of your miion another hour.
Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Then the record will stand, unless you want to cor-
rect it, Mr. Hoft'a. What about Mr. Tony Ducks Corrallo, vice presi-
dent of Local 293 of the Teamsters? Excuse me, it is Local 239
of the Teamsters.
Mr. HoFFA. I never met the man, don't know the man, and never
checked with the man. It is my understanding that the man is in-
tending to resign from our union,
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made any investigation of him ? Accord-
ing to the testimony before our committee, he is a leader in the nar-
cotics trade in New York City, This was when we had the hearings
a year ago. He controls Local 875 of the Teamsters, Local 275 of the
Teamsters, and influenced a good deal of control over Local 522 of the
Teamsters, four teamster locals. Did you make any investigation of
him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know what he is supposed to control. I think
you said he is a vice president. Is that right ?
Mr, Kennedy. Vice president of local
Mr. HoFFA. Vice president of the union,
Mr, Kennedy. Wait a minute. According to the testimony before
our committee, he controlled Local 875 of the Teamsters, in addition to
Local 239, Local 275, and had influence over Local 522 of the Team-
sters.
Mr. HoFFA. I believe that they have autonomy of their organiza-
tions, I don't think they are in trusteeship. How he would control
them, I don't know.
Mr, Kennedy. He has been arrested 12 times, ranging from robbery,
grand larceny, and narcotics. He was identified before the committee
as an important figure in narcotics, and he was a close friend of
Johnnie Dioguardi, My question is, Have you made any investigation
of him ?
Mr, HoFFA. I discussed that question concerning him. As I stated
before, I understand he intends to resign from his position in the
union,
Mr, Kennedy. This is a year ago that we had this testimony, Mr.
Mr.HoFFA. That is right.
Mr, Kennedy, Have you taken any steps against Mr, Tony Ducks
Corrallo ?
21243 — 58 — pt. 3G 17
13526 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. As of now, no.
Senator Kennedy. Mr, Corrallo, from 1929 to 1941 only could show
2 weeks of gainful employment, but he was deferred from the draft
because he was the sole support of his mother. Do you know anything
about him at all ?
Mr. HoFFA. I never met him. Senator.
Senator Kennedy. It has been a year since you came before the
committee or taken any action. I thought he was one of the worst
witnesses we had last summer; have you taken any action about it?
Mr. IIoFFA. Not yet, no, sir.
Senator Kennedy. Weren't you disturbed ( He was pretty well
characterized l:)efore this committee as one of the most notorious
hoodlums we had in the country. Do you mean to say tliat didn't
cause some disturbance in A^our mind, some distress about the repu-
tation of the Teamsters^ Did you proceed to take any action?
Mr. HoFFA. The testimony certainly was not good publicity for the
organization of the Teamsters. But on the other hand, the organi-
zation certainly had a right to tile cliarges against him and remove
him if they find he is not a proper person.
Senator Kennedy. We asked him some questions about liis activ-
ities as a Teamster official and he took the tifth amendment and gave
no information. Mr. Hoffa, when Mr. Ives talked to you last year,
you made some pledges which I hoped you would carry out to clean
up ih.^ Teamsters Union. But I don't see any indication that you
are prepared to take that action. You don't seem to feel that when
a witness comes before us and takes the fifth amendment, quite obvi-
ously technically he is entitled to that right but it does not seem to
disturb you at all. You said yesterday "Why don't you leave him
alone?" Talking then about Mr. Bushkin. Then you Avere about
to pull out a Supreme Court decision talking about his rights. Mr.
Corrallo is a notorious hoodlum in this country. This matter has
been in your knowledge for a year.
I can't understand how you, who are about to attempt to acquire a
dominant position in the whole transportation system in the United
States, can be so inditferent to that.
Quite obviously, if you don't do something about it. someone else
will have to.
Can you tell me why you wouldn't?
Mr. HoFFA. In my opinion, the situation will be corrected.
Senator Kennedy. When? That is a year now, Mr. Hotl'a.
Mr. HoFFA. I have been president of this international only since,
I believe, the 31st of Januaiy. I have had many problems facing
me, many important contracts. I have not gotten around to adjust-
ing all of the problems that I will be adjusting as I get to them.
Senator Kennedy. I don't think that is an adequate excuse. In 7
or 8 months, your powers are very vast under the constitution. In
addition, you, for example, supported two international vice presi-
dents who took the fifth amendment. You supported them in October
for international vice president, two witnesses who came before us
and took the fifth amendment. This was after you came before the
committee yourself.
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I am not going to change my mind for this
committee or anybody else concerning a man's right to exercise a con-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13527
stitutional right of a free American citizen, and I do not believe that
I have the right to deprive them of a constitutional privilege he
desires to put into effect.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, can I just ask you, when a witness
comes before this committee and takes the fifth amendment on matters
involving the use of union funds, whether that puts up a danger
signal in your mind, and, therefore, it is your custom and habitto
immediately begin an investigation as to what he may have done with
union funds ? Is that your practice or not ?
Mr. HoFFA. We will sit as an investigating committee under the
constitution to check into the affairs of his union.
Senator Kennedy. Have you done that?
Mr. HoFFA. We have in many, many instances, yes.
Senator Kennedy. Have you done it in the case of your interna-
tional vice presidents who took the fifth amendment ?
Mr. HoFFA. Do you mean Mr. O'Rourke and Mr. Brennan ?
Senator Kennedy. That is correct.
Mr. HoFFA. I have not had tlie opportunity to send anybody into
those local unions, because I have been busy, insofar as other affairs of
this union are concerned.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, I don't think there is any thing more
important. You are now seeking to arrange an alliance with Mr.
Bridges, with the west coast union, to extend your power over the
transportation system in the United States. You don't seem to be
interested in cleaning up corruption in your own union. It is not
very difficult to you. You have extensive powers. These people are
notorious, some of them Avho came before us. You don't seem to take
any action.
Mr. HoFFA. There will be action taken in due time.
Senator Kennedy. Yet you oppose the Congress taking action.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think the bill you introduced would keep a man
from taking the fifth amendment and becoming an officer of a union.
Senator Kennedy. No, but it would make it a Federal crime to
embezzle union funds, it would make it necessary to report the ex-
penditures of unions' funds to the Government, it would make the
destruction of union records or books a Federal crime.
I think chiefly you, Mr. Hoffa, have failed to take action yourself.
You are the greatest stimulus to all of the legislation we have had down
here.
JVIr. Hoffa. When those bills go into effect, every citizen will have
to comply with them.
Senator Kennedy. That is correct, and you are opposing their
going in. But I say your failure to take action yourself with all the
power you have seems to me to be a major reason why we have to do
it, even though it is not a happy situation that we are forced to do it.
But you are totally uninterested in it.
Now, Mr. Hoffa, the other day when you came down here, did you
talk to those witnesses that appeared before us on the laundry matter?
Mr. Hoffa. The laundry matter ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes. Mr. Meissner.
Mr. Kennedy. The Detroit Institute of Laundry.
Mr. Hoffa. I said hello to them, yes.
Senator Kennedy. Where? '
13528 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. On the way down on the airplane and both airports.
■Senator Kennedy. Did you discuss Mr. Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes. I said, "Did you fellows have any business with
Mr. Holtzman ?" And they said "Yes."
Senator Kennedy. Did you say anything about the fact that any
-money they got must have gone to Mr. Holtzman and not to you ?
Mr. HoFFA. Did I say anything to them ?
^Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know. I think they mentioned it, if I remember
it correctly.
Senator Kennedy. Did you use the words "any money that they
received must have gone to Mr. Holtzman, it did not go to you ?"
Mr. HoFFA. It certainly did not go to me.
Senator Kennedy. Did you say that to them? Did you remind
them of that? We have been rather concerned with their change of
testimony. Did you refresh their recollection ?
Mr. HoFFA. What did you say ?
Senator Kennedy. I said we have been concerned in the committee
about the change of testimony of some of these witnesses. I am asking
you if you refreshed their recollection on the way from Detroit to
Washington that the money they paid went to Mr. Holtzman and did
not go to you ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think that matter was discussed. It may have
been. They may have told me that they paid Holtzman some money.
Well, I think that it what happened.
Senator Kennedy. "When you came before this committee, Mr. Ken-
nedy, the counsel said, talking about the Detroit Institute of Laundry,
Mr. Bushkin and Mr. Holtzman :
Did you have some discussions with them about that?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think I discussed it with them.
^ Mr. Kennedy. Discuss
Mr. HoFFA. With who?
' -Senator Kennedy. Mr. Bushkin and Mr. Holtzman.
Mr. HoFFA. I did not discuss it with Mr. Bushkin and Mr. Holtz-
man, as I remember.
Senator Kennedy. You don't recall ever discussing the Detroit
Institute of Laundry case with Mr. Bushkin or Mr. Holtzman?
Mr. HoFFA. Are you talking about the question of these negotia-
tions?
Senator Kennedy. What did you say ?
Mr. HoFFA. Are you talking about the question of these negotia-
tions ?
Senator Kennedy. The 1949 negotiations, that is correct.
Mr. HoFFA. As I said, I don't recall discussing the question.
Senator Kennedy. Why did you bring up the matter with the two
witnesses coming down here ?
Mr. HoFFA. I had read in the newspaper articles, and I had listened
to discussions around concerning the problem.
Senator Kennedy. What newspaper ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't remember.
Senator Kennedy. Was it in the newspaper actually, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think there was some insinuation that there had been
a pa^-ment made by some laundry or something.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13529
Senator Kennedy. You don't recall
Mr. Kennedy. There was nothing in the newspapers about such
a situation.
Mr. HoFFA. There was something m the paper about somebody
having made a payoff.
Mr. Kennedy. Irving Paul Miller. But how did you know it was
in connection with Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not know it was.
Mr. Kennedy. You told these witnesses coming down to remembei:
that they gave the money to Mr. Holtzman.
Mr. HoFFA. I discussed with the witness
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you said that to them ?
Mr. HoFFA. What is that?
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you said to them, "Remember that
you gave the money to Holtzman" ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't remember discussing that with them.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am not going to sit here and tell you from memory
what I did or did not, but I don't believe that I did.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, I think in the interests of fairness,
Senator Kennedy has said that these witnesses changed their testi-
mony.
Senator Kennedy. Right.
Mr. Williams. I think if there was ever any testimony given to
this committee in executive session, or if anyone ever said to any
investigator from this committee that any of this money went to
this witness, that we ought to have that evidence now. I invite it
to go into this record, sir.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Williams, I made the statements that the
witnesses changed their testimony before the committee. You were
here when Mr. Miller changed his affidavit that had been notarized
and that he had initialed. I am giving you one example of the
change of testimony before this committee.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think I even know Miller.
Senator Kennedy. I am just giving you the example of the change
of testimony. I gave you the second example of Mr. Meissner. I
think when you remember what the changes were in the testimony,
I think it will be a matter of record.
Mr. Williams. I think in the interests of fairness, we should say
for the record that if Mr. Meissner changed his testimony, it was a
change of speculation or assumption concerning the ultmiate destina-
tion of the money to which he testified.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, then, the counsel asked you on page
33 of the testimony, "Did you discuss the Detroit Institute of Laundry
with Mr. Holtzman ? " You said, "I may have."
Mr. Kennedy. Do you remember that?
Mr. Hoffa. No, I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember?
Mr. Hoffa. No, I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. In 1949, did he make arrangements for you to visit with any
of tlie representatives of the Detroit Institute of Laundry?
in other words, you were rnther familiar with this whole matter
when you discussed it with the witnesses. The question that Mr.
13530 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Kennedy asked you regarding the Detroit Institute of Laundry with
Mr. Ploltzman did not come as a surprise to you.
Mr. HoFFA. I still say that I may have discussed it with them.
I think I said the other day after LoCicero got through testi-
fying
Senator Kennedy. Why did you raise the question of Holtzman
with them?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I think they know Holtzman. No particular
significance.
Senator Kennedy. Did you think you were under suspicion at that
time by the committee for receiving the money?
Mr. HoFFA. I am not under suspicion now.
Senator Kennedy. That is w^iy I am asking you about Monday. I
am asking you if you knew before you came down here that this matter
would come up, and how you knew it.
And why you chose to discuss it with witnesses and why you chose
to remind them it was Mr, Holtzman who got the money.
Mr. HoFFA. They told me they w^ere coming down to testify.
Senator Kennedy. They called you?
Mr. HoFFA. No. I met them at the airport. I did not even know
they were going to be on the same plane.
Senator Kennedy. Why did you raise the matter of Holtzman ?
Mr. HoFFA. Why did I raise the matter with Holtzman ?
Senator Kennedy. Of Holtzman?
Mr. HoFFA. Maybe they did. I don't know.
Senator Kennedy. You don't recall ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I don't.
Senator Kennedy. AAHio was it you talked to ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think both Meissner and Balkwill was there. But I
think it was in a kidding way. I don't think we made any serious
discussion concerning this problem. As a matter of fact, I know we
did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, after the hearing was over on Tuesday,
while leaving the hearinjjs after these people had testified regarding
this matter, did you say, "That S. O. B., I'll break his back" ?
Mr. Hoffa. Who ?
Mr. Kennedy. You.
Mr. Hoffa. Say it to who ?
Mr. Kennedy. To anyone. Did you make that statement after these
people testified before this committee?
Mr. Hoffa. I never talked to either one of them after they testified.
Mr. Kennedy. I am not talking about them. Did you make that
statement here in the hearing room after the testimony w^as finished ?
Mr. Hoffa. Not concerning them, as far as I know.
Mr. Kennedy. Who did you make it about, then ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't know. I may have been discussing someone in a
figure of speech. I don't even remember it.
Mr. Kennedy. Whose back were you going to break, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Hoffa. It was a figure of speech. I don't know what you are
talking about. .
Mr. Kennedy. I am trying to find out whose back you were trying
to break.
Mr. Hoffa. It is a figure of speech.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat?
Mr. Hoffa. A figure of speech.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13531
Mr. Kennedy. A figure of speech about what?
Mr, HoFFA. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Who were you talking about ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have no knowledge of what you are talking about.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you made the statement ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall making it.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you made it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I could have made a remark to somebody we had been
talking about the day before or the day after.
It is a figure of speech.
Mr. Kennedy. Whose back were you going to break ?
Mr. HoFFA. It does not mean physically.
Mr. Kennedy. Let's find out whose back you were going to break
figuratively.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know. I don't know.
The Chairman. Let me ask you this question : Whether physically
or figuratively
Mr. HoFFA. What, sir?
The Chairman (continuing) . Did you make that remark about any
member of this committee, any member of its staff, or any witness who
may have testified before it or whose testimony is expected ?
Mr. HoFFA. I do not recall making any such a statement. I cer-
tainly did not make it about any member of this committee or any staff
member or any witness that I can recall. I know I did not. I am sure
of that.
The Chairman. You certainly could recall back to Monday.
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall making any such statement, sir.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ?
Mr. I^nnedy. Let me ask you — excuse me.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I just want to state for the record
that in reference to cases that have been called up of gross wrongdoing
on the part of union officials, agents, others, I concur in the belief that
those men should be removed from their jobs. I do not think that the
matter should end there.
I do not think that if that is accomplished this committee has com-
pleted its work or the Congress has.
A few weeks ago we had as our witness Mr. Daniel P. Sullivan, of
the Crime Commission of Greater Miami and Miami, Fla. He dis-
cussed some of their problems down there and the fact that some of the
hoodlums and gangsters they were dealing with did have and had had
union connections, and I asked Mr. Sullivan this question:
Why does this gangster element move into the field of unions ?
Mr. Sullivan replied by quoting one such gangster, as he had stated
to him, as the reason, and this is what he said :
Well, first of all, when you have a checkoff system, you have a foolproof
system of collections. It does not cost you any money to operate. Secondly,
if you run one of these insurance companies or welfare outfits, you don't pay
out any money and you take it all in. And thirdly, you have no insi^ection on
the local, county. State, or Federal level, so your funds are not audited.
My point in bringing that up is that while I concur strongly that
responsible union officers should remove unworthy characters from
places of trust in the union, that this committee and this Congress have
not discharged their responsibilities until laws are made that take the
power and opportunity away from these people.
13532 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. All right. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr, Kennedy. I would like to call a witness, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Williams. Are we excused ?
The Chairman. No, You may remain where you are. There is
one point we want to clear up, and see if we can refresh Mr. Hoffa's
memory a bit.
Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Roberts,
The Chairman, Be sworn, please. You do solemnly swear the
evidence you shall give before this Senate select committee shall be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you
God?
Mr. Roberts. I do.
TESTIMONY OF ROBERT D, ROBERTS
The Chairman, State your name, your place of residence, and your
present employment,
Mr, Roberts. My name is Robert D, Roberts. I live at 120 C Street
NE. I am a member of the Capitol Police force.
The Chairman, You live here in the city of Washington ?
Mr, Roberts, Yes, sir ; I do.
The Chairman, Where is 3^our home ?
Mr, Roberts, My home is Jefferson City, Mo.
. The Chairman. Jefferson City, Mo. ?
Mr. Roberts. Originally, yes, sir.
The Chairman. How long have you been in Washington ?
Mr. Roberts. About a year and a half, sir.
The Chairman. How long have you been on the Capitol Police
force ?
Mr. Roberts. A year June 7.
The Chairman. A year June 7 ?
Mr. Roberts. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You waive counsel ? You know you are entitled to
have an attorney present, if you desire.
Mr. Roberts. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy. Proceed.
Mr, Kennedy. You are a member of the Capitol Police ?
Mr. Roberts. That is right, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You have been a member how long ?
Mr. Roberts. One year June 7.
Mr. Kennedy. You were on duty, were you, on Tuesday in this
hearing room, of this week ?
Mr. Roberts, Tuesday ; yes, sir, I was on duty here in the hearing
room,
Mr, Kennedy. Mr. Roberts, you were on duty at the end of the
session, were you ?
Mr. Roberts. Yes, sir; until the session was over. I stayed here
until the area was cleared.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear a statement made by the witness, Mr.
Hoffa?
Mr. Roberts. Yes, sir ; not in this room, though,
Mr, Kennedy. Where was the statement made ?
Mr. Roberts. On the street.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13533
Mr. Roberts. After the session was over, then I went downstairs,
and from there I was to perform the rest of my duties outside, in front
of the entrance of Delaware and C Streets, right by the trolley-car
tracks. I was standing there, and that is where I overheard the state-
ment.
The Chairman. Speak a little louder.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee what he stated, what
Mr. Hoffa stated, putting blanks in where blanks are necessary.
First, would you write it out, and then would you make the state-
ment ?
Mr. Roberts. You want me to write it out, leaving out the pro-
fanity ?
Mr. Kennedy. Ko; just state what he said and leave out the pro-
fanity. Then I will have you write it out.
Mr. Roberts. He said, "That sneaky little 'blank.* I'll break his
back."
I have no way of knowing what he was talking about or who he
was referring to. It was just that one statement that I heard.
The Chairman. Had he just left the hearing room here ?
Mr. Roberts. I presume so.
The Chaikman. Had w^e just adjourned ?
Mr. Roberts. Yes. It was very soon after adjournment.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. To whom did he make the statement ?
Mr. Roberts. He was talking to this gentleman that was with him.
Senator Curtis. Do you know who he was ?
Mr. Roberts. I am not sure who he was. I think I know who he
was, but I am not sure. I could identify the man, but I don't know if
this is his name. I think it was Mr. Fitzgerald.
Senator Curtis. Do j^ou know about whom he made the statement ?
Mr. Roberts. I have no idea, sir. I only heard that one statement ;
that is all.
Senator Curtis. Do you know what subject matter was under dis-
cussion when he made the statement ?
Mr. Roberts. I have no idea, sir ; none whatsoever.
The Chairman. Now write out the statement so that it may be incor-
porated into the record.
Mr. Roberts. Verbatim, sir ?
The Chairman. Write it verbatim.
TEXTIMONY OF JAMES R. HOFFA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWARD BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD, AND
DAVID PREVIANT— Resumed
Mr. Kennedy. Does that refresh your recollection, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. HoFFA. It doesn't refresh my recollection. We may have been
discussing some situation, and I may have said that.
The Chairman. The important thing in this, and I don't know nor
does anyone else, is whether you were directing those remarks to any
member of this committee, any member of its staff, or any witness who
had testified or whose testimony the committee expected to receive.
That is the point.
13534 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA, You can rest assured it was not.
The Chairman. You can state unequivocally under oath you were
not referring either physically or figuratively to any of those whom
I have identified ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not.
(Senator Kennedy, at this point, withdrew from the hearing room.)
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. KJENNEDY. Mr. Hoffa, we had some testimony before this com-
mittee regarding Mr. Milton Holt, secretary-treasurer of local 805, in
New York. Could you tell us whether you have taken any steps
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, may I see what the witness wrote out ?
The Chairman. Yes; you may. I cannot permit it to be verbally
stated in the language in which it is written over the air or before this
audience.
Mr. Williams. You can go ahead with the examination.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, we have had testimony regarding Mr. Mil-
ton Holt, secretary-treasurer of local 805.
Mr. Hoffa. Yes?
Mr. Kennedy. O. K.
Mr. Hoffa. Sure. Go ahead.
Mr. Kennedy. Secretary-treasurer of local 805, Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Hoffa. What about it ?
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken any steps against Mr. Milton Holt?
Mr. Hoffa. I have not. The man is indicted, waiting trial. He was
found guilty of an antitrust, the same as all the employers who are
involved with him. I have discussed the matter with him. But I have
taken no action.
Mr. Kennedy. You have taken no steps to have him removed from
his position ?
Mr. Hoffa. I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. He is very close and was identified as being very
close to Johnnie Dioguardi before this committee.
Mr, Hoffa. Is that a question ?
Mr. Kennedy. You have still taken no steps against him ?
Mr. Hoffa. No.
Mr. Kennedy. He was involved also in the so-called bouncing char-
ter, where this charter bounced around from one individual to another,
according to the testimony before our committee; that he was very
close to Mr. Johnnie Dioguardi and Mr. Getlin, in that matter.
Can you tell us whether you looked into that at all ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think I have talked to Milton Holt concerning the
problem. His case is coming up in court. We will take proper action
at that time if necessary.
Mr. Kennedy. You have taken no steps against him ?
Mr. Hoffa. No ; we have not.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat about Mr. Abe Gordon, the administrator of
the welfare fund of local 805 of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Hoffa. Wliat about him ?
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken any steps against him ?
Mr. Hoffa. No ; I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. He is a vice president of local 805. An investigation
by the New York Insurance Commission in 1956 revealed that he
received a certain percentage of the contributions as salary. Also it
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13535
was developed that he formed a trucking company back in 1932, he
became president in 1934, his partner was Kovolick, who was described
by former New York District Attorney Tom Dewey as a vicious
strong-arm man for Lepke and Durra, when these two men controlled
the garment industry in New York City during the 1930's. Have you
taken any steps against Abe Gordon ?
Mr. HoiTA. I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. Kovolick has a long police record.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think he is a Teamster member.
Mr. Kennedy. No ; he is a partner of Mr. Abe Gordon.
Mr. HoFFA. Isn't it true that Gordon gave up his truck company ?
Mr. Kennedy. Had he given it up ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am under the impression he has.
Mr. Kennedy. Also, Mr. Hoffa, according to an investigation that
was made by the New York Insurance Agency, it was found that he
sold a piece of property to the union welfare fund, which in April of
1953 he advertised for sale for $15,000, plus the mortgage, which I
believe was $11,000. In October 1953 he sold the same piece of prop-
erty to the union, to himself, for $85,000.
Did you make an investigation of that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe former President Beck did, and I believe the
charges were dropped. They were never pressed.
Mr. Kennedy. The evidence was in the record in connection with
that. Have you ever looked into it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not into the question of his development.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not look into that ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. He was very close to Mr. Johnnie Dioguardi ; isn't
that correct ?
Mr. HoFFA. I understand he knew him. How close he was is a
question.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, according to the testimony before our commit-
tee, Johnnie Dioguardi operated out of Abe Gordon's office, local 805.
Mr. HoFFA. He may have.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken any steps against Mr. Gordon?
Mr. HoFFA. I have taken no steps against Gordon.
Mr. Kennedy. And it was shown, revealed before the committee,
that Mr. Johnnie Dio used Abe Gordon's office as his contact, as his
telephone contact, when he and Tony "Ducks" were working on the
election of a joint council in New York. Did you look into that ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. In fact, Mr. Abe Gordon is a close friend of yours,
is he not, Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. HoFFA. A friend of mine ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Is he over at the Teamsters headquarters now?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I think he went home this afternoon.
Mr. Kjennedy. He has been over there until now ?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes.
Mr. KJENNEDY. He was over there yesterday ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And the day before ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And on Monday ?
13536 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And he was down here with you ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. This is Mr. Abe Gordon, Mr. Chairman, one of
Johnnie Dio's closest associates, who has been involved, linked up,
with numerous racketeers and gangsters in New York City.
Mr. HoFFA. Let the record show — excuse me.
The Chairman. What is his connection ?
Mr. Kennedy. Administrator of the welfare fund of local 805 of the
Teamsters, vice president of local 805, and the New York Insurance
Commission found that he had sold property, his own personal prop-
erty, his family's, to the welfare fund for an exorbitant profit back
in 1953.
Mr. HoFFA. I think the record ought to show, sir, that the New
York Insurance Commission, I believe, regularly checks welfare funds.
There is nothing reported to be wrong with that fund.
Senator Ives. May I get something straight here before you go any
further on the commission business? Is that the New York State
Insurance Commission or the New York State Insurance Department ?
Mr. HoFFA. It could be either one.
Senator Ives. I don't think they have a New York State Insui*ance
Commission. I think it is a department.
Mr. HoFFA. Whichever one checks the records. I know you have
to file some type of form.
Senator Ives. It is department.
Mr. HoFFA. Department.
Mr. I^NNEDY. You have not made an investigation of him, then,
either?
Mr. HoFFA. I have discussed Gordon's operation with him.
Mr. Kennedy. What about John McNamara, local 808 and local
295 of the Teamsters ?
Mr. HoFFA. I discussed John McNamara's operations of both local
unions with John McNamara. We have under consideration now an
audit of 295 and an audit of 808 by Price Waterhouse, to determine
whether or not the books are in order.
Mr. Kennedy. And you had an investigation and hearing of him ?
Mr. HoFFA. There are no charges filed against McNamara. He is
out on a certificate of reasonable doubt.
Mr. Ivennedy. You stated specifically before this committee in
answer to a question of Senator Ives, that based on the material that
we developed regarding McNamara's tie-in with the paper locals, you
would conduct a hearing and have an investigation of Mr. IMcNamara.
Mr. HoFFA. It is a question of what you call an investigation. I
have discussed this matter with McNamara and I consider that an
investigation.
Senator Ives. I pointed out, you know, that Mr. Hoffa's interpre-
tation of a clean and decent administration of a union might be some-
what different from mine.
The Chairman. Mr. Hoffa, surely, a man of your intellect does not
want the record to stand that that is what you consider an appropriate
investigation, just to simply ask a man who may be charged, or whom
all the testimony has accumulated against, just ask him, and then you
say that is your investigation ? .
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN IHE LABOR FIELD 13537
Mr. Ht»FFA. McNamara has no charge against McNamara except the
iact that while he was in jail they asked to have the vacancy filled.
If I recall correctly, the vacancy was filled by the board. McNamara
came out. It is onr report that he appeared in front of the inember-
ship and the membership retained him, subject to the question of a
hearing by the higher court.
There is no complaint that I know of concerning McNamara's or-
ganization, except that the monitors have requested and we have
agreed, to have both local unions audited by Price, Waterhouse.
Mr. Kennedy. There is one other thing that might have slipped
your mind, and it might be very small in your estimation, but he was
convicted with Johnny Dio in an extortion matter, and he was found:
guilty by a jury.
Mr. HoFTA. And it is still subject matter of an appeal.
Mr. KIennedy. But this is the man that still holcls this position.
Mr. HoFFA. Subject later to appeal.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been found guilty by a jury, and he is still
holding the important position in two locals in New York City.
Mr. IIoFFA. I recognize that, and I recognize he has a right of
appeal.
Mr. Kennedy. You said you were going to make an investigation
and have a hearing on him.
Mr. HoFFA. I did make an investigation.
Mr. Kennedy. You talked to him ?
Mr. IIoFFA. That is right, and that is an investigation.
Senator Chukch. In view of Mr. Hotfa's definition of an investiga-
tion, I would like to ask him what his definition might be of another
term I have heard liim use this afternoon.
Mr. Ho If a, I was not a member of this committee at the time you
first appeared. I understand that at that time you indicated to tlie
conimittee that it was your intention to clean up these problems in the
Teamsters Union with reference to many people whose names have
now been discussed and who had criminal records and were convicted
of serious crime, and that at that time, it is my understanding, that
you gave your pledge that this would be your effort as president of the
Teamsters Union.
Today I have heard many of these names discussed, and I have
heard you testify that you have taken no action, but you have said
repeatedly that these matters would be cleared up in due time.
Now, your earlier appearance was about a year ago, and no apparent
p'-ogress has been made, and what do you mean" by "these matters
will be cleared up in due time"" ^ How would you define that? What
do you mean by it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I wasn't the general president of this union when I
appeared here last time, and^ I became general president, I believe,
the 31st of January of this year. I have had a considerable number
of problems which arose during the question of the court proceedings,
and the question of monitors, and we have had trusteeship hearings,
and executive board hearings, and we have had several hearings or
many hearings out in the field by panels, reporting them back to
the monitors. It is my intention to do the same thing as complaints
come in, because when a complaint comes in we submit the complaint
to the monitors, and the monitors are aware of the complaints, and
13538 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
we in turn send out panels and hold hearings, and those hearings
come back, and the monitors have an opportunity to listen or read
the testimony and prior to making a decision we consult with the
monitors on those cases.
As the cases come in from the membership, under our constitution
-I will apply the procedure of the constitution.
Mow long that will take, that is an undetermined time.
Senator Church. In other words, you couldn't give this committee
any estimate of what "in due time" would mean ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I could not.
Senator Ives. You have changed that now to make it your intention
to do that and it is no longer your pledge. Remember you promised
me a few things, and I am going to read them to you before we get
through.
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I am well aware of what I said last time
to you.
Senator Ives. You have got a good memory today, I know that.
Mr. HoFFA. I am also aware of the question of the responsibility of
this union, and the problems that I had facing me when I took over,
and I have adjusted many of them. Those problems will be adjusted
as time goes on and will be corrected.
Senator Ivt:s. Your idea of '"as time goes on" seems to be indefinite.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think 6 months is a long time. Senator, to take
a position that it is indefinite.
Senator Ives, It is a little more than 6 months ; isn't it ?
Mr. HoFFA. It is not more than 6 months. It was January 31, and
it is a little after August now, the 6th or 7th.
Senator Ives. There are some of these things that are crying for
attention,
Mr. HoFFA. I beg your pardon ?
Senator Ives. There are some of these things that are demanding
attention,
Mr, HoFFA. They are getting attention.
Senator Ives, You know what we were talking about in our con-
versation that day. Now, it seems to me if you really would put your
mind to it and your will to it, you could have taken care of these things
in much less than 6 months.
Mr. HoFFA, Well, Senator, if you would sit in the office of the
Teamsters Building I think you would be willing to testify that I put
in a good day's work, and I think that I put in a good evening's work,
I think I have attended to my business concerning the teamsters as
faithfully as any international president of any international union.
This is a tremendous job to do, and it cannot be carried out overnight.
Senator I\^s. I am not talking about your routine work. I am talk-
ing about placing first things first.
Mr. HoFFA, First things first is to get this union on an operating
basis.
Senator Ives, First things first in your position is to have a decent,
honest union, operating under decent and honest leaders. You haven't
done that so far.
Mr, PIoFFA, This union is a union of one-million-five-hundred-
thousand-odd members, and it has local unions all over the country,
with all types of people working for it and all types of members. The
IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13539
membei's have a perfect right to file complaints concerning the opera-
tion of this union, and I have tried to adjust those complaints as they
come into our office, either in front of the board by sending out panels,
or personal interviews, by telephone conversations, and other methods
of adjusting this union.
Senator Iv^s. You realize, and I suppose you do, that the larger
your union is, the more imperative it becomes that this question of
honesty and decency in the administration of the affairs of that union
be paramount, and have first attention. I don't think that you have
done that, and you haven't convinced me you have done it in any way,
shape, or manner.
Mr. HoFFA. There is no question that there must be honesty in the
organization, but also we must keep in mind the fact that those things
will be adjusted as they are brought to our attention, with due process
of the constitution, and we must keep in mind, also, that the everyday
affairs of this union affecting the worker driving a truck and working
in warehouses is of primary importance of this union, and the other
things will be taken care of in due time.
Senator Ives. It is what you consider first things first. Apparently
you consider these other things you are talking about as most impor-
tant, and I don't.
Mr. HoFFA. I think wages, hours, and conditions. Senator, and con-
tracts, are very urgent and very important to our members. ' >
Senator Ives. You mean to tell me that those matters are more
important than common honesty ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; it isn't ; common honesty is
Senator Ives. That is what is involved here basically.
Mr. HoFFA. Common honesty will be taken along the same course
in our constitution as everything else.
Senator Ives. Common honesty is first and demands first attention
and there can be no delay in that at all.
You have delayed, and that is what I am driving at.
Mr. HoFFA. As they are brought to my attention, as charges are filed,
and they follow the constitution, we will take care of them.
Senator Ives. Whose constitution? Your own constitution, or the
Constitution of the United States ?
Mr. HoFFA. The international constitution, and the Constitution of
the United States.
Senator Ives. You have got a peculiar constitution if it allows that
kind of interpretation. Certainly the Constitution of the United
States, unless you want to be very technical, never embraced that idea
of carrying out the thought of honesty. Honesty is honesty, and you
know whether you have been honest about this yourself, and you know
whether you have carried out the promise you made to this committee.
Down in your heart you know darn well you haven't.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions ?
Senator Ervin. I believe that I would like to ask him one question,
in view of the testimony of Mr. Brennan.
How many vice presidents do the Teamsters have ?
Mr. HoFFA. Thirteen, sir.
Senator Ervin. Where is Mr. Brennan's office ?
Mr. HoFFA. In Detroit, Mich.
Senator Ervin. In the same building with yours ?
13540 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. In the same building ; yes.
Senator Ervin. And you have daily associations with him ?
Mr. HoFFA. We used to, and today I am in Washington primarily
the bidk of my time.
Senator Ervin. Now, I notice that when Mr. Brennan, a vice presi-
dent of the Teamsters, was called here as a witness tlie other day, he
swore in substance that if he told this committee anything whatever
about any action taken by him as a vice president of the Teamsters
Union that the disclosure he would make would tend to incriminate
him. You heard his testimony, I believe.
Mr. HoFFA. I did.
Senator Ervin. How can you, as the president of the International
Union of Teamsters, tolerate the presence in as important an office
as a vice president, of a man who comes and states on his oath that any
disclosure he might make about his action as a vice president, or action
taken by him as a vice president of tlie Teamsters, might tend to in-
criminate him, that is, might tend to show he was guilty of some crim-
inal oU'ense ^ Don't you think that your members of your union are
entitled to have the services of officers who can make a frank and
honest and a full disclosure of all of their actions as officers under the
glare of the noonday sun in the presence of everybody ?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I must say that Mr. Brennan has a right as a
citizen to take the fifth amendment without me trying to decide
Senator Ervin. As a citizen ; yes.
Mr. HoFFA. To decide whether or not he has performed some duty
that he does not want to disclose, but until that duty is brought to the
attention of the union, it may be a personal responsibility.
Senator Ervin. He was asked about his actions as an officer of the
union.
Mr. HoFFA. I understand, but I believe that IVIr. Brennan in answer-
ing those questions, I think he said something here, and I can't recall
exactly what he said, about being able to differentiate between one as
against the other, and so he felt that to protect himself he ought to
take the fifth on every question.
Senator Ervin. But he is protecting himself, he swore, against a
possible criminal charge by refusing to make any disclosure not about
his conduct as an individual, but about his conduct as a vice }>resident
of the Teamsters Union.
Now, I would commend to your reading a very celebrated opinion of
Chief Justice Holmes. Your very brilliant lawyer, for whom I have
the highest regard, can explain it to you.
On one occasion, in the city of Boston, they discharged a policeman
for participating in politics in violation of a city ordinance which for-
bade policemen participating in politics. So he went to court on the
theory, he said, that every American citizen had a constitutional right
to be interested in politics.
But Judge Holmes said that it was true that every American citizen
has a constitutional right to be active in politics, but every American
citizen doesn't have a constitutional right to be a policeman of the city
of Boston.
Now, I would say it seems to me that every American citizen has a
constitutional right to plead the fifth amendment, but I don't think
that a man who pleads the fifth amendment when he is asked about the
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13541
discliarge of the duties and obligations wliicli he owes as an officer of
the union, has a ritrlit to remain in that office after he pleads the fifth
amendment. I would be glad to have your views on that subject.
Don't you think that the Teamsters are entitled to have officers whose
conduct in their offices is such that they are not compelled to invoke
the fifth amendment when they are required to give an account of
their official conduct?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, my answer to you is that the membership of
Brennan's local union, through its duly elected representatives, had
an opportunity to decide that question. They decided the question in
favor of Mr. Brennan, and he brought to their attention the fact that
he had taken the fifth amendment here, and they still voted that he
did a job for them in negotiating wages, hours, and conditions and
voted to retain him in his position.
Senator Ervin. I didn't ask you anything aoout the opinion of the
members of Mr. Brennan's local. I asked you as the president of the
largest labor union in the United States, whether or not you think that
the members of your union are entitled to have in office, to look after
union affairs, men of such character that when they are asked about
their official conduct in union offices, they do not have to invoke the
privilege of the fifth amendment.
Mr. HoFFA. I believe we have a right to be a president or vice presi-
dent of this union as long as the people that we are vice president or
president of desire to maintain them in office, fifth amendment or not.
Senator Ervin. You know, there are three ways to avoid answering
a question. One is to plead the fifth amendment, and another is to say
you do not remember, and a third is not to answer the question but talk
about something else.
Mr. HoFFA. 1 thought I answered your question. I am sorry.
Senator Ervin. You said you thought they ought to be allowed to
stay there as long as the people wanted to keep them, but I am not
asking you about that. I am asking you for your personal opinion.
Mr. HoFFA. My opinion is the same as the people, and they have a
right to stay there.
Senator Irvin. In other words, you think it is perfectly all right for
men to be retained in offices of the Teamsters Union who are conduct-
ing themselves in such a way in the discharge of their official duties
that they have to succumb to the temptation to plead the fifth amend-
ment when inquiry is made of them about their official conduct. You
think that is perfectly all right.
The Chairman. Do you have any more questions ?
Mr. Kennedy. Well, this is the group that we have who have
criminal records, in addition to those we have established before the
committee that have committed some acts that would appear to be
detrimental to the union. This is not just the group of those who
have criminal records, but in addition, in their capacity as union
officials we have had some testimony about them.
So we haven't really started yet. These people are all still union
officials.
The Chairman. We can't possibly conclude this afternoon.
Senator Church. I think in order that we can keep this matter
that Senator Ervin inquired about in proper perspective with respect
to its relationship to the union movement in general, it might be well
21243—58 — pt. 36 18
13542 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
for the record to show that many of the international presidents of
numerous important and influential labor unions in this country have
publicly taken a position very much different from that that has been
stated by the witness today. They have expressed their feeling that
if union leaders in their organizations are unwilling to give a public
accountancy of their stewardship when competently inquired into by
this committee or any other public authority, and instead invoke the
fifth amendment, they are not entitled to remain in office.
I think that position is eminently sound and that it is necessary
to the preservation of a wholesome union movement in this country.
I would not want the record to leave any inference that the position
taken in this matter by the present witness is representative of the
position taken by the union movement as a whole.
Mr. HoFFA. May I make a statement?
The Chairman. Yes, you may.
Mr. HoFFA. I wonder if Senator Church is aware of what the board
of review of the CIO did in regard to those individuals that took
the fifth amendment concerning communism.
Senator Church. I think the position taken by the board with
respect to that matter is not relevant to the position taken by these
labor leaders in connection with the point of inquiry as to the steward-
ship of union leaders and an accountancy that they owe when that
stewardship is inquired into.
I think that the position that many labor union leaders have taken—
that if one wants to invoke the fifth amendment and refuse to dis-
close his stewardship over any particular local, when the questions
pertain to his official duties as a union leader, that such a person
ought not to continue as a union leader, if he refuses to give an
accountancy — is sound and in the best interests of the union move-
ment. That is my view, and it appears also to be the view of a great
many important and responsible union leaders in this country.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Hoffa, what system of audits of local unions
by the international union prevails in the Teamsters Union, if any?
' Mr. Hoffa. Up to this new constitution, the Teamsters Inter-
national Union had auditors who audited the books of the local
unions. Under the new constitution, the local unions are required to
have a CPA audit, and their international union, I believe, every 2
years, audits the books of the local union by CPA's for the first time
we have established that.
Senator Curtis. When was the change made from the old consti-
tution?
Mr. Hoffa. In October, and it took effect when the court decision
was handed down.
Senator Curtis. And the old method called for an audit by interna-
tional officers ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
Senator Curtis. And I assume that sometimes they were profes-
sional auditors, and sometimes they were not; is that right?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
(At this point, the following members are present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Ervin, Church, Kennedy, and Curtis.)
Senator Curtis. Under your new system, you require the local union
to have its books audited by an outside auditing firm ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13543
Mr. HoFFA. A CPA, yes. They could have their own CPA, if there
was a sufficient number of people in the building to have one, to hire
him regularly for their business.
Senator Curtis. Yes, but they would not be officers and members of
the union ?
Mr. HoFFA. No. They might be members. Pardon me, they may be
a member, a CPA. I don't know.
Senator Curtis. That would be rather coincidental. And what
system of auditing funds of other subordinate bodies exist between
locals and the international ?
Mr. HoFFA. Under the section of the constitution, subordinate bodies
will be treated the same as local unions.
Senator Curtis. And as they are required to have an audit by a
CPA, with whom are copies of that audit filed?
Mr. HoFFA. Filed with the international union. Also a 990 is filed
with the Department of Labor.
Senator Curtis. How about the membership ?
Mr. HoFFA. Membership has a right to have copies of the audit and
copies of the 990.
Senator Curtis. "Wliat procedure is followed when those copies
reach the international headquarters?
Are they filed and remain dormant until a specific question is raised,
or are they specifically examined when they come in, or soon there-
after?
Mr. HoFFA. I would imagine since it is not my department, and I
can only imagine what will happen, I imagine the secretary-treasurer,
English, will have somebody check those reports and if there are any
questions, they will raise the questions.
(At this point Senator Church withdrew from the hearing room.)
Senator Curtis. First let me ask : At what level in the Teamsters'
organization are welfare funds maintained ? Are there welfare funds
pertaining only to locals, or are they area funds? What system is
followed ?
Mr. HoFFA. Area and local, and multiple locals also without areas.
Senator Curtis. What do you mean by multiples ?
Mr. HoFFA. There could be more than one local union in a particular
fund.
Senator Curtis. That is health and welfare. Do you have any
pension funds, too ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, sir, we do.
Senator Curtis. And generally how are they maintained ?
Mr. HoFFA. On the same basis.
Senator Curtis. What system of auditing do you have in regard to
health and welfare funds ?
Mr. HoFFA. We have no system of auditing health and welfare funds
from the international union, because those funds are operated under
a trust agreement and are not chartered by this international union.
Senator Curtis. By trust agreement, you mean there is employer
participation ?
Mr, HoFFA. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Do those agreements call for a system of auditing?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, I believe they do. The ones I am familiar with do
13544 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. What system of auditing do you have in reference
to pension funds ?
Mr. HoFFA. On the same basis.
Senator Curtis. Have you personally had an opportunity to ex-
amine any audits that come in of local unions or joint councils or any
other teamster groups that have funds ?
Mr. HoFFA. There are only two funds that I am familiar with,
actually, and that is the Central States-Southeast-Southwest, pension
and welfare fund, and the Michigan Conference of Teamsters. I have
seen audits of all three of those funds.
Senator Curtis. To what extent does the Teamsters Union engage
in politics ?
Mr. HoFFA. To what extent ?
Senator Curtis. Yes.
Mr. HoiTA. On a local level we engage in politics in some instances
actively, in other instances not, and in some instances from the inter-
national standpoint we operate also in requests of local unions in
politics.
Senator Curtis. Your political operation on a local level, what con-
stitutes that ?
Mr. HoFFA. It is a question of helping candidates get elected, dis-
seminating information to our members, and doing whatever we can do
legally.
Senator Curtis. How do you define "local candidates" ?
Mr. HoFFA. Those running for other than Federal office.
Senator Curtis. Those what ?
Mr. HoFFA. Those who are running for office other than Federal
elections.
Senator Curtis. Other than Federal. That would include State,
county, and city officials ?
Mr. HoFFA. Very easily.
Senator Curtis. Are you prohibited by law in any States from doing
that?
Mr. HoFFA. I am not familiar with all the States. I don't know
if we are or not.
Senator Curtis. Do you engage in politics in reference to the elec-
tion of judges?
Mr. HoFFA. I beg your pardon ?
Senator Curtis. Do you have any political activity in reference to
the election of judges to State and local courts ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am quite sure that we participate in those elections.
Senator Curtis. Do you in Michigan ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Any other States?
Mr. HoFFA. I wouldn't want to get committed, but I would assume so.
Senator Curtis. In those cases where you know about, does that sup-
port of candidates for judges include a contribution in money ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think it could do both.
Senator Curtis. I know it could, but I say does it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I can't answer that, frankly. I would think that
it does both ways; but I am quite sure that we have from time to time
gave donations to political candidates by check or by cash.
Senator Curtis. From w^here would that money come ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13545
Mr. HoFFA. From local unions.
Senator Curtis. From what fund in local unions ?
Mr. HoFFA. What is that ?
Senator Curtis. From what funds in local unions ?
Mr. HoFFA. I would imagine in most instances the general fund. I
understand some of our locals have a special fund.
Senator Citrtis. From what source does the income come that makes
up the general fund of a union ?
Mr. HoFFA. Initiation fees, dues.
Senator Curtis. Do you engage in politics in the election of any
officials connected with schools and education ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, I see it is 5 o'clock.
Will the witness be back another day ?
The Chairman. Yes ; I am confident he will.
I was hoping we could recess at this time. I have a matter to look
after on the floor, and I would like to get over there before adjourn-
ment.
Senator Curtis. At some time I wish to pursue this inquiry that I
am making now, because I am very definitely interested in legislation
concerning it.
The Chairman. The Chair would not at all undertake to preclude
you from pursuing it.
I would anticipate that it would run into quite a lengthy interroga-
tion possibly. I am hoping we could defer you until another day.
Mr. Hoffa will be before the committee again, of course. iVs we
adjourn, I wish to associate myself with the remarks of Senator
Church. I notice he has left the committee room, but I think his re-
marks were very timely and most appropriate with respect to the
position that has been taken publicly, and the code of ethics that has
been adopted by other unions with respect to certain activities. I
regret exceedingly that this witness has a different opinion of what
ethics are and what his responsibility may be to the membership with
regard to these matters.
I am saddened by the impact of the testimony of this witness. I
think as you listen to what has been recorded here this afternoon, the
conclusion is inescapable that under the character of leadership now
being given to the largest labor union in the country, the prospects of
restoring integrity, where integrity has not been heretofore, and pro-
viding a leadership and administration that is capable and willing to
meet the responsibilities the membership of this union are entitled to
have, I think the impression has gone out that the prospects get dimmer
the further we go along for the reforms that are needed.
Mr. Hoffa, I think you have also created an impression and you may
want to correct it, if you care to — you will be given the opportunity —
created the impression in the minds of some people that possibly one
of the reasons you don't do any more toward cleaning up then is
because you are in the same category with those who you are failing to
take action against.
Mr. Hoffa. May I answer that?
The Chairman. You may answer it.
Mr. Hoffa. I say to you Senators respectfully, that the wages,
hours, and conditions of the Teamsters' membership is equal to or
13546 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
better than most labor organizations. And I say that under my lead-
ership I have eliminated trusteeships to the degree that I have been
allowed to eliminate them.
I have adjusted complaints that have come into my office and am in
the process of adjusting additional complaints.
I intend to comply with the constitution of our international union.
I expect that the membership of this country has a right to determine
whether wages, hours, and conditions and the functionings of this
international union, to be able to determine whether or not this inter-
national union is operating in their benefit.
I do not concur, nor do I think it is right nor fair for you to say, as
chairman of this committee, that there is something wrong with my
leadership, simply because I will not deprive people of the right to
make a living nor deprive people of the right and protection of a
constitution which I am bound to uphold.
The Chairman. Your opinion is yours and you are entitled to it.
The Chair made this statement. I did not want to go out and make it
to the press, as I feel about it and as I might be asked about it, but I
wanted to say it looking at you, and say it for the record, because I
don't go out and make speeches and say something, or give out state-
ments to the press about someone that I don't say to their face.
The committee stands in recess until 10 : 30 in the morning.
(Whereupon, at 5 p. m. the hearing recessed, to reconvene at 10 : 30
a. m. Friday, August 8, 1958. The following members were present :
Senators McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Kennedy, and Curtis.)
INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
FRIDAY, AUGUST 8, 1958
United States Senate,
Select Committee on Improper Activities
IN the Labor or Management Field,
Washington^ D. C.
The select committee met at 10 : 30 a. m., pursuant to Senate Reso-
lution 221, agreed to January 29, 1958, in the caucus room. Senate
Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select
committee) presiding.
Present : Senator John L, McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Senator
Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York ; Senator John F. Kennedy,
Democrat, Massachusetts ; Senator Sam J. Ervin, Jr., Democrat, North
Carolina ; Senator Frank Church, Democrat, Idaho ; Senator Karl E.
Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Senator Carl T. Curtis, Repub-
lican, Nebraska.
Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Paul Tierney,
assistant counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; Carmine S.
Bellino, accountant; Pierre E. Salinger, investigator; Leo C. Nulty,
investigator; James P. Kelly, investigator; James Mundie, investi-
gator; John Flanagan, investigator, GAO; Alfred Vitarelli, investi-
gator, GAO ; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk.
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
(Members of the committee present at the convening of the session
were Senators McClellan and Ives.)
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have here an affidavit from Mr.
Anslinger, in connection with the statement that he made swearing to
the truthfulness of the statement that was put in the record some 3
weeks ago, which was to be accompanied by an affidavit. I would like
to have permission to place the affidavit in the record. You gave
instructions to get the affidavit from Mr. Anslinger.
The Chairman. We used a statement that was not sworn to?
Mr. Kennedy. The witness, Anslinger, was expected to testify, but
he became ill, and his testimony was placed in the record with the
understanding that there would be an affidavit to accompany it.
The Chairman. All right ; the affidavit may be placed in the record
at the proper point.^ It is the same as his previous statement ?
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.
1 The affidavit referred to may be found on p. 12487 in pt. 32 of the present series of
hearings.
13547
13548 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
At the close of yesterday, there was some discussion by the witness,
Mr. Hoffa, regarding his interest in the wages, hours, and conditions
of the employees, and we also had some discussion yesterday after-
noon about gangster control of certain unions. We went last year
into the situation in New York City and the paper locals and what
was the result of gangsters' and hoodlums' control over certain of
those unions to the detriment of certain of the Puerto Rican and
Negro workers in New York City.
Today, I would like to, in view of Mr. Hoffa's statement yesterday,
take a situation in Philadelphia, Pa., which Mr. Hoffa had some-
thing to do with, and show the results of gangster and hoodlum con-
trol over a local there and the results on the employees. In that con-
nection, Mr. Chairman, I would like to call Mr. William J. Brennan.
The Chairman. You do solemnly swear that the evidence given
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Brennan. I do.
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM J. BKENNAN
The Chairman. Mr. Brennan, will you state your name, and your
place of residence, and your business or occupation ?
Mr. Brennan. JNIy name is AYilliam J. Brennan, president of Local
138, Hotel and Restaurant Employees, city of Philadelphia, and I
reside at 5443 Angora Terrace, Philadelphia.
The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ?
Mr. Brennan. I do.
Mr. KENNEDY. Now^, Mr. Brennan, from 1942 to 1958, you were
president of the joint board in Philadelphia ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Made up of the eight Restaurant Workers locals in
the Philadelphia area ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And then, in 1958, you decided not to run for that
oflSce again?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, you are also at the present time president of
the State council of the Restaurant Workers locals?
Mr. Brennan. I am.
Mr. Kennedy. And you also are vice president of the Pennsyl-
vania State Federation of Labor ?
Mr. Brennan. I am.
Mr. Kennedy. And you are acting secretary-treasurer and admin-
istrator of the Restaurant Workers Local 87; is that correct?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliich was created to supplement local 410 ?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. ^Yhich we will be discussing ?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, you have been in the labor movement how
long, Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Brennan. Twenty-four years.
Mr. Kennedy. During your period with the Hotel and Restaurant
Workers Union, had you made any attempt to organize the Dewey
chain of restaurants in the Philadelphia area ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13549
Mr. Brennan. Yes ; in the forties ; in the late forties, I don't know
the exaxit year, offhand. I would say around 1946 or 1947.
Mr. Kennedy. Had you had some difficulty at that time ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, we didn't seem to make any headway at all.
Mr. Kennedy. Had you gone back in 1955 and had some conversa-
tions with the officials of that company to inform them you were in-
terested in organizing them ?
Mr. Brennan. I, personally, didn't, but I do believe that an official
of our organization, some of the officers of the joint board, did discuss
with Mr. Baylenson, I believe it was, relative to the organization of
the employees of Dewey's, and Dewey informed him that, "Go get the
people and I will sit down and talk."
Mr. Kennedy. Did you learn around May of 1956 that the em-
ployees of this restaurant and chain had been signed up in another
union ?
Mr. Brennan. I first learned about it the last few days of April
1956, that there was an organization drive going on among Dewey's,
and they were signing cards to jom the Independent Unionist of
America, Local No. 1.
Mr. Kennedy. Had you ever heard of that local ?
Mr. Brennan. I never heard of it before.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know anything about who was behind this
local?
Mr. Brennan. At that moment, I did not. I did not know any
of the officials, or any of those who were in the drive.
Mr. Kennedy. But it wasn't a local that you had known of in your
union experience in Philadelphia ?
Mr. Brennan. No, and I don't think anybody else did.
Mr. Kennedy. How many restaurants are there approximately in
the Dewey chain ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, first they are actually are not restaurants, there
are only three restaurants, and the others are hamburger stands, and
orange juice stands.
Mr. Kennedy. How many approximately ?
Mr. Brennan. Thirteen altogether.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know how many employees were involved ?
Mr. Brennan. At that time I would say in the neighborhood of
250 employees.
Mr. Kennedy. "What else did you hear about this local in April of
1956 in this situation ?
Mr. Brennan. Two or three Dewey employees came to my office to
see me, and they informed me that they had received applications to
join this local union, and that they would rather go into local 138,
which I head. I immediately checked and investigated further, and
then filed charges with the labor board against the procedure that was
going on between the union and, as I interpreted it, the employer in the
signing of these applications.
Mr. Kennedy. Tell us what these employees reported to you.
Mr. Brennan. They reported that they had been told to sign the
cards or they would be fired.
Mr. Kennedy. By whom had they been told this ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, by the managers. They were supposed to be
told by the managers, and, of course, the managers there are working
managers, and they participate the same as an employee.
13550 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Had they been permitted to vote as to whether they
wanted to go into the union ?
Mr. Brennan. To my knowledge, no.
Mr. Kennedy. As they reported this to you, did they say they had
been consulted about belonging to the union 'i
Mr. Brennan. They said they were handed a card to sign, and they
were not consulted about it at all.
Mr. Kennedy. And told they would have to join the union or be
fired?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct; that is why I filed the charges.
Mr. Kennedy. Did quite a number of employees come to you with
this?
Mr. Brennan. Those that voluntarily came to me would number
approximately 45.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you learn during this period of time who was
behind this local No. 1 ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes ; I found out, I would say, about the first part
of May, that a fellow by the name of Abe Goldberg was supposed to
be leading the organization.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was xVbe Goldberg ?
Mr. Brennan. Abe Goldberg is a former business agent of the
Teamsters Union, in Philadelphia.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that the same Goldberg who did organizational
work for Johnny Dioguardia in New York City, for local 102 ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, personally I don't know that, but from what
I gathered, he was.
Mr. Kennedy. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that we have established
that he was one and the same, that he did go up to work for Mr. Dio-
guardia after local 102 was formed. Now, he was one of the people
behind this ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know anything more about Abe Goldberg ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, all I know, he was a former business agent of
the Teamsters Union in Philadelphia, Local 929. There had been
some question on a previous congressional investigation, and he was
removed from office at that time.
Mr. Kennedy. Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Salinger could just give
a little summary of his background.
The Chairman. All right, Mr. Salinger.
Mr. Salinger. Mr. Abraham Goldberg was former secretary-treas-
urer of Local 929 of the Teamsters Union. In 1947, along with a num-
ber of others, he w^as indicted for violation of the Hobbs Antiracketeer-
ing Act, and as a result of this indictment was sentenced to 3 months
and a fine of $2,500 and the sentence was then suspended and he was
placed on 2 years' probation.
One condition of this probation was that he resign as secretary-
treasurer of local 929 and hold no union office for a period of 2 years.
Mr. Kennedy. Also involved in that matter. Mr. Chairman, was the
witness that we have had some discussion about in prior hearings, and
that was Mr. Ben Lapensohn. He was involved with this, and Abe
Goldberg in 1947. But any way you heard he was one of the indi-
viduals, and did you hear about anybody else that was behind this
union ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13551
Mr. Brennan. Not at that particular time. It was sometime later
that I found that Mr. Feldman was interested.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was Mr. Feldman ?
Mr. Brennan. Mr. Feldman was Sam Feldman, an officer of 929 of
the local Teamsters in Philadelphia.
Mr. Kennedy. Does he still hold that position ?
Mr. Brennan. As far as I know ; yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know how many times Mr. "Shorty" Feld-
man has been arrested ?
Mr. Brennan. Frankly, I have been told at the time of the publicity,
and I never knew he was arrested.
Mr. KJENNEDY. Mr. Chairman, we have Mr. Feldman's background
also, and we would like to place that in the record.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Salinger. Mr. Samuel "Shorty" Feldman who also used the
name of Samuel Frank, and Samuel Harris, has been arrested on 18
occasions, has been convicted 6 times, and has served 2 prison terms.
In 1924 he served a 6-month county prison term for larceny by shop-
lifting and in 1929 he served a 3- to 10-year term in the Eastern State
Penitentiary of Pennsylvania for entering to steal.
Conspiracy in carrying burglary tools. He also served a peniten-
tiary sentence in 1935 in Sing Sing Prison in New York, 4 years, for
burglary and attempted grand larceny in the second degree. Mr.
Feldman was arrested by the FBI last week for interstate transporta-
tion of stolen bonds.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan and Ives.)
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Feldman was also involved in our hearings on
the Philadelphia Teamsters. We had some testimony, Mr. Chairman,
that he stated to an employer there that "for $50,000 or $25,000 I could
have some picket lines removed from the employer's place of business."
The Chairman. That is already in the record by sworn testimony ?
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger, what is Mr. Feldman's present
position ?
Mr. Salinger. Business agent of Local 929 of the Teamsters Union
in Philadelphia.
Mr. Kennedy. He still remains a business agent of the Teamsters'
Union ; is that correct ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Despite his criminal record and what we revealed of
his activities last year ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. He was one of those that you found to be active
behind this union ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, yes; I found that he was connected. I don't
know whether directly or indirectly, but he was connected.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what steps you took ?
Mr. Brennan. I will have to refer to my memory on dates. I do
have some chronology here. But on May 4 I filed charges of unfair-
labor practices against the local union and also against the employer,
Dewey.
13o02 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. "NVlio was it, specifically, as far as the employer was
concerned ? Did you mention anyone ?
Mr. Brennan. Dewey Yessner.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you talk to the international union about filing
these charges ?
Mr. Brennan. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. The internationa,l union of the Hotel and Restau-
rant Workers ? ; i ;.
Mr. Brennan. Yes. I got in touch with them and told them that
there was an organization, I believe that the situation was, that this
was an independent group. I had never heard of them before. Of
course, I will have to say that I was a little confused at the time
because there was another Hotel and Restaurant Workers' Union, local
No. 1, in the city of Philadelphia, an independent group, and I had
them confused with them.
But by this time I had found out that it was not the same group ;
they were different gi'oups. I told them that I didn't appreciate the
way the organization campaign was going on, and I thought it was
very bad, and I felt as though I isliould immediately interfere, and
they told me to go ahead, to do everything I could to stop them,
(At this point, Senator Ervin entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us what you did then ?
Mr. Brennan. I then filed the charges, and, as a result of further
connections with the employees, I. sent out communications and letters
to all the individual employees in Dewey's restaurant.
Mr. Kennedy. Were there hearings held ?,
Mr. Brennan. There were hearings held by the State labor-rela-
tions board. I believe the first one was held on May 28, 1956.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear or learn during this period of time any
of the other people that were behind this ?
Mr. Brennan. Through newspaper publicity, and active neAvspaper
publicity through the district attorney's office in Philadelphia.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did vou learn from the district attorney's
office? ^ ;
Mr, Brennan. I learned from the district attorney's office that they
informed me that behind it was Shorty Feldman, that he had been a
part of it, and also that Mr. Hoffa had interceded.
However, our own international union had advised me that they
had been approached by the Teamsters Union relative to issuing a
charter to the Philadelphia group.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Just SO that we get it in perspective, this local 1
was going, and you filed charges against local 1, this independent
union?
Mr. Brennan. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You knew at that time that Shorty Feldman was
behind it, and you knew that Abe Goldberg was behind it.
Mr. Brennan. Correct. ,
Mr. Kennedy. Then you were filing charges. You talked to your
own international union, and they told you to go ahead and fight this
group. Then you filed the charges, and there were some hearings
held. Then what happened?
Mr. Brennan. Then there was considerable publicity in the Phila-
delphia newspapers and over the air relative to further background
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13553
of this organization. Our joint board instructed a committee of three
to check on this publicity.
Mr. Kennedy. Is this still 'just local 1 ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. This is still local 1 ?
Mr. Brennan. No ; this is local 410.
Mr. Kennedy. You have to explain how we got from local 1 to
local 410. Wliat happened then ? How did local 1 become local 410 ?
Mr. Brennan. Local 1 became local 410 on the application of a
charter after the Labor Board case, after they had been cited by the
Labor Board, and Goldberg had been removed.
Mr. Kennedy. This was a hearing before the Board. Then local
1 became 410 of what international union ?
Mr. Brennan. The Hotel and Restaurant.
Mr, Kennedy. So, they received a charter from your own interna-
tional ; is that correct?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you learn how they were able to get that charter
when they had this bad background ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, I believe that at the time the international
union issued this charter, I believe, the background had been re-
moved. In other words, the fact of Goldberg and it was now an
independent group, a fellow by the name of Barrone, a fellow by the
name of Hughes, a fellow by tliQ name of Bergowitz.
Mr. Kennedy. Didn't they have a man by the name of Julius Berg
in that local ?
Mr. Brennan. It was Julius Berg or Bergowitz.
Mr. Kennedy. Berg?
Mr. Brennan. Or Bergowitz. Originally, it was Bergowitz, I be-
lieve.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't he one of those who was behind the local, in
addition to Goldberg, in addition to Feldman ?
Mr. Brennan. At that time, not of our knowledge.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you learn that, subsequently ?
Mr. Brennan. After the charter had been issued and on informa-
tion from the district attorney's office.
Mr. Kennedy. Wasn't he made secretary of this local 410?
Mr, Brennan. That is correct. That was preceding the informa-
tion we received.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know how many times he had been arrested ?
Mr, Brennan, No; I did not. In fact, I have been asked by the
international union, and I had no knowledge of any record of Hughes,
Barrone, or Bergowitz.
Mr. Kennedy. He had been arrested 11 times and had 2 convictions.
Mr. Brennan, I since learned that, but I did not know it then,
Mr, Kennedy. Was there also a Samuel Hoffman behind this local ?
Did you learn that?
Mr. Brennan. His name was mentioned, and the D. A. said that he
was. But I don't know that. I don't even know Hoffman; I never
met him.
Mr. Kennedy, But you were told that by the district attorney ?
Mr. Brennan. We were told that by the district attorney.
Mr. Kennedy. He has a record of 14 arrests and 5 convictions.
13554 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Brennan. Well, I read of Hoffman in the newspapers for yetirs
during my life in Philadelphia, but I have never yet met him. I
don't even know anything about him, although the newspapers con-
tinually publicize tlie fact that he is supposed to be a racketeer.
Mr. Kennedy. He is also known as Cappy Hoffman, is he not?
Mr. Brennan. I believe so ; yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you learn as to why the charter was given
by your international union ?
Mr. Brennan. The international union informed us that they had
received a request to install a charter in the luncheonette field in
Philadelphia; I, as president of the joint board, had to admit that we
were derelict in not concentrating on this field, because it existed and
there are quite a few people in it. All the local unions in Philadelphia
seemed to have passed up the field. But they had requested to put a
charter in for this independent group, the people who were now with-
out a local union, so to speak.
Mr. Kennedy. And Avho made the requests that they be given a
cliarter ?
Mr. Brennan. We were led to believe that it was through the
Teamsters Union.
Mr. Kennedy. Who in the Teamsters Union?
Mr. Brennan. I believe it was through Mr. Hoffa. In fact, if my
information is correct, Mr. Hoffa himself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa himself?
Mr. Brennan. I believe lie interceded. I may be wrong, but I be-
lieve he did. I know Mr. Miller did.
Mr. Kennedy. Who did you learn had contacted Mr. Hoffa to make
this request?
Mr. Brennan. Mr. Feldman, I believe.
Mr. Kennedy. Shorty Feldman ?
Mr. Brennan. I believe so; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. This is Mr. Feldman, who has been arrested 18
times and convicted 6 times ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, now I know that, but before I didn't. I knew
Feldman originally as a business agent of local 929, whom I met at
various State conventions. I knew nothing about any record, other
than the fact that he was a business agent, elected business agent of
a local union, up until the time that this situation developed.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also understand that involved in this was
a man by the name of Julius Berg, from Detroit? Excuse me; Mr.
Maxie Stern, from Detroit.
Mr. Brennan. The D. A. mentioned a man by the name of Stern,
from Detroit. Also, the newspapers published it at that time. In
other words, the D. A. informed us. I believe it was the county
detective, the chief of county detectives, who informed me about it
in the D. A.'s office.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know anything about Maxie Stern?
Mr. Brennan. No. I would not know him if I fell over him.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear about anything in connection with the
Briggs Hotel out there ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, I was told that there was a conference in the
Briggs Hotel or a meeting in the Briggs Hotel or a phone call to the
Briggs Hotel to a fellow by the name of Stern, who. I subsequently
learned, was supposed to be a fellow by the name of Maxie Stern.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13555
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also learn that lie discussed the matter
withMr.Hoffa?
Mr. Brennan. I was informed of that, yes, through the D. A.'s
office.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know about his background — Maxie Stern ?
Mr. Brennan. No ; I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have some information.
Would you give the background of Maxie Stern ?
Mr. Salinger. Maxie Stern, also known as Max Sterns, Michael
Jack Ross, and Jack Marino, in 1982 was arrested for breaking and
entering in Detroit, and the charge was dismissed. In 1933, as Mich-
ael Jack Ivoss, he was arrested for contributing to the delinquency of a
minor. This was dismissed. In September of 1934, he was sen-
tenced to the State penitentiary at Jackson, Mich., for armed robbery.
From there he was paroled and violated back to the penitentiary on
a number of occasions until December 1945, when he was finally re-
leased from his parole. In 1948 he was arrested for violation of the
National Stolen Properties Act. Mr. Stern is known as a close asso-
ciate of Angelo Meli, Peter Licavoli, Joseph "Scarface" Bommarito,
and Joe Massei. He is also known to be in contact with Raffaele
Quasarano. He has been employed and associated with the Mexican
Villa Policy and Mutual House, a numbers operations in Michigan,
also employed by the Michigan Mutual Distributing Co., a company
owned by Peter Licavoli and Joe Bommarito. The headquarters of
this Mexican Villa Policy and Mutual House was in a building leased
by Max Stern.
Mr. Kennedy. So this local 1 became local 410 of the Hotel and
Restaurant Workers Union. Did you have any difficulty with them
after that?
Mr. Brennan. No. The district attorney informed us that they
had made threats against me, but nobody, personally, threatened me
at all.
Mr. Kennedy. They had information ?
Mr. Brennan. They had information that they had threatened me.
In fact, the newspapers published it, but nobody at any time ever
threatened or approached me, personally.
Mr. Kennedy. What happened, so far as local 410 is concerned ?
Mr. Brennan. Local 410, after being chartered, naturally, had their
own autonomy, and ])roceeded to follow the ordinary procedure of or-
ganization, as I understand it. During that time, there was consid-
erable publicity over a period of about 6 or 7 months. The news-
papers contended that they were coercing and intimidating em-
ployers. These complaints came to the joint board, but, of course, the
joint board had no authority over a charter other than to try to clieck.
We did check, and we could find nothing out. So, we asked the in-
ternational union to investigate the situation. The international
union did investigate over some period of time, and still the publicity
was going on, which everybody in Philadelphia connected with our
joint board was very much disturbed with, because I, myself, found
my name in the newspaper every time I turned around, and it was
sandwiched in between names of people whom I had never met, never
saw in my life before, and, of course, 9 out of 10 people just don't read
the newspapers and read what it says altogether. They read my
13556 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
name and they read other names and I found that even the neighbors
were kind of sliying away from me.
They felt that I was guilty by association in some way. However,
during this course, we kept pressing the international union, and Ed
Miller said that he, himself, if necessaiy, would come in and investi-
gate. Finally, I would say around about March 1057, our general
president, Ed Miller, came into Philadelphia, to my office, and I be-
lieve he called in Berg, Feldman, Barrone, and Hughes, and had a
conversation with them.
After the meeting was over with, he told me that these fellows were
out. He wanted me to take over. On March 12, I believe, he noti-
fied me or gave me the authority to take over the union and expel or
dismiss those who were associated with the local union. On March
13, 1 took possession of the local union.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the status of the funds in the local union ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, I could not say, from memory. I actually
have the figures here.
Mr. Kennedy. Just generally.
Mr. Brennan. Generally, the receipts during the period of time —
that is actually, the charter was issued June 11 — between the time of
June 11 and March 13, the receipts were in the neighborhood of $19,-
000 or $20,000. The assets when I took over was about $400 worth of
furniture and $52. The liabilities of the audit report, as the inter-
national had the books audited, showed actually $19,000, $19,900, in
liabilities, and subsequently I found there was $3,000 or $4,000 more
in liabilities. So, the actual receipts were approximately $19,000 dur-
ing the period of time, and the liabilities, when I took over, were in
the neighborhood of $22,000 or $23,000.
The Chairman. Do you mean that is in addition? They owed that
much in addition to what they spent out of their receipts ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes, sir. In other words, they took in $19,000, they
had $52 left, and they owed $23,000.
The Chairman. How long a period of time had that operated ?
Mr. Brennan. Between 8 and 9 months.
The Chairman. Were there any assets to show for any expendi-
tures or for the liabilities ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, they had the equipment, I would say, which, I
would say, was in the neighborliood of four to six hundred dollars.
However, a great many of these liabilities were printing bills, tele-
phone bills. They were behind in their Federal taxes, and so forth.
In fact, quite a good deal of it was
The Chairman. In other words, there had been no investment of
funds?
Mr. Brennan. No.
The Chairman. They had spent the $19,000 they had received and
had incurred debts for $22,000 more ?
Mr. Brennan. That is right. Wliich, on the record, appears to be
the normal, shall I say, printing bills, organization, picket lines, and
so forth.
The Chairman. They would not hardly have that much printing,
$22,000.
Mr. Brennan. Well, I will admit it is a lot of money.
The Chairman. How many members did it have ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13557
Mr. Bkennan. At that time, approximately 300 to 350 members,
I guess.
The Chaieman. It was a pretty fast operation, wasn't it ?
Mr. Kennedy. Weren't there also some checks made to individuals
that you questioned ?
Mr. Brennan. Yes. In other words, there was checks — well, shall
I refer to them as bouncing checks ? When I took over, checks were
issued for which there were no funds to cover them, and I was in-
structed by Cincinnati to try to take care of what 1 thought were
legitimate business obligations, which I did, as we went along.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Feldman have anything to do with the money
from the union, with the checks ?
Mr. Brennan. Feldman informed me that he knew that the union
was broke, and there was 4 or 5 checks, I am not sure which, amount-
ing in total to $151, that he had cashed for these individuals. He
wanted me to make them good. Up to now I have not done so because
the local union does not have that kind of money that I can pay out
indiscriminately to everybody w4io sayes they have money coming.
Mr. IvENNEDY. What about its organizational work during the time
of its existence^ Were you satished with the kind of work it was
doing, or were they just organizing from the top down, just going to
the owners of these places ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, from what we could find out immediately fol-
lowing my taking over, several people who were members of the local
union protested their membership. They were employed by 3 or 4
different employers. You have to remember that these establishments
normally hire anywhere from 3 to 7 or 8 people, each one of these
individual establishments. They are not big operations. They came
to me and told me that they did not want to be in the union.
Of course, while they were still, shall I say, being paid below the
scale, I told them very frankly, and the Labor Board — a couple of
them went to the Labor Board — that we did not want them, if they
did not want to be members of the union, we certainly did not want
them in the union.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also find fault with some of the contracts
that were made?
Mr. Brennan. Well, yes. You have to take into consideration that
the wage scale in that particular field is very, very low, and in most all
of these instances the contracts provided for improvements. But I
would say the wages still were not enough.
Mr. Kennedy. And generally they were cut down contracts?
Mr. Brennan. I was informed of that by these employees that
came to me.
(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. I might also point out, Mr. Chairman, that a year
ago he was sometimes confused by his neighbors with the other" Mr.
Brennan who was involved with some of these people. He has been
down here for several days, and since the testimony of the last few
days some of his neighbors have been reading in the paper t: at Mr.
Brennan is taking the fifth amendment. I think we better straighten
it out.
Mr. Brennan. Yes. One of the witnesses in the room came and
talked to me and said they were talking about me all morning. I don't
21243— 5.8— pt. 36 19
13558 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
know tlie other Mr. Brennan. I never met him. But I was very much
concerned when even my wife was under the impression that I had
taken the fifth amendment. That I did not like. I might find my
suitcase on the porch when I go home.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Brennan has a very high reputation in the com-
munity and also a very big reputation in hxbor circles in Pennsylvania.
I wanted to make sure it was understood that it was a different Mr.
Brennan, with no relation.
Mr. Brennan. I felt a little disturbed. Thank you.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you disturbed at this kind of an operation as a
labor union official, Mr. Brennan ?
Mr. Brennan. I don't know whether you would call it disturbed or
not, but I certainly didn't feel too good. It worried me. I could not
sleep very well. I say this, and I say it without a question of doubt,
every announcer, every newspaper broadcaster, or every station broad-
cast, every television program, every paper you picked up had some-
thing about local 410 and the people who were supposed to be behind
it, people I never met in my life, never talked to.
And sandwiched in between there would be the name of Bill Bren-
nan. Of course, naturally, even in my own family, certain parts of it,
they said, ''Well, he must be associated with these people or his name
would not be in there."
Mr. Kennedy. I am thinking more of an operation as a union official,
in this kind of an operation.
Mr. Brennan. I spent 25 years in the labor movement, with the
thought in mind that my obligation was to look out for the people I
represent, and take care of them, and I was very much disturbed to find
that here we were in a position through no fault of our own, and I say
that very frankly, through no desire on our part we found ourselves in
a position where we were under condemnation and even the members of
the unions, belonging to other local unions, who for one reason or
another possibly had a gripe, were advocating the fact that all local
unions, and union leaders were a lot of thieves, burglars, and what
have you got.
Mr. Kennedy. Is this one of the worse operations that you have seen
in your experience as a union official ?
Mr. Brennan. I would say publicitywise. I have never experienced
anything like it.
Mr. Kennedy. Other than just publicitywise, the operations of the
local and those who were behind it who have some 50 or 60 arrests be-
tween them ?
Mr. Brennan. Well, in the final charges brought against the local,
naturally the international union has certain rules, and the final charges
were brought against the local of bringing the labor movement and
the local union into disrepute; and failure to make proper reports, and
failure in the course of that time to submit constitutions and rules of
order for the international approval. That was the charge on which
the charter was lifted.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all.
The Chairman. Are there any questions ?
Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, I w^ould just like to commend Mr.
Brennan for the fine reputation which he has acquired in working for
the interests of labor in this Nation. It is refreshing to have, in the
course of these hearings, a labor leader like yourself come before the
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13559
committee and make a full and frank statement without resorting to
the hftii amendment and without resorting to a bad memory or any
other thing to prevent the committee from receiving evidence from
you.
I want to commend you, and express the hope that men like your-
self will be in charge of the labor movement in this country in the years
to come.
Mr. Brennax. Thank you very much, Senator.
The Chairman. Mr. Brennan, what is the present status of that
union ?
Mr. Brennan. There is no more 410, I am happy to say. There is
now local 87, which was during the course of the time that I was trustee
of local 410, I held meetings of the individual members, and the total
membership now is approximately 310. In that time, during the
course of these meetings, the members informed me, couldn't I do
something about 410, and it had a bad name, and a bad reputation, and
I should do something about it. They were people that didn't want to
wear the buttons that had 410 on them and I had to supply them with
smaller buttons that had no numbers. I told them in view of the fact
that they comprised the local union, I could make recommendations but
the fact that they comprised the local miion it would have to be them
and them only who made the request for change in identification.
Subsequently they drew up a petition and this petition was signed
voluntarily by approximately, I don't have it with me, but I believe it
was signed by 160 of the membership at that time. I forwarded that
to Cincinnati, and Cincinnati immediately changed the name or num-
ber of the local union to local 87, and changed my position from
trustee to acting administrative secretary and treasurer which I now
am doing.
The Chairman. So local 410 as such and in name has been liqui-
dated ?
Mr. Brennan. Thank God.
The Chairman. And its assets such as it had, and its liabilities too,
I assume, were transferred to a new local, 87 ?
Mr.^ Brennan. That bringes in something, I understand. Senator.
I don't want to say its assets and liabilities, that is for the interna-
tional union to say what it is. I don't want to be held responsible for
the liabilities of local 410.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Brennan. I understand there is a suit now relative to wages
which I have refused to pay to previous officers of 410.
The Chairman. Then local 87 is a new local, but it is comprised
primarily of members of old local 410 ?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct.
The Chairman. So you are trying to make a fresh start, and get the
stigma off, and give them decent union leadership and representation
and administration ?
Mr. Brennan. That is correct. Senator.
The Chairman. I hope you have marked success, and we wish you
well.
Mr. Brennan. From the reaction of the previous publicity, and
since 87 has been in existence, I think the change has been healthy for
the individual member because we have been able to negotiate con-
13560 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
tracts covering the original membership which have improved their
benefits within the last 2 or 3 months.
The Chairman. May I make this statement, and I am sure you
agree with me, that such operations and such character of adminis-
tration and manipulations as you found tending an associate had with
local 410, when it becomes known and you have this adverse publicity
and when members in other locals as you point out find out about these
things, it does have an impact upon honest and decent unionism. It
causes people to wonder, and sometimes the innocent and the good in
unionism gets a black eye by reason of some of these rotten apples that
appear here and there.
Mr. Brexxan. I certainly do, and as a matter of fact I run into it in
this particular case. I emphasize that I liope the press and the public
will recognize the fact that local 87 is going to be the right kind of a
union, or it won't be a union at all.
The Chairman. Let me aske you. I have very strong view^s about
this. Since you bear the reputation you do, and you have be«n in the
labor movement a long time, and you have been identified with this
problem and in contact with it, and since it has become your respon-
sibility to try to find a solution to the conditions you found there, what
is your view with respect to taking people as soon as they get out of the
penitentiary and putting them in a local union as business managers,
or organizers, or giving them any other official position ?
What is your reaction to those practices as a decent union labor
leader ^
Mr. Brennan. Well, I would say this, and of course I don't know,
that sometimes people go to the penitentiaries for different things,
and I wouldn't want to say in general that an individual's mistake
should be held against him all of the rest of his life. I believe the
type and kind of an offense he has committed is important.
The Chairman. What is that ?
Mr. Brennan. The type and kind of an offense he has been charged
with would have something to do with it, and I believe in justice to
the individual member of the union that certainly the individual
member should give some consideration to the individual himself
who feels he is going to represent a group of people. I don't believe
as a practice a man should be, shall I say, denied the right to hold
office in the union just because he has been found guilty or has been
charged with some particular offense.
However, I don't think it should be used and continued, the practice
should be used and continued in his occupation from the time that
he is released from prison, so to speak.
The Chairman. It seems to me to be one of the great evils that is
tending to grow up in the labor movement. I just can't understand
how people who are convicted of robbery and burglary, and other
crimes of that nature, arson, and so on, I just can't see that upon their
release tlie}^ are immediately qualified to have such responsible posi-
tions. I do not believe in putting obstructions in their way toward
rehabilitation, but I don't think the practice of putting them in posi-
tions of authority and trust and over working people is a good
practice or a good policy until they have demonstrated their course.
Mr. Brennan. That I agree with.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13561
The Chairman, I think it is something we are going to have to
legishite about, and I am going to support legislation to try to eradi-
cate that 2)ractice from the labor movement.
Mr. Brennan. I agree with you 100 percent, Senator.
The ChairMx\n. Thank you very much.
Senator Ervin. If I may make an observation along that same line,
I agree with Mr. Brennan that no man should be barred from em-
ployment because of his conviction of a crime, and there are crimes
which do not involve moral turpitude which I think ought not to bar
a man from union office. There are a lot of misdemeanors that
people can be convicted of that don't involve moral turpitude. But
I think a crime that involves moral turpitude, especially such felonies
as armed robbery and burglary which are perpetrated for the purpose
in the main of committing thefts, are ofi'enses which ought to bar a
man from being permitted to be appointed to an office and to exercise
authority over honest men, at least until such time as his conduct
subsequent to release from prison indicates in the w^ords of the Scrip-
ture, that he has "brought forth fruits and meat for repentance."
But we have had in this case a man who allegedly had participated
in an armed robbery, where $23,000 I believe was involved, who was
convicted and sentenced to the penitentiary for a term of not less
than 10 or more than 25 years.
The president of the Teamsters according to the evidence assisted
in getting the man released from imprisonment and placed upon
payroll by the offer of a job and very shortly after he is released he is
made a business manager of a local union, and then given a place
among the executive board at a reputed salary of approximately
$12,000 a year.
Then after he takes his official position in the union, he goes around
and he does acts which give rise to inferences that are very strong
of misbehavior in an abuse of his otHcial rank. When his conduct
is reported by the persons affected to the president of this great union,
the president of this great union acquits him of all wrongdoing upon
his own testimony without making any effort to contact the person
wdio claimed to have been wronged.
I think that Congress is going to have to step in and prevent per-
sons immediately after their release from prison, where they serve a
sentence on commission of crimes involving moral turpitude, I think
Congress ought to step in and pass some laws to put an end to a prac-
tice which puts men of that character in positions of authority over
honest men.
Mr. Kennedy. I might just say, you have an individual similar to
that in Philadelphia right at this time, in ''Shorty" Feldman, have you
not?
Mr. Brennan. Well, of course, the knowledge of these facts is the
thing that governs your thoughts. I say to you that I always looked
upon "Shorty" Feldman, until this publicity, I always looked on him
as a business representative of a local union there and I had no knowl-
edge about him, and at no time up until this incident did I laiow that
he had ever been arrested before.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been convicted twice of burglary and sent
to Sing Sing and to Eastern State Penitentiary in Pennsylvania, and
13562 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
arrested 18 times, with 6 convictions, and he is still a union official
of this local Teamsters Union, is he not ?
Mr. Brennan. That Mr. Kennedy, is the problem of the Team-
sters Union, and I don't know anything about "Shorty" Feldman
other than what I have read.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't have anybody like him under you, do you ?
Mr. Brennan. I certainly do not, not to my knowledge and if I
do I would want to know it.
The Chairman. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Miss Lulubelle Eose.
The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ?
You do solemnly swear that the evidence, given before this Senate
select committee shall be tlie truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God.
Miss Rose. I do.
TESTIMONY OF MISS LULUBELLE ROSE
The Chairman. State your name, and your residence, and your
business or occupation.
Miss Rose. My name is Lulubelle Rose, 1516 South Woodstock
Street, Philadelphia, Pa. I work for Dewey's.
The Chairman. For Dewey's Restaurant ?
Miss Rose. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ?
Miss Rose. Yes ; I do.
Mr. Kennedy. You are a waitress at Dewey's, is that rights
Miss Rose. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And you work at 1225 Market Street ?
Miss Rose No; I have been transferred from 1225 Market Street.
Mr. Kennedy. ^Yliere are you now ?
Miss Rose. I am at 326 North Broad Street.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you been a waitress for Dewey's?
Miss Rose. Seven years.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, during April of 1956, were you notified or
given any notification regarding a union ?
Miss Rose. Yes ; the employees there were approached by Mr. Harry
Shapiro, he is our day manager, and he told us that Mr. Dewey yester-
day signed a contract with this independent union No. 1 for our benefit
and he gave us these cards to sign.
We were given these cards to sign and we were told that we were
automatically already in the union, but they wanted our signature,
and we had 1 week to sign or we would be automatically fired.
Mr. Kennedy. You never had been consulted about the union?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You never had been asked whether you wanted to
join the union ?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. And nobody from the union had approached you?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You were told by the management that you signed
up with the union or otherwise you would be fired; is that correct?
Miss Rose. That is correct.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13563
Mr. Kennedy. So what did you do, did you want to join the union?
Miss KosE. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not ?
MissKosE. No.
Mr. Kennedy. So what did you do, did you sign the card ?
Miss Rose. Well, to protect our job, the majority of the people did
sign, and some quit their jobs before they would sign, and after that
a committee of employees got together, and weno up to see Mr.
Brennan.
Mr. Kennedy. That was Mr. Brennan who just testified here?
Miss Rose. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And you protested to Mr. Brennan as to what had
happened ; is that correct ?
Miss Rose. Yes ; we told him the situation.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he state that he would file charges before the
Pennsylvania Labor Board ?
Miss Rose. Yes ; he did.
Mr. Kennedy. There were some hearings, were there ?
Miss Rose. Yes, sir ; there were.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you told then or subsequently about your
initiation fees or your dues ?
Miss Rose. Yes, sir ; we were told that our initiation fee would be
$15, and dues would be $4 a month, but that our employer, he would
pay our initiation dues for us, and our first month's dues.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know that your employer had paid any
money to Mr. Feldman for the purposes of bringing this union in ?
Miss Rose. No ; we did not.
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't know anything about that ?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear anything further after that? You
signed the card and then what happened ?
Miss. Rose. Later on we had a meeting, we were called to a meeting
at the Majestic Hotel, and the majority of the employees did go be-
cause they wanted to hear some more about this union that we were in.
Mr. Kennedy. Who presided ?
Miss Rose. Mr. Abe Goldberg presided over that meeting.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there any one else present ?
Miss Rose. There was Mr. Jules Berg sitting on the sideline.
Mr. Kennedy. They seemed to be the ones in charge ?
Miss Rose. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. We have already discussed their background and
criminal records. Wliat happened after that ?
Miss Rose. You mean at that particular meeting ?
Mr. Kennedy. No, after the meeting, then did they read anything?
Did they read the contract to you ?
Miss Rose. They read parts of the contract to us, and they read that
we wouldn't be fired for anything except drunkenness and stealing
and that he would get raises for us which we never received and a lot
of other things that had no meaning whatsoever, and the majority
of the meeting was taken up with self-praise of himself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Abe Goldberg ?
Miss Rose. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you about his convictions and his arrests?
13564 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Miss Rose. Oh, no, and he said he was recommended by the labor
board, and he had about 2 hours of self-praise about his wonderful
work in the union.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you Mr. Jules Berg's arrests and con-
victions ?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. He didn't mention that ?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You were in that union, and were you subsequently
transferred to another union ?
Miss Rose. Yes; we were. After the labor intervened for us, we
were transferred to 410, and Mr. Brennan called us to his office and
there we met a Mr. Ciccardini, who was a representative of the inter-
national union, and he told us that Mr. Jules Berg would preside over
us, and he recommended him, and he called him a brother member or
something or other, which they used among union officials.
Mr. Kennedy. You were transferred into local 410 ?
Miss Rose. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Did the membership want to transfer into 410 ?
Miss Rose. Well, we all talked and said, "Well, we will see exactly
what they have to offer," and we went to their meeting, and we found
the same thing, Mr. Jules Berg presided over the meeting, and the same
conditions that Mr. Abe Goldberg had presided over before.
(At this point the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ervin, Mundt.)
Mr. Kennedy. So it Avas just the same ?
Miss Rose. It seems that way.
Mr. Kennedy. You were never allowed to vote ?
Miss Rose. No ; we never voted on anything. We never saw a con-
tract. We never read a contract, and we were never allowed to vote
on any matters whatsoever.
Mr. Kennedy. You were never consulted at all on these matters?
Miss Rose. On any aft'airs ; no.
Mr. Kennedy. You were put in by the employer to local 1 and then
transferred from local 1 to 410 ?
Miss Rose. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And during all of this you were never consulted ?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You never received financial reports ?
Miss Rose. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You never knew what happened to your money ?
Miss Rose. No ; this is the first I heard of it now.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have to pay any dues ?
Miss Rose. Yes : we were paying $4 monthly.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know what happened to that money ?
Miss Rose. No ; we do not.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that held out of your pay ?
Miss Rose. That was automatically taken out.
Mr. Kennedy. It was automatically taken out ?
Miss Rose. Yes ; it was.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you sign cards authorizing that ?
Miss Rose. No ; we did not.
Mr. Kennedy. It was just automatically done ?
Miss Rose. That is correct.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13565
Mr. Kennedy. All right.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions ?
If not, thank you very much. Your testimony has been very helpful.
Miss Rose. You are welcome.
The Chairman. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Shorty Feldman.
The Chairman. Come forward, Mr. Feldman. Be sworn, please.
You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Feldman. I do.
TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL FELDMAN
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your
business or occupation,
Mr. Feldman. Samuel Feldman, 1124 Unruh Avenue, Philadelphia.
The Chairman. What is your occupation, Mr. Feldman ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer that on the grounds that it may
tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Do you mean your occupation is such that you
cannot acknowledge publicly what it is ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
The Chairman. Do you have counsel ?
Mr. Feldman, No, sir.
The Chairman. The Chair will state to you that the committee
will not take any advantage of the fact that you do not have counsel,
but you will be interrogated just as other witnesses who have assumed
the same attitude who did appear with counsel.
Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. You are a business agent for local 929 ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground that it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy, How long have you held that position ? Could you
tell us that?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Actually, you have been with the Teamsters Union
since 1940, isn't that correct ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Feldman, as Mr. Salinger stated,
has just been arrested for the transportation of stolen bonds last week
and is out on bail at the present time. I don't expect to go into that
matter at this time.
The Chairman. That matter will not be gone into. That is, any-
thing touching upon the merits of it.
Mr. Kennedy. I wouldn't go into it at all, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Don't go into that, but interrogate him about his
work with the union and any other activities that might be pertinent
to labor-management relations.
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
13566 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Feldman has been before the committee before
in connection with the testimony that we had that he tried to shake
down some employers up in Philadelphia, for, I believe, either $25,000
or $50,000.
The Chairman. Which amount is correct, Mr. Feldman ?
Mr. Kennedy. I believe it is $50,000, isn't it, Mr. Feldman ?
Mr. Feldman. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know which it is. Did you get any of the
money ?
Mr. Feij)man. I refuse to answer on the grounds that it may tend
to incriminate me.
The Ciiair:man. Let's have order.
Mr. Kennedy. What I would like to ask you about specifically, Mr.
Feldman, is your connection with the establisliment of this local inde-
pendent No. 1. Could you tell us about the background of that?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us about your conversation with
Mr. Hoff a regarding that matter ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why you approached Mr. Hoffa
to help you on this matter ? Why you went all the way out to Detroit
or contacted Detroit, contacted Mr. Hoffa out there to help you and
assist you in this matter ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. What was it about ISIr. Hoffa that led you to believe
that he would help somebody such as yourself ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy, Did you also contact Mr. Maxie Stern, in Detroit?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did you contact Mr. Maxie Stern who also has
a long criminal record ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you arrange for Mr. Maxie Stern to contact
Mr. Hoffa in connection with this also ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you paid, Mr. Feldman, by Dewey's restaurant
chain to organize, to take in these employees ?
Mr. Feldman, I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Did they pay and finance you in signing up the
employees ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you identify this check ?
The Chairman. I believe you said your name is Samuel Feldman,
is that what you stated ?
Mr. Feldman. That is right.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13567
The Chairman. I hand you a check, a photostatic copy of a check,
dated June 21, 1956, in the amount of $750, given on the account
of Dewey's Famour, Inc., and it shows here on the margin of the
check that it is for traveling expense.
I ask you to examine the clieck, this photostatic copy, and the en-
dorsement thereon, made payable to Samuel Feldman, and state if you
identify the check, and if you are the Sanuiel Feldman who received
the money.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer that on the ground it may tend
to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You have seen the check ; have you ?
Mr. Feldman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You have examined it ?
Mr. Feldman. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Is that your endorsement on the reverse side of
the check ?
Mr. Feldman. I don't know whether it is or not. I can't recog-
nize it.
The Chairman. Did you have someone endorse it for you ?
Mr. Feldman. No ; yes. This is mine, my name.
The Chairman. It is your name ?
Mr. Feldman. Yes.
The Chairman. Your signature ?
Mr. Feldman. Yes.
The Chairman. Your signature and your name. Very good. The
check may be made exhibit No. 10.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 10" for ref-
erence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13718.)
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you get that for '(
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that for your work that you were doing in con-
nection with signing up their employees ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Let me ask you : Was this check given voluntarily,,
willingly, by the Dewey's Famous, Inc., or was a little pressure ap-
plied, that if they didn't pay off a bit something might happen here
or there ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
The Chairman. What I am trying to find out, and you can be help-
ful, I am trying to find out if they are cooks, too, or if they were
simply, you know, imposed on and felt they had to do it in order to
avoid some harmful results. Can you tell us i
I have just as much feeling against those who are in business who
resort to these tactics as I do those that are not in business or on the
labor side of the issue. I just think it is contemptible in every respect.
I would like to have your help. I would like to know if this is an
arrangement that they voluntarily entered into with you, where you
or your union, so called, and management was to profit from it in
full disregard of the rights and welfare of the working people.
13568 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Will you be helpful and tell us something about it ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
The Chairman. All right, Mr, Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that you were in touch with Mr.
Hoffa during May and June of 1956 ?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that you went out to Detroit and
had a conference personally with Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. This check says on the side "traveling expenses."
Did you get this $750 for traveling out to see Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the gi'ound it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Did the Dewey chain think it was that important
that you go out to see him ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
(At this point, Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing
room. )
Mr. Ivennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to put in some of the
records of the telephone calls that we have that were made during
that period of time, what the tickets show as to the contact between
Mr. Feldman and Mr. Hoffa, and Mr. Maxie Stern.
Senator Kennedy. AVithout objection that may be done.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger.
Mr. Salinger. The record shows that between May 1 and JNIav 4,
1956, Mr. Feldman made 3 calls to Woodward 1-1241, Detroit,
Mich., the office of local 299 of the Teamsters Union in Detroit, and
he made 4 calls to Woodward 3-6800, which is the Briggs Hotel
in Detroit, and asked for Max Stern.
Mr. Kennedy. IMr. Feldman, do you know Mr. Bushkin?
Mr. Feld3ian. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the Bushkin of the firm, the labor consul-
tant firm, of Bushkin & Holtzman. Do you know Mr. Jack Bushkin ?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that you were also in touch with
Mr. Dave Bushkin?
Mr. Feldman. I refuse to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. ^Yhy would you be contacting Mr. Bushkin as well
as Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground it may tend to
incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger, do we have some telephone records
that indicate that Mr. Feldman was in touch with Mr. Bushkin, about
whom we have had some testimony, and who has just appeared before
the committee and taken the fifth amendment?
Mr. Salinger. On August 16, 1956, a call was made to Detroit,
Mich., Temple 2-1081, listed to Holtzman & Bushkin, 2955 Grand
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13569
River, Detroit. This call was placed from the office of local 929^,
of which Mr. Feldman is a business agent, but was charged to local
410 of the Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union.
In addition, calls were also made to Mr. Bushkin at his residence
on August 17, 1956, and August 18, 1956, and a call was made to
Dave at the office of Holtzman & Bushkin on September 17, 1956.
Mr. Kennedy. From local 410 ?
Mr. Salinger. From local 410, that is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us anything about that?
Mr. Feldman. I decline to answer on the ground that it may tend
to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. The witness is excused.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Feldman ?
Mr. Chairman, can we keep Mr. Feldman under subpena? We are
very interested, and always will be interested, in his activities. We
have some other information we are working on. If it is possible, Mr.
Chairman, I would like to keep him under subpena, with the agreement
from him that he would report back when requested.
Senator Kennedy. Do you agree to that, Mr. Feldman? Do you
agree to report back to the committee, remain under the subpena, and
agree to report back to the committee when they request you ?
Mr. Feldman. Sure.
Mr. Kennedy. Upon reasonable request ?
Mr. Feldman. Unreasonable ?
Senator Ivennedy. On reasonable, with proper notice.
Mr. Feldman. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you.
(At this point Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Max Stern.
The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear the evidence you shall give
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth,
would you mind letting us conclude the oath ?
You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Stern. I do.
TESTIMONY OF MAX STERN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
BELFOED V. LAWSON
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your
business or occupation.
Mr. Stern. My name is Max Stern. I live at 114 Adams, Detroit,
Mich.
The Chairman. You decline to give your occupation or your busi-
ness?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you have counsel ?
Mr. Stern. I do.
The Chairman. Counsel, will you identify yourself ?
13570 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Lawson. I am Belf ord V. Lawson, of Washington, D. C. May
I say, Mr. Chairman, that my miderstanding is that Mr. Stern has long
since advised the committee that he was going to invoke and exercise
the fifth amendment. I wonder if it is going to serve any useful pur-
pose— could we not just stipulate that his answers would be identical?
The Chairman. Well, we thank you for giving us that informa-
tion, so w^e will not be taken by surprise, but we do not permit the
taking of the fifth amendment by proxy. Of course, it can be hoped — •
it may be a vain hope — that the witness would change his mind and
decide to cooperate with his Government. I don't know. Maybe he
will not. Anyway, proceed, Mr. Kennedy,
Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, it might be worthy of observation
at this point that there is nothing whatever in the Constitution that
requires any person to invoke the fifth amendment. It is entirely a
voluntary act on their part.
Mr. Lawson. Nothing prevents them, either.
Senator Ervin. There is nothing in it that prevents them from
waiving it.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. IvENNEDY. I know Mr. Stern has been here several days, and
I am sorry we have inconvenienced him by keeping him waiting. But
I understand from what he has told Mr. Salinger that he has been
helping Mr. George Fitzgerald while he has been here. So his time
has not been completely wasted.
Mr. Stern. That is a lie. Quit smearing people.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Haven't you been carrying his bag ?
Mr. Stern. No; I haven't been carrying his bag. Mr. Salinger
better get a little better information.
The Chah^man. All right, if you will just speak up like that and
answer questions, that will be very helpful.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us then, Mr. Stern, if you know
anybody from the Teamsters ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. James Holla?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us, Mr. Stern, why Mr. Feldman
contacted you in Detroit in connection with obtaining a charter in
Philadelphia for this group of friends of his ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Did j^ou help and assist Mr. Feldman in connection
with that?
Mr. Stern, I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why you were in touch with Mr.
James Hoffa during this period of time ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13571
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. What I would like to find out is why you would be
interested in obtaining this charter and why Mr. Hoffa and Mr.
Brennan would be discussing the matter with you. Can you tell us
anything about that ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. What connection have you had with labor organiza-
tions, generally, Mr. Stern ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You have been in touch throughout the country with
some of the well-known gangsters — Mr. Dave Yaras, down in Miami —
have you not ?
Mr. Stern, I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You have been in touch with Mr. Tronolone, down
in Miami, also ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Pie is known also as "Peanuts"; isn't he?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennp;dy. And you are also a good close friend of Mr. Jack
Bushkin ; are you not?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. And also you are a close friend of xVngelo Meli, Pete
Licavoli, Scarf ace Bommarito, and Joe Massei; are you not?
Mr. Stern, I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
(The witness conferred with his counsel).
Mr, Kennedy, Have you had conversations with Mr. Owen Bert
Brennan and with Mr. Hoffa during 1957?
Mr, Stern, I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr, Kennedy, I guess that is all.
The Chairman. Are there any questions ?
Have you any questions. Senator ?
Senator Ervin. No questions, Mr, Chairman ?
Tlie Chairman, Are you kind of a missing link that we have dis-
covered between the underworld racketeers and some union activities?
13572 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Are you an American citizen ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. With the approval of the committee, the Chair
orders and directs you to answer the question : Are you an American
citizen ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Were you born in this country ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. With the approval of the committee, the Chair
orders and directs you to answer the question : Were you born in this
country ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. The two orders the Chair has given you and direc-
tions to answer the two previous questions will continue to be in effect
during the remainder of your time on the witness stand.
Are you a naturalized citizen or a natural citizen of this country?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. With the approval of the committee, the Chair
orders and directs you to answer the question.
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution— — -
The Chairman. Are you married ?
Mr. Stern. Not to be a witness against myself.
(The witness conferred w'ith his counsel.)
The Chairman. Are you married ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Do you have children ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Are you loyal to the United States of America ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully clecline to answ^er the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. Are you willing to fulfill the obligations of citizen-
ship that are required of citizens of this country who enjoy its blessings
of liberty and freedom ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13573
Mr. Stern. All right, yes.
The Chairman. I didn't hear you.
Mr. Stern. Yes.
( The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. Are you willing to perform any service for your
country ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. Are you willing to perform any service for your
country, for the United States of America? You haven't said it is
3^our country.
Mr. Stern. Yes.
The Chairman. You say "Yes" ?
Mr. Stern. Yes.
The Chairman. I give you the opportunity, then, right now, to
cooperate w4th your Government and give us the information we have
been seeking from you. Will you do that ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The Chairman. All right. You have said you would perform a
service for your Government. Would you tell us what service you
would be willing to perform for it ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
The C11AIR31AN. Do you honestly believe that if you answered the
question truthfully, the question "Are you a citizen of the United
States?" that a truthful answer thereto might tend to incriminate
you?
Mr. Stern. I honestly believe that if I am forced to answer the
question I will be forced to be a witness against myself in violation
of my rights under the fifth amendment of the United States Con-
stitution.
The Chairman. We have some peculiar people in this country.
Are there any other questions ?
Senator Kennedy ?
Senator Kennedy. I don't understand at all — you are not in the
labor movement — why you would have anything to do with this
matter, why you w^ould be the one who would be an intermediary
between Mr. Feldman and Mr. Hoffa.
I don't know what Mr. Hoffa's connection is with you, I don't know
Mr. Feldman's. But why should you be involved at all in a labor
movement ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Senator Kennedy. You have been arrested a number of times.
What are your means of support now ?
Mr. Stern. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
21243— 58— pt. 36 20
13574 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. You will remain under the same subpena, subject
to recall for further interrogation at such time as the committee may
desire your presence. Do you agree to that ?
Mr. Stern. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
You will be given reasonable notice, you and your attorney, of the
time and place that the committee may desire you.
Mr. Stern. Thank you.
The Chairman. With that understanding, you may stand aside.
Mr. Stern. Thank you.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12:04 p. m. the hearing recessed, to reconvene at
2 p. m. of the same day, with the following members present: Sen-
ators McClellan, Ervin, Kennedy.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
The Chairman. The committee will be in order.
(Members of the committee present at the reconvening of the ses-
sion were: Senators McClellan, Ives, Church, and Curtis.)
The Chairman. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we are going now into a trans-
action in connection with the estate of Paul Ricca, and we had re-
quested Mr. Fitzgerald for the file from the Teamsters Union in
connection witli that, and I would like to ask Mr. Fitzgerald to pro-
duce the file.
]Mr. Fitzgerald. W^ell, I have no Teamsters Union. I understand,
if I may sit here, that you have all of the files from the union.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a file ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I have a file in my office which I explained, Mr.
Chairman, to Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Bellino, that is my file on the
matter. I said as an attorney if a proper waiver is made by my clients
I would produce the file. Until that is done, it would be a privileged
communication.
The Chairman. "VVlio is your client in this instance ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I think in this case, if I recall properly, and I
might say that my lack of knowledge of it or lack of information
on it is because I didn't handle it myself, but I believe it involves two
locals, local 337 and local 299. I could be mistaken on that. Now,
it will be necessary to obtain from them the waiver, and if they make
the waiver I will be happy to produce the file.
The Chairman. Have you made that request ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. I have talked about it but we have not had any
meeting on it due to the pressure of all of these things, I just found
out now. They mentioned it to me 2 or 3 times but after all I just
happen to be 1 person, and I haven't been able to even get together
on it and it is a matter that would affect, I believe, an action of the
general executive board of both of those locals.
The Chairman. You do not have the records today ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. No, I do not. No ; this is not the files of the union.
The Chairman. This is your professional file as an attorney ; is that
correct ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is correct.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13575
The Chairman. I am not familiar with this. I think you and I
should have a talk about it and then I will take it up with the com-
mittee and we will undertake to work out something satisfactory.
In the meantime, urging your clients to give their consent.
Mr. Fitzgerald. All right.
The Chairman. Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Paul Ricca.
The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ?
You do solemnly swear that the evidence, given before this Senate
select conmiittee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. De Lucia. I do.
TESTIMONY OF PAUL DE LUCIA (ALIAS PAUL RICCA), ACCOM-
PANIED BY HIS COUNSEL, HARRY CLIFFORD ALLDER
The Chairman. State your name, and your place of residence, and
your business or occupation.
Mr. De Lucia. My name is Paul De Lucia, 1515 Bonnie Brae, River
Forest, 111.
The Chairman. What is your business or occupation, Mr. Ricca ?
Mr. De Lucia. I am retired.
The Chairman. What has been your business or occupation, Mr.
Ricca ?
(Witness consulted with comisel.)
The Chairman. I will ask you first, do you have an attorney repre-
senting you ?
Mr. De Lucia. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Attorney, identify yourself for the record.
Mr. Allder. My name is Harry Clifford Allder, a member of the
District of Columbia Bar.
The Chahoian. All right, Mr. Ricca, what was your previous occu-
pation ? You say that you are now retired.
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. When did you retire, Mr. Ricca ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Do you think it would make any difference whether
you retired in September or whether you retired at some other date ?
I don't see the sense of that. You say you retired, and I just simply
asked you when you retired. It doesn't make much sense to me that
you can say that you retired, and not state when you retired.
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. With the approval of the committee, the Chair is
going to order and direct you to state when you retired. You said
that you were retired.
Mr. De Lucl\. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
13576 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. The order and direction just given you by the Chair
will continue throughout the remainder of your appearance before
the committee.
All right, Mr. Counsel, you may take over and proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. De Lucia, are you also known by the name of
Mr. Ricca ?
Mr. De Lucia. LTnder the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. As we understand it you are known as "Ricca," and
also as "De Lucia," is that correct?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Wliich is your correct name ? What is your cor-
rect name?
Mr. De Lucia. Paul De Lucia.
The Chairman. That is your correct name ?
Mr. De Lucia. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. De Lucia, what I wanted to ask you about
specifically is the purchase of your home, or supposed purchase of
your home in 1956, your home in Indiana, by the Teamsters. Could
you tell us about that ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the LTnited States, I decline to answer on the ground tliat my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedys Could you tell the committee whom you discussed
the purchase of this home with in the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss this matter with Owen Bert
Brennan ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have a blown-
up picture of the estate put up here on the chart.
The Chair]man. The committee exliibits to you a picture and it is
now placed before you and we ask you to examine it and state if you
recognize what it is.
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. I hand you here now a photograph, the same as
that displayed in blown-up form, and I ask you to examine this photo-
graph and state if you identify it.
(A document was handed to the witness.)
The Chairman. Have you examined the photograph ?
Mr. De Lucia. Yes.
The Chairman. Do you identify it?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13577
Mr. De Lucl^. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. The pliotograph may be made exliibit No. 11.
(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 11," for identifica-
tion, and may be found in the files of the select committee. )
The Chairman. Do you not recognize that as a photograph of your
property or your former property, which you occupied as a home at
Long Beach, La Porte County, Ind. ? Do you not recognize that as
a picture of your former property or home ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. All right, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, these are two checks which have been
exhibits earlier, checks Nos. 161 and 162, a total written on the bank
account of local 337 in Detroit, totaling just under $150,000, which
we understand were used for the supposed payment for Mr. Ricca's
estate.
The Chairman. He calls himself De Lucia, and so I will call him
Mr. De Lucia. Mr. De Lucia, I hand you here two checks. One has
been made exhibit 161 and the other made exliibit 162 in testimony
taken on the 21st day of August, 1957, before this committee. I ask
you to examine these checks, and state if you identify them ?
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
The Chairman. Have you examined the exhibit ?
Mr. De Lucia. Yes, sir.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Church, and Curtis.)
The Chairman. Do you identify those checks ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Wliat is the Nancette Estate ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that
my answer may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. I notice on the back of these checks it says, on each
of them it says first "In full payment of Nancette Estate." And the
other one says "Payment on Nancette Estate."
Each of them then is endorsed "Pay to the order of and deposit to
the account of Paul De Lucia."
They are signed "Joseph Bulger, attorney for trust 96." Are you
the Paul De Lucia that these checks were endorsed to ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Did you ever own a home or an estate in Indiana ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. These checks — one of them is dated July 27, 1956,
and the other is dated August 8, 1956.
13578 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
You make no contention that you don't remember. You j ust think
they might incriminate you if you acknowledge them, is that correct?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the gi'ound that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You do remember the transaction, do you not?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answ^er on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. You did receive this money, did you not?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment to the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we don't seem to be proceeding too
far with Mr. De Lucia. I would like now to call Mr. Adlennan, who
has made a study of the situation.
The Chairman. Mr. De Lucia, I wish you would pay very close
attention, and if there is anything stated by this witness that is inaccu-
rate or incorrect, we would be happy to have you correct his testimony.
Mr. Adlerman, you have been previously sworn, have you ?
Mr. Adlerman. I have, sir.
TESTIMONY OF JEROME ADLERMAN— Resumed
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Adlerman, have you made a study of the docu-
ments in connection with the so-called sale of this property to the
Teamsters Union, the property of Paul De Lucia ?
Mr. Adlerman. I have.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us when the so-called sale took place?
Mr. Adlerman. The sale on the so-called tract No. A which con-
sists of lots 35, 36, 41, and 42, took place on September 20, 1957. And
the sale on tract B, lots 37, 38, 39, 40 took place a year and 2 months
earlier, on July 31, 1956.
Mr. Kennedy. Let's just understand. The part No. B was trans-
ferred over to the Teamsters in 1956, is that right ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. According to the records for the sale of that prop-
erty, the Teamsters paid $150,000 ?
JNIr. Adlerman. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. That was all that was transferred in 1956 ?
Mr. Adlerman. That was all that was transferred.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all that the Teamsters received in 1956; is
that correct ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is correct.
The Chairman. Point out on that map just what part was conveyed
at the time these checks were given or just preceding the checks.
Mr. Adlerman. There are 4 lots in this area that were conveyed in
1956, these 4 lots, and that contains the main house, which is a 20-room
house, and it also contained a part of the tennis court and a corner of
the swimming pool.
Mr. Kennedy. All the rest of the property was still owned in the
name of Mr. De Lucia ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD ISSVQ'
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. So Mr. De Lucia and the Teamsters were going to
share the tennis court and share the swimming pool ; is that right ?
Mr. Adlerjian. I believe so.
Mr. Kennedy. This was mutually owned by the two organizations,
by Mr. De Lucia and by the Teamsters ?
Mr. Adlerman. Well, this part A was owned by Mr. De Lucia and
this part B by the Teamsters.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. De Lucia owned half of the tennis court and
the Teamsters the other?
Mr. Adlerman. That's correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And the Teamsters owned just a little bit of the
swimming pool and Mr. De Lucia the rest of it ?
Mr. Adler:man. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. This is from an examination of the records ?
Mr. Adlerman. An examination of the records and the engineer's
map and survey that was made.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a copy of that ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, we have a copy of that.
The Chairman. I ask you to examine this map that I present to
you, this document, and state what it is.
Mr. Adlerman. Tliis is a plat of a survey made by Richard R.
Frame, professional engineer for the State of Indiana.
It is a plat of the lots, of the eight lots, that involves Mr. DeLucia's
property or the Teamsters' property.
The Chairman. Where did you obtain that plat ?
Mr. Adlerman. That was obtained in the course of our investigation
from the trust company.
The Chairman. From the trust company ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
The Chairman. And that is the plat the engineer had filed with the
trust company ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
The Chairman. All right. That plat may be made exhibit No. 12.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 12" for
reference and may be found in the files of the select committee.)
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Who was the grantor in the deed or other convey-
ance that conveyed the title on the area marked "B".
Mr. Adlerman. The property was originally held by Mr. and Mrs.
De Lucia. They signed a trust agreement with their attorney, Mr,
Bulger, and the Lake County Trust Co., under w^iich trust agreement
the Lake County Trust Co. was acting as trustee under the direction
of Mr. Bulger and Mr. De Lucia for the benefit of Mr. De Lucia.
Mr. Bulger handled the conveyance from thereafter under this trust
agreement.
Senator Cltitis. Was it free from encumbrance ?
Mr. Adlerman. I believe it was unencumbered. I mean as far as
the Teamsters are concerned, I think it is unencumbered.
Senator Curtis. No, I mean at the time of the conveyance.
Mr. Adlerman. That I don't know.
Senator Curtis. I see.
13580 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Adlerman will be back in a moment to put in
documents to back up his testimony.
Mr. Adlerman, I would like to have you testify as to what happened
immediately or shortly following our hearing in August 1957, when
Mr. Hoffa was asked questions about the transfer of this estate.
Mr. Adlerman. Shortly thereafter they took steps to convey tract
A. We have in the records a letter from Mr. Bulger to the Lake
County Trust Co., saying that for the purpose of correcting the omis-
sion of the four lots he is exercising a direction to the Lake County
Trust Co. to convey the property to the trust company under a trust
agreement with the Teamsters.
In other words to convey the property to the Teamsters.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you mean after our hearing which was in August
of 1957
Mr. Adlerman. This letter was dated September 20, 1957.
Mr. Kennedy. After that, the Teamsters got the rest of the prop-
erty ; is that right ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Until the hearings took place, the Teamsters had
paid $150,000 only for plot B ?
Mr. Adlerman. They had paid $150,000. A few cents short of
that.
Mr. Kennedy. Just for B ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Just for plot B ; is that right ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
]\Ir. Kennedy. Did they pay any consideration for plot A when
that was transferred in 1957 ?
Mr. Adlerman. I think maybe they have a $10 or $100 considera-
tion.
Mr. Kennedy. But no material consideration ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you put the documents in that will sub-
stantiate your testimony ?
Offer the documents to the chairman.
These are the various trust agreements and transfer of the deed.
The Chairman. As you offer the documents, identify them and we
will have them made exhibits in the order of your presentation.
Mr. Adlerman. I feel as far as the first part, the transfer of prop-
erty B, it is rather complicated, and it might be involved and rather
hard to understand. They made a mistake when they transferred the
property to the local 299 and local 337. They made a direct transfer
to those locals in 1956. The Indiana law prohibited a local holding
any real estate, so they had to make these numerous documents trans-
ferring the property back and forth and so forth to get correct title.
Mr. Kennedy. Which is not directly involved in what we are look-
ing into. They made another error in the transfer in 1956 of plot
B, Mr. Chairman, in which they transferred it once, found out it was
illegal, so they had to transfer it back and transfer it again.
We have all of those documents. It ultimately would appear to
have ended up in the possession of the Teamsters, however, in 1956.
The Chairman. Those documents referring to the correction of an
error may be attached and made exhibit No. 13 for reference.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13581
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 13" for ref-
erence and may be found in the files of the selected committee.)
Mr. Kennedy. Then you have the transfer of the property in
plot A.
(At this point, Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.)
Mr. Adlerman. On tract A wliich are lots 35, 36, 41, and 42, which
is the sort of elbowed shape part of the property, there is a trust
agreement, No. 97. Can I have the plat, please ?
I have in my hand four documents which relate to the conveyance
of tract A. I would like to put those into the record.
The Chairman. They may be made exhibit No. 14, for reference,
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 14" for ref-
erence, and may be found in the files of the select committee.)
Mr. Adlerman. There are six of them, actually.
The Chairman. They may be attached, the 5 documents, and
made exhibit 14 for reference.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Adlerman, from an examination of this map,
there is no possible way, there would not appear to be any possible
way to be confused about the transfer of this property ?
Mr. Adlerman. No, I can't see how.
Mr. Kennedy. Each lot of land is very clearly set out, is it not?
Mr. Adlerman. Not only that, but if you look at the plat, it refers
to the trust agreement, which only affects property B.
Mr. Kennedy. And the property is clearly split into lots, and the
property that was transferred to the Teamsters clearly stated that
they were to only get 37, 38, 39, and 40 ; isn't that correct ?
Mr. Adlerman. The trust agreement only j^rovides for that.
Mr. Kennedy. Just for lots 37, 38, 39, and 40 ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And the lots 35, 36, and 41 and 42 were not even
mentioned ; is that right ?
Mr. Adlerman. As far as I am concerned, they are still not men-
tioned in the trust agreement. I spoke to the trust officer this morning,
and he said as far as they are concerned, they are not in the trust
agreement.
Mr. Kennedy. You mean it is possible they still do not own the
property ?
Mr. Adlerman. If they do own it the trust company has no knowl-
edge of it, because they still do not have the fhial deed on it.
Mr. Kennedy. They at least made some step toward transferring it
in 1957 after our hearing?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. They took a step in that direction in 1957 ?
Mr. Adlerman. They did.
Mr. Kennedy. And there they specifically mentioned the 4 plots
of land, 35, 36, 41, and 42 ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. But even at that, even in 1957, it would appear that
possibly still the Teamsters do not own these four lots of property ?
Mr. Adlerman. Well, we have requested every deed that the trust
company has. They do not have any deed beyond the one conveying
the property to the secretary, to the attorney, Mr. Bulger. Pardon
me, that refers to tract B. I believe that there must be another deed,
13582 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
but the trust company does not have it. They think that it may be in
the hands of the Teamsters.
Mr. Kennedy. But at least, Mr. Adlerman, what we can definitely
establish, is that only a portion of the property was transferred in
1956?
Mr. Adlerman. Between 1956 and 1957, Mr. De Lucia owned
tract A, and the Teamsters only owned tract B.
Mr . Kennedy. And it was not until after our hearings took
place
Mr. Adlerman. Yes. As a matter of fact, I spoke to the trust officer
this morning, and he told me it was only after an investigator went
down to see him that he got word from the Teamsters that they wanted
to transfer that.
Mr. Kennedy. It was after we sent an investigator in there to look
at it?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. I would like to have Mr. Salinger tell us what the
minutes of the union show as far as the purchase of this property.
The Chairman. Mr. Salinger, have you examined the minutes of
the local that purchased the property ?
TESTIMONY OF PIERRE SALINGER— Resumed
Mr. Salinger. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Do you have copies of those minutes ?
My. Salinger. I have, sir.
The Chairman. The minutes may be made exhibit No. 15. Now you
may refer to the pertinent parts thereof.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 15" for ref-
erence and may be found in tlie files of the select committee.)
Mr. Salinger. With reference to the minute book of 337, which
issued these two checks on July 27, 1956, and August 8, 1956, there is
no specific mention of the Nancette estate at any point in those minutes
with these exceptions: At the meeting in August 1956, the general
authorization was given as follows :
Investments, piirchase of bonds, real estate, etc., discussed by the Chair.
Motion made by Marshall Du Bach, supported by James Langley, passed unani-
mously by the board that the president of the local be given full authority to
make any investments or purchases he thought beneficial to local union.
Mr. Kennedy. So there was no mention at all of the purchase of
this estate ?
Mr. Salinger. No specific reference to it, until January 4, 1957,
which is some 3 or 4 months after they had issued the checks for
$150,000.
In those minutes, it is mentioned that President Brennan of the
local gave a report.
In his report he mentioned the local union, in the year 19.56, had made various
investments, also had advanced and secured a note from joint council 43 for
$75,000 for a real estate purchase made in behalf of joint council 43.
Although it does not mention the Nancette estate, we believe that
that refers to the Nancette estate.
Mr. Kennedy. Still there was not mention, specific mention, of the
property ?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13583
Mr. Kennedy. And there was no mention of the fact that the
property had belonged to Mr. De Lucia, also known as Paul "The
Waiter" Ricca?
Mr. Salinger. That is correct. The only specific mention of the
Nancette estate in any of the minutes we examined are in the minutes
of joint council 43 at a special meeting on August 14, 1957.
At that meeting Mr. HofFa gave a report to the joint council and
stated that through an oversight minutes of the meeting of October
19, 1956, failed to mention the Nancette estate. A motion was made
by Joseph Prebenda that the Nancette estate, now owned jointly by
local 299 and 337, be purchased by joint council 43 from those unions
for the purpose of establishing a training center for health and wel-
fare, pension, and contract negotiations, and for the general welfare
of local unions affiliated with joint council 43, Locals 299 and 337
were to be repaid no more than the original purchase price for this
property, the property to be held in trust by the Lake County Trust
Co. for joint council 43 and to be paid for by joint council 43 from any
available resources during any given year.
This is a meeting of August 14, 1957, and discusses the purchase of
the Nancette estate. But even through Mr. Adlerman's testimony it
shows that even on that date they did not own the entire estate.
TESTIMONY OF PAUL DE LUCIA— Resumed
The Chairman. Mr. De Lucia, you have heard the testimony with
respect to the transfer of this property. Is there any inaccuracy in
the testimony or anything incorrect that the two witnesses, staff mem-
bers, have just testified to that you would wish to correct?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of the
United States, I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that my
answer may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Is it a fact that you only transferred four lots the
first time, and substantially as indicated on this picture of the map ?
Mr. Allder. Mr. Chairman, I did not hear anything about him
transferring any property.
The Chairman. He can say he did not.
Mr. Allder. I listened very attentively. I understood him to say
that there was a trust and Mr. Bulger transferred some lots. There
is no testimony there that this witness transferred anything.
The Chairman. I would be most happy to have you explain it, Mr.
De Lucia — just what the situation was.
Mr. De Lucl^. I respectfully decline to answer, Senator.
The Chairman. I don't want to make anything inaccurate. I un-
derstood this property was owned by you, although you may have
placed it in a trust for your own benefit. That may be true. Of
course, the trust, after you had placed it in the trust, would be the
proper one to convey it.
May I ask you. Did you place this property in a trust ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer. Senator.
The Chairman. You don't want to be helpful ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer. Senator.
The Chairman. Did the trust handle the property according to your
directions ?
Mr. De Lucia. I respectfully decline to answer. Senator.
13584 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Allder. May the record show that each time he declines it is
because he fears that his answer might tend to incriminate him ?
The Chairman. I wouldn't press him on that. I am sure you still
mean that you are afraid that if you answered the question the answer
might tend to incriminate me ?
Mr. De Lucia. Incriminate me.
The Chairman. Is that correct.
Mr. De Ltjcia. That is right.
The Chairman. All right. Is it a fact that you did not make the
second conveyance or have the trust make the second conveyance until
after this committee began looking into the transaction'^ Is that a
fact?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer, Senator, on the ground that my
answer may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairjsian. Well, I don't want this committee to be either cred-
ited or blamed where neither is due. If the committee is entitled to no
credit for discovering this situation, you may very well, if you will,
correct the record for us and let us know that we had nothing in the
world to do with it.
Mr. De Lucia. I respectfully decline to answer. Senator.
The Chairman. If we are altogether in error, I would be glad for
you to point it out.
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer, Senator.
Senator Curtis. INIr. Chairman, to clear it up in my mind, does
the committee have information as to the size of tract B, and the size
of tract A, and also do they have an estimate of some qualified per-
son as to the value of each ?
Mr. Adlerman. The tract consists of 41^ acres.
Senator Curtis. Which tract?
Mr. Adlerman. Tracts A and B.
Senator Curtis. The two of them together ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right. I have no idea how large each of
them is, but you can see the proportions from the plat.
Senator Curtis. Has the committee obtained an estimate as to the
value ?
Mr. Adlerman. I don't know exactly what the value is, but respon-
sible real estate people have indicated that it would be very hard to
resell that property, because it can be only used for a private resi-
dence, and the cost maintenance on it is very very high. It is prob-
ably much less than $150,000 that was paid for it.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
The Chairman. Well, we will be glad. Senator Curtis, to know
that and we are trying to interrogate the people who know about it
and let them be helpful and give us accurate information as to its
value and why the transactions were handled this way. It may be per-
fectly all right. Would you like to reconsider and help us get the
facts just as they are?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer, sir.
The Chairman. You decline to be helpful ?
Mr. De Lucia. To answer, and not to be helpful.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, is it a fact that you are a friend of Owen Bert
Brennan, and that was the reason that this sale was made?
Mr. De Lucia. Who is that?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13585
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Owen Bert Brennan.
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my an-
swer may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it a fact that you needed money at that time,
as you were under investigation by the Internal Revenue Department,
and you prevailed upon the Teamsters to purchase this property for
the $150,000?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer.
Mr. Kennedy. Isn't that the reason that this was handled in this
fashion ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer.
The Chairman. I have been pretty indulgent, but you had better
decline for reasons here.
All right, proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, I would like to read the testimony of Mr.
Hoffa, on page 5043.
The Chairman. Read the testimony and ask the witness if that
testimony is correct, and if he knows about it.
Mr. Kennedy (reading) :
The Chairman. The total investment was around $150,000, and not $300,000?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. That is going to be a sort of a school for the business agents and
the officers?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right, and if it works out properly we will have the key
stewards also attend classes.
Mr. Kennedy. Is it a home and some land?
Mr. HoFFA. It is a home and some land, with sufficient sleeping quarters, I
believe we can have about 30 or 40 people at a time in classes, and we don't
think it is advisable to have more than that at a time to try and get people to
listen properly to explanations.
Now, did you understand, Mr. De Lucia, that the property was to
be used as a school for business agents?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer that.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Chairman
The Chairman. Now, you decline to answ^er for what reason ?
Mr. De Lucia. Under the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. How in the world could you say that you under-
stood that the folks who purchased your home intended to use it for
training schools sites facilities or how in the world do you think that
could possibly tend to incriminate you in the slightest degree any-
where anyhow ? Do you want to answer that question ?
Mr. De Lucia. LTnder the fifth amendment of the Constitution of
the United States, I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the reason I read that testimony is
because we have here the Long Beach zoning ordinance in connection
with the area on which this property is situated, and there are certain
restrictions and I read from section 5 called, "Residence Districts."
The Chairjman. Let me ask the witness, do you know if this is in
zoning district of the city ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer. Senator, on the ground that my
answer may tend to incriminate me.
13586 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. The fact that you might have had knowledge about
the zoning status of the property might tend to incriminate you ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Don't you know that that is just plain silly, and it
couldn't possibly incriminate you, there is a public record. If you
knew what the public record is, it couldn't possibly incriminate you to
know it.
O. K., proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Section 5 reads :
Hereafter no building, structure, or land shall be used nor shall any building
or structure be erected, altered, or enlarged except for the following uses :
(1) Single family dwelling; (2) home occupation, professional office, or other
incidental use conducted in connection with any single family dwelling in a
manner clearly incidental and not detrimental to said dwelling or other premises ;
and, (8) church, grammar or high school, public park or playground, golf or
tennis club incorporated, and operated not for profit, community center or
publicly owned recreation building; (4) signs of not more than 6 square feet of
area advertising the premise for sale or rent.
I will read this again.
The Chairman. May I ask you if that is the public record or the
ordinance of the city, is that correct ?
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct.
The Chairman. Well, if it isn't certified to, there wall be some
question about its admissibility, but I will let it go in as a statement.
Mr. Kennedy. We can have someone introduce it.
The Chairman. I think that it should be introduced.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, has it been established that it covers
the area where this property in question is located ?
Mr. Kennedy. It does. Mr, Adlerman can introduce it.
The Chairman. Mr. Adlerman, did you procure a copy of the zoning
ordinance that would affect the property ?
Mr. Adlerman. I did.
The Chairman. Is that a copy of it which you have in your
hand ?
Mr. Adlerman. I obtained this copy from Mr. Vale, Robert Vale^
the president of the Town Board of Long Beach.
The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 16, for reference.
(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 16," for reference-
and may be found in the files of the select committee.)
Mr. Kennedy. Now, could you tell the committee, as this was going
to be used for a school for business agents, including 30 or 40 people,
how under the zoning law it could possibly be used for that purpose ?
Could you tell us that ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
would tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Could you tell us if that is the reason that it hasn't
been used for that j^urpose for approximately a year ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Adlerman. do we find that the Teamsters have
made any request to the zoning board for the permission to change
the zoning ordinances in connection with this matter?
Mr. Adlerman. I have inquired from the president of the town
board, and he has advised me that there has been no application made
for any change in the zoning regulations.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13587
Mr. Kennedy. Certainly the exceptions here wouldn't permit the
Teamsters to use the property. The Teamsters organization is certainly
not a church or a grammar or a high school and it is not a public park
or a playgromid, or golf or tennis club, incorporated, and it is not a
home occupation. Thirty or forty people going to be there. It is not a
single family dwelling.
Can you tell us how they are going to use it then ?
Mr. Allder. I object to this, Mr. Chairman. He is calling for a legal
conclusion or opinion of this witness and I don't think he is entitled
to ask him for a legal conclusion concerning what an ordinance means
or does not mean.
The Chairman. If the witness is not going to answer anyway, I sup-
pose it is not an important matter. The witness may not know the legal
conclusion of an ordinance, and he may not be able to interpret tech-
nicalities involved. We might ask the witness. Are j'ou familiar with
this ordinance and its provisions? And we may ask you that.
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. De Lucl\. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, I don't believe objections are neces-
sary, and I believe he will give us no information anyway.
Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. I tliink to find out the purpose of the purchase by the
Teamsters of this property, and in view of the ordinance, certainly
there must have been some discussion about it at the time tliat they were
purchasing the property, and I am trying to find out from the witness
any information that he can give to us on that matter.
The Chairman. Did you have any discussions about the ordinance,
and the restrictions on this property, at the time if it ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Well, was this a sale made primarily for your con-
venience, so you could have some ready cash ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Had you ever offered the property for sale to any-
one else ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer, sir.
The Chairman. What is the ground ?
Mr. De Lucia. That my answer may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. What was the largest offer you had had for the
property prior to the time of this sale ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the gi'ound that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Had you ever placed it on the market with any
agency to sell or instructed the trustees to sell it?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, was this also arranged not only by Mr. Bren-
nan, but was it also arranged by Mr. Joey Glimco in Chicago ?
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. You are an associate of Mr. Joe Glimco, of the Team-
sters Local 777, are you not ?
13588 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. De Lucia. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer
may tend to incriminate me.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us w^hat other Teamsters officials you
know in Chicago ?
Mr. De Lucia. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that
my answer may tend to incriminate me.
The Chairman. Is there anything further? Are there any ques-
tions ?
Mr. De Lucia, you will remain under your present subpena, subject
to being recalled at such time as the committee may desire to interro-
gate your further. If you acknowledge that recognizance, reasonable
notice will be given to you and your attorney of the time and place
where the committee desires to hear you.
Do you acknowledge it ?
Mr. De Lucia. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right, you may stand aside.
Call the next witness.
Mr, Kennedy. I would like to interrupt our schedule and call Mr.
Fitzsimmons at this time.
The Chairman. Mr. Fitzsimmons.
Will you be sworn, please ?
Do you solemnly swear that the evidence given before this Senate
select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I do.
TESTIMONY OF FEANK E. FITZSIMMONS, ACCOMPANIED BY HIS
COUNSEL, GEORGE FITZGERALD
The Chairman. State your name and your place of residence and
your business or occupation.
Mr. Fitzsimmons. My name is Frank E. Fitzsimmons, and I live
in Dearborn, Mich., and am vice president of local union 299, and
business representative.
The Chairman. Do you have counsel? Let the record show that
Mr. Fitzgerald appears as counsel for Mr, Fitzsimmons.
All right ; proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you say your position was ?
Mr, Fitzsimmons. Vice president and business representative of
local 299.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any other position with the Teamsters
Union ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I am with the Michigan Conference of Teamsters.
Mr. Kennedy. What is your position with them ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Secretary-treasurer.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any other position with the Teamsters ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. In what capacity do you mean ?
Mr. Kennedy. The welfare fund,
Mr, Fitzsimmons, I am a trustee of the welfare fund.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Herman Kierdorf ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Yes ; I do.
Mr. Kennedy. When was the last time that you saw him ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Last Saturday.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you see him any time on Sunday ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No ; I didn't.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13589
Mr. Kennedy. Where were you on Sunday ?
Mr. FiTZsiMMONS. Sunday ? With my family at home.
Mr. Kennedy. You were there all Sunday afternoon ?
Mr. FiTZSiMMONS. No ; I think my wife and my children went out
to the lake.
Mr. Kennedy. Monday morning ; where were you then ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. In my office.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you out at the lake with your family Sunday
afternoon ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONs. Yes ; I was.
Mr. Kennedy. And Monday morning ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONs. At the office.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, the last time that you saw Mr. Kierdorf was
Saturday ; is that right ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you heard from him since Saturday ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No ; I haven't.
Mr. Kennedy. You weren't in touch with him on Monday ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir,
Mr. Kennedy. When did you first hear of Mr. Frank Kierdorf's
accident ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I think in the Monday morning papers.
Mr. Kennedy. That was the first time you heard about it ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have anything to do with the automobiles
of the Teamsters local ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Have anything to do with the automobiles ?
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have anything to do with the ownership of
the automobiles, or the management of the automobiles, that belong
to the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No ; I do not.
Mr. Kennedy. You do not ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No.
Mr. Kennedy. What is the general policy with the automobiles of
the union? Do they belong to, or are they in the names of, the
individuals or in the name of the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. In the name of the Teamsters Union.
Mr. Kennedy. None of them are in the names of the individuals?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I am speaking now of local 299, and I can't
answer for the other local unions.
Mr. Kennedy. Does any individual of the Teamsters Union, of local
299, have authority to transfer title of the automobiles ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Well, the secretary-treasurer would handle that,
fix affairs of the union.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any authority ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Certainly; I have authority as an executive
board member.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any authority to transfer the owner-
ship of automobiles ?
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. Fitzsimmons. In the absence of the president, I naturally take
over the duties of the administration of the local union.
21243 — 58— pt. 36 21
13590 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken upon yourself tliat responsibility
of transferring the title of any of tlie automobiles of the union ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. In a particular case. I can clear this up without
any more delay.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you explain ?
Mr. FiTZSiMMONS. He came in the office Saturday morning.
Mr. Kennedy. AVhoisthat?
Mr. FrrzsiMMONS. Mr. Herman Kierdorf, and he resigned previous
to that, as I understand it, and he wanted to buy the automobile, and
arrangements were made, and I cleared that matter up.
Mr. Kennedy. What arrangements do you mean ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I arranged for him to purchase the automobile.
Mr. Kennedy. Will you tell us what it is ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. He signed a demand note.
Mr. Kennedy. He came in Saturday morning and said he wanted
to buy the automobile, and you just transferred it over to him ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I said he signed a demand note.
Mr. Kennedy. For how much ?
Mr. FITZSIMMONS. Exactly I can't say at the moment, and I think
it was $1,400 or $1,500.
Mr. Kennedy. Who has the demand note at the present time ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Mr. Collins, our secretary-treasurer.
Mr. Kennedy. What authority, under the union, do you have to
transfer an automobile such as that to the ownership of Mr. Kierdorf?
Mr. FITZSIMMONS It was a sale.
Mr. Kennedy. What authority do you have to sell the property of
the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONs. As far as the Teamsters I^nion is concerned, on
the basis of the automobile, it was transferred on that basis, on a sale.
Mr. Kennedy. What authority do you have, Mr. Fitzsimmons ?
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. FiTZSiMMONS. In the absence of the president, I am in charge of
the responsibility of the local union.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did it have to be transferred? What resolu-
tion is there of the Teamsters Union giving you authority to transfer
title of its property ?
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. FiTZsiMMONs. As far as the bylaws are concerned. I think our
minutes reflect the president has tlie authority to carry on the business
of the local union, and according to bylaws, as far as the vice president
is concerned, he carries on in the president's absence, and those duties
are allocated to him.
Mr. Kennedy. Has this been taken up with the executive board or
anyone else?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. The bylaws and the authority, you mean ?
Mr. Kennedy. I am asking you whether this matter of transfer of
the automobile had been taken up with the executive board of the
union ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. This particular incident?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No; it will reflect in our next executive board
meeting.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, the first time that you heard Mr. Kierdorf was
interested in buying this car was Saturday morning ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13591
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
Mr. FiTZsiMMONS. There was a conversation previous to this about
Herman buying one of our cars.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa instmct you to transfer the title of
the automobile ?
Mr. FiTZsiMMONs. Mr. Hoffa instructs me to take care of the business
of the local union.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he instruct you to transfer the title of the
automobile?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONs. I didn't have an opportunity to discuss it with
Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss it at all with Mr. Hoffa ?
(Witness consulted with counsel.)
The Chairman. Let us move along.
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I think that I did. Yes ; I mentioned it to Mr.
Hoffa later on that day.
The Chairman. Before or after you had sold it?
Mr. FrrzsiMMONs. Sir?
The Chairman. Before or after you sold the car ?
Mr. FiTZSiMMONS, Well
The Chairman. It was just last Saturday ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I understand, Mr. McClellan-
The Chairman. Well, all right, did you mention it to him before
you sold the car or after you sold the car ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I think it was discussed with him before I sold
it and I don't know whether we had gone ahead and transferred it or
made arrangements for Mr. Kierdorf to buy the automobile.
(At this point, the following were present: Senators McClellan,
Ives, Church, Curtis.)
The Chairman. When did you discuss it with him Saturday ?
Mr, Fitzsimmons. Saturday morning.
The Chairman. Where ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. In my office.
The Chairman. Was Mr. Hoti'a in your office Saturday morning?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Yes ; he was.
The Chairman. Was he there when Mr. Kierdorf came in and said
he wanted to buy the car ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Just a moment, please.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I beg your pardon. JMr. Hoffa was not there
before he came in. He came in afterward.
The Chairman. Mr. Hoffa came in after you had sold the car I
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. So you did not discuss it with him before?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
The Chairman. You are pretty positive now. A minute ago you
said you had discussed it with him both before and after. Which is
correct ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. After I arranged to have Herman sign for the
car.
The Chairman. You never heard of him wanting to buy the car
until he walked in there that morning, had you ?
He came in there and told you he wanted that car; is that correct?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. There was conversation previous to that time.
13592 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Wliere and when ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I don't remember it.
The Chairman. How long ago ?
Mr. FiTZSiMMONS. I wouldn't say. I wouldn't know, Mr. Mc-
Clellan.
The Chairman. Who had the conversation ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Mr. Collins, I am sure, came to me
The Chairman. Wlio?
Mr. FiTZSiMMONS. Mr. Collins.
The Chairman. Who is Mr. Collins ?
Mr. FiTzsi:\rM0NS. Our secretary-treasurer.
The Chairman. He came to you when ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. He came to me the previous week.
The Chairman. When?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. The previous week.
The Chairman. The previous week. "\Yliere were you when he
came to you ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I was either in his office or in my office.
The Chairman. And said what ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. He said in respect to the car that Herman wants
to buy from local 299.
The Chairman. Which car was it ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. The car
The Chairman. You have several cars. "WHiich one was it?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. The car that he bought, Mr. McClellan.
The Chairman. A-VHiat kind was it ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. A Cadillac car.
The Chairman. How old was it ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. A 1956.
The Chairman. Did you get any money for it at all ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. We have a demand note, as I say.
The Chairman. I know, you got a demand note. Do you have
authority to sell these cars on credit ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I have the authority given to me as far as our
bylaws and the president is concerned.
The Chairman. Wliere was the president of your local ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. The president of our local ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Fitzsimmons. The moment this transaction took j^lace ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I couldn't answer that. I don't know exactly
where he was at.
The Chairman. Well, was he in town ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I presume he was.
The Chairman. Well, he wasn't gone? He was there somewhere
available for the transaction of business ; was he not?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, he wasn't.
The ChairMxVN. He wasn't right there immediately at the moment,
that is what you are saying, but he was there running the local, at-
tending to all of the business the president should attend to. He
wasn't gone away on a vacation or business or something, was he?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, he wasn't.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you contact him about it ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13593
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I said I contacted him after the transaction.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Well, before the transaction ? Before the trans-
action ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. That morning, no.
Mr. IvENNEDY. The day before, Friday ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzsimmons, you would know whether you
talked to Mr. Hoffa about it or not.
Mr. Fitzgerald can't help you.
This is just last week.
You know whether you talked to Mr. Hoffa or not.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Mr. Chairman, I am not trymg to help the witness
at all.
The Chairman. The witness has a right to consult with counsel as
to his legal rights. I don't know whether he is gettinng close to
where he wants to exercise the legal right or not.
He has a right to interrogate you about it. But as to the facts,
the knowledge, they are within his information, I am sure, and it only
happened last Saturday. It seems to me that the witness could speak
up about it. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss it with Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No ; I did not discuss it with Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat took you so long to figure that out?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Well, I was asking Mr. Fitzgerald as far as the
designation of the duties and bylaws and as far as discussion was con-
cerned.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any discussions directly or indirectly
with Mr. Hoffa, about the transfer of this automobile before you
transfered it?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. After I transferred it.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Did you have any discussions with Mr. Hoffa di-
rectly or indirectly before you transfered it ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlio did you discuss it with, then, Mr. Fitzsimmons?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Mr. Collins.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Did he tell you he discussed it with Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, I don't think he mentioned it.
Mr. Kennedy. He did not mention that he discussed the matter
with Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. He did not mention it to me.
Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat conversations did you have with Mr. Collins ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Mr. Kierdorf came in.
Mr. Kennedy. This was — when did he come in ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Saturday morning.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the first time you had heard about it ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. As I said before, Mr. Kennedy, there was some
discussions about Herman wanting to buy a car.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlio were those discussions with ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. With Herman.
Mr. Kennedy. He spoke to you ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No ; I think he talked to Collins. Collins came
to me and asked me if it would be all right if he bought the auto-
mobile.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlien was that ?
13594 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. That was some time previous to Saturday.
Mr. Kennedy. What day was it ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I couldn't say exactly what day.
Mr. Kennedy. Had he also discussed it with Mr. Holi'a?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I wouldn't know whether he had or not.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Collins tell you he had discussed it with
Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS He did not.
Mr. Kennedy. What did he tell you ? What did Mr. Collins tell
you?
Mr. FiTzsiiNEMONS. Exactly what I told you a moment ago.
Mr. Kennedy. That Mr. Kierdorf was interested in buying an
automobile ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you that you should transfer the auto-
mobile to him ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. He didn't tell me that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you you should sell the automobile to
him?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONs. He didn't tell me that at all.
Mr. Kennedy. A^^lat did he say ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. He said Herman wants to buy the automobile.
1 said if he wants to buy the automobile, we will sell him the auto-
mobile.
Mr. Kennedy. Was this just after his appearance before the com-
mittee when he took the fifth amendment ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Saturday?
Mr. Kennedy. When you had the discussion about the automobile?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONs. I think it was before.
Mr. Kennedy. Then he came in on Saturday ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. At what time ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I would say around 9 o'clock.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you say to him at that time ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I went in to see Mr. Collins, and Mr. Collins
came in and said "As far as the car is concerned, Mr. Kierdorf wants
to buy the automobile."
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have the automobile appraised then ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Well, Mr. Collins checked the wanting price of
the automobile and we would sell him the automobile at the going
price.
Mr. Kennedy. How did you find out what the going price was ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Mr. Collins took care of that matter.
Mr. Kennedy. How did he find out ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I presumed he called a dealer.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know how much the automobile cost
originally ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. No, I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. It cost some $4,800. How much did you sell it for?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONs. I think it was $1,400 or $1,500, if I am not
mistaken.
The Chairman. You said you received a demand note for it ?
Mr. FrrzsiMMONS. Mr. Collins received the demand note, Senator.
The Chairman. Do you know that he received a demand note for it ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13595
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Yes, he told me tliat he did.
The Chairman. Did you see the note ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. No, I did not.
The Chairman. He is supposed to have it now, is he not ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. It properly would be there in your headquarters?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Yes, it would.
The Chairman. Mr. Fitzgerald, do you represent the local?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The Chair will advise that a subpena is on its way
there now, a subpena duces tecum to secure that note. Will you im-
mediately wire or call Mr. Collins and direct him to deliver that note ?
We have had the experience in the past that any time we seek records,
they wish to confer with you about it first.
(At this point, Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Fitzgerald. You can have all the union records, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. I want this particular note. I want to see if it has
Frank Kierdorf 's signature on it.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Herman Kierdorf ? I had this suggestion to make,
because it is a note. If one of your people can examine the original,
would you accept a photostat of the note?
Mr. Kennedy. No
Mr. Fitzgerald. We are not going to — I'm sorry.
The Chairman. Just a moment. You may be present. If you will
present the original note this afternoon in response to this subpena,
we will photostat it and return the note to you.
I just want to see if such a note was given. I would like to find
out today. Is that agreeable ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. That is agreeable, yes.
The Chairman. Will you send the wire or telephone them imme-
diately ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. Yes. We will call. Can I call at the Govern-
ment expense this time ?
The Chairman. Yes, sir. I will pay for it myself You don't
have to worry about the Government. Go right ahead. Ascertain
the amount of the charges and I will pay for them.
Mr. Fitzgerald. We will be happy to pay for it. I just said that.
The Chairman. I knew you did. I said that in the same spirit.
All right. Let's pi'oceed. Are there any further questions of this
witness ?
Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Is this note a bankable note ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Senator, you ask me a question but it is some-
thing I am not familiar with, bankable notes.
Senator Curtis. Do you think you can take it to the bank and get
the money on it '(
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Well, it is a demand note, such as I understood
it. Senator.
Senator Curtis. A lot of demands are made, but do you think you
could take this note to the bank and get the money, less a reasonable
discount ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr, Fitzsimmons. Senator, I just don't know. I can't answer the
question as far as the note is concerned, it is a demand note.
13596 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. Who made out the note ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Mr. Collins, I presume.
Senator Curtis. You don't know ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Xo, sir ; I do not.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzsimmons, why would you do this favor for
Mr. Heiman Kierdorf wlien Mr. Hoffa testified that he requested he
resiijn from the union ?
]VIr. Fitzsimmons. Well, Mr. Kennedy, as far as the favor is con-
cerned, a man come in and asked to buy an automobile.
Mr. Kennedy. Can anybody 20 into the Teamsters building today
and ask to buy an automobile and you will sell them a 1956 Cadillac
for $1,400 on a demand note without puttino- up a penny?
Mr Fitzsimmons. No, this man had used this car, and as far as the
car was concerned, we had no further use for the car.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Certainly the Teamsters Union could give it to the
business agent that replaced Mr. Kierdorf.
Mr. Fitzsimmons. There is a possibility that as far as replacing Mr.
Kierdorf is concerned, he would not be replaced.
Mr. Kennedy. What?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I say there is a possibility that Mr. Kierdorf
will not be replaced.
Mr. Kennedy. Is he irreplaceable, Mr. Herman Kierdorf?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I didn't say that, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Who made up the note for the $1,400 ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Mr. Collins, I presume.
Mr. Kennedy. He wrote it up ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I presume.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I presume Mr. Collins.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know that ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No; I wasn't present when the note was made
Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody endorse the note ? Did anybody sign
the note other than Mr. Herman Kierdorf ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I would not know that, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. A^Hien did you assign title of the automobile?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I did not assign title to the automobile.
Mr. Kennedy. Who did?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I presume Mr. Collins. I wouldn't know.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not do it yourself ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No ; I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. You just knew it was being done ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Yes; I did.
Mr. Kennedy. It is amazing to me that somebody comes in on a
Saturday morning and wants an automobile and you transfer an
automobile on a note to this individual, without taking it up with the
executive board. You transfer Teamster property to this individual
after Mr. Hoffa testified that he asked him to resign from the union.
I just don't understand it.
The Chairman. Did you make any inquiry as to the value of the
car?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Myself, Mr. McClell an? No.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13597
The Chairman. Did you ascertain whether it could be traded in for
much more vahie, be sold on the market for a higher price ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I left that transaction entirely to Mr, Collins,
our secretary-treasurer.
The Chairman. Do you mean now to say you had nothing to do
with the transaction ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. I say as far as the transactions are concerned,
we discussed the transaction about him taking the automobile and
signing a demand note.
The Chairman. Does the note bear interest?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Sir?
The Chairman. Does the note bear interest ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Again, as I say, Mr. McClellan, I didn't see the
note after the transaction was made.
The Chairman. Do you know actually of your own knowledge
whether there is a note or not?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. I know of my knowledge as far as Mr. Collins
is concerned that he did and told me that he had signed a note, a
demand note for this money.
The Chairman. Did you see the note ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, I didn't see it ; no, sir.
The Chairman. You have never seen it up until now ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. AVho came with Mr. Kierdorf ?
Mr. FiTzsiM]\roNs. He came by himself, as I remember it.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there anybody else in on this transaction ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. What?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Nobody else.
The Chairman. All right, you may stand aside, subject to being
recalled. You will remain here. Mr. Fitzgerald, the Chair's will
is that you immediately proceed to carry out our agreement.
There is one other question, I believe.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any discussions with anyone re-
garding the organization of cleaners, the organization of any dry
cleaners or other kind of cleaners, with Mr. Herman Kierdorf ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss that matter with Mr. Frank Kier-
dorf?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss the LaTrielle Cleaners with Mr.
Kierdorf ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever heard of the LaTrielle Cleaners ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. Only what I read in the newspapers.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not discuss that at all, the organization of
the LaTrielle Cleaners ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons. No, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if Mr. Herman Kierdorf or Frank
Kierdorf were workins: on that matter ?
13598 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee Avho else was doing
organizational work with Frank Kierdorf ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. No. He worked for local union 332 in Flint.
I have no reason to know anything- about that local union outside of
the State conference.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know who else would be working with
Frank Kierdorf?
Mr. FITZSIMMONS. No, sir, I do not.
Mr. Kennedy. And you say you first heard of Mr. Frank Kierdorf 's
accident from reading it in the paper ?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Monday morning?
Mr. FiTzsiMMONS. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all.
The Chairman. You may stand aside for the present, subject to
being recalled.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Mr. Chairman, may I ask him a question ? I have
a question in my mind that I read about with this transaction.
The Chairman. You may direct the question to the Chair, under
the rules.
Mr. Fitzgerald. I merely wanted to ask him to refresh his recollec-
tion on this.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. I thought you wanted a question.
Mr. Fitzgerald. No, I did not want him to leave the stand with a
piece of wrong testimony.
The Chairman. All right. Thank you. As soon as you have placed
the call, will you report to us, please, sir ?
Thank you.
Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman we are just going to have two short
witnesses on another entirely separate matter. I would like to call
them. I would first like to call Mr. George Francis Heid.
The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear the evidence you shall give
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Heid. I do.
TESTIMONY OF GEORGE HEID
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your
business or occupation.
Mr. Heid. George Heid, Fifty Lakes, Minn.
The Chairman. George Heid ?
Mr. Heid. Heid.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Heid. I cut timber up north. I cut timber and grow it.
The Chairman. You are a laborer ?
Mr. Heid. No. I cut timber.
The Chairman. You cut timber ?
Mr. Held. Yes.
The Chairman. That is your present occupation ?
]SIr. Heid. Yes.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13599
The Chairman. Do you waive counsel, could you, Mr. Held ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I might say before we interrogate
this witness that last year we discovered that some $54,000 in legal
fees had been paid in connection with Gerald Connelly and, I believe,
3 other union officials, involved in 2 extortions and a dynamiting up
in Minneapolis, Minn. ; that the bulk of the money had been paid on
behalf of Mr. Gerald Connelly who was then a union official. We
also had testimony regarding Mr. Connelly's misuse of his union
position and his disregard of the rights of the union members. There
was some question raised at that time, and in our report, regarding
the expenditure of these funds. We have called Mr. Heid to give
what information he has of the background of Mr. Gerald Connelly,
and the kind of an operation he ran in Minneapolis, the local union
that he operates.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Heid, in the winter of 1955 and 1956, did you do
some work for a local union in Minneapolis ?
Mr. Heid. Yes. I worked for local 548 as an organizer.
Mr. Kennedy. You were hired as an organizer ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And that was a union run by Mr. Gerald Connelly ?
Mr. Heid. It was.
Mr. Kennedy. What experience had you had iii organizing prior
to that time ?
Mr. Heid. Well, none until that time.
Mr. Kennedy. You had not had any experience ?
Mr. Heid. No.
Mr. Kennedy. For what reason did Mr. Connelly hire you ?
Mr. Heid. Well, he said he needed some man that would go out and
get some customers, and a friend of mine, Mr. Flick
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Flick ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir. So then we went to work for local 548,
organizing.
Mr. Kennedy. Both of you became organizers ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Had Mr. Flick had any experience organizing ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. He had. Who did he work for ?
Mr. Heid. He used to work for the Teamsters when they organized
the breweries, the Minneapolis breweries.
Mr. Kennedy. Tell me, what specifically did Mr. Connelly want
you to work on.
Mr. Heid. He specifically wanted us to work on the liquor stores
in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Mr. Kennedy. Were most of these one-man stores ?
Mr. Heid. Quite a few of them was ; yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. They were run by the people themselves ?
Mr, Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. He was trying to organize these stores run by the
people themselves ; is that right ?
Mr. Heid. Organize them all.
13600 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Did you go around and attempt to organize tkem?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the initiation fee for these individuals?
Mr. Heid. Well, it was supposed to be $50.
Mr. Kennedy. In order to join the union, you had to pay $50?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And most of the shops were owned by the people
themselves.
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kjennedy. What arrangements did Mr. Connelly make with
3^ou, financially?
Mr. Heid. Well, we were supposed to organize them, and we would
get two-thirds of the initiation fee and the other third was to go to
the home office in Kansas City.
Mr. Kennedy. But you could keep two-thirds of anything you
could collect?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you get a salary in addition to that?
Mr. Heid. No ; we got expenses and two-thirds of the initiation fee.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlien you collected the money, would you give it to
Connelly and then he would pay you some money ?
Mr. Heid. Most of the time when you give him the money you would
never see any money back.
Mr. Kennedy. How much money did you get, usually, a week?
Mr. Heid. Well, it all depends on what we needed. We got expenses
for the car, and a lot of times we would have to take it ourselves with-
out turning it back in ; otherwise, we would not get nothing.
Mr. Kennedy. How much did you get, about?
Mr. Heid. $35 or $40 a week.
Mr. Kennedy. That is how much you would make ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Had you had a good deal of experience handling
explosives?
Mr. Heid. Yes ; I have.
Mr. Kennedy. You have handled dynamite?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And mines and bombs while you were in the service ;
is that correct?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir. I have handled composition X, composition B,
nitrostarch, nitroputty, all of it.
Mr. Kennedy. All types of explosives ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Connelly speak to you at all about dynamit-
ing any of the employers ?
Mr. Heid. Yes ; he did.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us the conversations you had with
him?
Mr. Heid. He asked me what experience I had in using dynamite
and explosives, and I told him quite a bit. I knew quite a bit. He
asked me how I would go about setting a stick of dynamite on a car,
and I told him you would get an electric cap and hook the dynamite
up to either the spark plug or your switch or your starter. Then, when
they turn on the switch or step on the starter, they have had it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he think that was a ffood idea?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13601
Mr. Heid. Well, I don't know. He mentioned quite a bit about
dynamiting-, but he never said, one way or the other, whether it was
a good idea or not.
Mr. Kexxedy. Did you also discuss dynamiting any of the stores
or the homes of any ?
Mr. Heid. Yes. Tony Felicetto was talking about giving him some
heat because he had let some people go across the picket line where
we were trying to organize.
Mr. Kennedy. Tony what ?
Mr. Heid. Felicetto.
Mr. Kennedy. Giving him a little what ?
Mr. Heid. Heat. Giving him a little trouble. The Five Point
Liquor Store. There was somebody else he mentioned, but I don't
remember his name.
Mr. Kennedy. Giving somebody a little heat; is that dynamiting
him?
Mr. Heid. Well, giving them a little trouble ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you, in fact, make any plans to use the
dynamite ?
Mr. Heid. Well, he asked me if I would do it, and he said he would
promise me a lifetime job with the union and a good-paying job.
Mr. Kennedy. So, did you explain to him about the use of the
dynamite?
Mr. Heid. I explained about the use of dynamite.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell what happened then ?
Mr. Heid. Well, he was talking about setting dynamite on the back
of a house, and I told him, "No; if there is any women or kids in
there, they will get it, and that is murder. I don't want no part
of it."
Mr. Kennedy. So, what happened? Would you tell us?
Mr. Heid. Well, I went to Wisconsin. I went to my sister's place
in Wisconsin.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he say he was going ahead and using the
dynamite ?
Mr. Heid. Well, he said he did not think I had enough guts to do it,
and I told him not when it come to making it on kids and women.
Mr, Kennedy. Did he, in fact, use the dynamite ?
Mr. Heid. Yes; he did.
Mr. Kennedy. Whom did he dynamite up there ?
Mr. Heid. Well, it wasn't him. It was Reddin, Lattin, and Flick.
He was in Florida at the time.
Mr. Kennedy. But he gave the instructions on it ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. I believe, Mr. Chairman, we established that he was
in Florida, and he was staying, at that time, v.ith Mr. Ben Dranow,
of the Thomas department stores, and they were in under different
names in a Florida hottel in adjoining rooms, and that their hotel
bill at that time was paid by the Thomas department store, and,
further, we established that the Thomas department store and Ben
Dranow had been the recipients of loans totaling $1,200,000 from
Mr. Hoffa's Teamsters Union. I might add, also, that the Thomas
department store is now in bankruptcy.
Mr. Heid, you went out of town, and the dynamite was used; is
that correct ?
13602 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Is that the same place that they had asked you to
dynamite ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, you did not do the dynamiting,
but tlie place was dynamited, but they had tried to get you to dynamite
it yourself ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir. The two officials' house was dynamited. The
liquor store was never dynamited.
The Chairman. ^Yliat was dynamited ?
Mr. Heid. The two officials, union officials, that had went across
the picket line; one of their cars was dynamited and the house was
dynamited.
The Chairman. But the car of one of the officials who had crossed
the picket line and the house of the other was dynamited ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How long was that after he had asked you to do
these jobs?
Mr. Heid. That was approximately 2i/^ weeks, as near as I can re-
member right now.
The Chairman. Some 2i/^ weeks after he had tried to get you to
do it, and you did not do it, then they were dynamited ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. These are the same identical places or people that
he had asked you to perform that operation on ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And these were Teamsters officials, were they not?
Mr. Heid. They were.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, in connection with that case where
Mr. Connelly dynamited the automobile and the home of two Team-
sters officials, some $17,000 of union funds were used to defend them.
The Chairman. Is that the time that they were charged with this
dynamiting ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. "WHiat were you told, as far as your testimony ? You
had information indicating that they were guilty. Did you have any
conversations with Mr. Connelly about it ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir. He would see that I was taken care of, if he
had to do it himself.
Mr. Kennedy. If you testified ?
Mr. Heid. If I turned state's evidence, he would have me taken care
of. Otherwise, he would do it himself.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you testify at the trial ?
Mr. Heid. I testified for the defense.
Mr. Kennedy. You testified for the defense ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not testify truthfully ?
Mr. Heid. No, I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. And your testimony was prepared by Mr. Connelly
and by some of the other union officials ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever raise a question as to whether you
would always have a job ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13603
Mr, Heid. Well, he told me if I played along with him and was a
witness for the defense, he would see that I had a job if it was nothing
more than driving over the road.
Mr. Kennedy. If it was what ?
Mr. Heid. If it was nothing more than driving over the road.
Mr. Kennedy. Did yon ever ask for any assurances to have a job ?
Mr. Heid. Well, yes. Before this deal went through, there was a
phone call that he w^as supposed to have received from Jimmy Hoffa.
He told him about organizing the liquor stores, and he asked him,
"What if we have to get rough?" And he said, "If you have to get
rough, get rough, but get them organized."
Mr. Kennedy. Who said that ?
Mr. Heid. The man on the other end of the wire. He said it was
Jimmy Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. "If you have to get rough, get rough" ?
Mr. Heid. "But get them organized."
Mr. Kennedy. And he identified this man as Jimmy Hoffa ?
Mr. Heid. He did.
Mr. Kennedy. After the trial w.as over, did you receive any money
from the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Heid. Yes. $12.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you supposed to get more than that ? Did you
expect more ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, I did. What was left over from the court trial we
were supposed to split three ways.
The Chairman. What was left over from the court trial ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. How much was involved in the court trial ?
Mr. Heid. Jerry told us there was $55,000 coming through for our
defense.
The Chairman. Who told you that ?
Mr. Heid. Jerry Connelly.
The Chairman. He told you there was $55,000 available for the
defense ?
Mr. Heid. Yes.
The Chairman. And whatever was left you w^ould split it three
ways?
Mr. Heid. It was supposed to be a three-way split.
The Chairman. According to what you got, there is $36 left; is
that right ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. I might say, Mr. Chairman, that for Mr. Connelly — •
he w^as involved, as I said, in 2 extortions and this dynamiting, and
convicted in all 3, he had some other defendants, as well, but for his
defense and these other people, some $54,381.55 of union funds were
used for his defense.
The Chairman. According to what they told him, they did not
shortchange him very much, did they ?
Mr, Kennedy. No.
The Chairman. Is this the same Connelly that we are talking about
that I sent that subpena to to get the note ?
Mr. Kennedy. No.
13604 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Gerald Connelly is now in the penitentiary. That was Mr. Collins.
The Chairman. Collins. I am sorry. All right. I didn't want
the record to reflect on someone wrongfully. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. Where were these court proceedings held, when
you testified for the defense ?
Mr. Heid. It was held in Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Senator Curtis. Do you happen to know whether it was a State or
Federal court?
Mr. Heid. It was in a State court.
Senator Curtis. It was in a State court.
(At this point, Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing
room.)
Senator Curtis. Wliat information did you have that would have
been helpful to the prosecution other than the talk of the plans for
dynamiting ?
Did you see any of the work done ?
Mr. Heid. No; I did not. But they wanted to know who, in the
court trial in Ramsey County they wanted to know who had knowledge
of the use of dynamite. Flick and myself at that time had the
business of Allied Sanitary Construction and I used dynamite for
breaking into hardpan and things like that, w^hen we had to go
through rock for getting down to sand.
Senator Curtis. But you appeared as a witness for the defense?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Wliat, in substance, did you say ?
Mr. Heid. Well, I told them that I did not know anything about it ;
that there was no talk of dynamiting — to that effect.
Senator Curtis. To whom did you talk about the testimony that you
were to give prior to the trial ?
Mr. Heid. Well, I talked to the county attorney, and detectives.
That is about all.
Senator Curtis. Did you tell them that you were going to testifv
falsely ?
Mr. Heid. No; I did not.
Senator Curtis. But you say now that you did testify falsely.
Mr. Heid. Yes; I did.
Senator Curtis. With whom did you talk about testifying falsely ?
Mr. Heid. With Jerry Connelly and Flick.
Senator Curtis. With Jerry Connelly ?
Mr. Heid. Jerry Connelly.
Senator Curtis. He was the man that was arrested and tried ?
Mr. Heid. Jerry Connelly, Bryant Flick, Diane Harvey, and my-
self were all indicted.
Senator Curtis. You talked to him, to Flick, and who was the
third person?
Mr. Heid. Diane Harvey.
Senator Curtis. Did you talk to anybody else ?
Mr. Heid. No, sir ; that is all.
Senator Curtis. Did anybody interview you concerning your testi-
mony, other than these people?
Mr. Heid. Not that I can remember ; no, sir.
Senator Curtis. These people that you have mentioned are the only
ones for the defense that you talked to before you took the witness
stand ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13605
Mr. Heid. No. I talked to Jerry's lawyer and I talked to Flick's
lawyer.
Senator Cuetis. Who were they ?
Mr. Heid. Gordon C. Peterson, in Minneapolis, and Sid Goff, at
St. Paul.
Senator Curtis. What conversation did you have with them?
Mr. Heid. Well, about getting a stoi*y, and what I was going to say.
And that is about all.
(At this point, Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.)
Senator Curtis. Did you reveal to them that you were going to
testify falsely ?
Mr. Heid. Well, they knew it.
Senator Curtis. Did you reveal it to them ?
Mr. Heid. No, I don't
Senator Curtis. How do you know that they knew it ?
Mr. Heid. Because we was all up in the union hall together when
they was talking about dynamiting, and they used some of the fuse
that we had in the cesspool business. It was a slow-burning fuse and
they used the wrong kind of fuse when they set the dynamite. But
they tested the dynamite with a slow-burning fuse and they bought
a different type fuse when they used the dynamite.
Mr. KJENNEDY. They almost got blown up, did they ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. That is when they were demonstrating something
in the union hall ?
Mr. Heid. That was after I left.
Senator Curtis. You weren't there ?
Mr. Heid. No, sir.
Senator Curtis. But my question is : How do you know that these
two lawyers for the defense knew that you were going to testify
falsely ?
Mr. Heid. Well, Jerry said he told them the whole story, about all
of it, and he said he told them Flick had jumped the gun. That was
all there was to it.
Senator Curtis. Was there any conversation when you were present
and these two lawyers that you mentioned were present, that would
give them information that you were going to testify falsely?
Mr. Heid. Not through the lawyers ; no.
Senator Curtis. And you base your statement that they knew you
were to testify falsely on Connelly's statement that he had told them
the whole story ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. And by that you believe that he had told them the
entire truthful story ?
Mr. PIeid. Well, I figured he probably would.
Senator Curtis. I beg your pardon ?
Mr. Heid. I figured he would, yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. But was there any discussion between you and
the lawyers to the effect that you were going to testify falsely?
Mr. Heid. Not between me and the lawyer, no, sir.
Senator Curtis. Was there any discussion by you and any other per-
son when these two lawyers, or either one of them were present, that
revealed the fact that you were going to testify falsely ?
21243— 58— pt. 36— — 22
13606 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
(At this point, Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
Mr, Heid. Well, when we was over at Gordon Peterson's, I stayed
over at Gordon Peterson's there at night.
Senator Curtis. He was one of the attorneys ?
Mr. Heid. Yes. And Jerry was talking about what happened to
people that turned state's evidence. If he was not talking to that
effect, and if a lawyer did not know the whole case, then he sure knew
then that I had to testify falsely to keep from getting a life sentence,
because Flick used to brag about the noise and stuff like that that went
on when the bombing took place.
Senator Curtis. Did you learn who did do the bombing ?
Mr. Heid. I did.
Senator Curtis. How did you learn that ?
Mr. Heid. In the court trial.
Senator Curtis. In the court trial.
Mr. Heid. There was a confession from Lattin and Eeddin.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Connelly speak often during this period of
time about his relationship with Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Heid. Yes. That is all he ever talks about. He is a buddy of
Jimmie's.
Mr. Kennedy. He was a buddy of Jimmie's ?
Mr. Heid. And they talked about how they had been in the labor
movement so long together.
Mr. Kennedy. You left after the trial and tried to get jobs else-
where, did you not ?
Mr. Heid. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever contact the Teamsters Union again?
Mr. Heid. Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Who did you contact ?
Mr. Heid. Well, the first call I made I made it to Kansas City, into
the head office of the Teamsters, and I tried to get ahold of Jimmie
Hoffa. They said he would not be back for an hour or an hour and a
half.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you call him again then ?
Mr. Heid. Later on that afternoon I called back. I started talking
to Gene Williams, or to Mr. Williams, and he said that Jimmie was not
in yet.
Then he says "Well, he come in just now."
So they put what I presumed to be Jimmie on, and I asked him, I
said "Where is the job I am supposed to have?" I told him "This is
George Heid, the one that was indicted with Flick and Connelly."
He said "Oh, meet me in a hotel up in Chicago. He told me the
name of the hotel, which I don't recall. I told him I did not have the
money and that w^as the end of the conversation.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever go to the hotel ?
Mr. Heid. No, I never.
Mr. Kennedy. You never saw him. You don't know whether you
were in fact talking to Hoffa at the time ?
Mr. Heid. No ; I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. The man just stated that this man was Hoffa ?
Mr. Heid. That this man was Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Heid was kind enough to submit
to a lie detector test prior to the time that he testified before the com-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13607
mittee on the matters that he testified about, and that confirmed he is
telling the truth on the lie detector test on all of these matters.
The Chairman. Where did he submit to it ?
Mr. Kennedy. Here in Washington.
The Chairman. Who gave it ?
Mr. Kennedy. The Washington, D. C, Police Department.
The Chairman. When did you submit to a lie detector test?
Mr. Kennedy. The beginning of the week, sir.
The Chairman. This week ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. All of the testimony, or material testimony, that he
has given here he was asked in the polygi'aphic test, and he was telling
the truth on all of these matters.
The Chairman. That is just a statement, and if we want that proof,
or anybody challenges the testimony, we can bring that in later for the
record.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee the reason that you are
testifying as you are testifying today ?
Mr. Heid. Well, I was in the workhouse at Minneapolis there for
being drunk, for coming in town drunk, and Flick came out to see me,
and I got in there about 2, and he was out there at 3 : 30, and he was
talking about, he said, "They have never done anything for us, let us
go turn state's evidence, and they never gave us a job or did anything
for us."
And he said, 'Wlien they were having trouble we were in, and now
they won't give us a job."
Mr. Kennedy. That is the reason ?
Mr. Heid. That is the reason.
The Chairman. When did you have that conversation with Flick?
Mr. Heid. I had it Friday af ternon.
The Chairman. Last Friday afternoon?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. We have talked to him, and I will explain the situa-
tion regarding that later.
Senator Church. Mr. Heid, when you testified at Connelly's trial,
and testified falsely, you committed perjury. You realize that the
giving of perjured testimony is a criminal offense, do you not?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir ; I realize that.
Senator Church. You have here testified today that you did perjure
yourself ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
Senator Church. You are under oath again today, and if you were
to testify falsely before this committee it would also constitute
perjury ; you understand that ?
Mr. Heid. I realize that ; yes, sir.
Senator Church. Understanding those things, you want the record
to stand that you testified falsely in the Connelly trial ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir ; I do.
Senator Church. Despite your testimony in his defense, Connelly
was convicted ; is that right ?
Mr. Heid. He was convicted over in Minneapolis ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. There were two trials ; is that correct ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
13608 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Church. He was convicted in the course of a different
trial?
Mr. Heid. He was convicted in Minneapolis on the bombing, and
in St. Paul he wasn't.
Senator Cm Rcir. Did you testify in the Minneapolis trial ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir ; I did.
The Chairman. Are thei-e any f ui'ther questions ?
Senator Curtis. When was that trial ?
Mr. Heid. I think it was in April of 1956.
The Chairman. Do you have a family ?
Mr. Heid. I have a mother to take care of and two nieces.
The Chairman. You have a motlier and two other dependents to
take care of ?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. You will remain under the jurisdiction of this
committee, and you will be under a continuing subpena to reappear
at such time as the committee may desire to hear your testimony or
further testimony from you.
You acknowledge that, do you, and agree that you will return to the
committee at such time as the committee may indicate it wants to hear
you further?
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Upon our giving you reasonable notice.
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Without being resubpenaed.
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In the meantime, the Chair will advise you that a
measure of protection is going to be afforded to you, and if anyone
in any way attempts to threaten or intimidate or coerce or frighten
you or liarm you or any of your dependents, I ask that you report it to
this committee immediately.
Mr. Heid. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. We are determined to give you all of the protection
within our power. If you have told the truth here today, and if what
you have said here is true under your oath, then you are to be highly
commended and you have rendered a distinct service to your country.
It is most gratifying that men will finally come to their senses and
break with the underworld element and come out in court or in other
tribunals and give the information that they have that will help us
preserve law and order in this country and preserve the liberties and
freedom that this Government assures its citizens. You are to be
highly commended, and I am assuming you are telling the truth. If
you are not, then you ought to be in the penitentiary, and there is no
doubt about that.
But I am assuming that you have. I don't give full credence to
these lie detector tests, but the fact that you were willing to do it and
submitted to it, carries some weight with me at this time, at least,
until I find, or the committee finds, that you have imposed on it by
serious falsehoods here that would injure the character and reputation
of others.
Thank you very much.
You may stand aside for the present.
Mr. Counsel, see that he is taken care of.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13609
Mr. Kennedy. I would like to say that we have had the full co-
operation of the Police Department of Mimieapolis, and the mayor of
Minneapolis, Mayor Peterson, in this matter, and we are very ap-
preciative.
We have also one other witness on Minneapolis that I would like to
call, and we have also, Mr. Chairman, obtained from the Library of
Congress the blue book value of the cheapest model of 1956 Cadillac
sedan, which is $2,895, for the cheapest model.
The Chairman. All right. Thank you.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Mr. Chairman, in line with your request or sug-
gestion or order, we have Mr. Collins on the telephone, and I allowed
him as his counsel to read to Mr. Bellino the note, and he has, I think,
a script of it, and I think what you asked for was complied with.
The Chairman. Yes, I understood the subpena was complied with,
and we wish to thank you for calling, thank you very much.
Wlio do you want to call now ?
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzsimmons.
The Chairman. Until we get the note, we have of course this report
on it, but there will be quite a number of questions to ask about it, but
I think we ought to have the note itself present because there could
be some error in it. We have the information as reported as to what
the note shows, and so forth, and I believe it would be better not to
interrogate Mr. Fitzsimmons at this time until we get the note.
Mr. Fitzgerald. Well, I understand from Mr. Collins that the note,
so that the record will be clear on it, the note covered a price of $2,000
for the automobile, from what he told me.
The Chairman. The note is for $2,000, but there are many other
aspects of the note that suggest some inquiry.
Mr. Kennedy. When you transferred the automobile, why didn't
you know how much you were getting for it ?
Mr. Fitzgerald. May I address the Chair ?
Mr. Fitzsimmons has testified that he didn't transfer the automobile,
and Mr. Collins advised both Mr. Bellino and myself
Mr. Kennedy. He can testify, Mr. Fitzgerald.
The Chairman. Just a moment. Are we going to interrogate him
now ? I would rather get the note here, and there will be no further
interrogation about it until we get the note.
At that time there will be some questions to be asked.
You may stand aside, and keep yourself available for recall.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Morgan is the next witness.
The Chairman. Mr. Morgan, will you come around, please.
You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Morgan. I do.
TESTIMONY OF ARTHUE L. MORGAN
The Chairman. Mr. Morgan, will you state your name, your place
of residence, and your business or occupation, please.
Mr. Morgan. My name is Arthur L. Morgan. My address is 116
West 32d Street, Minneapolis, Minn., and I am an independent labor
representative.
13610 IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Thank you, sir. Do you waive counsel, Mr. Mor-
gan?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir ; I do, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Morgan, you appeared before this com-
mittee back in September of 1957 ?
Mr. Morgan. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. And at that time you testified on your relationship
with Gerald Connolly ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. You testified as to his organizational activities and
you testified as to his misuse of union funds ?
Mr. Morgan. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that correct ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And the abuse of the rights of the union members ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And the fact that you had led an insurgent group
against him ?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And the international officers of the Teamsters, in-
cluding Mr. Hoffa, had insisted that Mr. Gerald Connelly remain in
his position as head of this local ?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And this was despite the fact that he had been con-
victed of extortion and had been indicted on another extortion case?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And subsequently he was convicted and found guilty
of a dynamiting case ; is that right ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And then you testified as to the fact that you led a
group of insurgents out of the local union ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And you became independent because you did not
want to be under the leadership of Gerald Connelly ?
Mr. Morgan. That's right.
Mr, Kennedy. Xow, since your testimony before the committee, and
your return to Minneapolis, have you been the subject of any harass-
ment or threats ?
Mr. Morgan. Since I returned to Minneapolis, my life has been a
living hell. Every night practicalh' the telephone would ring all
night long, and my wife would get calls that asked if the children were
home from school^ and she would say that they are, and they would tell
her, ''Maybe you are lucky toniglit, and maybe you won't be so lucky
tomorrow night."
Mr. Kennedy. Did they say anything to you about your stopping the
representation of these shops?
Mr. Morgan. I had calls both at my house and my office telling me
to stay out of the places that I represented with certifications from
the National Labor Relations Board, and they went into my plants
and threatened the members and threatened management with picket-
ing lines, and I have presently got one of my members in St. Paul under
protection of the St. Paul Police Department. Somebody called a
woman up and asked her if she had the afternoon off one day, if she
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13611
did she had better tjo up and look for a new husband, "because you are
going to tind him murdered in an alley on the way home from work."
Mr, Kennedy. After you testified here, had the Teamsters gotten in
touch with you and said that you could come back into the Teamsters
Union ?
Mr. Morgan. I have a letter here that I received from an attorney
for Sidney Brennan, asking me to meet with him, which I did, and I
didn't know wliat they wanted, or anything. He told me at that time
that he could fix it up so that I could get a charter to come back, and
I told him at the time that I didn't want anything to do with any of
them, and that I couldn't bring my members back into anything like
that if I wanted to.
Mr. Kennedy. Your members were completely disgusted with the
leadership of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Morgan. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. They had voted almost unanimously to walk out ; is
that correct ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir ; and they have voted since less than 2 months
ago, for the second time in 2 years, through NLRB elections, to do the
same thing.
Mr. Kennedy. To stay out of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. This is because of the way they had been treated
while they were members of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, this is an example of the group that
broke away successfully from the Teamsters Union, from this leader-
ship about which we have had the testimony. A man who had been
convicted twice of extortion and another time of dynamiting, whom
union funds were used to defend, and this man, Mr. Morgan, led an
insurgent group out of the Teamsters.
I thought it was important to have the testimony before the com-
mittee as to what has happened to him since that time.
The Chairman. How many are in your group that you led out of
the Teamsters ?
Mr. Morgan. It depends on the season. It is from 140 up to ap-
proximately 220, or 225, and it covers 16 small shops, and I have
another shop that I organized since then on my own, that has been
bothered by the unions, and that came into my organization.
The Chairman. You and your group are determined that you will
not be subjugated to the dictatorial and vicious rule of the Teamsters
in that area ?
Mr. Morgan. Of the Teamsters or anyone else.
The Chairman. Thank God for that. That is the kind of courage
it is going to take in this countiy to break up this racket. I want
to say at this time, in my judgment, the leadership of the Teamsters
Union can clean house in 24: hours if it actually wants to do it.
Mr. Morgan. There is another union in Minneapolis that has peti-
tioned to go independent less than 2 weeks ago.
The Chairman. I beg your pardon ?
Mr. Morgan. There is another Teamster Union in Minneapolis that
has petitioned to go independent 2 weeks ago.
The Chairman. I hope it becomes contagious. '
13612 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy, Now, were any of the people that were convicted
with Gerald Connelly in this extortion case, are any of them still
officials of the Teamsters Union ?
Mr, Morgan. Eveiy one of them are,
Mr. Kennedy. They still hold offices with the Teamsters Union?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy, What about Sidney Brennan now, who was con-
victed of extortion ?
Mr, Morgan, Sidney Brennan is still secretary-treasurer of 544,
and he is a vice president of the Joint Council 32, and I understand
he is still a vice president of the Central States Conference.
Mr. Kennedy. He is a vice president of the joint council that con-
trols all of these Teamsters unions in that area ?
Mr. Morgan. That is exactly right.
Mr, Kennedy, He still holds that position ?
Mr, Morgan, Yes, sir,
Mr. Kennedy, And he was convicted of extortion some 2 years
ago?
Mr, Morgan. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And it was appealed all of the way to the Supreme
Court?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
Mr, Kennedy, And he is still holding that position ?
Mr, Morgan, He still holds that position,
Mr. Kennedy, What about Mr. »Torgenson ?
Mr, Morgan. He is president of Joint Council 32,
Mr, Kennedy, Was he also convicted of this extortion ?
Mr, Morgan, He was.
Mr. Kennedy. He still holds the position ?
Mr. Morgan, He does.
Senator I\t:s. Mr. Chairman, in that connection I want to point
out that if the Kennedy-Ives bill were law, that could not happen.
The Chairman, It ought not to take a law to clean up a situation
like this. The leadership ought to have the integrity and the will to
do it.
Senator Curtis. Do you Iniow the names of any of the individuals
who performed these acts of harassment either against you or other
members of the independent union who withdrew from the Team-
sters, or committed acts of harassment against the employers involved ?
Mr. Morgan. I know the names of two of them. One of them is
president of 544, Edward Blicks, who walked into the plant and de-
manded that the employees join his union or he would straighten out
the place. And Sidney Brennan called the management of the Phil
Mallen Co., and I only have three girls working there, and that is the
shop that Eddie Blicks walked into, and told a fellow by the name of
Francis Mallett that does personnel work there that if he continued to
negotiate contracts or settle any grievances with me he would have
to put the place out of business.
Senator Curtis. Do you know the names of any others ?
Mr. Morgan. No ; I don't know the names of any of the others.
Senator Curtis. Did you ever find out who was harassing you by
ringing your telephone at night and disturbing your family ?
Mr. Morgan, I couldn't say ; no, sir.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13613
Senator Curtis. We spent a number of weeks taking similar testi-
mony in another case, and we couldn't find out either.
Mr. Morgan. I tried to have the Federal Bureau of Investigation
even check my telephone line at night. I have had my telephone
changed three times since I appeared before this committee, with un-
listed numbers, and some way in a short period of time, it continues.
Senator Curtis. They would find out the new number ?
Mr. Morgan. Wliat is that ?
Senator Curtis. Whoever was harassing you would you find out the
new numbers ?
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir, in a short period of time.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you had any help from the National Labor Re-
lations Board ?
Mr. Morgan. As to the National Labor Relations Board, I wrote a
letter to this conunittee a couple of months ago, and received a letter
from the National Labor Relations Board in Washington here, to
take things up with the National Labor Relations Board in Minne-
apolis. At the time the Teamsters had gone into one of my shops, the
Merrill Co., and threatened employees and forced them to sign cards so
they could petition for an election with the Board. I immediately con-
sented to an election, and I defeated the Teamsters in seven companies.
The Teamsters filed charges of employer interference in the election,
and I have a copy right here of the decision by the National Labor Re-
lations Board, and they upheld interference as far as the election was
concerned.
If this committee would read this report, the committee itself would
be disgusted with the report.
As to the charges filed by the Teamsters Union, none of them are
found true in this report, and still they think there should be a new
election.
Mr. Kennedy. This is the Board out there ?
The Chairman. AVill you submit a copy of it ?
Mr. Morgan. I will submit this one here ; yes, sir.
The Chairman. It may be submitted as an exhibit and made ex-
hibit No. 17.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 17" for refer-
ence and may be fou.nd in the files of the select committee.)
The Chairman. That is submitted for reference, and also will you
submit a copy of the letter that you referred to that you received from
the attorneys.
Mr. Morgan, I will submit the original, and I have no use for it
myself.
The Chairman. We will return it to you and we will make a copy
of it and return it to you.
That may be made exhibit No. 18 for reference.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 18" for refer-
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13719.)
Senator Curtis. Do I understand that the National Labor Relations
Board did not approve of the election ?
Mr. Morgan. No ; they didn't.
Senator Curtis. On what grounds didn't they, if you know?
Mr. Morgan. Well, a charge filed by the Teamsters said a high
company official of Industrial Steel in St. Paul had interfered by
13614 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
stating to one of the employees that if I won the election the employees
would receive a 15-cent wage increase.
I had been in negotiation for over 3 months prior to the time that
they filed for an election. This letter from the National Labor Kela-
tions Board doesn't find that this Simmons has done a thing, and the
only thing they find is that I told the people myself that I had com-
pleted negotiations and that they w^ould receive a 15-cent wage in-
crease.
Senator Curtis. That is a recitation of what had already taken
place, and not given out as an inducement to win the election?
Mr. Morgan. Absolutely not, and the shop had been on a 4-hour day
for approximately 6 months, and in January they received a small
wage increase with the understanding that as soon as the shop went
back on full 8 hours a day that the employees w^ould receive the balance
of their increase, which they would have gotten.
Now^ that the Teamsters have filed these charges, it has kept the
employees from receiving their 15-cent wage increase, and also their
retroactive pay which would amount to practically $200.
The Chairman. You mean per employee i
Mr. Morgan. Yes, sir.
Senator Ives. I would like to point out one thing in this connection.
I think the witness has hit upon a rather important matter when it
comes to the critics of the Kennedy-Ives bill. Some of these critics
have been maintaining that a heavier burden would be placed on
management if the bill were enacted than has been placed in the
past under the Taft-Hartley Act. What you just told us about the
National Labor Relations Board throwing out this case demonstrates
beyond question that the very thing that they are talking about as
being new under the Kennedy-Ives bill is already in force under the
National Labor Relations Act, or the Taft-Hartley Act.
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions ?
Mr. Kennedy. So the local board had supported the union that
was led by some of these individuals that we have been discussing,
against your group which had walked out of the Teamsters Union
because it w^as corrupt ; isn't that right ?
Mr. Morgan. In my opinion, sir, yes. They have made no inves-
tigation whatsoever of any of the charges in any of the shops as covered
by this election or anything, and the only thing they did outside of the
evidence the teamsters supported was talk to my steward for about 10
minutes.
The Chairman. They made no investigation of your side of the
case ?
Mr. Morgan. To my knowledge ; no, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Do these individuals that you have discussed have
any positions within the city ?
Mr. Morgan. To my knowledge. Jack Jorgenson was a former
alderman in the city of Minneapolis, and he w^as appointed, but never
■elected by the people. After he was convicted and brought up in this
Archie Daniels case he declined to run when it was brought up, because
he knew he w^as defeated.
But since then he has been appointed to the Oral Review Board of
the Minneapolis Police Department.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 13615
Mr. Kennedy. "What is that again ?
Mr. Morgan. The oral review board. They have written examina-
tions for police promotion, and an oral examination.
Mr. Kennedy. He is on the board to decide on police promotions?
Mr, Morgan. That is right.
Mr, Kennedy. This is Mr. Jorgenson who was convicted as a Team-
ster official of extortion ?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
•Clellan, Ives, Chnrch, and Curtis.)
The Chairman. How long has he been out of the pen ?
JNIr. Morgan. On this board ?
The Chairman. How long has he been out of the pen, before he was
uppointed on this board ?
Mr. Morgan. He never served time. He was fined and placed on
probation.
The Chairman, He was fined how much ?
Mr. Morgan. $3,000, 1 believe.
The Chairman.' Fined $3,000. They didn't send him to the pen?
Mr. Morgan. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Is there anybody else on this police board ?
Mr. Morgan. Well, on the civil service commission the chairman of
the civil service commission is a fellow by the name of Thomas Coch-
lemacher, that is the Teamster attorney for Joint Council 32, and I
understand he is on an $18,000 a year retainer by the Teamsters.
Mr. Kennedy. He is the Teamster attorney. What is his position ?
Mr. Morgan. He is chairman of the civil service commission.
Mr. Kennedy. Is he the one that made arrangements for the ap-
pointment of Mr. Jorgensen ?
Mr. Morgan. I wouldn't know that.
Mr. Kennedy. But Mr. Jorgensen is in a position on the board that
decides police promotions ?
Mr. Morgan. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. From the information we have, the mayor of Minne-
apolis, Mayor Peterson, was not aware of this fact.
The Chairman. He is aware of it now.
I am sure he will give it proper attention. Are there any other
questions ?
Mr. Morgan, you heard the statement I made to the witness, Mr.
Hyde, who just left the witness stand ?
Mr. Morgan. I did, sir.
The Chairman, The Chair will make the same announcement with
reference to you. We are going to give you all the protection within
our power. If you can give us a report of any further developments,
do so. I assure you, sir, that even though there may be some scoundrels
who are trying to get you and trying to intimidate you, trying to take
away your rights of an American citizen, I know at this hour that the
great mass of American citizens not only sympathize with you, but
they want to reach out to help you, and this Government and your
local government will be strong enough to give you and the family the
protection to which you are entitled.
Mr. Morgan. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
13616 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Report to us anything that occurs.
Call the next witness.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Ernest Belles.
The Chairman. You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall o-ive
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth
and nothmg but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Belles. Yes, sir.
TESTIMONY OF ERNEST G. BELLES, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
BENEDICT F. FitzGERALD
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence and your
business or occupation.
Mr. Belles. Ernest G. Belles, 480 Sesame Street, Opa-locka, Fla.
At the present time I am renting a tavern.
The Chairman. Running a tavern ?
Mr. Belles. Renting one, leasing one.
The Chairman. Renting a tavern ?
Mr. Belles. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, you may identify yourself for the
record.
Mr. FitzGerald. My name is Benedict F. FitzGerald, Jr., attorney
at law in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the District of
Columbia, with offices at suite 983, National Press Building, Washino--
ton,D.C. to' »* t,
The Chairman. All riglit, Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed.
]\Ir. Kennedy. Mr. Belles, you were a president of Local 375 of
Buffalo, N. Y., of the Teamsters?
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Belles, the information that we have is that you
ran for office against a man by the name of Stanley Clayton for the
head of local 375 ; that Mr. Stanley Clayton won the election ; that
there was some violence in connection with the election against the
followers of Stanley Clayton. There was some dynamite uncovered
m the bottom of his automobile. I would like to know if you have
any information regarding the dynamite put in the bottom of his
automobile.
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. After he won the election, there was an investiga-
tion made of the union funds. Mr. Stanley Clayton has a very, very
high reputation in New York and in union circles generally. There
was an investigation made by a trial board of the union and they
found that you had misappropriated some $31,000. Could you tell
us anything about that ?
(At this point. Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing
room. )
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise niy privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us if you did misappropriate $31,000 ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13617
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. After the trial, the union reached a verdict and the
verdict was that you were to be removed from local 375, removed
from the Teamsters for a period of 10 years, and that you were never
to hold union office again because you had violated your trust.
Isn't that correct, Mr. Belles ?
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. This was a union trial. Then, Mr. Belles, you left
Buffalo, N. Y., and suddenly became head of a local down in Miami,
Fla., local 390. Could you tell us how you were able to do that ?
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a w^itness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. You became an international organizer for the
Teamsters Local 399 — excuse me, local 390 — in Miami, Fla., and later
became president of that local, did you ?
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. According to the information, you first became an
international organizer for local 390, and then you were appointed as
trustee president of local 390 by Mr. "Dusty"' Miller, who is the
director of the Teamsters Southern Conference.
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. The sovithern conference at that time was under the
direction of the Central Conference of Teamsters, Mr. James Hoffa.
Can you tell us what Mr. Hoffa did in connection with placing you
in this position of trust ?
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliere your own union members had found you
misappropriated money, said you should not hold a union position
for 10 years, you suddenly end up as a union official and ultimately
as president of another local in Miami, Fla.
Can you give us any explanation for that whatsoever ?
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
(At this time. Senator Church withdrew from the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. You are now out of that position. Could you tell us
what the reasons were for your resignation ?
Mr. Belles. I would like to have my attorney make a statement at
this time.
Mr. Kennedy. I w^ould like to hear it from you.
Senator Ives. You make it yourself.
Mr. Belles. I didn't hear the question.
13618 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. The question is : I understand that you are now out
of that union position. I would like to ask you why it was that you
resigned, were fired, or whatever happened.
Mr. Belles. I respectfully decline to answer that question and exer-
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the United States
Constitution not to be a witness against myself.
Mr. FitzGerald. Mr. Chairman — who is the chairman now?
Senator Ives. I am acting chairman at the moment.
Mr. FitzGeilvld. Mr. Ives, at this time I would like to interpose a
general objection to the calling of this witness at this time.
Senator Ives. Just a minute.
(At this point Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.)
Senator Ives. The chairman himself has just arrived. I will turn
this over to him. I don't want to mix up the signals.
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. FitzGerald. If the gentleman from Arkansas will permit me
to make a few remarks at this time, the questioning started so quickly
I was hardly able to introduce myself and interpose an objection
The Chairman. Let me get my bearings.
Mr. Kennedy. It is not on a question. He just has a general
objection.
The Chairman. Go ahead.
Mr. FitzGerald. I just wanted to fix the same objections to this
hearing that I have frequently done in the past with the several other
witnesses that I have represented. I want to object to the calling of
this witness, and for the record, indicate that I feel it is a violation
of sections 1, 5, 6, and 8 of the Constitution of the United States, the
amendments to the Constitution, and want to set those objections up
to every one of these questions.
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
The Chairman. The objections are heard. The objections are
overruled.
Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Ivennedy. Mr. FitzGerald, could I ask you a question? You
are being retained for Mr. Belles by the Teamsters, are you ?
Mr. FitzGerald. ^Vhsit was that ?
Mr. Kennedy. You are being retained by the Teamsters for Mr-
Belles?
Mr. FitzGerald. By what Teamsters ?
Mr. Ivennedy. Any Teamsters.
Mr. FitzGerald. No. I am here as attorney for Mr. Belles.
Mr. Kennedy. You are getting your fee by Mr. Belles ?
Mr. FitzGerald. I hope so. He has been terrorized so much by the
newspapers and by the committee, I don't suppose he has very much
money, but eventually I hope to get paid. We haven't discussed that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you expect to get your fee from the Teamsters
or Mr. Belles?
Mr. FitzGerald. By Mr. Belles, the man I represent on this oc-
casion.
The Chairman. Maybe the Chair misheard you. What did you say
about the committee a moment ago ?
Mr. FitzGerald. I said that the committee has been following this
man so fast and furiously that he is no longer with the Teamsters,
and he is down in Florida now. and he is not a man of much means.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13619
The Chairman. I thought you said the committee has been terror-
izing. Did I misunderstand you ?
Mr. FitzGerald. I don't know wliether I said that or not. But my
intention was that he had been followed by committee investigators
and had been interrogated so frequently.
The Chairman. Let me say I may have misunderstood you. Let
me say this: Lawyers, Avhen they stay in their proper place before
this committee, will be treated with all courtesy due counsel appearing
as attorney for a client. But I may admonish you, if that is what
3'ou had in mind, this committee will not be subjected to epithets and
criticism of that nature. I need not say more to you.
Mr. FitzGerald. I did not mean that to apply to you, sir.
The Chairman. I mean to any member of the committee or the
committee collectively. Don't let there be any misunderstanding
about that. You are welcome here as counsel, and you will be treated
with eveiy courtesy, but you will in turn respect this committee.
Mr. FitzGerald. I have great respect for you, sir, and the com-
mittee. I think a question as to who was paying you is a little bit
out of order, particularly between counsel.
The Chairman. No, sir ; it is not out of order. We are establishing
a record here, and we established it before, where people are indicted
for crimes wholly unconnected with the affairs of the union — that
is, affairs that could not possibly be in the interest of the laboring
people who pay the dues — that dues money, money out of the treas-
ury of the union, is being used to defend criminals, to support them
while they are in the penitentiary, and other improper uses.
I think the committee is entitled to know, when an attorney appears
here representing a witness, whether he has actually been retained
by the witness and is expecting to be paid by the witness, or whether
such arrangements have been made by a labor organization or a
business interest. We will pursue that and we will ascertain about
it. If we find this committee is being imposed upon, we will excuse
the attorney, because the rules of the committee permit an attorney
to be here representing the witness, an attorney of his choice. By
''his choice" we also mean an attorney that is to be paid by him, if I
interpret our language correctly.
Mr. FitzGerald. For the record, if the Chair pleases, I am being
retained by Mr. Belles. I have known him for some time. As a
matter of fact, when I was an attorney for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board in Buffalo in 1942 I knew of his activity in that area.
The Chairman. Very good.
Mr. FitzGerald, I am being paid, I hope, by him, if he has the
money. As I say, he has been harassed quite a bit in the newspapers.
I want to also say for the record I don't consider him a criminal. He
has no criminal record that I know of, other than a few indiscretions
of youth, which many Senators and Congressmen have, as far as
I know.
The Chairman. Just a moment. I don't need anything further
like that. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. FitzGerald, just so we get the record straight,
you have worked for the Teamsters since this committee began, have
you not ?
13620 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. FitzGerald. I have had this privilege of working for that
great organization, but I am not doing so now. I am Mr. Belles'
counsel.
The Chairman. You have a perfect right to appear here, if he has
retained you, if you are the attorney of his choice. I don't want to
deprive anybody. Let's proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, about Mr. FitzGerald's mention
earlier that he was here on per diem, so he did not care how long it
lasted
Mr. FitzGer.\ld. I always work on per diem.
Mr. Kennedy. I thought that indicated that maybe you were being
paid by the Teamsters.
I think I have finished with Mr. Belles.
The Chairman. All right. Stand aside. Are there any further
witnesses ?
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bitonti.
The Chairman. Come forward, Mr. Bitonti.
Will you be sworn, please? You do solemnly swear the evidence
you shall give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the
whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Bitonti. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN BITONTI, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
PERRY W. HOWARD
The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your
business or occupation, please.
Mr. Bitonti. My name is John Bitonti, Dearborn, Mich., 7865
Oakmont Boulevard. I am in the steel business. I own Byton Steel
Corp.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. Mr. Bitonti, do you hava
counsel ?
Mr. Bitonti. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Counsel, identify yourself for the record, please.
Mr. Howard. Perry W. Howard, attorney at law, Washington,
D. C, for a large number of years.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. All right, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bitonti, you received a loan from the Teamsters
Union ?
Mr. Bitonti. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that?
Mr. Bitonti. Well, I can't recall but 1953, but I don't know exactly
the dates.
Mr. Kennedy. From whom did you receive the loan ?
Mr. Bitonti. From 299 and 337.
Mr. Kennedy. How much was the loan ?
Mr. Bitonti. Well — do you want me to tell you the story my
way?
Mr. Kennedy. All right.
Mr. Bitonti. Because I can't understand very good English and I
don't want no $25 words.
Mr. Kennedy. All right.
The Chairman. Well, I will tell you, you use nickel words.
Mr. Bitonti. Thank you.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13621
The Chairman. You go right ahead.
Mr. BiTONTi. I was ready to go m business and I wanted to go in
business in the steel business. I went to Hamtramck bank, the Peo-
ple's State Bank, to see a teller over there, and I asked him if I could
borrow money on my property. He told me, he says, "Yes; you can,
but it will take you 3 or 4 weeks or 5, whatever it is."
And ''You got to bring the abstract.'' When I heard that, I said,
"Forget it." So I heard that tlie Teamsters were lending money, and
I went to see Mr. Hoffa. Mr. Hoffa, I told him, I said, "I need
$50,000." He asked me, "What do you want to do with it ? " and I said,
"I am going to go into the steel business,"
He said, "'Have you got any security f I said, "I got $300,000
worth of security."*
He said, "Well, your word ain't good enough for me ; you bring the
abstract here."
So I brought tlie abstract. He said, "Take them to Mr, Ben
Levinson."
Mr. Kexxedy, Ben Levinson '.
Mr. BiTONTi. Ben Levinson. I don't know if the name is correct.
It is Michigan Mortgage, I think. So, I took the abstract to Ben
Levinson. Ben Levinson told me, he said, "Be back in a week or 10
days and we will tell you."
So, I went back and I said, "What happened?" He said, "Your
property is free and clear. Now, go see Mr. Holf a."
I went over there, and I said, "Well, the property is free and clear.
Would you give it to me ?"
He said, "You want it; you can have it."
So, we started talking about the interest. I said, "How much you
going to cliarge me V
He said, "Five percent." I said, "Well, don't you think it is a little
too much."
He said, "Take it or leave it," and "That is the way we do business."
(), K. So, I figure out, and I took it. So, after I took it, I said,
"Mr. Hoffa, T hock eveiything. Why don't you take my wife and
kids." He said, "You can keep that."
Well, that is tlie truth.
The Chairman. Let's have order. Go ahead and tell it your way.
Mr. BiTONTi. So, I signed it. He said, "Go to Ben Levinson and
sign the mortgage over." I don't know what it is. That is a term of
an attorney. So I sign it for $50,000. So, later on I said, "I don't
need the money right now. When I need it. I will come over and pick
it up.''
He said, "Any time," after I signed the paper. So, I went over
there one day, I couldn't recall what, 2 or 3 weeks later; T don't know,
because T had to take care of my corporation paper first. I said, "Need
$25,000."
So, he said, "All right. Here is a check for 25."
So, I thought I could do business with the 25, but it was not enough.
So, I went about 2 or 3 weeks later and I said, "I need another 15,"
He said, "It is O. K. Take the 15."
I didn't need no more money, so I didn't take the other 10. I figured
why should I pay interest on 50 when I can pay interest on 40. So, I
kept going with my business ; didn't need the other 10. So, finally, I
21243— 58— pt. .36 23
13622 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
forgot all about it, about the 10. Mr. Kelly come over to my house to
investigate this
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kelly of the staff ?
Mr. BiTONTi. Mr. Kelly, he come over to my house to investigate
this, and he asked me if I borrowed any money from the union. I said,
"Yes.'] He said, "How much did you borrow?" I said, "$40,000."
He said, "Don't you know you signed for 50?" Well, right at that
moment, I was all excited, and I said, "I don't know."
Mr. Kennedy. Is that when you took Mr. Hoffa's picture down from
the wall?
Mr. BiTONTi. That is the time when I took Mr. Hoffa's picture down.
So, he said, Mr. Kelly said, "What that picture doing over there ?'^
I said, "That is Mr. Hoffa. For $40,000, 1 think I am entitled to get
a picture."
So, he said, "You know, if you were to die, you could have lost the
$10,000." I said, "I don't know."
So, he said, "Well, I will see you tomorrow. By the way," he said,
"did you pay the loan?" And I said, "Yes." And he said, "Did you
pay everything?" I said, "Yes." He said, "Where is your paper?"
I said, "I didn't get it yet." The next day I went to see Mr. Brennan.
I thought Mr. Hoffa was there, but Mr. Brennan was there. I said,
"Mr. Brennan, I paid the loan; I paid the interest. I would like to
have my property back."
He said, "Mr. Bitonti," he says, "Mr. Hoffa is not here, but I will
give you a letter right now." Just a minute. He said, "I will call
Mr." — the secretary of 299. I have forgotten his name now — "Mr.
Collins."
So, Mr. Brennan called Mr. Collins and said, "See if the Bitonti
mortgage is clear. If he is not clear, hold it."
So, Mr. Collins called back and he said, "It is all clear."
He said, "Why don't you give him his deeds and the mortgage
papers?" And they said, "Well, we didn't have no time." So Mr.
Brennan raised hell, otherwise, and he said, "Now, I want you to give
it to him, because the man already paid, and I can't see why you didn't
give him the mortgage yet."
The fellow says, "Well, we didn't have the time." So, anyhow, Mr.
Brennan wrote me a letter, which I got here, to say the property was
free and clear and, as soon as we have a little time, he said, we will take
it off of the county building or whatever it is. So they did. So, this
is the story, and there is no more, no less.
The Chairman. Any further questions ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
On some of these checks on the loan for $40,000, you paid it to local
337.
Mr. Bitonti. 337 and 299.
Mr. Kennedy. You received the loan from 299.
Mr. Bitonti. No ; I received both.
Mr. Kennedy. From both of them ?
Mr. Bitonti. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, you have a check for $25,000 and a check for
$15,000?
Mr. Bitonti. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. They are both on local 299.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13623
Mr. BiTONTi. I don't know. They give me a check. I don't know.
I don't think so. You people have the check, don't you ? I mean the
original checks. We got the stubs here.
Mr. Kennedy. Both the checks are 299 checks.
The Chairman. You may have honestly thought you were getting
the money from both unions.
Mr. BiTONTi. Well, I didn't know, Mr. Senator.
The Chairman. But the checks appear to be— the $25,000 check on
July 17, 1953, and the $15,000 check of August 10, 1953, appear to have
been on local 299.
Mr. BiTONTi. That could be possible.
Mr. Kennedy. The point, Mr. Chairman, is that he paid to both
299 and 337. I would like to ask how that happened, where the money
came from local 299 ; why he paid some of it back to 337.
Mr. BiTONTi. Well, I have a record here to show
Mr. Kennedy. I am not questioning that you paid it back, but it
would appear that the loan all came from 299. You don't understand
that?
Mr. BiTONTi. I beg your pardon ?
Mr. Kennedy. You don't understand that ? I am pointing out that
both the checks are from 299, and you paid all the money back to local
337.
Mr, BrroNTi. Well, I don't know.
Mr. Howard. I think the checks speak for themselves.
Mr, BiTONTi. The checks speak for themselves.
Mr. Kennedy. I am not questioning this man at all. The checks
were both from the same union, but they were repaid to local 337, one
Mr, Brennan's union and one Mr. HofFa's union. How many times had
you been arrested at the time you received the loan ?
Mr. BiTONTi, The record shows for itself, Mr, Kennedy.
Mr, Kennedy, Our records show 23 times ; is that about correct ?
Mr. BiTONTi. Well, I don't know. When I was a young man
Mr. Kennedy, This isn't very young. This is during the 1930's, the
1940's, and during 1950, also,
Mr, BiTONTi, Well, Mr, Kennedy, let's put this straight.
I have been out of the number business for 14 years, and I try to
go straight.
Mr. Kennedy. What other business interest do you have other than
the steel business ?
Mr. BiTONTi. Real estate.
Mr. Kennedy. Where do you have the real estate ?
Mr. BiTONTi. Well, I collect rents and live on it.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that the only interest you have ?
Mr. BiTONTi. Yes, and the steel business. But the steel ain't been
very good.
Mr. Kennedy. And the real estate is where ?
Mr. BiTONTi. In Dearborn.
Mr. Kennedy. In Dearborn ?
Mr, BiTONTi. And in the State of Michigan, yes,
Mr. Kennedy, Those are the only two sources of income ?
Mr, BiTONTi, Yes,
Mr. Kennedy, You had gone to a bank, had you not, at this time ?
You had been to a bank prior to getting a loan from the Team-
sters ?
13624 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. BiTONTi. Well, I talked to one of the tellers, you know,
Mr. Kennedy. Didn't you tell the investigator that you were not
able to get the loan from the bank becavise of your background, that
they weren't anxious to give you a loan ?
Mr. BiTONTi. My friend, I don't think so, because with $300,000
worth of property, if I can't get $40,000 or $50,000, there is something
wrong someplace. They don't look at records, they look at the
property, the securities you got.
Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you get the loan from the bank, then?
Mr. BiTONTi. Well, I didn't get the loan from the bank because
in the first place I wanted to go in business quick. The Korea war
was on, and I thought the steel was very hot, and I could have made
money. But had I gone through the bank, it would have taken me
a long time to get the money, so I took a chance to go see Mr. Hoffa,
to see if I could get money.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't have any business interests in connection
with Mr. Hoffa, have you ?
Mr. BiTONTi. I never have no business, I never was hired by the
unions. I never know nothing. The only thing I went was to bor-
row money.
Mv. Kennedy. But do you liave any business interests in connection
withMr. Hoffa?
Mr. BiTONTi. At no time.
Mr. Kennedy. At no time ?
Mr. BiTONTi. At no time,
Mr. Kennedy. You never have ?
Mr. BrroNTi. Never have.
Mr. Kennedy, You never made any investments together with Mr,
Hoffa?
Mr. BiTONTi. No, sir. AVlien I made investments, I made my own.
Mr. Kennedy. That is all, jSIr, Chairman.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Chairman ?
The Chairman. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. On this mortgage, it says May 6, 1953. I guess
the date of the check is July or August 1953. It would indicate that
at least 2 or 3 months did pass between the time that you signed this
mortgage paper and the time that you had these checks.
Mr. BrroNTi. I can't understand you. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. The date of the mortgage is ^May 6, 1953, to John
Bitonti and Josephine Bitonti, his wife. The mortgage was ]VIay 6.
The check to John Bitonti from the International Brotherhood of
Chauffeurs and Helpers is July 17. and the other one is August 10, 1953.
That is 3 months.
Mr, Bitonti. Well, in the first place, I want to get my paper, my
corporation paper from the State of Michigan, and when I was ready
I told Mr. Hoffa, "When I am ready I will come over and pick the
money up," l^ecause I didn't want to pay no interest. What I was
worrying about was interest. Why should I hnve the $-1:0,000, taking it
away, when I was doing no business. I have to pay interest. So this
way, when I was ready to do it, I took the money. I don't see no liarm
in that.
Senator Kennedy. I just don't understand your story nbout tlie
reason you didn't go to a bank because of the time factor. Tliat isn't
the reason, is it ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13625
Mr. BiTONTi. Well, in one way, yes.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Bitonti, I don't think that is the reason you
didn't go to the bank, because I think the testimony of these checks con-
flicts with that; what is the reason for the $40,000 and the $50,000?
You are smart enough to know how much money you were getting.
Did you think you were getting 50 or 40 ?
Mr. Bitonti. I got $40,000.
Senator Kennedy. But you signed for 50 ? Why ?
Mr. Bitonti. Because I didn't need the other 10.
Senator Ivennedy. Why did you sign for it ?
Mr. Bitonti. Because I thought I needed the 50.
Senator Kennedy. You just had the $10,000 that you owed?
Mr. Bitonti. I beg your pardon ?
Senator Kennedy. You owed $50,000, is that correct, and got
$40,000?
Mr. Bitonti. Because I only needed $40,000.
Senator Kennedy. Did you pay interest on the other 10 ?
Mr. Bitonti. No, sir.
Senator Kennedy. You didn't pay interest ?
Mr. Bitonti. No, sir.
Senator Kennedy. You didn't receive the other 10 ?
Mr. Bitonti. I didn't receive the other 10.
Senator Kennedy. You didn't owe it, then ?
Mr. Bitonti. I didn't owe it, and they give me the clarification of
the deed.
Senator Kennedy. Where did you get the money to pay the in-
terest ?
Mr. Bitonti. I paid it in cash.
Senator Kennedy. Where did you get that cash ?
Mr. Bitonti. I borrowed it.
Senator Kennedy. From whom ?
Mr. Bitonti. From Charlie Harrison.
Senator Kennedy. How do you spell his name ?
Mr. Bitonti. Well, Harrison.
Senator Kennedy. Harrison ?
Mr. Bitonti. Harrison, yes, I signed a note for $2,000.
Mr. Kennedy. Where were you when we were looking for you, Mr.
Bitonti ?
Mr. Bitonti. I was out of town.
Mr. Kennedy. Whereabouts?
Mr. Bitonti. I was in Canada.
Mr. Kennedy. You stayed there all that time?
Mr. Bitonti. I had to go on business.
Senator Kennedy. Where is Mr. Harrison located ?
Mr. Bitonti. He has a bar.
Mr. Kennedy. Wiere?
Mr. Bitonti. In Detroit.
Senator Kennedy. What is the name of it ?
Mr. Bitonti. The Manor Bar.
Senator Kennedy. The Manor Bar ?
Mr. Bitonti. Yes. I borrowed $2,000 from him.
Senator Kennedy. $2,000 in cash ? Did you give him a note ?
Mr. Bitonti. Yes. He still has the note. I didn't pay it yet.
Senator Kennedy. Did you pay him back ?
13626 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. BiTONTi. Not yet.
Senator Kennedy. How long ago was that?
Mr. BiTONTi. Well
Senator Kennedy. 1953 ?
Mr. BiTONTi. No. Well, I can't recall the date.
Senator Kennedy. This is July 1953.
Mr. Bitonti. No, I paid
Senator Kennedy. The check was on August 7, 1957. To pay the
interest on this money, you borrowed it and you haven't paid him back.
Did you pay any interest on that?
Mr. Bitonti. To Mr. Harrison ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Bitonti, I don't have to. He is a friend of mine.
]Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any interest in the Westwood Inn ?
Mr. Bitonti. "Wliy, no.
Mr. Kennedy. You do not ?
Mr. Bitonti. Why, no.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any investment in it ?
Mr. Bitonti. I say no.
Mr. Kennedy. That is fine.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I don't think it is proper for or
that this is a use to which unions dues ought to be put. I don't think
Mr. Hoffa ought to have lent you that money, Mr. Bitonti.
Mr. Bitonti. I don't see why Mr. HofFa should not loan me money
when I give him $300,000 worth of security.
Senator Kennedy. I don't think that, to be frank with you, Mr.
Bitonti, I don't think he ought to go into business with you with
union dues. I don't think that is the way union dues ought to be
invested.
Mr. Bitonti. That I don't know. But I know I give him $300,000
worth of security. He was only interested in my $300,000 in security.
He wasn't interested in me. If I failed, he would take the property.
Senator Kennedy. You had to put up $300,000 to get 40?
Mr. Bitonti. Well, he told me, he said, "Bring everything you got."
Senator Kennedy. A bank would not insist on that.
Mr. Bitonti. The bank would insist, too.
Senator Kennedy. $300,000 to get 40 ?
Mr. Bitonti. Well, they insist.
Senator Kennedy. A^^iat ?
Mr. Bitonti. They would insist.
(At this point. Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.)
Senator Kennedy. I think there's a good deal more to this story
than we have. I don't think the explanation is satisfactory. "Wliat
is the name of the teller you talked to ?
Mr. Bitonti. Mr. Kennedy, I want you to know there is nothing
what you think. This is the truth and the God's truth.
Senator Kennedy. Wliat is the name of the teller and what bank?
Mr. Bitonti. Well, the name is George.
Senator Kennedy. Do you know the last name ?
Mr. Bitonti. I don't know the last name.
Senator Kennedy. "What bank ?
Mr, Bitonti. People's State Bank.
Senator I^nnedy. A fellow named George ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13627
Mr. BiTONTi. Geor<re. That is what I used to call him. I just went
over there and asked him if I could borrow money.
Senator Kennedy. You don't go to a teller to ask him if you can
borrow money.
Mr. BiTONTi. This is my way to do business.
Senator Kennedy. I don't think that is a satisfactory explanation,
Mr. Bitonti. I don't think when you go to borrow money from a bank,
you go to teller, whose name you don't know, so that he will loan you
the money.
Mr. Bitonti. Well, this is the truth.
Senator Kennedy. I don't think it could be the truth.
Mr. BiTONTi. As far as me, I did it. That is the way I did it.
Senator Kennedy. You don't know his last name ?
Mr. BiTONTi. No.
Senator Kennedy. Is the teller still working there ?
Mr. Bitonti. I guess so.
Senator Kennedy. It is a teller called George ?
Mr. Bitonti. George.
Senator Kenedy. \ ou went in on the main floor of the bank. Did
you know the teller before ?
Mr. Bitonti. I saw him over there ; yes.
Senator Kennedy. Had you ever seen him before ?
Mr. Bitonti. Why, sure.
Senator Kennedy. Do you have an account at the bank ?
Mr. Bitonti. I have, yes, the People's State Bank, in Hamtramck.
Senator Kennedy. And you knew this teller beforehand ?
Mr. Bitonti. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. You did not talk to any other officer, the loan
officer in the bank ?
Mr. Bitonti. Never talked to anybody else.
Senator Kennedy. The fellow who usually handles the loans?
Mr. Bitonti. No ; I never talked to anybody.
Senator Kennedy. Well, I don't think your story adds up. You
said you were in a rush to get it, you signed a paper in May and you
didn't pick up the money until July or August, and you stated you were
going to get it from a bank but a teller named George told you you
probably couldn't get it, and you put up $300,000 security for a $40,000
loan, yet you signed for $50,000.
You borrowed money for the interest, from a friend.
Mr. Howard. I most respectfully state, Mr. Chairman, and Sen-
ator, that it was a loan, legally made, regularly made, paid for, and
as fine Americanism as I know of.
He borrowed it and he paid it back. As to the procedure, the dif-
ferent procedures, the different jurisdictions and different officials
act in those capacities, Senator.
Senator Kennedy. The point I made is that I don't thinlv it is par-
ticularly fine Americanism. I think he is entitled to go to where he
can get the money, but I don't think Mr. Hoffa should have given it to
him. I don't think his explanation of the bank is satisfactory. He
is not naive, he has had numerous experiences of one kind or another.
You don't go up to a teller in a bank and ask him if he will loan you
the money, the last name you don't recall.
Mr. Howard. Senator, you never had to borrow money. You don't
know what you have to go through to borrow money.
13628 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Kennedy, I will tell you this, as long as you want to ex-
change comments, that I know that is not the way to borrow money,
and he knows it. I don't think Mr. Bitonti is telling the truth, if that
is the statement he was wants to stick to.
Mr. BiTOXTi. I am telling you the truth.
Senator Kennedy. I don't believe 3^ou. I don't think you went up to
a teller in a bank, a teller named George. I don't believe that. That
isn't the reason you did not get the money from the bank. I hope the
committee goes into it further.
I don't think your explanation is satisfactory.
We have heard some strange stories the last few days, but this is
the strangest.
The Chairman. Is there anything further ?
The connnittee will stand in recess until 10 : 30 next Tuesday morn-
ing.
(At the recess, the following members were present: Senator Mc-
Clellan and Senator Kennedy.)
(Whereupon, at 5 : 05 p. m. the hearing was recessed, to reconvene
at 10 : 30 a. m., Tuesday, August 12, 1958.)
INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD
TUESDAY, AUGUST 12, 1958
United States Senate,
Select Committee on Improper
Activities in the Labor or Management Field,
Washington^ D. C.
The select committee met at 10 : 30 a. m., pursuant to Senate Reso-
lution 221, agreed to January 29, 1958, in the caucus room, Senate
Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select
committee) presiding.
Present : Senator John L, McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Senator
Irving M. Ives, Republican, New York; Senator John F. Kennedy,
Democrat, Massachusetts; Senator Sam J. E.rvin, Jr., Democrat,
North Carolina; Senator Frank Church, Democrat, Idaho; Senator
Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota; Senator Carl T. Curtis,
Republican, Nebraska,
Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Paul Tierney,
assistant counsel; John J. McGovern, assistant counsel; Carmine S.
Bellino, accountant; Pierre E. Salinger, investigator; Leo C. Nulty,
investigator; James P. Kelly, investigator; James Mundie, investi-
gator; John Flanagan, investigator, GAO; Alfred Vitarelli, investi-
gator, GAO ; Ruth Young Watt, chief clerk.
(At the convening of tlie session, the following members were pres-
ent : Senators McClellan, Ives, Ervin, and Curtis.)
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
Mr. Holla has been recalled to the witness stand. Proceed, Mr.
Kennedy.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES R. HOPFA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWAED BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD, AND
DAVID PREVIANT— Resumed
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, without taking the time of the com-
mittee to restate the objections that I have made heretofore, at the
opening of the session on Wednesday, August 7, in the morning, and
at the opening of the afternoon session on Thursday, August 8, I
believe Wednesday, August 6, I would like to renew the objection
that I have lodged in all of its particulars to the procedure that we
are following. Also, Mr. Chairman, I want to plead guilty to having
inadvertently misled this witness in his last testimony here. He was
being interrogated about certain persons and the action which the
union had taken against those persons. He was interrogated spe-
cifically about one Glenn Smith, of Chattanooga. I said to the wit-
13629
13630 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
ness in the hearing of the committee that it was my recollection that
charges had been lodged against him. Actually, I have learned since
that I was confused and that I had in mind one Sam Smith, of
Wichita.
I now know that charges are being prepared against this particular
individual, but the answer which the witness gave as his best recollec-
tion was not accurate, and I would like for him to have a chance to
correct that in the record here this morning.
The Chairman. The committee will proceed.
As the Chair has previously announced the objections interposed
are overruled.
The testimony of the witness, we have learned, was not accurate.
Of course, he may have opportunity now, if he desires, to correct his
testimony.
Mr. Williams. Unless my statement may be construed as a cor-
rection of it, which would shortcut going into it again. But I did
want to call it to the committee's attention at the earliest moment that
that was not accurate in all respects.
The Chairman. We will leave it to the judgment of this witness
and his counsel as to whetlier he wishes to make an}'^ comment about it.
Mr. HoFFA. Mr. Chairman, I would like to correct the statement
that charges were filed against Glenn Smith of the local union in Chat-
tanooga, and I requested the advice of my counsel to handle those
charges.
I now find that the charges were against a different Smith and
apparently they are charges being prepared but not filed yet against
Smith.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. That is Glenn Smith who admitted taking the $20,000
from union funds and paying it to fix the case ; is that right ?
Mr. HoFFA. Glenn Smith you mentioned in the last hearing, which
I assume is the one.
Mr. Kennedy. You are familiar with the fact that he testified that
he took $20,000
Mr. HoFFA. I am not familiar, only from reading the question in the
newspaper and having you tell me.
(At this point. Senator Gold water entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. We went into that rather extensively. I am glad
we have corrected the record. You have not taken any steps yourself
toward removing Glenn Smith ?
Mr. HoFFA. I said I had not, and I have not yet.
Mr, Kennedy. You said last time that the local union had made
charges and you were mistaken on that. I wanted to make sure that
the record was completely clear on pages 588 and 190. I want to make
sure the record is completely clear that you, yourself, have not taken
any steps against Mr. Glenn Smith.
Mr. HoFFA. I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat about Mr. "Shorty" Feldman? Have you
taken any steps to remove "Shorty" Feldman from local 990?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made an investigation of "Shorty"
Feldman ?
IJMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13631
Mr. HoFFA. I discussed the matter with Feldman to find out the
situation, and I understood at the time I discussed it with him he had
no trouble since he has been with the union.
Mr. Kennedy. He has had 18 arrests, 2 convictions, and 2 prison
terms.
Mr. HoFFA. I believe that was prior to his coming to the union and
had nothing to do with the union, if what he tells me is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. We also had extensive testimony on his activities as
a union official before the committee. He appeared before the com-
mittee where we had some testimony that he had stated to an em-
ployer that for $50,000 he could settle a strike, and remove the picket
line. He appeared before the committee and took the fifth amendment.
Have you made any investigation or have you taken any steps to re-
move him ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
(At this point, Senator Church entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. None at all ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. You are not interested in that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am interested, certainly, but I have been quite busy
and have not had an opportunity to get into those situations.
Mr. I^NNEDY. What conversations did you have with him about
it?
Mr. HoFFA. I discussed the question with Feldman as to whether
or not he had sought from the employer any money, and he denied
whether he had.
Mr. Kennedy. And you let it go at that ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. He has just been arrested on July 29, 1958, for the
possession and interstate transportation of stolen bonds. That is just
a couple of weeks ago. Have you taken any steps against him in con-
nection with that ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I have not had an opportunity since I have been
preparing for this meeting, this situation here.
Mr. Kennedy. You have not taken any steps against him ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. You have not taken any steps to suspend him?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Mr. Feldman is the one that contacted you in con-
nection with the restaurant charter in Philadelphia ?
JVIr. HoFFA. Mr. Feldman was in my office. We discussed the ques-
tion as to why he was sponsoring an independent union, and he did
discuss with me the question of getting a charter for the hotel and
restaurant workers.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you take any steps yourself along that line ?
Mr. HoFFA. If I remember correctly, and I think it is right, I
called Ed Miller.
Mr. Kennedy. You did what ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am quite sure I called Ed Miller, in Cincinnati, and
told him that I thought that they would be able to get the independent
union into their union if they would sit down and discuss the matter
with the independent officers.
Mr. Kennedy. The people that were with "Shorty" Feldman on that
were Mr. Abe Goldberg, who has been convicted of extortion and who
13632 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
has been arrested and convicted on a number of other occasions, Julius
Berg, and "Cappy"' Hoti'man, who between them have approximately
40 arrests. Did you look into the background of any of the people
who were sponsoring this charter ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; because the charter was not actually sponsored by
anybody. It was simply stated, I believe, to Miller, that if he would
look into the situation, they could get the independent union into their
organization. I think they handled it from that point on through
their own organization.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did you call Mr. Miller for a man such as
"Shorty" Feldman?
Mr. HoFFA. I didn't call him for Feldman. I called him to get rid
of the independent union to get into the Hotel and Restaurant
Workers.
Mr. Kennedy. Can't the Philadelphia people handle their own
problems, Mr. Hoff a ?
Mr. HoFFA. I assume they could. It was brought to my attention.
Knowing Miller, I called him. I am pretty sure I called Miller.
Mr. Kennedy. This is "Shorty" Feldman, who has been arrested
some 18 times coming out to see you in connection with this, and you
inject yourself into it.
Mr. HoFFA. He did not come out to see me about this. He came out
to see me about a jurisdictional problem betw^een his local union and
another local union concerning, I believe, the Penn Fruit Co., and this
developed out of the conversation.
Mr. Kennedy. You got a charter for a local that had made a col-
lusive deal with an employer ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I didn't get the charter. The charter was granted
by the Hotel and Restaurant Workers.
Mr. Kennedy. You were the one that made the telephone call which
resulted in the charter being granted.
Mr. IIoFFA. I wouldn't say that that was true. I simply alerted
them to the fact that they wanted to sit down with the independent
union, that they were willing to discuss the question of becoming
affiliated.
Mr. Kennedy. They had been trying to get a charter, Mr. Hoffa, and
they were having difficulty in Philadelphia, because of the fact that
there were so many criminal elements that were backing this local.
Then Mr. Feldman has conversation with you, or you call Mr. Miller,
and they are granted a charter in the Hotel and Restaurant Workers
Union. Why would you ? Once again this is a case where you have
injected yourself in a situation which involves criminals and gangsters
and racketeers.
(At this point. Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us anything about that?
INIr. HoFFA. I think I have answered your question concerning my
interest in this particular charter.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Maxie Stern speak to you about this ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe he did.
Mr. Kennedy. You say he did not ?
Mr. HoFFA. I would not say he did not, because I know he knows
Feldman.
He may have.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known Maxie Stern ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13633
Mr. HoFFA, Probably — well, 10 years or so.
Mr. Kennedy. He is a well-known gangster in Detroit, is he not?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if he is a well-known gangster or not. He
is out of jail.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been arrested a dozen or so times ?
Mr. Hor^FA. He has been arrested, yes.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been in jail for armed robbeiy ? He violated
his parole, Avent back to the penitentiary a number of times. He is a
friend of yours ?
Mr. HoFFA. I know him. He is a friendly acquaintance, yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you had any business dealings with him?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. In 1947 he was shot by one Chris Scroy. His life
was saved by the fact he was wearing a bulletproof vest at the time.
This is one of your friends ?
Mr. HoFFA. He is a friendly acquaintance, yes.
(At this point, members of the committee present were: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Church, Ervin, Gold water, and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. Now, did he attend your trial in New York?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't remember seeing him in the courtroom.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember him being there at all ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't remember him being there.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever call Mr. Stern about any problems
or did he ever call you ?
Mr. HoFFA. What kind of problems ?
Mr. Kennedy. Any kind of problems.
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall any discussion we had other than to pass
the time of the day.
Mr. Kennedy. You would just be discussing the time of the day ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. What about Ray Cohen in local 107, Mr. Hoffa?
Have you taken any steps against Ray Cohen ?
Mr. HoFFA. There are charges filed against Cohen. The committee
is set up, we are going to have hearings in local 107. I believe today
there is a meeting of the committee who is set up to have a trial of
Cohen and to go into those books.
Mr. Kennedy, Have you taken steps to suspend Mr, Cohen while
those charges are being heard ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee why you have not taken
steps along those lines to suspend Mr. Cohen ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe he is entitled to have the constitution followed
of the international union. Charges are being filed, the charges are
being processed.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken steps to remove him as an interna-
tional trustee?
Mr. HoFFA. I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us why you have not ?
Mr. HoFFA. Because he has not had his trial under the constitution
of the international union. Until he does, being duly elected by the
convention, I have taken no action.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, we have some extensive testimony over a period
of 3 weeks regarding the misuse of union funds, regarding the forgery
13634 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
of checks, and that was some 3 or 4 months ago, Mr. Hoffa. You still
have not taken any action against him.
Mr. HoFFA. That is what the hearing is set up for with an outside
member of the committee to hear those charges.
Mr. Kennedy. You personally have not taken any action as you
can understand the constitution against Raymond Cohen ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe the man is entitled to filing under the con-
stitution.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Kennedy, he testified that he had handled the
central board in Philadelphia to have hearings on Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Kennedy. I am asking whether he had suspended Cohen.
Mr. Williams. You asked whether he had taken any action in your
last question.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you suspended Mr. Cohen ?
Mr. Hoffa. No.
Mr. Kennedy. He has some 19 officials working in local 107 as
organizers and among them they have 104 arrests and 40. convictions.
Can you tell us whether you have taken any steps against those people ?
Mr. HoFFA. The investigating committee will go into all of the
affairs of local 107.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you personally suspended any of those in-
dividuals?
Mr. Hoffa. I have not since there have been no charges filed against
them by their officers other than those charges pending that the com-
mittee will hear.
Mr. Kennedy. Under the constitution you can take some action
against them, Mr. Hoffa. Can you tell the committee why you have
not?
Mr. Hoffa. They are entitled to their file under the constitution.
Members have a right to file their charges. When it gets to my office
I will hear the case.
Mr. Kennedy. Arthur Freeze, organizer for local 107. In 1936,
he got 10 years for breaking and entering. In 1938, 3 to 21 years for
burglary and transportation of explosives ; 1945, 5 years for aggravated
assault while in prison. He is an organizer for local 107.
Have you taken any action to have him removed ?
Mr. Hoffa. I told you I had not taken action against any of them.
Mr. Kennedy. What about Al Reger up in New York City ?
]\Ir. Hoffa. Wliat about him ?
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken any action to remove Al Reger?
Mr. Hoffa. I have not. There have been no charges to my knowl-
edge placed on my desk concerning Al Reger.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you taken any action against him? He was
convicted July 30, 1957 of extortion and sentenced to 5 to 10 years in
Sing Sing and he is still in the union, still a union official. He is pres-
ently secretary-treasurer of Local 522 of the Teamsters. Have you
taken steps to remove Al Reger ?
Mr. Hoffa. I said that I didn't.
Mr. Kennedy. We have had extensive testimony about Al Reger,
his connection with Johnny Dill, his connection with Tony "Ducks"
Corallo and even your name was mentioned in some of the discussions,
Mr. Hoffa. Have you taken any steps to remove him ?
Mr. Hoffa. I said I didn't.
Mr. Ivennedy. "Why have you not ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13635
Mr. HoFFA. Because there is a constitutional provision of our con-
stitution which was passed by the convention outlining trials and
procedures.
Mr. Kennedy. Have any charges been made against Al Reger by
you
Mr. HoFFA. Not by myself.
Mr. Kennedy. Have any charges been made by anyone ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. I^nnedy. You are international president. Don't you want
those kind of people removed from the Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Mr.Hoffa?
Mr. HoFFA. The membership of their local union have a right to
elect their officer and right to follow the constitution under trials and
procedures.
Mr. Kennedy. We have testimony regarding the membership of
some of these locals, Mr. Hoffa, where it shows that they were com-
pletely exploited by union officials. They were getting substandard
wages and there was collusion between the union officials and the
employers. This man was convicted for extortion in 1957.
Mr. Hoffa. Was he with the union at that time ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Hoffa. Wliat union ?
Mr. Kennedy. Local 522, secretary-treasurer.
Mr. Hoffa. Wliat union was that ?
Mr. Kennedy. Teamsters. You have not taken any action against
him ?
Mr. Hoffa. I said no.
The Chairman. Mr. Hoffa, is there anything in the constitution
that prohibits you from taking action against these crooks ?
Mr. Hoffa. I could have emergency powers under the constitution
which are limited as to what I can do but wo have found out from
experience in one particular local union that you had to be careful
how you exercised that emergency power of the constitution.
The Chairman. This extraordinary care that you are exercising
perpetuates these crooks in office ; does it not ?
Mr. Hoffa. I believe that the members are the ones who keep the
officers in charge of the local unions because they are the ones who
placed them there in the first place and they are the ones who contin-
ually nominate and elect them.
The Ghahiman. We have found many instances, Mr. Hoffa, where
the members cannot control affairs, and whenever they do oust their
officers I think we have instances — I am not sure whether this is team-
sters or not at the moment — but I know that we have had testimony
here where the members did oust them, the union was placed in trustee-
ship, and the same people they ousted appointed the trustees to
manage their affairs.
We have that example before us. I am not sure, and counsel may
recall whether that was in the Teamsters Union or other.
Mr. Kennedy. In the teamsters.
The Chairman. We have had that example. This has become a
sordid story. Lord Almighty, you are the man at the head of it. You
have the responsibility. But apparently instead of taking any action
you are undertaking to do everything you can to perpetuate this situa-
tion. You can make any comments you like. All of these things have
13636 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
come to your attention and you have told this committee tliat you are
going to clean the thing up, as I remember your testimony.
Mr. "WiLLLVMs. May I make this observation on a legal facet of the
question you are raising. I refer to the question as to whether an officer
should be ousted immediately after conviction while he is pursuing his
appeal at remedies. All of us have had opportunity to watch cases of
this character. Some I have participated in myself. We know, so far
at least as I have been able to determine, never in tlie history of the
United States has the Congress ousted a Member immediately after
conviction.
There have been a number of convictions in the past few decades, but
the Congress has always waited until the Member has exhausted his
appeal at remedies before taking summary action against him.
The CiiAiRMAx. May I say to you, Mr. Williams, that if I had a
crook working for me, and I found out he was a crook, 1 would get rid
of him. I would do the same thing if 1 were head of the union and
had the power to do it. Maybe you wouldn't and maybe Mr. Hoffa
would not.
Mr. Williams. I agree with you.
Mr. Kennedy. On Al Reger, even if he had not been convicted, here
are some of his associates as develoi)ed by the committee. Mr. Berl
Michelson, who has a criminal record; Harry Davidotf. about whom
we have extensive testimony ; Ralph Mahone. Tony "Ducks*' Corallo,
Johnny Dioguardi, Carmine Formandi, Dickey Miksky, all of whom
have criminal records; Abe (^liase, Archie Cates, Sam Davy, Milton
Hope. This man himself was a member of the Comnumist Partv from
19r,8 until at least the late 1940's. He was a member of the" Daily
Worker Advisory Council. He is press director of the Xew York
County Connnunist Party. He was convicted in 1957 of extortion,
and he is still a union official. It is in a union that is controlled,
according to the testimony before the committee, by Tony ''Ducks"
Corallo. You still have not taken any steps against him? Are you
frightened of these people, Mr. Hoft'a ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am not frightened of anybody, Mr. Kennedy, and I
don't intend to have the impression left, as has been stated publicly,
that I am controlled by gangsters. I am not controlled by them but
by the same token I do not intend to go aroimd and evade the pro-
visions of the constitution of the international union which you ac-
cused Mr. Beck of doing by having dictatorial powers. I want to
be able to follow the constitution in due time. Tliis situation will be
cleared up. If you recall I took office almost just about February 1.
Then I went through a long trial in New York which tied me up.
I had the question of monitors which tied me up. I have not had much
opportunity to do the normal duties that would have taken place
if all of the various incidents had not come about during my short
pei'iod of time as general president.
In due time these situations will be cleared up.
(At this point, members of the committee ])resent were: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Ervin, Church, Kennedy, Mundt, and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, that would make a great deal of sense.
I would be very sympathetic if it were not for the fact that a majority
of these people are in the Central States Conference, and people under
your jurisdiction. You have people in Detroit, at least 15, who have
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13637
jjolice records. You have Joey Glimco, in Chicago. I say you are
not touch enough to get rid of these people, then.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't propose to be tough.
Mr. Kennedy. You haven't moved against any of tlieni.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't propose to act tough. I will follow the consti-
tution of the international union. In due time the situation, where
necessary, will be corrected.
Mr. Kennedy. Why haven't you gotten rid of any of these ])eople
in the (^entral States Conference, and why are these people allowed
to continue with police records, Mr. Hofta ?
Mr. HoFFA. If there ai'e no charges hied against them
Mr. Kennedy. Why don't you take action against them yourself ?
Mr. HoFFA. I told you why.
Mr. Kennedy. Why haven't you taken action in the Central States
CVmference against these ])eople during all this period of time^
Joey Glimco has been in there for 10 or 15 years. He has 38 arrests.
Mr. IToFFA. It is my understanding that Joey Glimco has been many
a year since he was convicted of some sort of a crime. I don't know
exactly what it was. But on the other charges against him, either he
was found imiocent by the jury or the cases were dropped; isn't that
correct ?
Mr. Kennedy. He is one of tlie close associates of Tony Accardo.
Paul "The W^aiter" Ricca, the leading gangsters in Chicago, and has
been identified before this conmiittee and other public bodies for
years as being a close associate of these i)eople.
He has 30 arrests. And he has a number of convictions.
Mr. HoFFA. Our constitution does not deal with associations, but
deals with the operation of a union.
Mr. Kennedy. That would be fine. Then you get back and you say
that the man has to be convicted. Then we give you the example of
Glenn Smith, who says he took $20,000 of union funds to make a
payoff, and you have not taken any action against him. You have the
fellow^ in Minneapolis, Ray Brennan, who appealed all the way to the
Supreme Court. He is still in office. You have not taken any action
against him, and that is in the Central Conference of Teamsters.
And Jorgensen and Williams, all three of them are union officials in
Minneapolis, all have taken appeals to the Supreme Court. No action
has been taken against them, has it, Mr. Hoffa?
Mr. HoFFA. There has been no action taken against Jorgensen or
Brennan. It is my understanding that Jorgensen's membership, he
went in front of tliem, took his case there, they reaffirmed their desire
to have him represent them, and I believe, from the information that
we have, although I do not have it m writing, that Brennan did the
same thing.
I think the membership has a right to select the people they want to
represent them. In due time, all those cases will be handled and inves-
tigated under the constitution.
Mr. Kennedy. What about Mr. Frank Matulla, out in California ?
Mr. HoFFA. What about him ?
Mr. Kennedy. He has been convicted of perjury.
Mr. HoFFA. Frank Matulla is up on appeal. I have taken no
action.
21243 — 58 — pt. 36 24
13638 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made any charges against him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have not.
Mr. Kennedt. Have you suspended him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been convicted of perjury. Bernie Adel-
stein, have you taken any action against Adelstein in New York City ?
Mr. HoFFA. I understand Adelstein has been indicted and I believe
he is pending trial.
Mr. Kennedy. We had a good deal of information about him before
the committee, about Bernie Adelstein. Did you look into any of
that?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not. I have not had an opportunity.
Mr. Kennedy. He is a close associate of Toney "Ducks" Corallo,
Nick Ratteni, well-known gangsters in the United States.
Why is it in every section of the country these people exist, Mr.
Hoffa, in the Teamsters Union, and you have not taken any action
against any of them ? You have not taken any action against Bernie
Adelstein ?
Mr. HoFFA. I said I didn't.
Mr. Kennedy. You have Roland McMasters out in Detroit. Does
he Avork for you ?
Mr. HoFFA. What did he do so bad ?
Mr. Kennedy. Does he work for you ?
Mr. PIoFFA. He does, local 299, my own local union.
Mr. Kennedy. How long has he been with you ?
M]-. HoFFA. I believe Mac came Avith us somewhere around the
1940^8.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you write a letter for him to obtain a deferment
from the draft for hijn ?
Mr. HoFFA. I probably did, if he requested it. He was still m-
ducted. As you know, he has one bad eye.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you say he was essential for the work there in
local 299?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. At the same time you wrote the letter, was he under
indictment on a charge of felonious assault against Leslie Smith and
Brother Hugh Smith, these two brothers being assaulted with base-
ball bats and knives ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't remember if he was or not. I don't remember
the indictment.
Mr. Kennedy. Here is the letter that 3'ou wrote, and I quote :
You described his activities :
Settling of all labor disputes between management and labor and particularly
through his extensive knowledge was very successful in the careful handling of
all jurisdictional disputes between various A. F. of L. labor organizations; also
with the CIO, in particular of keeping a continuous supply of essential war
materials flowing into our war industries.
Mr. Williams. If you are going to ask him questions about a letter,
may we see the letter, please ?
The Chairman. The Chair presents to you the letter the counsel
has referred to. You may examine it and identify it, please.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
The Chairman. Do you identify the letter, Mr. Hoffa ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13639
Mr. HoFFA. I beg your pardon, sir.
The Chairman. Do you identify the letter ?
Mr. HoFFA. I must have sent this. It is back to January 5, 1943.
I don't remember it, but my signature is on it. It does not look as
though — when I say my signature, my name is on it. It does not
look as though it is my signature. It could very well be. It could
have been one of my secretaries or somebody else signed it with my
permission.
The Chairman. All right. It may be made exhibit 19.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 19" for refer-
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.)
Mr. Kennedy. It says in the letter that McMasters was promoted
to the position of "paid business representative on December 19,
1941." At that time he was under indictment, at the time that you
promoted him to paid business representative.
Mr. Williams. Where is that, Mr. Kennedy ?
Mr. Kennedy. The bottom of the first page.
(At this point, Senator Goldwater entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that, in the 1930's, he had 2 other convic-
tions, Mr. Hoffa, 1 for assault and battery, and 1 for larceny of auto
tires in 1932.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, you say you wrote the letter of 1943 ?
Mr. HoFFA. The letter seems as though I did.
Senator Kennedy. Wliat was your job ?
Mr. HoFFA. President of local 299.
Senator Kennedy. Well, now, what was your status ? This was in
regard to the draft ?
Mr. HoFFA, That is right.
Senator Kennedy. What was your status ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe I was 1-A.
Senator Kennedy. Were you called up ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, sir.
Senator Kennedy. For what reason ?
Mr. HoFFA. Did you say for what reason ?
Senator Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. I assume the fact that I was in transportation.
Senator Kennedy. Did Mr. Bennett write a letter for you ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think he must have.
Senator Kennedy. You must know about that. That would be
fairly important, wouldn't it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I probably had a letter drafted, I don't recall
exactly what Brennan wrote, but he must have had a letter drafted ask-
ing for deferment.
Senator Kennedy. Did you ask him about the letter ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did. I am quite sure I did.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Ray Bennett, what was his position at that
time?
Mr. HoFFA. I would think he would be international organizer.
Senator Kennedy. And he was in the picture, identified as a member
of the bomb squad ?
Mr. Hoffa. Pie was picked up.
Senator Kennedy. As being a member of the bomb squad ?
, Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if they listed him as that, as such.
13640 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Kennedy. You saw this picture that was put in as an
exhibit ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I did not see the picture, Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. I am sorry. Anyway, you know who Mr. Ben-
nett is ?
Mr. H(.>FFA. Yes, I do.
(The photograph was handed to the witness.)
Senator Kennedy. He wrote the letter in 1943 ?
Mr, HoFiw. I believe I requested a letter to be drafted.
Senator Kennedy. He wrote it, in answer to your request ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. I beg your pardon, what did you say ?
Senator Kennedy. He wrote the letter, then, in answer to your re-
quest in 1943, is that correct ?
Mr. HoFFA. If he wrote the letter, I probably requested him.
Senator Kennedy. Do you know what was the result of the letter.
Mr. HoFFA. I was not inducted.
Senator Kennedy. Who wrote one for him ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I wouldn't know otl'hand. I don't remember. I
think he was the age he ]^i'obably would not have been drafted.
Senator Kennedy. Under the emergency ])ower of the general presi-
dent to conduct a trial when the welfare of the organization demands,,
section lOA, your powers seem quite vast under the constitution in
moving against any of these people. It says :
Whenever charges involving a member or members, officer or officers, local
union, joint council, or other subordinate body create, involve or relate to a
situation imminently dangerous to the welfare of a local union, Joint council,
other subordinate body or the international, the general president is empowered,
in his discretion, in all cases except where the general executive board has as-
sumed jurisdiction under section 4 of this article, to assume original jurisdiction
in such matters, regardless of the fact that charges have been filed with a
subordinate body and are pending.
Under such circumstances, the general president shall hold a hearing upon
giving not less than 48 hours' notice to the party or parties charged to appear
before him at a place and time designated by him.
It seems to me that your powers are extensive. You don't have
to rely on this moving from the bottom to the top. You could move in
on any occasion. I would think when you have influential officers
of your organization come before this committee with damaging testi-
mony before them, where they take the fifth amendment in regard to
their use of funds, that that would be a situation that you would feel
involved danger to the organization and you would move at once.
Mr. WiLLiA3is. Wliat page did you read from, Senator, please ?
Senator IVEN NED Y. 77.
Mr. Hoffa, I don't understand why, when somebody comes before
us, and takes the fifth amendment in regard to their use of union
funds, you don't immediately decide that that is of danger to the
Teamsters, endangers their reputation and endangers your reputation.
You have not moved against one of them.
Mr. HoFFA, I don't know why anybody takes the fifth amendment.
They may have reasons of their own. I certainly can^t inquire into
their minds.
Senator Kennedy. It does not disturb you when they do ?
Mr. Hoffa. It disturbs me to the effect that individuals don't have
a right to cross-examine witnesses, and it may get them disturbed to
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13641
the point, or to have lawyers representing them where there cannot
be questions asked, which are confusing and conflicting, and it would
very easily confuse a very honest man in trying to answer many of the
questions that are proposed and propounded at this hearing here.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, your view is that when all of
the officers of local 107, Philadelphia, take the fifth amendment, that
that does not disturb you because you may feel that honest men can be
confused by the questions ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is not correct because there is a committee going
to investigate the 107 situation.
Senator Kennedy. Now, will you tell me why it is on all other
cases you do not at least, particularly involving union funds or abuse
of union position, with the vast powers given to you under the title
that I have just read, why it is that you do not immediately proceed
to investigate at least to see if they are honest or dishonest'^
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I explained to you a minute ago that I took
office February 1. I have had a trial which lasted weeks.
I have had the problems in the international office.
I saj^ in due time this situation in our international union will all
be checked into and the constitution will be applied where necessary.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Holfa, that would be a fine assurance, but
you do not seem to indicate, either the other day or in your answer
today, any great zeal to move in.
You are defending the right to their taking the fifth amendment,
which is your privilege and their privilege, but why should anybody
take your statement on faith considering your attitude ?
Mr. HoFFA. You probably do not realize the fact that we are deal-
ing with hundreds of thousands of people. If a group of our mem-
bers elect an officer of the local union and he is the man of their choice,
it is not as easy as it sounds to go in and yank that man out and put
in a trustee of a local union and have all the members become dis-
turbed and dissatisfied with the union.
Senator Kennedy. I do not think you have to under this section.
Mr. HoFFA. It has to be handled with care.
Senator Kennedy. You do not have to put them under trustee in
this section.
Mr. HoFFA. If you are going to remove the officers and take original
jurisdiction, then in my opinion section 6 would come into effect under
the president's powers, I believe it is, of trusteeship because until there
are hearings on charges I do not believe that you can remove a man
without the threat of him being able to go into court and demand that
he have a hearing before he is removed.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, under section 5A, I agree if you are
going to remove an officer under that section you would have to put
the local under trusteeship, but under section lOA there is no necessity
for you to put a local into trusteeship.
You can call for a trial of that officer any time the situation is
"imminently dangerous to the welfare of a local union," or other
organization.
There is no necessity for you to follow the procedure of placing in
trusteeship.
Mr. Hoffa. Out of the experience dealing with local unions it just
is not as easy as it sound to be able to do this and it has to be handled
13642 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
at the opportune time to be able to keep the union intact rather than
to have it disrupted.
Senator Kennedy. I do not loiow what is more disrupting than to
have Duke Corallo holding office in New York City, a responsible
office in the union ; does that not disturb you ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have discussed the matter, I won't say discussed it —
I have followed the matter for a considerable period of time. In due
time I will take care of it.
Senator Kennedy. Are you disturbed about it?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Do you think he should stay in his position?
Mr. HoFFA. I will give him a hearing.
In my opinion after having a hearing the decision will be proper
and I question whether or not he will be there.
Senator Kennedy. When are you going to have the hearing?
Mr. HoFFA. When I get time to have hearings where I am not
involved with the Senate committee or courts and I can have a normal
operation of the international union.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ives (presiding). Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. In regard to your policy of dealing with individ-
uals wlio take the fifth amendment, were you speaking of all of them,
or is there a different policy followed between those that are inter-
national representatives serving directly under you, and those who
are officers of local unions ?
Mr. HoFFA. Senator, I thought I made myself clear on the fifth
amendment the first day I was here, that I believe that every man
has a right to take the fifth amendment, but in line with his con-
stitutional privilege as an American citizen, where it involved any
question of finance we would investigate into it, either as charges
came along or as we had time to get into it.
I do not differentiate between international officers and local unions.
Senator Curtis. The reason I raise the question whether you dif-
ferentiate, you have pointed out that local officers you have said were
elected by the local membership.
But whether or not there are some of these people who took the
fifth amendment, representatives of the international appointed by
you and your associates
Mr. HoFFA. Excuse me, just a moment.
(Witness confers with counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. I do not believe prior to the convention that any inter-
national officer took the advantage of the fifth amendment except
President Beck, but I believe after the international convention two
officers, O'Rourke and Brennan, did take advantage of the fifth
amendment and that just happened recently.
Senator Curtis. I do not think it is good practice. I think the
American workmen are entitled to better stewardship.
When Walter Reuther was before this committee Senator Mundt
developed the case in reference to his union. There are a number,
I do not know how many, individuals who took the fifth amendment.
They are still a part of that organization.
I do not believe that is fair to the members ; I think they are entitled
to something better.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 1364S
Now, the other clay, when you were here, I started to inquire into
the Teamsters activity in politics.
Mr. KoFFA. In where?
Senator Curtis. In politics.
On page 655 of last Thursday's record, I asked you :
Do you have any political activity in reference to the election of judges ta
State and local courts?
Mr. HoFFA. I am quite sure that we participate in those elections.
Senator Curtis. Do you in Michigan?
Mr. HOFFA. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Any other States?
Mr. HoFFA. I vpouldn't want to get committed, but I would assume so.
Then we proceeded to develop the point that some of this support
came from general funds made up from initiation fees and dues.
Later on on the next page I asked you :
Do you engage in politics in the election of any officials connected with schools
and education?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Now, I rather think that this political activity of unions goes to the
very heart of all of this investigation by this committee. It is not
only the Teamsters Union. We took the testimony of the situation
in New York City, the "paper" locals, some of which were Teamsters,
some of which were others.
We have investigated the Carpenters. We have investigated the
Operative Engineers. We have investigated the Ivohler strike, the
Perfect Circle strike. Where we have gone into it we have found that
these unions have contributed to the campaign funds of prosecutors
and mayors and judges and I just am thoroughly convinced that this
same full record that has been built up here now for over a year and a
half could not have happened unless there is a liaison between people
in offices and the offenders.
The Chicago Restaurant Association was a typical example.
Now, you have answered about judges and school officials. Do the
Teamsters engage in politics in reference to the election of prosecuting
attorneys ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes. I am talking now about the locals that I know
about. I can't say nationwide.
Senator Ctjrtis. Where are those locals located ?
Mr. HoFFA. I will talk about Detroit.
Senator Cuetis. Do the Teamsters take part in the election of
mayors ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Have you been successful in electing your people,
your prosecuting attorneys ?
Mr. HoFFA. I would not consider them our people.
Senator Curtis. The people you supported ?
Mr. HoFFA. In some instances, yes; in some instances, no. There
is no pattern one way or the other.
Senator Curtis. Do all the labor forces in Michigan unite in whom
they are going to support ?
Mr. HoFFA. Once in a while we can agree on a candidate. Many
times we cannot agree on a candidate for a particular office, but each
organization will reserve the right to go for its own if we could not
agree.
13644 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. Do you participate in politics by contributions and
otherwise in the election of members of the State legislature ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Have you elected some of those people that you
have endorsed and supported ?
Mr. HoFFA. Some of them have been elected that we endorsed ; yes.
Senator Curtis. Has the Teamsters Union participated in elections
for governor, the Governor of the State of Michigan ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Senator Curtis. Has the Teamsters Union supported the present
Governor of Michigan ?
Mr. HoFFA. We did at one time.
Senator Curtis. How long ago was that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think it was the first 2 or 3 terms.
Senator Curtis. That takes me back to the Monaco case and some of
these other efforts to get action in that State on extradition into the
sister State of Wisconsin.
I think at that time also we developed a record of pardons and
prefential treatment.
Now, certainly this record of violence and corruption and beating
people up in union meetings and all of that just couldn't go on if unions
were treated like other citizens. But they are given special privileges.
W^e had the account of the restaurant man here from C^hicago who
told of all of his harassment, appealing to a State trooper to help him.
He said that the Governor called him off.
That just would not happen if there was not an alliance between
politics and those few in the labor movement who are criminals.
Now, has the Teamsters Union taken any part in Federal elections?
Mr. HoFFA. Around the country, I imagine we have.
Senator Curtis. Have you in Michigan ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know. I am not the chairman of the political
action committee, and I couldn't answer whether or not we did or
didn't, specifically. I think you would have to ask the chairman of
the political action committee that question.
Senator Curtis. Now, is that a separate committee ?
Mr. HoFFA. W'ell, it is a designated person. Brennan is chairman
of the political action committee. I think you would have to ask
Brennan that question.
Senator Curtis. Do you have a sj^ecial fund set up for it ?
Mr. HoFFA. For politics ?
Senator Curtis. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. I believe when we have a political campaign that we
contribute money to the various local unions, sometimes the business
agents, so far as contributing to the various representatives or candi-
dates for office of political parties.
Senator Curtis. Now, in these special funds, are those funds raised
entirely by voluntary contributions of individual members ?
Mr. HoFFA. In our particular instance, they would be dues and
initiation fees when it came to the election of State, county, or city
employees.
Senator Curtis. And that is not prohibited by law in Michigan ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not to my knowledge.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13645
Senator Curtis. Now, any money that iroes into the election of
Federal officers, does any of that money come from dues or initiation
fees?
Mr. HoFFA. I say not to my knowledge. I think you would have to
ask Mr. Brennan that question, since lie is political action chairman
and he handles the contributions on that basis.
Senator Curtis. I would like to know the answers to that, not only
for the Teamsters' Union, but for unions at large, because the admitted
contributions, those filed by various union affiliates where there are
several of these union-designated outfits that will contribute to a par-
ticular candidate in four figures, that I just do not believe that that
money is raised by voluntary contributions of the workers. I think that
the union dues money is going into Federal elections from violations
of Federal law. There has not been a Federal election since you were
made president of the Teamsters, has there?
Mr. HoFFA. Just recently, there were some nominations around the
•country.
Senator Curtis. Primaries?
Mr. HoFFA. Primaries, yes.
Senator Curtis. If you mean business in this cleanup of unions,
generally, you can make a great contribution by doing something that
no other labor-iniion leader has done yet, come in here and tell the
Congress how they can make effective, more effective, the present pro-
hibitions of Federal laws for unions to spend money in politics. Until
we stop that, there will not be any Federal legislation that will go
to the very real heart of any of these abuses that have arisen, where
it involves money or violence or bankrupting of somebody by methods
of tlie union or otherwise.
That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ives. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Ives.
Senator Ives. I would like to follow up Senator Curtis' peroration.
I take it, Mr. Ploffa, you are a pretty practical political operator,
among other things.
Mr. Hoffa. Tentatively.
Senator Ives. I gather so. I would like to ask you a simple ques-
tion, one which I have discussed with leaders of organized labor over
the years. Is it your idea that you actually control the votes of the
members of these organizations and their wives ?
Ml". HoFFA. Senator, the best answer is many candidates that we
expressed to our membership for the candidates should be elected were
defeated. So, I would say that we do not control the member nor his
wife nor his relatives concerning his right to vote whom he wants. I
think, ultimately, even though he listens to us, when he walks into the
booth he expresses his own desire and right of choice as to whom he
wants to be elected.
(At this point, the following members Avere present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Ervin, Church, Kennedy, Gold water, and Curtis.)
Senator Ives. That has been the response I have received invari-
ably from the labor leaders with whom I have talked. They don't
claim for 1 minute that they can control these votes. In fact, I think
the best evidence that they do not control the votes is the last election
13646 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
of President Eisenhower, when all of the leadership of organized
labor went out against President Eisenhower, and he won by such
a sweeping majority. Apparently, the wives did not go along and
a lot of the men did not go along. I don't really think you help your-
selves with this effort.
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I think that the membership are entitled to the
views of the officers who represent them. I think that the mem-
bership is entitled at meetings to either authorize the officers, in gen-
eral or specifically, to support certain candidates.
Senator Ives. You follow the theory, of course, of Samuel Gomp-
ers?
Mr. HoFFA. Take care of your friends and attempt to whip your
enemies ; yes.
Senator Ives. I think you do. I think that is perfectly all right.
I wouldn't argue about that at all. But I think, when you go any
further than that, politically, you are making a mistake, for your
own sake and everj' body else's.
Mr. HoFFA, I haven't made it a practice of being a one-party man.
Senator Ives. I am not talking about you, personally.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Kennedy. I also want to ask you, Mr. Hoffa, whether you took
any action against Jack Thompson, also of local 332, who has just
been arrested in connection with the matter involving Frank Kier-
dorf , of Flint, Mich.
Mr. HoFFA, The matter is under investigation by the police depart-
ment. There have been no charges filed yet.
Mr, Kennedy. I am talking about after he testified before our com-
mittee.
Mr. HoFFA. The fifth amendment ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. It was not just the fifth amendm^ent, Mr. Hoffa.
We developed some extensive information regarding Thompson.
He had also given the committee an affidavit in which he said
that he had accepted the hospitality of George Kamenow, on various
trips. Then, when he appeared before the committee, he took the
fifth amendment. But we developed information that there was col-
lusion and that there were shakedowns of various employers in Flint,
Mich. Did you take any action against Mr. Thompson then ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have not. I know that Thompson went in front of
his membership after he attended this meeting, so he told me, and
explained to his membership that he had taken the fifth amendment.
Mr. Kennedy. But you did not take any action to have him re-
moved ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. We had before the committee the fact that the
automobile from local 332 was the automobile that was used to at-
tempt to run down one of the employees of one of companies up there,
an attempted killing. Did you take any action against Thompson
or Frank Kierdorf in connection with that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think it is the responsibility of the Flint Police De-
partment to handle the situation concerning that. I don't recall any
arrest made in that particular incident.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13647
Mr. Kjennedy. I am asking you whether you took any action, Mr.
Hoffa?
Mr. Hoffa. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. As well as taking the fifth amendment, and the other
material that w^e developed about him, his police record goes back to
1930, when he was sent to boys' vocational school at Lansing for break-
ing and entering. He served 2 years. In 1935, arrested for unlaw-
fully driving away in an automobile, he was sentenced to 3 years' pro-
bation. In 1937, breaking and entering in the nighttime, he pleaded
guilty and was sentenced to 5 years' probation. In 1937, arrested for
armed robbery, he pleaded guilty and received a sentence of 4 to 25
years in the southern Michigan prison at Jackson, Mich. In 1941 he
was paroled. There is a man with an extensive criminal record. Once
again armed robbery, and he ends up as a business agent of local 332.
We develop information about him before the committee, the fact
that he is shaking down employers, with George Kamenow, of the
Shefferman organization, he and Frank Kierdorf. And you don't
take any action whatsoever ; you don't even look into the matter. Did
you or not ?
Mr. Hoffa. There has been no charges lodged against Jack Thomp-
son.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know George Kamenow yourself ?
Mr. Hoffa. I do.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known George Kamenow, of the
Shefferman organization ?
Mr. Hoffa. Well, a considerable number of years. How many I
don't know, offhand.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, approximately how many ?
Mr. Hoffa. Better than 5. I will put it that way.
Mr. Kennedy. Ten years ?
Mr. Hoffa. It could be. I can't recall how long I know George.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any business dealings with him ?
Mr. Hoffa. Business dealings with him ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Hoffa. I bought a television set from him ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that?
Mr. Hoffa. Maybe 2 or 3 years ago.
Mr. Kennedy. How did you pay for that ?
Mr. Hoffa. Cash.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any records to show you paid for it ?
Mr. Hoffa. I do not.
Mr. Kennedy. You bought a television set ?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes ; portable.
Mr. Kennedy. Of course, we can't find the answer to that from him,
because he appeared before the committee and took the fifth amend-
ment, so we can't go into that.
Did you get anything else from him ?
Mr. Hoffa. I may have got a Christmas present from him.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't know. I am saying he may have. I don't
recall. It would not be anything extensive.
Mr. Kennedy. How much did you pay for the television set ?
13648 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. I believe th.it it was $100, if I am not mistaken. Some-
where around there.
Mr, Kennedy. You don't have anj' records on it ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, I do not.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you had any otlier business dealings with him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall of any that I had with George.
Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you just buy the television set directly?
Mr. HoFFA. I think I got it at a discount, if I remember right.
(At this point, Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing
room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Is he a personal friend of yours ?
Mr. HoFFA. They are friendly acquaintances. He is not a personal
friend, no. He is more or less of a business acquaintance.
Mr. Kennedy. He has discussed contracts with you?
Mr. HoFFA. Definitely.
INIr. Kennedy. He has.
Have you ever received any mone}' from him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have not.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever received any money directly or indi-
rectly from him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think if you are talking about money, I want to cor-
rect the situation. I say I may have got a gift certificate from him,
I don't know, for Christmas.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you get from him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall. It may have been a gift certificate.
Mr. Kennedy. You have only known him for 5 years. You should
remember that.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you or did you not
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall. I say he may have given me a gift
cert ificate or a gift for Christmas. I don't recall.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you get anything else from him, directly or
indirectly ?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall anything else George ever gave me. Well,
yes, I guess he did. He gave me a fishing tackle outfit, I believe.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that?
Mr. HoFFA. I think 2 or 3 years ago.
Mr. Kennedy. How much was the gift certificate for ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't remember.
Mr. Kennedy. Anything else other than the television set?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall of a thing.
Mr. Ivennedy. And a fishing tackle and possibly the gift certifi-
cate?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall of a thing.
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't get any money from him directly or
indirectly ?
Mr. HoFFA. No cash money from Kamenow.
Mr. Kennedy. Has he visited at your home ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think George was ever at my home. Well, now,
maybe he was at my cottage one Sunday. I don't know. It was not a
regular habit. If he was there, he just dropped in and spent the time
of day and went about his business. It would not be a regular habit.
I don't even think that happened, though it might have.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you visited his home ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13649
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I don't think I was ever in George's honse.
Mr. Kennedy. You and Bert Brennan own the Lake 13 Hunting
and Fishing Chib ?
Mr. HoFFA. Hobren Corp. owns it.
Mr. Kennedy. You own Hobren Corp. ?
Mr. HoFFA. My wife and Brennan's wife has the stock in the
company.
Mr. Kennedy. Your wife and Brennan's wife owns Lake 13 Hunt-
ing Chib ; is that right ?
Mr. HoFFA. Hobren Co. owns it, and they have stock in Hobren Co.
Mr. Kennedy. Then they own the Hobren Co. ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Any questions about Lake 13 you are going to have to
ask your wife?
Mr. HoFFA. Not that I know ; any question you would have to ask
her.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know about Lake 13 ?
Mr. HoFFA. Certainly I know about it.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you liave outsiders other than union members as
members of the Lake 13 Hunting and Fishing?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, we do.
Mr. Kennedy. Who do you have ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I believe George Kamenow is a member.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the same George Kamenow we have just
been discussing?
Mr. HoPTA. That is right. Well, I don't know who all are members.
You have the list. Bellino got it.
Mr. Kennedy. Who else ?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't tell you. You show me the list. Bellino has
it. I can read it off and tell you.
Mr. Kennedy. We are trying to get some information from you.
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I can't recall offhand who are the members, since
I do not handle that particular situation.
Mr. Kennedy. Who handles it^
>.Ir. HoFFA. Walter Schuler.
Mr. Kennedy. What about Ben Di-anow ?
Is he also a member ?
Mr. HoFFA. Ben has been there. I don't know whether he is a mem-
ber or not. He may be a member, but I don't know, offhand.
Mr. Kennedy. He is from the Thomas Department Store ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. That is the Thomas Department Store that vou ad-
vanced $1,200,000 to ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, we advanced two loans to him : yes.
Mr. Kennedy. $1,200,000?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, he paid 1 loan back out of the $1 million. He paid
back the first loan, so it was a million dollar loan. But he paid the
original money back that he borrowed out of the second loan he
received.
Mr. Kennedy. What is the status of the Thomas Department Store
at the present time ?
Mr. HoFFA. It is an operating business.
Mr. Kennedy. Has it gone into bankruptcy ?
13650 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFTA. I was informed that it is not in bankruptcy, that there
is some kind of a credit arrangement under some chapter of law. I
don't know exactly Avhat it is,
Mr. Kennedy. It is a chapter 11 procedure, is it not ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know. Just a moment. I can find out for you.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. Yes ; I am told it is.
JMr. Kennedy. Isn't that correct ?
Mr. HoFFA. It is in bankruptcy or receivership. It is in bankruptcy
court anyway, is it not ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. I am avised that it is in Federal court, and there is an
arrangement made between the creditors and the company which has
been approved, I understand, by the court.
Mr. Kennedy. That is bankruptcy court, is it not ?
Mr. HoFFA. It is under that type of law ; yes. I am not familiar
with it.
Mr. Kennedy. We have been looldng for Ben Dranow, to whom
this money went. Can you tell us where I3en Dranow is ?
Mr. HoFFA. The last I heard of him he was in New York.
Mr. Kennedy. How long ago was that ?
Mr. HoFFA. About 3 weeks ago — I think I talked to him — 2 or 3
weeks ago.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know where he is now ?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; I don't. I have not heard from him for about 2 or
3 weeks.
Mr. Kennedy. We have been looking for him for about 3 weeks and
have not been able to find him.
Mr. HoFFA. I think he was in New York.
Mr. Kennedy. Whereabouts was he in New York ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know. He called me, if I remember correctly.
Mr. Kennedy. If you talk to him again, would you tell him we are
looking for him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I will be very happy to inform him of that, Mr.
Kennedy.
(At this point, Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.)
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Dranow owns the store to which the loans
were given ; is that correct ? He controls it ?
Mr. HoFFA. He controls it. Whether or not he owns all of the stock
or not, I don't know.
Senator Kennedy. The $200,000 was from where ?
Mr, HoFFA. Michigan Council of Teamsters.
Senator Kennedy, And the million dollar loan ?
Mr. HoFFA, The Central Conference,
Senator Kennedy. Did you approve both of them ?
Mr. HoFFA, The trustees did, I was one of the trustees in the Cen-
tral Conference,
Senator Kennedy, With George Fitzgerald?
Mr, HoFFA. George is not a trustee.
Senator Kennedy. You were a trustee and you approved the two
loans?
Mr. HoFFA. No; I was not a trustee on the Michigan loan, but I
was a trustee on the Central Conference loan.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13651
Senator Kennedy. Did you discuss both loans with those who were
in positions of responsibility as trustees?
Mr. HoFFA. I did.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, you gave your support to the
loan?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. And how much did Dranow have invested in the
company ?
Mr. HoFFA. I couldn't tell you.
Senator Kennedy. Isn't it a fact he only had $14,000 ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know. He may have only had that. I think at
that time he was only a representative of the company but became
the owner of the company.
Senator Kennedy. He bought his share for $14,000. Wasn't that
his equity in the company?
Mr. HoFFA. I couldn't tell you if it is or isn't, Senator Kennedy ; I
don't know.
Senator Kennedy. According to the testimony, he had invested
$14,000, with which he took control. Then you loaned him, or the
Teamsters' organization in Michigan, of wliich you are the dominant
figure, loaned him $200,000 and $1 million, and now the company is
in the bankruptcy court. I don't think that is a very safe loan.
Mr. HoFFA. There is sufficient collateral as a real-estate loan, even
if it wasn't an operating company, to be considered a good loan for a
welfare fund in our opinion as trustees.
Senator Kennedy. When the $200,000 was loaned, I am informed
by the counsel a strike was going on at that time. Do you know of
that?
Mr. HoFFA. The Eetail Clerks.
Senator Kennedy. Your organization loaned him the money, the
$200,000, at a time the strike was in effect against them ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. Do you think that is a good idea, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't know what one has to do with the other.
Senator Kennedy. This loan was not just because it looked like
such a good investment, was it ?
Mr. Hoffa. We considered it a good investment.
Senator Kennedy. What about Mr. Bushkin; what was his job
in it?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't believe he had any job, except the fact that he
knew Dranow.
Senator Kennedy. Was he labor-relations adviser ?
Mr. Hoffa. I can't answer that.
Senator Kennedy. Didn't he help settle the strike with the Retail
Clerks?
Mr. Hoffa. He discussed the strike, but I don't know whether or
not he was retained by Dranow.
Senator Kennedy. Did he discuss the loan with you?
Mr. Hoffa. Bushkin didn't discuss the loan with me.
Senator Kennedy. He never discussed the loan ?
Mr. Hoffa. Not with me.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, though, isn't it a fact that Mr.
Bushkin was active in settling the strike with the Retail Clerks and
was labor-relations adviser for this company ?
13652 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if he was labor-relations adviser, but he
was active in helping settle the strike.
Senator Kennedy. In other words, so I get it clear, the $200,000
was loaned at the time the strike was in effect ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. Then a million dollars was loaned ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Senator Kennj:dy. Mr. Dranow was the dominant figure, the owner;
his own equity in the company was $14,000. Mr. Bushkin, who took
the fifth amendment the other day in regard to his financial dealings,
had some relationship with the company.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think that Dranow was the owner of the com-
pany at the time of the first loan. I believe he was the manager of
the company.
Senator Kennedy. When the million dollars was loaned, he was the
owner ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if he owned all of the company or not.
Senator Ken nedy. He was the controlling owner.
Mr. HoFFA. I believe he was the controlling owner.
Senator Kennedy. His total investment was $14,000.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know that. I can't answer that.
Mr. Kennedy. I might say, also, that we have developed the fact
that, at the time the bombings were planned, the dynamitings were
planned, Mr. Dranow and Mr. Gerald Connelly were in Miami, Fla.,
staying at a hotel in adjoining rooms.
The call giving the instructions for the bombing was made out of
Gerald Connelly's room; that the bill for Gerald Connelly and Ben
Dranow at that time was paid by the Thomas department store, and
Gerald at that time was a union official.
After Gerald Connelly got into difficulty and was arrested, Mr.
Dranow paid $25,000 in cash while he was running the Thomas de-
partment store to defend Gerald Connelly in connection with the
dynamiting.
How long have you known Ben Dranow ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think 3 or 4 years.
INIr. Kennedy. W\\o introduced you to him ?
Mr. HoFFA. Dranow wrote a letter to our office, requesting an inter-
view concerning a loan for their company. A lawyer from Minne-
apolis came with him, I think St. Paul, came with him to our office.
Mr. Kennedy. And you met him at that time ?
Mr. HoFFA. Right.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was the lawyer ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think it was a fellow named Davis, if I am not mis-
taken. I think it was a man named Davis.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever had any business dealings witli Ben
Dranow ?
Mr. HoFFA. Have I been in business with him ?
Mr. Kennedy. Have you liad any business dealings of any kind.
Mr. HoFFA. I never have had.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you had any financial dealings of any kind
wifji him?
Mr. HoFFA. Onlv to the extent I bought a fur piece off liim: that
is all.
Mr. Kennedy. When did you buy tlie fur ]>iece ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13653
Mr. HoFFA. Maybe a year ago ; maybe 2 years ; I don't know which.
Mr. Kennedy. How much money did you pay for that ?
Mr. HoFFA. Five hundred dollars.
Mr. Kennedy. How did you pay for it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Cash.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any records to show you paid for it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if I have the receipt or not. I might have
a receipt.
Mr. Kennedy. From whom ?
Mr. HoFFA. It would be, necessarily, from him.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you get the fur piece directly from him ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did you not turn it over when we subpenaed all
your records ?
Mr. HoFFA. Turn what over ?
Mr. Kennedy. If you had such a receipt ?
Mr. HoFFA. Turn what over ?
Mr. Kennedy. Why didn"t you turn the receipt over to the com-
mittee ?
Mr. HoFFA. I said I don't know if I have one or not. I may have.
Mr. Kennedy. We subpenaed all your records. If you had such a
receipt, Avhy didn't you turn it over to the committee ?
Mr. HoFFA. I haven't been able to find it. It may be around some-
where.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any documents you know of to show you
paid $500 for the fur piece you got from Ben Dranow ?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't tell you that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Dranow also get something?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. You laiow he got a fur piece, also ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if he did or not. I know he discussed it.
I don't know if he completed arrangements or not.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you get anything else from Ben Dranow?
Mr. HoFFA. I think I bought some sweaters from Dranow, I think
he did send me some kind of material for hunting purposes. I can't
think what it was, now.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlien was this ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think it was Christmastime.
Mr. Kennedy. How long ago ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think he sent it to me last year.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you pay for that?
Mr. HoFFA. No ; it was a Christmas gift.
Mr. Kennedy. A^^iat was it, again ?
Mr. HoFFA. A suite of underwear that fits under the hunting suit;
you don't have to wear as heavy clothes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you get anything else, other than a suit of
underwear?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Nothing else ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any other financial dealings with him,
other than the underwear ?
21243— 58— pt. 36 25
13654 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall any financial dealings with him other
than what I said.
Mr. Kennedy. Excuse me.
Mr. HoFFA. I said I cannot recall any other financial dealings I had
with him, other than that situation except — well, you are talking
about me, personally ?
Mr. Kennedy. Well, you or your family ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Whatever ones you know?
Mr. HoFFA. I am thinking of the fact that our lawyer did reim-
burse Dranow for the $2,500 he put out for Connelly. Whether or
not you consider that a business transaction, I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that out of union funds ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. "Wlio reimbursed him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe the central conference.
Mr. Kennedy. What lawyer ? You said your lawyer did.
Mr. HoFFA. I am just trying to think what lawyer it was. It might
have been Solly Robbins or a fellow by the name of Irving something;
I can't tliink of his last name.
Mr. Kennedy. Nemeroff?
Mr. HoFFA, That could be the one.
Mr. Kennedy. You also told us you had bought some things, ob-
tained some things through Buslikin. Will you tell us about that?
Mr. HoFFA. "WHiat did I say I obtained through Bushkin ?
Mr. Kennedy. You said you bought some material wholesale, or
bought some tilings wholesale through Bushkin.
Mr. HoFFA. I didn't tell you that.
Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; you did.
Mr. HoFFA. TAHiere did I say it ?
Mr. Kennedy. We can look it up. You don't remember that?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you or did you not?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall getting anything from Bushkin.
Mr. Williams. I think, in fairness, we ought to direct the witness'
attention to that part of the record.
Mr, Kennedy. I think he made that statement.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think I did. I can't recall buying anything
from Bushkin on that basis.
Mr. Kennedy. You did not do such a thing; you didn't get any-
thing through Bushkin ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall getting anything through him. It
wasn't anything of major importance, if I did.
Mr. Kennedy. We can look it up. Did Holtzman buy you any-
thing? Did you have any financial dealings with Holtzman?
Mr. HoFFA. I borrowed some money from Holtzman.
Mr. Kennedy. Other than borrowing the money ?
Mr. HoFFA. When I first bought my house, I believe, now I think
about it, I think Holtzman and Bushkin did give me some equipment
for my recreation room ; tables and chairs.
Mr, Kennedy. They gave that to you?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe they did.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlien was that?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13655
Mr. HoFFA. It must have been 1941, 1942, 1943 ; somewhere around
there, when I set up a recreation room.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, anything else ?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't think of anything else.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, we are talking about loans. What about
the loans from Bitonti ?
Mr. HoFFA. What about it ?
Mr. Kennedy. You made the loan of some $40,000 to Mr. Bitonti ?
Mr. HoFFA. Right.
Mr. Kennedy. Why was the note signed for $50,000 ?
Mr. HoFFA. Because he had a potential borrowing of up to $50,000.
He only wanted $40,000. He could have borrowed up to $50,000.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he actually borrow 40 and pay 50 back?
Mr. HoFFA. He borrowed 40 and paid interest. What the interest
amounted to, I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. But he did borrow $40,000 and $50,000 back in
principal ?
Mr. HoFFA. He paid $40,000 back that he borrowed.
Mr. Kennedy. If he was only receiving $40,000, why would he
make a note out for $50,000 ?
Mr. Hoffa. I just told you.
Mr. Kennedy. He could w^ite a second note when he received the
$10,000 ?
Mr. HoFFA. He had the potential borrowing up to $50,000.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any financial dealings with Bitonti?
He received $40,000 on a loan from the union and has been arrested
23 times. Did you have any financial dealings with him?
Mr. Hoffa. No ; I didn't have any financial dealings with him that
I can ever recall.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you receive anything from him directly or
indirectly, money, gifts ?
Mr. Hoffa. At Christmas time I received a gift certificate occasion-
ally from Bitonti.
Mr. Kennedy. How much ?
Mr. Hoffa. I suppose $20, $30, $50, maybe $100.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that, last Christmas ?
Mr. Hoffa, No ; several years ago.
Mr. Kennedy. Just one Christmas ?
Mr. Hoffa. No ; Bitonti has a habit of giving Christmas gifts. It
may have been 2, 3, 4 times. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Is there anything else you received from him?
Mr. Hoffa. Not that I recall receiving from Bitonti ; no.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you ever in any business dealings together?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't recall any business dealings with Bitonti; no.
Mr. Kennedy. Never made any investments together ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't believe so ; no.
Mr. Kennedy. About the time of the loan that he received from
the union, you weren't in any dealings together ?
Mr. Hoffa. No; not to my knowledge. I am sure we weren^t.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make an investment in the North American
Rare Metals Co. ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right, a stock company.
Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Bitonti in that ?
13656 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. He has stock in it, but he is not part of the company
as far as I know.
Mr. Kennedy. Does Mr. Bert Brennan own that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think he has some stock in it.
Mr. Kennedy. Will yon identify this and this ?
Mr. HoFFA. I think I listed that with you the last time I was here.
The Chairman. The Chair presents to yon a photostatic copy of a
document. Will you please examine it and state if you identify it.
Mr. HoFFA. Could I inquire when the loan was made to Bitonti ?
Mr. Kennedy. The money came to him on July 17, 1953, and
8-10-53.
(Witness confers with his counsel.)
(At this point, the following; members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Ervin, Church, Kennedy, Goldwater, Curtis.)
The Chairman. You have examined the document, Mr. Hoffa?
You identify it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if I ever saw it or not. I may have saw
the document. I don't remember ever seeing it. I recognize the name
of one of the men on there, Lou Cadesky, as a fellow who I did business
with, buying some stock.
I think Bitonti bought stock in the same company.
The Chairman. The document may be made exhibit 20 for reference.
(Tlie document referred to Avas marked "Exliibit No. 20" for refer-
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.
The Chairman. You may interrogate the witness about it.
Mr. Kennedy. This is the North American Rare Metals, and it has
as one of its directors Mr, Owen Bernard Brennan, union executive,
Wilcox Road, Plymouth, Mich.
Then it states on page 2 :
The particulars relating to the acquisition of the property of the company are
as follows : Section 3 : Arthur .James McLaren, Toronto, Ontario ; Donald John
Birse, Winnipeg, who are associated with the vendor in the staking and acquisi-
tion of the claim group.
Andrew Robertson, 60 Highland Avenue, Toronto, Ontario ; * * * John
Bitonti.
John Bitonti, Dearborn, Mich. ; Owen Bert Brennan, Plymouth, Mich., and
James Hoffa, are the only persons who received or are entitled to receive from
the vendor a greater than 5 percent interest in the consideration paid for the
claim group aforesaid.
You evidently were in this business together. Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Hoffa. No, that isn't necessarily true.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know he was in it ?
Mr. Hoffa. I said that before. But Bitonti isn't any director, I
don't believe, or any owner, other than
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bert Brennan is a director.
Mr. Hoffa. I believe he was.
Mr. Kennedy. The only three people who are listed here are people
who have a special interest in this company, Owen Bert Brennan,
James Hoffa, and John Bitonti.
Mr. Williams. That is not accurate. I have not got the document
before me, but I know from my recollection that that is not correct.
If you are going to quote from the document, you ought to quote
accurately.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Williams, I am quoting it.
Mr. Williams. May we have the document ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13857
Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; you may.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
(The witness conferred with the counseL)
Mr. Williams. Your question was that according to the document
the only three people who had a special interest in it were Brennan,
Hoffa, and Bitonti, and you were reading from the second page oi
the document ?
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct ; yes.
Mr. Williams. That is not the way I read the document, Mr. Ken-
nedy, because I can count
Mr. Kennedy. Read the paragraph.
Mr. Williams. All right. I will read it.
Arthur James McLaren, 2601 Bathurst Street, Toronto, Ontario ; Donald John
Birse, 609 Agues Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, who were associated with the
vendor in the stalling and acquisition of the claim group. Andrew Robertson,
60 Highland Avenue, Toronto, Ontario; Dr. Leon Fred Simon, 2640 John R.
Street, Hazel Park, Mich., U. S. A. ; John Bitonti, 6S65 Oakman Boulevard, Dear-
born, Mich., U. S. A. ; Owen Bernard Brennan, 41801 Wilcox Road, Plymouth,
Mich., U. S. A. ; and James Hoffa, 16154 Robson Avenue, Detroit, Mich., U. S. A.,
are the only persons who received or are entitled to receive from the vendor a
greater than 5 percent interest in the consideration paid for the claim group
aforesaid.
So I count seven names, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. I thought there was a separation between John
Bitonti and the other two names. So there are 6 people instead of
just 3.
The principle, I believe, is the same, that you people had the pri-
mary interest in this organization. What I am trying to find out is
whether you were aware of this fact and whether you went in business
with John Bitonti.
Mr. Hoffa. I didn't go in business with anybody. I simply had
stock in the concern.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss it with him, that you w^ere going
to have an interest in the rare metals ?
Mr. Hoffa. Well, I knew that Bitonti had it, and we certainly dis-
cussed it as time went on.
Mr. Kennedy. Then how did Owen Bert Brennan become a direc-
tor of it ?
Mr. Hoffa. I imagine the board of directors or the people in charge
of the company made him a director.
Mr. Kennedy. The situation is this, Mr. Hoffa, that he received a
loan, as we developed last w^eek, under rather suspicious circumstances ;
he had been arrested 23 times ; he received a loan from your union ; the
loan stated that he was to repay $50,000 ; he only received $40,000 from
the union.
And then the 3 of you, Owen Bert Brennan, John Bitonti, and
James Hoffa, end up as 3 of possibly 6 people who have a special
arrangement in the North American Rare Metals.
Mr. HoFFA. I thinlv you ought to ask Lou Caclesky to give you the
information, because he would, be the only man who could give it to
you. I coulcl not give it to you.
Mr. Kennedy. He is up in Canada.
Mr. HoFFA. Well, I think he can be reached. He comes back and
forth to the United States quite regularly.
13658 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD
(At this point Senator Ervin withdrew from the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Who interested you in it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Cadesky.
Mr. Kennedy. He came down to Detroit ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have meetings with John Bitonti in con-
nection with it ?
Mr. HoFFA. Bitonti and Cadesky both were there, yes, when we
discussed the question of us buying stock in it.
Mr. Kennedy. Did the three of you have a meeting with him; is
that right ?
Mr. HoFFA. Bitonti came in with Cadesky, and discussed the ques-
tion of tlie prospects of this stock, and out of that discussion we
bought some stock.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you make a loan to Ahmed Abass?
Mr. PIoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. How much money did you advance to Ahmed Abass ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know offhand. The record will have to speak
for itself. I have not got the record here.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, on this previous deal, how did you
pay for your share of the investment ?
Mr. Hoffa. Cash.
Senator Kennedy. How much ?
(At this point. Senator Goldwater withdrew from the hearing
room.)
Mr. Hoffa. Well, I think $7,500.
Senator Kennedy. What did you do, buy cashier's checks?
Mr. Hoffa. Xo.
Senator Kennedy. Who did you give the cash to ?
Mr. Hoffa. Lou Cadesky.
Senator Kennedy. You gave it outright to him in cash ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think it was Lou in the office that I gave the cash to.
Senator Kennedy. Where did you get the $7,500 in cash ?
Mr. Hoffa, An accumulation of savings.
Senator Kennedy. You keep it at home ; do you ?
Mr. Hoffa. I keep it around the office or home, wherever it is
convenient.
Senator Kennedy. You just carried $7,500 in cash in and gave it
to him ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. Did he give you a receipt for it ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think I got the stock for it. I don't think I got all
the stock. I think there was some kind of a holding arrangement on
the stock, where you can't get it all at one time.
Senator Kennedy. Do you ever write checks ? You do everything
in cash ; do you ?
Mr. Hoffa. Almost always.
(At this point. Senator Church withdrew from the hearing room.)
Senator Kennedy. That was a substantial percentage of your yearly
income : wasn't it ?
Mr. Hoffa. It didn't necessarily have to come out of one year. It
comes out of an accumulation.
Senator Kennedy. Has it made out, this deal? Wliat is it worth
now, do you know ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13659
Mr, HoFFA, If you don't hold it to me, I think it is up around a
dollar.
Senator Kennedy. So what would your investment be worth now ?
Mr. HoFTA. Well, I think I had 50,000 share of stock. If you look,
I think you will find it is 50,000 shares of stock, and I think I got 5,000
shares of stock.
I think you get the other 45,000 shares over a period of time, in some
way. I am not familiar with it.
Senator Kennedy. I didn't understand that. As I understand,
you paid $7,500 for how many shares? 5,000?
Mr. HoFFA. I think it was 50,000 shares put in escrow. I think Mr.
Bellino has it. I think I got 5,000 shares. I think he could come up
with the right answer rather than me guessing with it, if he wanted to.
Senator Kennedy. I am just trying to get the details of the trans-
action.
Mr. HoFFA. I am trying to give it to you, but it is from memory.
Senator Kennedy. Could you give me any idea from memory what
you bought with the $7,500 in cash ?
Mr. HoFFA. I told you what I bought.
Mr. Williams. May I suggest. Senator, that if Mr. Bellino has the
records, and if the committee is really looking for information for a
legislative purpose, then it might be expeditious to give the witness
the records and it would probably move things along more rapidly.
Senator Kennedy. To establisli what the legislative purpose is, I
am trying to find out, because it involves the use of union dues and
pension and welfare money in the sense of being a loan originally to
Mr. Bitonti.
Mr. HoFFA. Excuse me, that is not correct, sir.
Senator Kennedy. What money was involved ?
Mr. HoFFA. The $7,500
Senator Kennedy. I am talking about the original business in 1953,
as I understand it, did involve union money.
Mr. HoFFA. With Bitonti, you are talking about ?
Senator Kennedy. Therefore, you loaned money to Mr. Bitonti and
now you are in business with Mr. Bitonti in 1955.
Mr. HoFFA. Excuse me. I am not in business with Mr. Bitonti.
Mr. WiLLLiMS. The record shows, as I recall, there were 720,000
shares of stock, as I recall the prospectus, which I read in a few seconds,
that were authorized.
Senator Kennedy. The reason I use the phrase, Mr. Williams, is
because he is 1 of 7 people, Mr. Hoffa, Bitonti and Brennan, 3 out of
7 who seem to be especially picked out of this group to purchase more
than 5 percent. So his position, in a sense, is a preferred position, as is
the position of the other six people.
There were 7 and 3 of those are involved before this committee. I
would just like to find out what he did to be in that preferred position,
and how much he was able to buy with $7,500, and what his holdings
are now, what his profits have been.
Mr. Williams. My point, I think originally. Senator, was that these
records were turned over to Mr. Bellino, who currently has them in
his possession. I think that the basic dictates of fairness would re-
quire that since the witness turned the records over to the commit-
tee
Mr. Hoffa. I didn't turn them over to him. I didn't have them.
13660 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Williams. Just a minute. Or from wherever he got them.
That he should be given these records before this testimony is pur-
sued.
(At this point, Senator Ives withdrew from the hearing room.)
The Chairman. I believe we have no records. They were not
turned over to us. We are having to try to find out in this manner.
Mr. Williams. If you have none, that clears it up.
Senator Kennedy. Well, it has not cleared it up in my mind. You
could tell me what you got with the $7,500.
Mr. HoFFA. I told you.
Senator Kennedy. What did you get ? How many shares ?
Mr. HoFFA. I am quite sure that there was 50,000 sliares of stock
for tlie $7,500, but I think I only received 5,0C0 shares of the stock
with the understanding that as the project progressed — and I am not
familiar witli the operations of the stock exchange in Canada, that
the stock would come to us. But over an extended period of time. I
don't believe, if I recall rightly, that you could sell the stock for a pe-
riod of time, either.
Senator Kennedy. As I understand, what you are saying is that for
$7,500 you bought 50,000 shares, of which 3^ou received 5,000.
iNIr. IIoFFA. I think that is right.
Senator Kennedy. Your judgment today is that it is worth a dol-
lar, is that correct?
Mr. HoFFA. I say I think that it is. I am not sure. You could
probably check the stock market and find out, if you want.
Senator Kennedy. I think we can check. How did you and Mr.
Bitonti and Mr. Brennan arrive together?
Mr. HoFFA. Caclesky was a friend of Bitonti's, and Cadesky, I be-
lieve, was the fellow who was handling the selling of the stock. Since
it was supposed to be a good investment, we discussed the question
with Cadesky, made the loan
Senator Kennedy. ^Vlio did? You and Mr. Brennan or you alone?
Mr. HoFFA, Brennan, myself, Bitonti, and Cadesky.
Senator Kennedy. The four of you sat down together and dis-
cussed it?
Mr. HoFFA. They were in our office. They came to our office, yes.
Senator Kennedy. Then the four of you decided to proceed ahead
with this investment ; is that correct.
Mr. HoFFA. I know that I did. I don't know what Bitonti and
Brennan did; I think Brennan did the same thing I did; I am not
sure.
Senator Kennedy. Tlie four of you discussed it in your office, so you
must have some idea what they did.
Mr. HoFFA. No; that isn't true, we simply discussed whether or not
it was a good stock, whether or not it would be able to increase in value.
Senator Kennedy. '\Yliat conclusion did you come to ?
Mr. HoFFA. Well, listening to Cadesky I thought it was a good
investment.
Senator Kennedy. And so did Mr. Brennan, and so did Mr.
Bitonti ?
Mr. HoFFA. Apparently so.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Kennedy, and Curtis. )
Senator Kennedy. Of course so, obviously they are all.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13661
Mr. Brennan is tlie director ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know if he is now, or not. He may have been
at the time.
Senator Kennedy. At the time he went in he was ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think he was director at the time he was in.
I think he became a director hiter on.
Senator Kennedy. So you and Mr. Bitonti did go in a business
dealing together ?
Mr. HoFFA. No, we did not. We simply bought stock in one
company.
Senator Kennedy. After holding a conference in your office and the
three of you who met getting a preferred position ?
Mr. HoFFA. No. I think Cadeslr^ was already into the company by
buying stock. I don't think Bitonti came in at the same time we
were in.
Senator Kennedy. He was in ahead of the time ?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe he was. That is why he had Cadesky come in
and see us.
Senator Kennedy. Cadesky and Bitonti came in to see Brennan
and urged you to go in ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Senator Kennedy. So, in other words, you did join Bitonti in a
business deal ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not. I simply bought some stock in a company
that Bitonti was in.
Senator Kennedy. What did you have to pay to get the preferred
position ?
Mr. HoFFA. Have to deliver
Senator Kennedy. Only people who put in $7,500 or more got
that position?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know whether they did, or not.
Senator Kennedy. What did you do that put you in that position ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have no reason to believe it was brought to my atten-
tion until such time as I saw this that there was only that many people
involved in this.
Senator Kennedy. I hope, Mr. Chairman, it will be possible for us
to get detailed figures on this North American Rare Metals, including
the amount of the investment of the other people who got this position,
Mr. Bitonti's own holdings; Mr. Cadesky's own holdings, and Mr.
Bert Brennan's holdings along with the other participants, and we
can make a judgment as to what kind of deal exactly it was there.
Mr. Kennedy. Is Cadesky Samuel Siglin's partner ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Sam Siglin ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe I ever met the man in my life, or heard
the name until now.
Mr. Kennedy. I want to ask you about Ahmed Abass.
How much money did he receive from the union ?
Mr. HoFFA. I told you I am not quite sure. I know you have
the checks there, if you will show me the check.
The Chairman. The Chair presents to you what appears to be a
photostatic copy of a check dated April 19, 195G, drawn on local
No. 299, payable to Ahmed Abass and also a photostatic copy of check
stub of this same date.
13662 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
I ask you to examine these two documents and state if you identify
them.
(The witness conferred with his counsel. )
Mr. HoFFA. I authorized the loan, Senator.
The Chairman. The check and stub thereof may be made exhibit
21 and 21 A, respectively.
(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits 21 A and 21B,"
for reference and will be found in the appendix on pp. 13720-13721.)
Mr. Kennedy. That was for $12,000 ?
Mr. HoFFA. The check ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the date of that check ? That is Ahmed
Abass, A-h-m-e-d A-b-a-s-s. Has he ever been arrested?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. How many times has he been arrested ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. According to our records he has not been arrested
as many times as Bitonti, which is 23, who received a $40,000 loan,
but lie was arrested 17 times and he has 7 convictions.
You made a $12,000 loan of union funds to him.
Mr. HoFFA. Yes, with sufficient collateral to cover the loan where
there was no possibility of loss and I believe either 5 or 6 percent
interest.
Mr. Kennedy. He has been associated with John Bitonti ; did you
know tliat ?
Mr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Charles Harrison, who is known as Black Charlie
Harrison ?
INIr. HoFFA. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever intercede for Charlie Harrison to get
a liquor license? Did you ever take any steps along those lines to
intercede for him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't recall ever interceding for Charlie.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny you did ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't deny if I did or did not. If he had asked me
to, I would have. I don't know if he did or not. It seems to me
that the license was already there, it came from his father-in-law, or
somebody.
Mr. Kennedy. This is the Manor Bar.
Mr. HoFFA. I think the license was owned by some part of their
family, if I am not mistaken, and he took it over from there. So I
don't know why anybody would have to intercede for him.
Mr. Kennedy. He was having trouble because of a police record in
having the license transferred over. I want to know if you or the
union interceded on his behalf ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe I was asked to do it. If I had been
asked I would have interceded.
Mr. Kennedy. You figured that that was part of your duties and
responsibilities as a union official, to make sure that your friends get
a liquor license ?
Mr. HoFFA. It is a union restaurant and bar.
Mr. Kennedy. I want to explain the reason he was having trouble
getting it was the fact that he had such a long police record.
Does it help in getting a loan from the union if you have had a
criminal record, Mr. Hoffa ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13663
Mr. HoFFA. Any license for wliat ?
Mr. Kennedy. Any loan from the union. Does it help to get a
loan from your union if you have a criminal record ?
Mr. HoFFA. It certainly does not. You must have necessary col-
lateral for the loan.
Mr. IvENNEDY. These two individuals, between them, have been
arrested 40 times, Ahmed Abass and Bitonti. Now, Mr. Hoffa, after
some of these individuals in the union get into difficulties, even the
ones with criminal records, and they have been found involved in
extortions, then according to the record, and according to the testi-
mony w^e have had before the committee, you then on occasion have
paid their legal bills, have you not ?
Mr. IIoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You paid the legal bills of Mr. Linteau ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy Mr. Marroso ?
Mr Hoffa. I believe so.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Nicoletti ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think we paid those bills.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Keating ?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And they w^ere all found guilty of extortion ?
Mr Hoffa. Yes — no, just a moment. I forget the background.
It was a bribery statute violation.
Mr. Kennedy. Receiving money from employers; is that right?
Mr Hoffa. Yes, but it was not extortion.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr Chairman, we probably won't be able to finish
this this morning. I would like to call your attention to your testi-
mony regarding Bushkin on page 49 ?
Mr. Williams. The first day ?
Mr. Kennedy. The first volume.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan and Curtis.)
Mr. Kennedy. The chairman asked the question :
I am not talking about just concerning the loaning of money. I am talking:
about any other financial transactions or business transactions with them in
which money was involved.
Mr. Hoffa. I may have asked Bushkin or I may have wanted him to buy me
something at wholesale. I don't know. But so far as other than purchasing
something from him, that is the only financial transaction I had.
Did you purchase anything from him or through him ?
Mr. Hoffa. As I say, I don't recall whether I did or not, buy any-
thing through him wholesale or not. I could have.
The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock.
(Whereupon, at 12:26 p. m., the hearing recessed to reconvene at
2 p. m. of the same day, with the following members present : Senators
McClellan and Curtis.)
afternoon SESSION
(At the reconvening of the session, the following members were
present : Senators McClellan and Ives. )
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
You may proceed.
13664 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, before we proceed with Mr. Hoffa, I
would like to call Mr. Adlerman, who will testify on a couple of mat-
ters that were brought up this morning.
(At this point, Senator Church entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. INIr. Adlerman, have you made a study of the records
of the Thomas department store in connection with the purchase of
any fur pieces ?
Mr. Adlerman. I have.
Mr. Kennedy. And fur coats ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you find, in fact, that Mr. Dranow did purchase
two fur coats through the Thomas department store ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes. There were two fur coats ordered from the
firm of Faden & Appel Furs, Inc., of New York City.
Mr. Kennedy. F-a-d-e-n ?
Mr. Adlerman. F-a-d-e-n A-p-p-e-1 Furs. They were billed to the
John W. Thomas department store.
Mr. Kennedy. "When was that ?
Mr. Adlerman. That was on August 13, 1956.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee what the value of those
furs were 'i
Mr. Adlerman. Yes. One coat was valued at $2',000 and the other
coat was valued at $2,150.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the disposition of the coats ?
Mr. Adlerman. These two coats were ordered and sent to Ben Dra-
now, care of the Briggs Hotel, Detroit, JSiich.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he pay the Thomas department store for that ?
Mr. Adlerman. He received a check from Mr. Bushkin in the sum
of $4,430, 1 believe.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, could we have him identify the
check ?
The Chairman. The Chair presents to you a photostatic copy of a
check. You may examine it and state if you identify it.
(The document was handed to the witness.)
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, this is the check I am referring to.
The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 22.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 22" for refer-
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13722.)
Mr. Ivennedy. Did we find that one of these coats was forwarded
directly to Mr. Bert Brennan ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes. Of the 2 coats, 1 of them was returned and
then a substitute coat was sent down. At this time it was sent on
August 27, 1956. It was returned to the fur company of Faden &
Appel, and on September 28, 1956, another jacket, a mink jacket,
valued at $2,125 was charged to the John W. Thomas Stores, and
delivered by air express to Alice Brennan, 41801 Wilcox Road,
Plymouth, Mich.
Mr. Kennedy. Do we know what happened to the other coat ?
Mr. Adlerman. The other coat ? I don't know what happened to
it. It never was returned. It was paid for.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know, Mr. Hoffa, if that was the coat you
received, the second coat ?
Mr. Hoffa. I did not receive a coat.
Mr. Kennedy. What did you receive ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13665
Mr. HoFFA. It was, I believe, a stole.
Mr. Kennedy. What was the material ?
Mr. HoFFA. Mink.
Mr. Kennedy. A mink stole. When did you receive that ?
Mr. HoFFA. 1956 or 1957. I can't recall which it was. I believe
1 of those 2 years.
Mr. Kennedy. And the price of that was $500 ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You never received any coat ?
INIr. IIoFFA, I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. You never purchased any coat through Mr.
Bushkin %
Mr. HoFFA. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Or purchase a coat through Mr. Dranow ?
Mr. HoFFA, No, I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. This is the only thing ?
]Mr. HoFFA. Right, except what I told you.
]\Ir, Kennedy. Yes, except what you have testified to.
Mr. HoFFxV. That is riglit.
Mr. Kennedy. We don't know what the disposition then is from the
records, the disposition of the second coat ?
Mr. Adlerman. No, we do not.
Mr. Kennedy. One coat you did trace to Mrs. Brennan ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Are there any records that we have seen that indi-
cate that that was paid for by the Brennans ?
Mr, Adlerman. No. As far as I know, I have seen no records show-
ing that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also make an examination, Mr. Adlerman,
of this loan to the Thomas department store, this loan of $200,000
originally and then later of $1 million, to determine what the status
of that loan was and what the status of the store is at the present
time ?
Mr. Adlerman. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us whether the store is now in a bank-
ruptcy court ?
Mr. Adlerman. There is a so-called chapter 11 proceeding which
is now in the hands of the referee in bankruptcy in the Federal court
in Minneapolis. This was filed in January of this year, some 6 months
after the loan was made, 7 months after the loaiL
Mr. Kennedy. Are there any claims against Mr. Benjamin Dranow ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes. The records and schedules of the bankruptcy
proceeding show that Mr. Ben Dranow withdrew from the corporation
the sum of $116,431.48.
Mr. Kennedy. $116,000?
Mr. Adlerman. $116,000.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that over and above his salary ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes. He drew a salary of $1,000 a month.
Mr. Kennedy. This is $116,000 that he has taken out of the Thomas
Department Store ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Is the Thomas Department Store or the bankruptcy
court officials looking for Mr. Dranow ?
13666 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Adlerman. I spoke to the referee in bankruptcy, I think his
name was Mr. Heitzig, and he said he is very anxious to speak to Mr.
Dranow about this item.
Mr. Kennedy. And we also have been looking for Mr. Dranow ?
Mr. Adlerman. We have been looking for him very hard.
Mr. Kennedy. From an examination of the records, did you tuid
that Mr. Hoffa had been in touch with Mr. Dranow approximately
3 weeks ago ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. By telephone ?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know where he is now, Mr. Hoffa '^
Mr. Hoffa. I do not.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES R. HOFFA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWARD BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD, AND
DAVID PREVIANT— Resumed
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, is this mink stole that you purchased
insured ^
Mr. Hoffa. I don't believe so.
Mr. Kennedy. It is not insured ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't think so.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you find that out for us? Would you let us
know that ?
Mr. Hoffa. Yes ; I can find it out.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call Mr. Kelly on
a different matter.
The Chairman. Has he been sworn ?
Mr. Kennedy. I dont' think he has been ; no, sir.
The Chairman. You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall
give before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God '?
Mr. Kelly. I do.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES P. KELLY
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kelly, do you have anv information on Mr.
Cadesky?
Mr. IvELLY. I do.
Mr. Kennedy. What is your position with the committee ?
Mr. Kelly. I am a staff' investigator with the committee.
Mr. Kennedy. How long have you been with the committee ?
Mr. Kelly. Since February 1957.
Mr. Kennedy. And prior to that you were with the New York Police
Department ?
Mr. Kelly. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. For how long ?
Mr. Kelly. For 7 years.
(At this point Senator Goldwater entered the room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Have you compiled some information on Mr. Ca-
desky ?
Mr. Kelly. I have compiled some information on his background ;
that is correct.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13667
Mr. Kennedy. That is the Mr. Cadesky who is in the North Ameri-
can Rare Metals that we had the testimony about this morning ?
Mr. Kelly. He was connected with the North American Rare
Metals, Ltd., of 100 Adelade West, a street in Toronto.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us what you found about Mr. Cadesky's
background ?
Mr. Kelly. Mr. Cadesky came to this country from Russia — came
to Canada, rather, from Russia.
Mr. Kennedy. I don't want to go into everything.
Mr. Kelly. He got into the securities business as far back as 1934 ;
we do have reference to the fact that in 1949 he was listed as vice presi-
dent of this C. E. Hepburn Co., Ltd., 2 Toronto Street, Toronto,
Canada. In October of 1949 a show-cause order was obtained in the
supreme court. New York County, by the New York attorney general's
office, to enjoin this company, C. E. Hepburn, and five individuals,
including Louis Cadesky, from engaging in the sale of securities in
New York State. I understand that from information of the Secu-
rities and Exchange Commission that at or about this time there were
numerous cease-and-desist orders from the various States, including
Pennsylvania, in 1946, and Michigan, which named Cadesky and the
company, also the Solinco Mines, Ltd., company, that Mr. Cadesky
was connected with, and which is now known by another name.
It is now called the Ancil Mines, Ltd. In 1949 the State of Wis-
consin also had a cease-and-desist order against the Solinco Mine Co.
and the C. E. Hepbiirn Co.
Mr. Kennedy. He was with them ?
Mr. Kelly. He was vice president of C. E. Hepburn at that time,
and also connected with Solinco, in the guise of a salesman or pro-
moter. In March of 1949 the State of Virginia had a cease-and-desist
order, which I understand is the same as an injunction in that State.
In 1949 the State of Ohio also had a cease-and-desist order against
both Hepburn and the Solinco Mining Co.
Mr. Kennedy. So he had a career to at least indicate, from the infor-
mation that you had, involving himself in some questionable financial
transactions ?
Mr. Kelly. That is correct. Incidentally, Mr. Kemiedy, when 1
was looking for Mr. Bitonti last year, after he had left the jurisdic-
tion of this committee, I was seeking to serve a subpena on him, I had
occasion to call Mr. Cadesky in Toronto, Canada, the North American
Rare Metals, Ltd., and he told me he had not seen Mr. Bitonti, al-
though I learned since that Mr. Bitonti had been in Toronto and had
been in contact with this person.
Ml'. Kennedy. All right.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES R. HOEFA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWARD BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD AND
DAVID PREVIANT— Resumed
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. HofFa, I would like to ask you about some other
matters. We had a witness appear before this committee last year by
the name of Robert Scott. He told the committee of the fact — well,
one of tlie things that he related to the committee was that upon your
instructions, he hid your brother William Hoffa from the police when
he was wanted for armed robbery. Can you tell us if that happened ?
13668 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. I discussed this matter with my brother as to whether
or not he had been in Pontiac during that time. He told me he had
been in Pontiac but he was under bond. I don't know^ w4iy he would
be hiding if he was under bond.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you answer the question, please? Did you,
in fact, instruct Mr. Scott to hide your brother from the police when
the police were looking for him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't ever recall discussing this matter with Scott
whatsoever.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you requested or instructed, Mr.
Scott to hide your brother from the police when the police were look-
ing for him ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't recall ever discussing tliis matter with Scott. I
certainly did not tell him to hide my brotlier from the police. I may
have asked him to have my brother in Pontiac for a period of time.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, when the police were looking for him, is that
another way of saying
Mr. PIoFFA. I understand that isn't true.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you or did you not? That is what I am trying
to find out from you, Mr. Hoffa. I think most people could answer
that question as to whether they asked someone to hide their brother
from the police. Did you tell Mr. Scott — —
Mr. Hoffa. I had no reason to ask Scott to hide my brother.
Mr. Kennedy. Well, did you do that ?
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. Hoffa. I have no recollection discussing my brother with Scott
insofar as hiding him or tiying to avoid the law.
Mr. Kennedy. What conversations did you have with him ?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't remember any of them. The best I would have
had with him if he was in Pontiac would have been to ask Scott to
make arrangements for him.
Mr. Kennedy. To do what?
Mr. Hoffa. To stay in Pontiac.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, are you prepared to deny Mr. Scott's
testimony, then?
Mr. PIoffa. I am saying that to the best of my recollection I have
no disremembrance of discussing witli Scott any such question.
The Chairman. AVliat year was this ?
Mr. Kennedy. 1948 or 1949, 1 believe, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Hoffa. That is a long time ago.
Mr. Kennedy. Yes, but as I said before, I don't think that there are
many people in this room or in the United States that can't remember
whether they asked someone to hide their brother when the police
were looking for them. I think that is a very important matter in
somebody's life. I can't believe that you cannot remember it.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, w\y I suggest to you, sir, No. 1, that
the witness has answered this question. He has said, as I understand
his answer, that he has no recollection of this ever having taken place,
I guess it was in 1944.
May I point this out to you, sir, in the interest of fairness in the
interrogation of tliis witness : Mr. Kennedy wants him now categori-
cally to deny this, or to affirm it. I understand that this is a wholly
unreliable witness. My information is
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13669
Mr. Kennedy. Why don't you let him — I don't think that is fair,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Williams. My information is that this man, Mr. Chairman, is
a narcotic addict. I think that this witness need not subject himself
to a pattern whereby his testimony is forthwith sent to the Depart-
men of Justice for investigation as to perjury immediately upon a
conflict arising in the testimony.
Last week, Mr, Chairman, we had a witness come in here and testify
to some certain facts about Mr. Ploffa. It was represented by the
counsel that that witness had taken a lie detector test and that he had
passed it. My information, Mr. Chairman, is that in three particu-
lars in which he mentioned Mr. Hofl'a under that lie detector test, he
was found to have lied. This was a self-confessed perjurer. This
man, when he took the lie detector test, said that he had had a dinner
with Mr. Hoffa, wherein certain bombings were discussed. He sub-
sequently, when the lie detector test showed that he was lying, recanted
on tliat. Thereafter, Mr. Chairman, he said he had a telephone con-
vei'sation with Mr. Holi'a. When that was shown by the lie detector
test to be false, he recanted on that. Now, if the witness is put into
a position where he must cross swords with witnesses of this character
and subject himself to a perjury case, I say. No. 1, that no legislative
purpose is being served ; No. 2, I say that it is improper to conduct
this kind of an interrogation of the witness when he is giving his best
recollection on events which took place a decade and a half ago.
So I submit, Mr. Chairman, that this subject has now been exhausted.
The witness has said, in response to the questions, that he has no recol-
lection of this event with Mr. Scott; that his brother did stay with
Mr. Scott at a time when he was under bond. I ask that the interro-
gation in this vein be concluded.
The Chairman. Let the Chair proceed. The question is that we
have this proof here, and you want to say maybe the fellow was lying.
I don't know what you are trying to say. That is your privilege.
If you want to take the position that you don't believe him, that is
all right. But we have this proof here, and it's a matter of record.
It is under oath. Certainly, the one who knows best about it, other
than the ones who have testified, would be Mr. Hoffa, himself. He
is being given the opportunity to deny it or to admit it. To say that
he does not remember it, that is a matter people will have an
opinion about, if it does occur. I think, even to counsel, if he ac-
tually engaged someone, employed someone, to hide his brother out
when officers were looking for him, it is very unlikely that he would
forget that, if he did it.
He can say he did or did not. Or, if he is not going to say either
way, he can continue to say he does not remember. But I do want
him to have the opportunity definitely to deny tliat he did. For that
reason, I will ask you, Mr. Hoffa, did you or did you not hire some-
one or arrange with someone to hide your brother out from the law?
Mr. Hoffa. I have no recollection of ever discussing any such a
situation w^ith Mr. Scott.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you want to leave the record that way ?
Mr. Hoffa. It will have to be that way, to the best of my recol-
lection.
21243— 58— pt. 36 26
13670 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, Mr. Scott also testified that union funds
were used to take your wife and Mrs. Brennan on a trip by air over
the Lake 13 property. Is that correct, and that it cost the union
approximately $1,400 ?
Mr. HoFFA. I asked Mr. Keating whether or not that was correct,
not having handled the transaction myself, and he told me it was
not correct. So, I have to take Keating's word for it, because I didn't
handle it. My wife did go up to Wisconsin, but I do not believe she
ever went to Lake 13 by air.
Mr. Kennedy, We asked Mr. Keating the same question, Mr. Hoffa,
and he took the fifth amendment under oath before the committee.
We are trying to get the information.
Mr. HoFFA, I am trying to give it to you from what he told me,
and he handled the transaction.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that the only answer you can give us on that?
Mr. HoFFA. I would have no other answer.
Mr. Kennedy. Who paid for your wife's trip, airplane trip, up
there, then ?
Mr. HoFFA. Keating — and I discussed this matter with Keating — •
he did not remember the incident, but he said if it did happen that he
would have had a friend take her up there who owns an airplane.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was the friend?
Mr. Hoffa. He wouldn't tell you.
Mr. Kennedy. He wouldn't tell you the name of the friend?
IVIr. Hoffa. That is right.
INIr. Kennedy. That is not very satisfactory, Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Hoffa. I can't make Mr. Keating tell me something he doesn't
want to tell me.
Mr. Kennedy. It is very convenient for you. Either you forget it,
or you tell us somebody who is responsible for the incident, who takes
the fifth amendment.
Mr. Hoffa. If the individual who carries out the transaction wants
to take the fifth amendment, I can't help that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ask your wife about the trip ?
Mr. Hoffa. jSIy wife remembers going to Wisconsin. How the
arrangements were made, who flew her up, she has no recollection.
Mr. Kennedy. What about when your brother Billy's wife went off
and Mr. Scott also testified that union funds were used; that a man
by the name of Tom Burke was sent to find Billy Hoffa's runaway
wife?
Mr. Hoffa. I asked Tom Burke that question. Tom said he went
on his own and spent his own money.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Burke will be a witness, Mr. Chairman.
Mr, Scott also testified that you requested him to intercede with the
Government in connection with obtaining a pardon for somebody who
was under a life sentence in jail. Can you tell us if you asked Mr.
Scott to intercede?
Mr, Hoffa. Yes; I think I did. I don't remember exactly what
date, but I think I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was that that you asked to intercede for ?
Mr. Hoffa. Frank
Mr. Kennedy. Imoratta ?
Mr. Hoffa, I think that is the name ; ves.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13671
Mr. Kennedy. Is he a relation of Pete Licavoli ?
Mr. HoFFA. I wouldn't know that.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliy did you want to intercede with the governor
■on the part of Frank Imoratta?
Mr. HoFFA. I believe some attorney asked me to see whether or not
Scott could get the governor to give a pardon.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that Mr. Louisell?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't remember.
Mr. Kennedy. Didn't you tell him that union otHcials don't inter-
cede on behalf of people who are in jail for life sentences?
Mr. HoFFA. I didn't intercede. I asked Scott to see if the governor
would give him a pardon. Scott did not work under me. Scott was
secretary-treasurer of the Michigan Federation of Labor. What year
was this ? Was it under the trusteeship ?
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know the year?
Mr. HoFFA. I can't call, offhand. Was the local 614 under trustee-
ship (' If it was, Scott was under my authority. If it wasn't, then
they were an autonomous local. I don't recall the year.
Mr. Kennedy. You were in that area at that time?
Mr. HoFFA. I was Michigan conference chairman.
Mr. Kennedy. Then he was under your jurisdiction, certainly. All
I said is that, if somebody did this, I would think it was completely
outside the realm of union activity.
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think there is any question about that.
Mr. Kennedy. That again becomes questionable; why you would
interject yourself in such an operation of trying to get a pardon for
somebody from the governor who was sentenced to life imprisonment ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know that Scott ever went to the governor or
not.
Mr. Kennedy. You went to him and asked him to go to the
governor?
Mr. HoiTA. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you also ask Mr. Scott to make arrangement with
the State prosecuting attorney in Oakland County so that a number of
individuals, includina: Ben Arso, could set up a gambling o23eration
there?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't have any conversation with him about
that?
Mr. HoFFA, I did not discuss the matter with Scott or anybody else.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Ben Arso ever discuss the matter with you ?
Mr. HoFFA. Ben Arso never discussed the matter with me.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he ever discuss with you the fact he wanted to
open u]) an operation in Oakland County ?
Mr. HoFFA. Not with me.
Mr. Kennedy. With Bert Brennan ?
Mr. HoFFA. I wouldn't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Bert Brennan relate this to you ?
Mr. HoFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if Ben Arso wanted to set up such an
•operation ?
Mr. HoFFA. I wouldn't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Scott also testified that he was a contact
man with the grand jury that was investigating you back in 1940.
13672 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Did you assign him to that operation to try to find out what informa-
tion came out of the grand jury in connection with you ?
Mr. HoFFA. Never assigned Scott to find out from the grand jury
any information that was improper. I asked liim to contact news-
papermen to see what was going on in the grand jury, if he could, for
what newsworthy information tliey had.
Mr. Kennedy. Then he related he gave you the information that
Turk Prujanski had testified that you liad approached him and said
that for $5,000 or $10,000 you could get Turk Prujanski's liquor license
restored, and that the money was to be split between you and Ahmed
Abass.
Mr. HoFFA. That is not true.
Mr. Kennedy. That did not happen ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not discuss the matter with Scott.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss the matter with Turk Prujanski?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not ; no, so far as money was concerned.
Mr. Kennedy. He said tliat you said you had arranged for Turk
Prujanski to leave, and Turk Prujanski left for California.
Mr. HoFFA. I never arranged for Turk to go to California at all.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever urge him to go to California ?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. And that the State liad to extradite liim back into
iSIichigan, Tlien, wlien he appeared before the grand jury, lie re-
fused to answer the questions on the same matter and was sentenced
to 60 days. He said you knew all about this.
Mr. HoFFA. I am not responsible for what Scott said. I don't
know why Prujanski didn't testif}^ and preferred to take 60 days in
Mr. Kennedy. Had you approached Turk Prujanski and told him
for a sum of money you could arrange to have his liquor license
restored ?
]\Ir. HoFFA. I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Didn't your union pay for any of the defense bills
of Turk Prujanski when he was indicted at a later date, 1953, I
believe?
INIr. HoFFA. Let me check with counsel, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. All right.
(The witness conferred with his counsel.)
Mr. HoFFA. ^^Hiat year was this, ]Mr. Kennedy ?
Mr. Kennedy. 1954.
Mr. HoFFA. Will you tell me what attorney represented him?
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fitzgerald knows.
jNlr. HoFFA. He doesn't remember, either. I just asked him. That
is why I am trying to find out.
Mr. Kennedy. He doesn't know anything about that ?
Mr. HoFFA. He doesn't recall, he told me, who represented him.
That is what I was trying to find out to refresh my memory.
Mr. Kennedy. Joe Louisell.
Mr. HoFFA. I would have to check the record before I could answer
that, because it was a conspiracy trial and there may have been some
legal fee>s in the conspiracy trial which could be construed one way or
the other. I can't answer that.
Mr. Kennedy. Did the union pay for Turk Prujanski's legal bill ?
IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13673
Mr. HoFFA. At this moment, I don't know because I have not
checked. I will have to check back to see if he did.
Mr. Kennedy. I tliought you were checking with George Fitz-
gerald.
Mr. IIoFFA. George doesn't recall.
Mr, IvENNEDY. It was Mr. Louisell; does that refresh your recol-
lection ?
Mr. HoFFA. No; it does not. I know Joe. We will have to check
if he was involved. We will find that out. That is all we can do.
The Chairman. Mr. Scott, will you come around?
Mr. Williams. While we are waiting, and since it won't take any
time of the committee, I want to renew my objection, as I have lodged
it heretofore, to this calling of witnesses in juxtaposition.
I submit most respectfully to you, sir, that this cannot have a legis-
lative purpose because this man, as I understand it from comisel, has
already testified before this committee. He is now being recalled in
juxtaposition to this witness.
I understood your ruling the other day, Mr. Chairman, to be that,
hereinafter, although you did not subscribe to the views which I ex-
pressed as to the conduct of the hearing and overruled my objection,
you did rule, as I understood it, that witnesses would not be called
back with this man after he had been interrogated on the subject
matter.
The Chairman. Which way do you want us to do it; put the wit-
ness on first and ask him, or do it the other way? I cannot quite
undei-stand which way you want us to go,
Mr. Williams, I don't want you to do it either way, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr, Kennedy. Mr. Scott, you were in the Teamsters Union, were
you?
Mr. Scott. I was.
Mr. Kennedy. For what period of time
The Chairman. You have not been sworn. Will you be sworn?
Do you solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Sen-
ate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God ?
Mr. Scott. I do.
TESTIMONY OF EOBERT P. SCOTT
The Chairman. Be seated, please.
State your name, place of residence, business, and occupation,
Mr. Scott. My name is Robert P. Scott. I live at 31 Bloomfield
Terrace, Pontiac, Mich. I am on the board of examiners of barbers
for the State of Michigan.
Mr. Kennedy. At the beginning, Mr, Edward Bennett Williams,
the attorney for Mr. Hoffa, has made a statement here, without any
proof, that you are a drug addict. Will you make any comment on
that, please,
Mr, Scott. I would be glad to. I would like to have Mr. Williams
offer some proof to that effect.
The Chairman. Answer, are you a drug addict or not ?
Mr. Scott. No ; I am not.
The Chairman. All right ; proceed.
13674 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. IvENNEDY. How long have you been in the Teamsters Union,
Mr. Scott?
Mr. Scott. From 1945 until 1952, July 2.
Mr. Kjennedt. For what local were you ?
Mr. Scott. 614.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, were you an officer in 614 ?
Mr. Scott. In later years, I was. I think I was elected in 1948 to
the vice presidency.
Mr. Kennedy. Under what circumstances were you elected ; by the
membership ?
Mr. Scott. Yes ; I was.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that a rigged election, Mr. Scott ?
Mr. Scott. Well, they declared everyone else ineligible to run.
Mr. Kennedy. So it was arranged for you to win by that means ;
is that right ?
Mr. Scott. I believe that was the purpose of it.
Mr. Kennedy. Based on the standard that they used, which I be-
lieve was as to whether you had your dues paid up, were you eligible
to run for office ?
Mr. Scott. There wasn't an officer that was eligible to run at that
time.
Mr. Kennedy, They just ruled everybody else ineligible: is that
right?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Wlio made those arrangements ?
Mr. Scott. I think Ray Bennett made the final decision. He was
an international organizer.
Mr. Kennedy. After you became an officer — tell me who else were
the officers of local 614 ?
Mr. Scott. At that time Dan Keating.
Mr. Kennedy. What was his position ?
Mr. Scott. He was president, and Louis Lento was secretary-treas-
urer, and Finazzo was recording secretary, and I was vice president.
(At this point, the following members were present : Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Church, and Goldwater. )
Mr. Kennedy. Were there any financial statements given to the
union after you became an officer and the rest of these gentlemen
became officers ?
Did you ever give any financial statements ?
Mr. Scott. Under the Taft-Hartley law, they were required to give
a financial statement, but they didn't give it. They posted it on the
window in the office.
Mr. Kennedy. Were these financial statements accurate ?
Mr. Scott. I didn't make them out. I couldn't swear that they were.
Mr. Kennedy. During this period of time, was the home of Mr.
Hoff a being erected at Lake Orion ?
Mr. Scott. I think he purchased that in 1948.
Mr. Kennedy. He was remodeling it during this period of time ?
Mr. Scott. From 1948 on.
Mr. Kennedy. He was remodeling it from 1948 ?
Mr. Scott. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you told by the president of the union as to
how the bills for the remodeling of the home were paid ?
Mr. Scott. He said he was
IJVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13675
Mr. Kennedy. Who is he ?
Mr. Scott. Dan Keating was paying all the bills for the remodeling
of the home. Someday he was going to hand them all to Jimmie
Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. Did yon understand that this was being paid out
of union funds ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Were tlie telephone bills for Mr. Hoffa at that time
also being paid out of union funds ?
Mr. ScoTT. For his lake cottage ; yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Out of union funds ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, they were. They were paid by local 614.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you see that yourself ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes ; I seen the girls make out the checks.
Mr. Kennedy. On the Lake 13 property, did you understand that
Mrs. Hoffa and Mrs. Brennan were going to fly up there ?
Mr. Scott. Dan Keating said he made arrangements with Gordon
Rorich, who is now dead, to fly tliem up there, and he had to pay $1,400
to fly them up there.
Mr. Kennedy. That was out of union funds ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa ever speak to you about the fact
that his brother was being looked for by the police ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, he did, in the Fort Shelby Hotel in Detroit.
Mr. Kennedy. What conversations did you have with him ?
Mr. Scott. He asked me to take his brother, Billie, out to Pontiac
and hide him. At first he said I could take him out to the cottage,
but there was no heat in the cottage, so I put him in the hotel, the
Roosevelt Hotel in Pontiac.
Mr. Kennedy. Was this the time he was wanted by the police ?
Mr. Scott. He had a case going on in circuit court in Wayne
County, at that time.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that the police were looking for
him at that time ?
Mr. Scott. I was told that they were going to pick him up again.
Mr. Kennedy. At that time ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Who paid for the bills for Mr. Billie Hoffa while he
was staying at that hotel ?
Mr. Scott. Local 614.
Mr. Kennedy, How do you know that ?
Mr. Scott. Because I carried the check over to the hotel.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. William Hoffa receive any money during
the period of time he was being hidden ?
Mr. Scott. $75 a week for spending money.
Mr. Kennedy. From whom did that come ?
Mr. Scott. From local 614.
Mr. Kennedy. How do you know that ?
Mr. Scott. Because I took that check over to Billie.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the fact that when William Hoffa's
wife — did she run away from him ?
Mr. Scott. Yes ; she did.
Mr. Kennedy. Was that during the same period of time ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, it was.
13676 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Kennedy. And could you tell us whether you heard anything
about trying to get her to come back ?
Mr. Scott. Well, slie run away and Billie was throwing a tit about
it. Jimmie raised hell and he called me down to the office, and he
raised hell with me, and I didn't have a thing to do with his wife.
But he said he would send Tom Burke after her.
j\Ir. Kennedy. Jimmie Ilotfa said he was going to send Tom Burke
after her ?
JVIr. Scott. Yes : and Tom was in the office at the time.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he go out after her ?
(At this point, Senator Curtis entered the hearing room.)
]\Ir. Scott. Well, the next thing I knew she was brought back,
but she didn't stay very long. She went again.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand who paid for the bill for him,
for Tom Burke, to go look for Mr. Willie PToffa's wife?
Mr. Scott. I was told it was in the neighborhood of $7,000.
Mr. Kennedy. Who told you that ?
Mr. Scott. Tom Burke.
INIr. Kennedy. Did he tell you who paid for that?
Mr. Scott. A^Tiy, he was working for the union at the time.
Mr. Kennedy. You just gathered from the fact that he was working
for the union, that the union must have paid for it, is that right?
Mr. Scott. Well, he said it cost them $7,000 to go get her and bring
her back.
The Chairman. Cost who ?
IMr. Scott. The union.
The Chairman. Are you sure of that, that he said it cost the
union ?
Mr. Scott. That is what he told me.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you ever approached
Senator Goldwater. Where was she ?
Mr. Kennedy. She was out in the Far West, is that right ?
Mr. Scott. Arizona, or some place.
Senator Goldwater. I would prefer it if you didn't say "Arizona
or some place." Was she in Arizona ?
Mr. Scott. I don't know. I didn't go get her.
Senator Goldwater. Wliy would she be in Arizona, do you have
any idea ?
Mr. Scott. That I could not tell you. I did not know her at all.
Senator Goldwater. Did you know any of the Licavolis that lived
down there ?
Mr. Scott. No, I did not.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you ever approached by anyone about putting
Billie Hoffa up in the rackets in Pontiac ?
Mr. Scott. A fellow they called "The Chinaman" said that Billie
Hoffa wanted to get in the numbers racket.
Mr. Kennedy. 'V^^io was the Chinaman ?
Mr. Scott. He was a Greek fellow.
The Chairman. Let's have order.
Mr. Kennedy. When was this, approximately ?
Mr. Scott. About 1950.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he have conversations with you ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13677
Mr. Scott. Tlie Cliinaman did. He said that Billie Hoffa wanted
to get in the number rackets. He was going to muscle in. I asked
him not to let him muscle in because he worked for local 614, and
his brother would not like it.
Mr. Kennedy. So what happened ?
Mr. ScoTT. He didn't get in.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any conversations with anybody
else in connection with this ?
Mr. ScoTT. Herman Kierdorf .
Mr. Kennedy. Kierdorf? What did he say to you ?
Mr. ScoTT. He told me that Billie wanted to hire him to bump me
off because I stopped him from getting in the numbers rackets.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa, Jimmie Hoffa, ever approach you
about interceding with anyone, with the Governor, in connection with
anyone who was serving a penitentiary sentence, life sentence in the
penitentiary?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, he did.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us about that ?
Mr. ScOTT. There was two fellows, but the one fellow I don't know
his name at all.
Mr. Kennedy. He asked you to intercede on two different occasions ?
Mr. ScoTT. Right.
Mr. Kennedy. Both of these people were serving life sentences ?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, I can't say what Cammarata was serving, whether
it was life
Mr. Kennedy. Cammarata.
Mr. ScoTT. Cammarata was serving, whether it was life or not, but
he was serving time for violating his parole, because he was deported
from the United States.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did he want you to intervene on his behalf?
Mr. ScoTT. Because they were going to pick him up, and they were
afraid they was going to deport him again.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that he was a relative of Pete
Licavoli?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, Bill Buffalino came and got me and took me over
to Pete Licavoli's house, and Frank Campanero was there.
Mr. Kennedy. Is it Frank Cammarata ?
Mr. ScoTT. Or Cammarato, I don't know how you pronounce it.
Mr. Kennedy. He was there at the time ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, he was.
Mr. Kennedy. It was in connection with the fact that he might be
breaking his parole.
Mr. Scott. His parole.
Mr. Kennedy. He wanted you to intercede with the Governor on
behalf of him ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, he did. But a lot of people had interceded for
him and they could not get the Governor to do anything.
Senator Goldwater. You have been in Michigan politics ?
Mr. Scott. I was in the Michigan Federation of Labor and I was
also in politics.
Mr. Kennedy. What level of politics ?
Mr. Scott. Just precinct worker and a delegate to the conventions.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you know the Governor well enough to ask
him a favor like this ?
13678 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Scott. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Is that some time ago ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, it was.
Mr. Kennedy. \Vliat Governor was it ?
Mr. Scott. Governor Williams.
Mr. Kennedy. He turned you down ?
Mr. Scott. I didn't ask him.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa, James Hoffa, ever speak to you in
connection with putting a fix at the Oakland prosecutor?
Mr. Scott. Bert Brennan called me up on the telephone in Lansing
and he asked me if my insurance was paid, and I said "What have
you got to do with my insurance ?"
Well, he said "There are two fellows here in the office that are
pretty bad guys, and they might have something to do with it."
Mr. Kennedy. What was that about ?
Mr. Scott, Then he asked me to come down to the office, and I came
down and there was two fellows in the office.
He wanted me to put the fix in,
Mr. Kennedy. Who was present ?
Mr. Scott. Jimmie Hoffa and Bert Brennan and these two fellows.
Mr. Kennedy. Who were these two fellows ?
Mr. Scott. One of them was Sammie Furness
Mr. Kennedy. Finazzo ?
Mr. Scott. I don't know how you pronounce it.
Mr. Kennedy. We had him as a witness.
The Chairman. How did you pronounce it ?
Mr, Scott, Sammie Furness,
The Chairman, Sammie Furness ?
Mr. Scott. Yes,
Mr, I^NNEDY. He is also known as Sam Finazzo,
The Chairman. We had a Sam Finazzo.
Mr. Kennedy. That is him. He has various names.
The Chairman. Does the witness identify him ?
Mr. Scott. I beg your pardon ?
The Chairman. I am just trying for the record to determine
whether you are talking about the same man.
Mr. Scott. He is a little short fellow, and he is Jewish. That is
what I think he is. And he runs a boxing ring in town there.
The Chairman. Is that the one ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
The Chairman. He ran the boxing ring ?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
The Chairman. Did you ever know Embrel Davidson ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. The prizefighter ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir. I seen him box.
The Chairman, Was he working there at the same place where
Finazzo was ?
Mr. Scott. He boxed in the same ring that he owned.
The Chairman. That Finazzo owned ?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
The Chairman. So that is the man you are talking about ?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13679
The Chaxrman. The one there that runs the boxing show ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Ejennedy. What was the conversation between you when you
went down to the office ?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, Bert wanted me to put a fix in for this Sammie
and this other fellow to run a gambling joint out on the Eight Mile
and Greenfield Road. I told them I couldn't do it. They said I
knew the prosecutor and I should be able to do it. I said, "Well, I
couldn't do it." Then they wanted the fix in for 30 days, for this
fellow to get his money back out that he had invested in clubs.
Mr. Kennedy. Who was this fellow you are talking about?
Mr. ScoTT. Sammie Finazzo or Furniss. I guess the fix was put in
by somebody else besides me, because the place did run better than
30 days.
Mr, Kennedy. What did Bert Brennan mean when he called you up
and asked you if your insurance was paid up?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, he said I was keeping these two fellows from
operating in Oakland County.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever go to the prosecutor in connection with
this?
Mr. ScoTT. Do, I didn't.
Mr. Kennedy. You refused to do so?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, I did, because this Sammie Finazzo had a fellow
out in Oakland County that had put the fix in for the sheriff, and
when I was down there to the office, I told Bert to have the same fellow
put the fix in with the prosecutor.
Mr. Kennedy. Anyway, the fix was put in by someone, because they
were allowed to operate; is that right?
Mr. ScoTT. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa ever speak to you about the grand
jury that was investigating him?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, he did.
Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us what you did about that?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, they were investigating all of the Teamsters'
boys in Detroit, and there was a fellow I went to school with by the
name of Earl Keeler. He either worked for the Detroit News or
was an investigator for the grand jury. He was getting information
and I was to give the information to Jimmie.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you furnish him information?
Mr. ScoTT. I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you give him any information about a man by
the name of Turk Prujanski?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. What information ?
Mr. ScoTT. I told him Turk Prujanski testified in front of the grand
jury that he had paid Jimmie either $5,000 or $10,000 to put the fix
in for a liquor license, to have them keep from taking it away from
him. He was a front for the Bernstein boys.
Mr. Kennedy. What did Jimmie Hoffa say when you told him that?
Mr. ScoTT. Well, he said he would have him taken care of.
The next day a couple of the boys went out to the racetrack and
Turk Prujanski left town.
Mr. Kennedy. That is when he went to
13680 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Scott. California.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Hoffa relate tliis to you, that he was going to
get him sent out of the State?
Mr. Scott. He said he would have these boys take care of him.
Mr. Kennedy. And Prujanski, in fact, leave and go to California?
Mr. Scott. He left Michigan and went to California.
Mr. Ivennedy. Was it ever arranged for him to come back ?
Mr. Scott. They brought him back on a fugitive warrant.
Mr. Kennedy. What happened then ?
Mr. Scott. He would not talk, and they put him in jail for 60 days,
I believe, for contempt of court.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa ever speak to you about Charlie
Harrison, about whom we had some testimony this morning? About
the Manor Bar? Did he ever speak to 3'ou about the Manor Bar?
Mr. Scott. The Manor Bar? He asked me to intercede for the
fellow that owned it to get the license put in his name. His father
was dying of cancer. This Charlie wanted the license put in his
name.
Mr. Kennedy. So what did he ask ?
Mr. Scott. So I said I could not at that time because I only know
one of the commissioners on the liquor-control commission. Well, he
said, "I know one." I said, ""Wlio is that?" And he said, "Mr. Hen-
derson." He said, "Can you do anything with the other fellow?"
I said, "Yes; I can get him to vote for putting the license in his
name," and he said, "I will get Mr. Henderson to vote." Well, it
came up a couple of nights later Jimmie called me about 11 o'clock,
and lie said, "You are not so damn smart," and hung up on me.
]Mr. Kennedy. The fellow had not gotten the liquor license?
Mr. Scott. No ; he did not.
Mr. Kennedy. So Hoffa called you up and said what ?
jMr. Scott. That I am not so damn smart. I called him back and
said, "You are not so smart, either. Your man did not vote for the
damned liquor transfer at all and my man did."
Mr. Kennedy. So what happened then ?
Mr. Scott. Well, then he said — he cooled off a little, and he said,
"Well, what can be done?" I said, "Well, if you keep your nose out
of it, it can be done after the first of the year."
So after the first of the year it was done.
Mr. Kennedy. And he did get the transfer ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever hear mention of Mr. Bushkin or Mr.
Holtzman ?
Mr. Scott. Abe Buslikin worked for Jimmie in the Retail Clerks
Union.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there any discussion about the coin-operated
machines or the cigarette machines that Mr. Bushkin owned in the
various chainstores ?
Mr. Scott. Well, they were supposed to own all the cigarette ma-
chines that was in the supermarkets, but they were having some diffi-
culty with the sales tax division of the revenue department of the
State. They asked me to get it straightened out. Well, I made ar-
rangements for Mr. Bushkin and Mr. Brennan to see Mr. Mintz.
Mr. Kennedy. You made that appointment ?
IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13681
Mr. Scott. Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Was it straightened out ?
Mr. Scott. I believe it was.
Mr. Kennedy. Was there also some effort during the campaign
regarding the Democratic Party? Were there certain efforts to get
nomination papers?
Mr. Scott. Well, at one time they attempted to get all the precinct
delegates elected.
Mr. Kennedy. That was 1950 ?
Mr. Scott. I believe it was.
Mr. Kennedy. What did they do along those lines ?
Mr. Scott. Well, they paid to have petitions circulated.
Mr. Kennedy. "^Vho is "they" ?
Mr. Scott. The Teamsters Union, Mr. Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. What happened ?
Mr. Scott. Well, the fellows that he paid didn't circulate the peti-
tions. They sat down and filled them out by roundrobin at a table.
Mr. Kennedy. And signed their names in in that way ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Plow much were they to be paid for these petitions ?
Mr. Scott. $150 a week.
Mr. Kennedy. Instead of going out and getting them, they filled
the names in ?
Mr. Scott. That is what I understood they did.
Mr. Kennedy. Who did you understand that from?
Mr. Scott. Monroe Lake.
Mr. Kennedy. What was his position ?
Mr. Scott. Well, he just worked at that time for the county board
of auditors on the welfare setup.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa ever speak to you about approaching
a judge in connection with, I believe, Mr. Fletcher — is that his name?
Mr. Scott. Harry Fletcher.
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Scott. He asked me to intercede and see if I could not get a
retrial for him. I think they were sentenced to 20 to 40 years.
Mr. Kennedy. Why did he want you to see if you could get a new
trial ?
Mr. Scott. He knew Harry Fletcher. I guess they were friends.
That is all I know about it.
Mr. Kennedy. Had you known the judge? Is that why he ap-
proached you ?
Mr. Scott. Yes. I did.
Mr. Bellino. We understand that Harry Fletcher was the head of
the Purple Gang in Detroit.
Mr. I^ENNEDY. Had you known the judge ; is that why he approached
you ?
The Chairman. Wait a minute, do you know about him being the
head of a gang in Detroit ?
Mr. Scott. He had that reputation. All the newspapers wrote him
up that way, as the head of the Purple Gang, and he was arrested
in Oakland County by Governor Zigler. He arrested him on the
pretense that he was the fellow that killed one of the State senators.
He got the judge to give 20 to 40 years sentence in order to make
him talk about this senator that was killed.
13682 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. I particularly wanted some testimony regarding
this Purple Gang, or whatever it was, because while that was our in-
formation I wanted to know what you knew about it.
Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Goldwater.
Senator Goldwater. I want to see if I have this right.
This Fletcher was a judge?
Mr. ScoTT. No, he was the fellow that was arrested.
Senator Goldwater. Wliat judge are you talking about? I got
the name of Fletcher.
Mr. ScoTT. Judge Hartrick was the man that sentenced him.
Senator Goldwater. Judge Hartrick was the man you went to see ?
Mr. ScoTT. I did not go see him because there was no use. He
sentenced him and I think he made an agreement with the former
Governor there for appointment on the State supreme court if he
sent these guys to jail for 20 to 50 years and they were sentenced to
that.
Senator Goldwater. Did he get his appointment to the supreme
court ?
Mr. ScoTT. No, he didn't, because they elected Williams.
Senator Goldwater. As Governor?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Goldwater. That judge's name was Hardy ?
Mr. Scott. Hartrick. H-a-r-t-r-i-c-k.
Senator Goldwater. Those judges are elected; is that right?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Senator Goldwater. Would you have felt that you had access to his
office had you wanted to talk to him on this ?
Mr. Scott. I always have had, but there was no use because he was
the one that sentenced him and there were four of them that I can
recall by name that were sentenced.
There was Pete Mahoney, Harry Fletcher, and Mike Selig and
Candy Davis. I think there were 5 of them, but I can only recall the
names of 4.
They all got the same sentence. Then they got out on bond and
they skipped the country, or the State, rather, and they were even-
tually caught.
Senator Goldwater. These members were members of the Purple
Gang that were sentenced ?
Mr. Scott. They were supposed to be.
Senator Goldwater. That is all I have right now.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Curtis.
Senator Curtis. What information do you have as to an under-
standing conceiTiing this sentence with the possible appointment tO'
the supreme court between the Governor and the judge?
Mr. Scott. Well, the Governor and I debated one time a woman
grand jury bill, for the repeal of it, and there was repeal, and after the
debate that was held in the house of representatives, and after the
deb;ite at night the Governor and I went out for something to eat.
I told him I thought it was a rotten sentence over in Oakland
County.
He said, "You know why that was done, don't you ?"
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13683
I said, "No."
He said, "Judge Hartrick wanted an appointment on the supreme
court and I wanted to convict the murderer of Senator Cooper."
Senator Curtis. What Governor told you tliat 'i
Mr. Scott. Governor Zeigler.
Senator Curtis. Where did this conversation take phice ?
Mr. Scott. In the senate cafe.
Senator Curtis. The senate cafe in the capitol building ?
Mr. Scott. In Lansing.
Senator Curtis. When ?
Mr. Scott. It was about midnight or 1 o'clock.
Senator Curtis. What was the date ?
Mr. Scott. I can't tell you the date.
Senator Curtis. What was the year t
Mr. Scoti\ I think it was 1950.
Senator Curtis. What month 'i
Mr. Scott. I can't tell you that.
Senator Curtis. Who else was present ?
Mr. Scott. Just the Governor and I.
Senator Curtis. Tell me just what did the Governor say.
Mr. Scott. I just got through telling you.
Senator Curtis. Yes; but tell me what were the words that he said?
Mr. Scott. The exact words ?
Senator Curtis. As you can remember them.
Mr. Scott. I can't tell you the language he used because he was
quite a scholar.
Senator Curtis. Will you tell me what he said ?
Mr. Scott. I said first, "That was a hell of a sentence you gave them
boys in Oakland County and caused them to get with the grand jury."
He said, "Well, that was done for a reason."
I said, "What was the reason, Governor ?"
He said, "Well, I wanted to convict somebody for the slaying of
Senator Cooper."
And he said, "Judge Hartrick gave them 20 to 50 years and that was
supposed to make them talk."
Senator Curtis. Did he say anything else ?
Mr. Scott. We had a conversation there for a couple of hours.
Senator Curtis. Did he say that he intervened with the judge and
asked for a stiff sentence of this kind ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, he did.
Senator Curtis. Did he say that in return he was offering a place
on the supreme court ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, he did. He made a deal with him.
Senator Curtis. Nobody else was present but you ?
Mr. Scott. The Governor was there.
Senator Curtis. He is not living any more?
Mr. Scott. No, he isn't. Hp wasn't Governor at that time, either.
Senator Curtis. He was not Governor ?
Mr. Scott. No, sir.
Sena tor Curtis. \Vhat position did he hold ?
Mr. Scott. He didn't hold any.
Senator Curtis. Oh, I thought you said he was the Governor.
13684 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Scott. He had been the Governor when these boys were sen-
tenced to jail, but at that time he wasn't Governor no more. Wil-
liams had defeated him and he debated for this one-man grand jury
bill that was no good. I debated with him against the bill and the bill
was killed.
Senator Curtis. Where did this debate take place ?
Mr. ScoTT. In the house, in the capitol.
Senator Curtis. During one of their sessions, or did they just use
the house chambers ?
Mr. Scott. They used the house chambers that night.
Senator Curtis. It was not part of the legislative session ?
Mr. Scott. No, it wasn't, but the bill was up for passage.
Senator Curtis. "VVliere is the judge involved now ?
Mr. Scott. He is on the bench in Oakland County yet.
Senator Curtis. Now, these four men were not being tried for
Cooper's death, were they? They were being tried for something
else?
Mr. Scott. They were tried for robbing a gambling joint. They
charged them with conspiracy. Then they started questioning them
about Cooper's murder.
Senator Curtis. Who was the first person that you told this conver-
sation you had with the Governor? Did you ever tell anybody be-
tween the time it took place and now ?
Mr. Scott. No, I don't believe I did.
Senator Curtis. Never told anyone about it ?
IVIr. Scott. Nobody ever asked me anything about it, so I never said
anything.
Senator Curtis. What led you to being asked about it today?
Mr. Scott. You will have to ask Mr. Kennedy that.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever hear Mr. Hoffa talk to or about Mr.
Anastasia in New York, or Joe Massei ?
Mr. Scott. I heard him call Tony Anastasia one time after he got
through talking to Mr. Bugas.
Mr. Kennedy. "Wlio was Mr. Bugas ?
Mr. ScoTP. Mr. Bugas is the personnel director for the Ford Motor
Co.
Mr. Kennedy. What was he at that time ?
Mr. ScoTT. He was the personnel director at that time. He was a
former FBI director for Michigan.
Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was he calling Anastasia about ? Which Ana-
stasia was it?
Mr. Scott. Tony.
Mr, Kennedy. Where was he calling him ?
JNIr. Scott. In New York.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what it was about ?
Mr. Scott. About some trucks. The Ford Motor Co. was going to
have some trouble in delivering their cars and Jimmy was trying to
straighten it out.
Mr. Kennedy. Was this in connection with a trucking company that
Anastasia had an interest in ?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever hear him talk about or to Joe Massei ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13685
Mr. ScoiT. He told me that Joe Massei was tlie head Dago in Mich-
igan.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever hear him talking to him ?
Mr. Scott. Once when he called him in Florida.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, when did you break with the Teamsters or with
Mr. Hoffa, Mr. Scott'^
Mr. SooTT. July 2, 1952.
Mr. Kennedy. What was that in connection with ?
Mr. Scott. I was secretary-treasurer of the Michigan Federation of
Labor, and I quit. He said I couldn't quit. He said nobody quits
him.
Mr. Kennedy. Is this Mr. Hoff a ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes.
I said, "I will quit."'
He said, "I will break both your arms and legs."'
I said, "Don't forget you have 2 arms and 2 legs, too."
That is all we had to say and I quit.
Mr. Kennedy. Why had you quit ?
Mr. Scott. Because him and Bert Brennan came into an executive
board meeting and insisted upon changing the constitution.
Mr. Kennedy. Would this have deprived you of some of the powers
that you had ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. And given them to someone else ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. So you quit the whole thing ; is that right ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Now, you have had a stroke, have you, Mr. Scott?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that ?
Mr. Scott. In March of 1953.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you a member of the Barbers Union ?
Mr. Scott. I was.
Mr. Kennedy. In March of 1953
The Chairman. Did you say 1933 or 1953 ?
Mr. SooTT. 1953.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you a member of the Barbers Union ?
Mr. Scott. I was.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you a member of the Barbers Union up to the
time you testified last year ?
Mr. ScoiT. I was.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you been expelled now from the Barbers
Union ?
Mr. Scott. I can't say whether I have or haven't. The court has
restrained them from expelling me.
Mr. Kennedy. They took action against you, however, after you
testified here ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, they did.
Mr. Kennedy. For what reason did they take action against you ?
Mr. Scott. Well, 2 weeks after I went back from here I was in
the old Conoly Bar and 3 business agents and the secretary was in
there and an international officer.
He said, "We are going to expel you."
21243— 58— rt. 36 27
13686 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
I said, "What for?"
He said, "You will find out."
I said, "Well, what is it for ?"
He said, "You belong- to another union."
I said, "You want to be sure you can prove it when you prefer
the charges."
Mr. Kennedy, So it was going to be for dual unionism; is that
right ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. What other union were you supposed to belong to?
Mr. ScoTT. The State Barbers Association.
IMr. Kennedy. Were you in fact a member of the State Barbers
Association?
Mr. Scott. No ; I haven't been since 1947.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a withdrawal card in 1947 ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, I did.
Mr. Kennedy. You were also able to obtain the ledger sheet show-
ing the last payment into that organization, the State Barbers Associa-
tion, was on July 28, 1947 ?
Mr. ScoTT. That is right.
The Chairman. I hand you a photostatic copy of a card. Will
you examine it and state if you identify it ?
Mr. ScoTT. That is a withdrawal card.
The Chairman. It may be made exhibit 'No. 23.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 23" for refer-
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13723.)
The CiTAiR]\rAN. I do not know whether you can identify this, or
not, but I hand you what purports to be a photostatic copy of a ledger
sheet reportedly showing the payment of your dues and the time
you retired. I do not know whether you have seen that, or not.
Have you ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, I have.
The Chairman, Are you familiar with it ?
Mr, Scott. Yes, I am.
The Chairman. What is it ?
Mr. Scott. It is the ledger sheet, or it is a photographic copy of
the original sheet showing the years I paid dues to them, 1943, 44,
45, 46, and part of 1947.
The Chairman. It may be made exhibit No. 24.
The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 24" for refer-
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13724.)
The Chairman. There is some writing on there that indicates that
you retired, a withdrawal is noted on there.
Mr. Scott. Yes. In 1947 I was working for the Teamsters Union
out in Pontiac and the officers office was next door.
I went over to pay my dues. He said, "You don't have to pay
dues any more. You are not barbering, so we are going to put you
on a retirement card."
So they did.
The Chairman. They refer here to a retiring card, not to a with-
drawal card. Are they all the same ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In other words, you retired from the union?
IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13687
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. From the association ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
The Chairman. From what?
Mr. Kennedy. From the State Barbers Association ?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
The Chairman. Is that a union ?
Mr. Scott. It is a State association of barbers.
Mr. Kennedy. They chximecl that that was a union and you were
guilty of dual unionism ; is that right ?
Mr. Scott. That is what they claimed.
Mr. Kennedy. They wrote you a letter April 14, 1958, from local
552 of the Barbers ; is that right ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. They wrote you on May 13, 1958, notifying you
that the trial board of local 552 had found you guilty as charged?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. That is despite the fact that you had the with-
drawal card?
Mr. Scott. That is right, and that was submitted as evidence at
the trial.
Mr. Kennedy. Then on May 16, 1958, 3 days later, you received a
telegram notifying you that the trial committee's report would be
read at the meeting of Monday evening. May 19; is that right?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
The Chairman. Is this a Teamsters Union you were expelled from ?
Mr. Scott. No. It is a State association and the Barbers Union
is the one I was expelled from.
Mr. Kennedy. Then you tried to send your dues in, did you not?
Mr. Scott. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. And they refused to accept your dues ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Goldwater. Before you leave that point, Mr. Chairman, let
me get something straight.
Were you a member of the Barbers Association when you joined
the Teamsters ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Goldwater. How long have you lived in Michigan ?
Mr. Scott. All my life so far.
Senator Goldwater. How long have you been a barber, before you
joined the Teamsters ?
Mr. Scott. I got my license in 1926.
Senator Goldwater. When did you join the Teamsters ?
Mr. Scott. In 1945.
Senator Goldwater. Was that 552 ?
Mr. Scott. No. 552 is the Barbers Union.
Senator Goldwater. Plow big was the local that you joined ?
Mr. Scott. The Barbers Union ?
Senator Goldwater. No, the Teamsters ?
Mr. Scott. Well, I would say there is probably 3,000 members in it.
Senator Goldwater. When did you become an officer ?
Mr. Scott. In 1947 or 1948.
Senator Goldwater. You have been a member for 2 years and you
became an officer of a local of some 3,000 ?
13688 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Goldwater. A^Tiy did you join the Teamsters ?
Mr. ScoTT. Because I was oli'ered a job to go to work for them. I
was working at the Barbers Union as a business agent. George Husk,
who was the then secretary-ti-easurer, said that Jimmy Hoffa would
have to see me. I said, "What for ? ■ '
He said, "Come on, I will take you over there."
So he took me over there and Dan Keating was there in the office
and Bert Brennan.
flimmy said, "I want you to go to work for me."
I said, "AVell I am satisfied where I am at."
He said, "Well, we want you to go to work out in Pontiac. We are
having some difficulty out there and we would like you to go to work
out thei-e."
So I went to work out there.
Senator Goldwater. That is all I have.
Mr. Kennedy. I just want to get the situation finished about what
happened in the Barbers Union.
They then had the meeting; is that correct ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You have been ousted from the union and you are
now on appeal ; is that right ?
Mr. Scott. Well, I was ousted, but then I went into court and the
court restrained them from kicking me out.
Mr. Kennedy. Xow, the evidence against you was the fact that you
were listed by the Legislative Agents' Register as of January 1958,
as "Scott, Robert, capacity, legislative agent and member of the State
Barbers Association."
Mr. Scott. Tliat is correct. But they did not introduce that at the
trial.
The only thing they introduced was a throw sheet that I had when
I was running for the legislature, and I said I was a charter member.
Mr. Kennedy. You are a charter member i
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. What you meant to put on here also was that you
were a charter member?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. You just are not an active member and have not i)aid
dues since 1947 and you had your withdrawal card ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. They ousted you anyway ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. I thought it was of significance, Mr. Chairman. We
have had some testimony in connection with the Barbers Union and
Teamsters Union in the past. This man appeared before the com-
mittee and testified.
Shortly afterward they took action against him. Of course, we
have had testimony in the last few days where people have committed
all sorts of crimes and have not been ousted.
The Chairman. Let me present to you wliat purports to be a plio-
tostatic copy of a telegram and ask you to examine it and state if j'ou
identify it.
Mr. Scott. I do.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13689
The Chairman-. Is that the telegram you received ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir; I received that on a Friday night about 8
o'clock.
The Chairman. That may be marked "Exhibit No. 25."
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 25" for ref-
erence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13725.)
Mr. Kennedy. The other officer that you mentioned, Mr. Keating,
was ultimately found guilty of extortion ; is that correct, or receiving
money from employers ?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes; he was. I don't know what the charge exactly
was.
Mr. Kennedy. Also, Marroso, Nicoletti, and Linteau?
Mr. ScoTT. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that they continued to receive
their salaries ?
Mr. ScoTT. Dan Keating told me that when he was in the House of
Corrections.
Mr. Kennedy. What did he say ?
Mr, Scott. He told me he was getting paid and Sam Marroso and
Louis Linteau were getting paid at the same time.
Mr. Kennedy. I might say that even before we knew the fact that
these people were receiving salaries after they had been convicted, we
received this information from Mr. Scott. We checked into it and it
was one of the other matters that we found was correct.
The Chairman. Mr. Scott, have we found that this action was taken
against you in the Barbers Union simply because you testified down
here?
Mr. Scott. I would say so.
The Chairman. Sir?
Mr. Scott. I would say, "Yes."
The Chairman-. You know of no other reason ?
Mr. Scott. No, sir.
The Chairman. You never have had a complaint filed against you
before ?
Mr. Scott. No, sir; because I was a former business agent for
them and a legislative agent. I lobbied for it.
The Chairman. You never had any problem with them before ?
Mr. Scott. No, sir ; not at all.
The Chairman. Immediately after you testified down here?
Mr. Scott. Two weeks.
The Chairman. They took this action against you ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Kennedy. I think that about summarizes it, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Scott has testified, went over some of the material he testified
to the last time.
Also, Mr. Chairman, he gave some new information that we did
not have before and which has some significance in view of what
we have had developed over the period of the last 6 months.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions of Mr. Scott?
Senator Curtis. Yes,
Who brought the action to oust you from the Barbers Union ?
Mr. Scott. The secretary-treasurer.
13690 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Senator Curtis. He relied upon a provision in their constitution
which prohibits dual membership ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Do you know of any other instances where that
provision has been invoked against an individual ?
Mr, ScoTF, No; I don't. But I know a lot of members that have
dual membership.
Senator Curtis. Is it known to the National Barbers Union?
Mr. Scott. It is known to the secretary-treasurer, the same one that
preferred the charges against me.
The Chairman. Are there any further questions ?
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Keating or any of the other individuals
ever indicate to you that they kicked back any of this money they
received from these employers ?
Mr. Scott. Just Mr, Keating was the only one.
Mr. Kennedy, What did he tell you ?
Mr. ScoTT. He said that he shook Heck de Tavenier down for
$35,000 to give it to Jimmy Hoffa.
Mr. Kennedy. He told you that?
Mr. Scott. That is what he said.
Senator Curtis. Will you look at this telegram, the photostat.
That appears to be a telegram addressed to you telling you when
the membership would act ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Senator Curtis. Did you appear ?
Mr. Scott. Yes ; I did.
Senator Curtis. Did they permit you to speak ?
Mr. Scott. Hardly, but I did get in a few words and they took a
vote and the first vote was in my favor.
Senator Curtis. How many members were present ?
Mr. Scott. I would say a hundred.
Senator Cut.tis. AVliat was the first vote ?
Mr. Scott. Total?
Senator Curtis. You said it was in your favor. How did it come
out?
Mr. Scott. They voted not to sustain the trial board.
Senator Curtis. How many votes did you get ?
Mr. Scott. That I couldn't tell you.
Senator Curtis. Did they call the roll ?
Mr. Scott. No.
Senator Curtis. On the first vote how did they do it ?
Mr. Scott. Voice vote.
Senator Curtis. The Chair announced that it was in your favor?
Mr. Scott. He didn't announce it was in my favor, but everybody
there knew it was and he kept talking and finally he said we are
going to take another vote. He said that vote is questionable, so we
will have another vote. Then they had a standing vote.
The Chairman. Did anybody vote for you then ?
Mr. Scott. There was just a vei-y few.
The Chairman. When they had to stand up and be counted?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Senator Curtis, How do you explain the change in sentiment be-
tween the first vote and the second vote ?
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13691
Mr. Scott. Well, fear, more than anything else.
Senator Curtis. Who were they afraid of i
Mr. Scott. Business agents and the officers.
Senator Curtis. All right, name them.
Mr. Scott. George Husk, Elmer Albrecht, Lawrence Miller, Moro-
sky, and a fellow by the name of Johnson.
Senator Curtis. They are all officers and agents of the Barbers
Union ?
Mr. Scott. That is right.
Senator Curtis. What is the number of that local ?
Mr. Scott. 552.
Senator Curtis. Where is it located ?
Mr. Scott. In Detroit.
Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Goldwater. This does not relate to this particular series
of questions, but we have not had an opportunity to have a man like
you who has lived in Detroit, Mich., for such a length of time. I
would like to ask this question: Is the numbers racket going on in
Detroit?
Mr. Scott. That I would not care to testify to, because I could not
testifj'^ honestly and say it was or it was not.
Senator Goldwater. To your laiowledge, does the numbers racket
go on in the factories in Detroit ?
Mr. Scott. Well, as recently as a month ago they arrested people
for being in that business.
Senator Goldwater. In the factories ?
Mr. Scott. I couldn't tell you whether it was in the factories or
on the street.
Senator Goldwater. Is there any other form of gambling going on
in the factories ?
Mr. Scott. That I couldn't tell you.
Senator Goldwater. You don't loiow ?
Mr. Scoi^. I don't know.
Senator Goldwater. That is all.
The Chairman. Are there any other questions of this witness ?
If not, thank you very much.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, did you receive any of this money from
Mr, Keating ?
Mr. Williams. Before you resume the questioning of Mr. Hoffa-
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Scott, would you stay around ? You might have
to defend yourself again.
Mr. Williams. Mr. Chairman, I want to call to your attention, sir,
that this witness has testified for, by my count, approximately 44 min-
utes, and the first 34 minutes of his testimony was simply a restate-
ment of what he said on September 26, 1957, in the transcript begin-
ning at page 5582 and ending at page 5613.
Mr. Kennedy. That is not right.
Mr. Williams. May I finish ?
The Chairman. What is the purpose of this? If we want to get
the testimony — I don't know what the point is.
Mr. Williams. I think I can make the point, Mr. Chairman, if you
will just allow me another minute.
In the interim report of this committee, the testimony of this wit-
ness was summarized, and I refer to the interim report that came out
13692 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
earlier this year, at pages 244 and 245. So I submit, Mr. Chairman,
always respectfully to you, sir, that there could have been no legisla-
tive purpose in calling this witness. I also submit to you, sir, and
again always respectfully to you, that the recall of this witness and
the rehash of this testimony constitutes an abuse of the legislative
power of inquiry.
I say again that this is demonstrative of the fact that this is really
a legislative trial.
The Chairman. Now let the Chair and you have an understanding.
Mr. Williams. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. This investigation is going to proceed. We just as
well make up our minds.
Mr. Williams. I know that. Senator. I have no power to do any-
thing except with your permission to make such observations as you
permit me to make for this record.
The Chairman. I'm going to permit the counsel, of course, to pre-
sent anything that he feels he should present to the committee, but
we have settled the matter and there is no use to keep bringing it up.
That is why I am saying this investigation is going to proceed. You
say it has no legislative purpose. I wholly disagree with you. The
unions should not be run in the fashion that this testimony shows one
is being run.
Just because a man comes down here and gives testimony before a
legislative committee that he is expelled from a union, if that is proper
practices, I don't know what decency is. That testimony, as well as
other, is very important, because if your client has been spending union
money, as this witness testified he has been, that is nothing but corrup-
tion, and we do have a legislative purpose.
The Congress is going to try to legislate some of these crooks out of
this business.
Mr. Williams. You and I agree wholeheartedly on this. Senator.
My point is that it was a rehash of old testimony that was given here
a year ago. My point further is, Mr. Chairman, that there is no testi-
mony that there is any casual relationship between the expulsion of
this man from his union and any activity of anyone in the Interna-
tional Brotherhood of Teamsters.
The Chairman. How do you know we are not going to show that ?
I can't show you everything in 10 minutes.
Mr. Williams. I would say up to now we have been guilty of the
logic of post hoc ; ergo propter hoc, that something took place because
he testified, that therefore that is the cause of it.
The Chairman. I suppose that is the reason he was turned out.
Mr. Williams. I have no idea why he was turned out. After hear-
ing him, I still have no idea.
Senator Ives. I would like to ask the distinguished counsel how
many labor relations matters he has been in, in connection with litiga-
tion. Is he an expert in labor relations ?
Mr. Williams. I am certainly not an expert in labor relations, but
I feel I am qualified to make observations on due process of law.
Senator Ives. What I would like to bring out in this relation is
this : I know you are not an expert in labor relations, you don't con-
tend to be, that is not your field. You are, however, one of the few
outstanding criminal lawyers in the United States. I would like to
point out that you are here not as a labor relations representative in
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13693
any way, shape, or manner, or representing here from the standpoint
of labor relations, but as a criminal lawyer defending the Teamsters.
Now kindly reconcile that,
Mr. Williams. I want to correct you, first of all, Senator, since
you have seen fit to characterize me. I am not
Senator Ives. You don't deny it, do you ?
Mr. Williams. I am a trial lawyer, Senator Ives. I have been a
trial lawyer all of my professional life. I try cases. I try them
according to my lights and the limits of integrity. I am here acting
within the limits of my integrity here. So long as I feel that any
client that I have is being abused, I shall speak up.
Senator Ives. I would not argue with you on that point, but you
don't deny that you are one of the few outstanding criminal lawyers
in the United States, do you ?
The Chairman. Gentlemen, that is not a legislative matter as to the
ability or character of practice that Mr. Williams has. Let's move
along with the investigation. Mr. Williams has a perfect right to be
here, as long as he respects the committee, he has a right to be here, and
counsel his client with reference to legal matters. The Chair, when
Mr. Williams presents anything to the committee, the Chair will rule
on it. But where we have ruled and ruled I think that should end it.
Proceed with the interrogation.
Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, could I ask Mr. Scott a question be-
fore he departs ?
The Chairman. Yes.
Senator Cltrtis. Mr. Scott, you testified about intervening with the
Oovernor to receive clemency for people charged or convicted of of-
fenses. Did you even intervene with the Governor for anyone other
than a member of the Teamsters Union ?
Mr. Scott. I did not testify that I did intei*vene. I was asked to
intervene, but I did not.
Senator Curtis. You did not intervene?
Mr. Scott. I did not intervene.
Senator Curtis. Were you ever asked to intervene for anybody other
than members of the Teamsters ?
Mr. Scott. Wlien I was secretary -treasurer, yes.
Senator Curtis. By whom ?
Mr. Scott. I couldn't recall now.
Senator Curtis. Could you tell me something about the circum-
stances of who it was ?
Mr. Scott. Well, a fellow met me in the lobby one time and asked
me to intervene for a fellow that was going to be extradited, and I told
him I did not have any jurisdiction.
Senator Curtis. Extradited from where to where ?
Mr. Scott. From the State of Michigan to Minnesota, I believe.
Senator Curtis. It was not Wisconsin ?
Mr. Scott. No.
(At this point. Senator Church withdrew from the hearing room.)
Senator Curtis. When the Governor had this conversation with
you, he knew that you were active in politics, did he not ?
Mr. Scott. He knew that I was secretary -treasurer of the Michi-
gan Federation of Labor, and I was a legislative agent for that body.
Senator Curtis. Were you of the same political party as Governor
Selig here ?
13694 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. Scott. No, I was not.
Senator Cirtis. He knew that you were not ?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
Senator Curtis. Still he told you about liis commitment to give an
appointment to the svipreme court on the basis of a sentence passed ?
Mr. Scott. At the time he told me this, he was not Governor.
Senator Curtis. That is all.
The Chairman. Mr. Scott, you will remain under your present
subpena, subject to being recalled. Do you accept that recognizance?
Mr. Scott. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. In the event anyone undertakes to intimidate or
threaten or harm you in anyway, you advise this committee about it
promptly. We will give you all the protection we can, I have about
reached the conclusion that there are efforts being made, beyond any
doubt, to intimidate witnesses that this committee has before it. I ask
you to give this committee any information you have that may come to
your attention along that line.
Mr. Kennedy. Just in connection with that, Mr. Chairman, I might
ask Mr. Scott if he knows anything about it — when did you first hear
about the situation involving Frank Kierdorf ?
Mr. Scott. The night it happened, at 5 minutes to 2 in the morning,
the police came to my house and woke my wife and I both up. He
asked my wife if I was home, and she said "Yes." He said could he
see me ? She said, "Well, he is in bed."
He said, "Well, I would like to see him." So I came downstairs
and he put his hands on my shoulder, and he said "God, I am glad to
see you." I said "Why ?" He said, "Well, I thought you just walked
into the hospital all burned."
Mr. Kennedy. What had been said to make him believe that?
Mr. Scott. Well, this fellow first mentioned the name Bob 2 or 3
times when they questioned him, and then he said his name was John
Doe and he was from Washington.
Mr. Kennedy. They had not been able to identify Kierdorf ?
Mr. Scott. They could not identify him.
Mr. Kennedy. And the first person that they thought of was
Mr. Scott (continuing) . Was me.
Senator Goldwater. Could I ask counsel a question? Have you
talked with Judge Hartrick, or whatever his name is ?
Mr. Kennedy. "Wlioishe?
Senator Goldwater. The Judge Mr. Scott mentioned in connection
with the Governor's promise to give him a higher job if he did a cer-
tain thing.
Mr. Kennedy. No. I don't think that is directly involved.
Senator Goldwater. I don't know whether that is directly involved
or not, but I think it involved the honesty of a former chief executive
of Michigan. While I don't see any need of bringing the judge down
here, I do think in fairness to this man's family and his reputation,
that we get an affidavit.
Would that be possible, to get an affidavit from the judge as to
the testimony of Mr. Scott ?
The Chairman. Sure. We will undertake to do that. The judge,
of course, or anyone else whose name is mentioned here, if they feel
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13695
like any testimony lias been given, derogatory to them, or which re-
flects upon them, by request will be given an opportunity to testify.
That is the rule of the committee.
Senator Goldwater. I thank the chairman. I think that is being
fair,
Mr. Kennedy. I just got a note here saying Plartrick dropped dead
in California today. That answers it.
The Chairman. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Scott, I want to tell you how much we appre-
ciate your help and assistance.
TESTIMONY OF JAMES R. HOTTA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL,
EDWARD BENNETT WILLIAMS, GEORGE FITZGERALD, AND
DAVID PREVIANT— Resumed
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Scott has testified regarding the repairs done
on your home, and his conversation with Mr. Keating that union
funds were used to make repairs on your home.
Can you tell us anything about that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I had Dan Keating handle the remodeling of my cot-
tage. Keating presented bills to me. I paid what bills he pre-
sented to me, and I paid them.
Mr. Kennedy. How did you pay for them ?
Mr. HoFFA. Cash.
Mr. Kennedy. You must have some of those bills.
Mr. HoFFA. I do not,
Mr. Kennedy. Did you turn some of those bills over to the com-
mittee ?
Mr HoFFA. I don't believe I did.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you ?
Mr. HoFFA. I say I don't believe I did. Because I don't believe I
had them,
Mr. Kennedy. What did you do with them ?
Mr HoFFA. I would normally destroy them if I had the bills, after
I paid them.
Mr. Kennedy. You said you had the bills,
Mr. HoFFA. No, I didn't, I said that I had the bills and paid the
bills. I don't have the bills.
Mr. Kennedy, What did you do with the bills ?
Mr. HoFFA, I destroyed them.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any records whatsoever showing that
you paid for this ?
(At this point, Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing
room.)
Mr, HoFFA. I have only my word.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr, Hoffa, we have had that before,
Mr. HoFFA. I paid the bills in cash. I suggest that you call Keat-
ing and ask Keating whether or not I paid the bills, those that were
presented to me.
Mr. Kennedy. We called Mr. Keating and he respectfully declined
on the ground that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate him.
Mr. HoFFA. I cannot be responsible for Mr. Keating's answer to this
committee.
Mr. Kennedy. How much were the bills ? How much did you pay
out?
13696 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HoFFA. I talked to Keating recently and asked him what he
thought the estimation for the remodeling was, and he said the best
he could recall it was less than i^:),0()0. That is what he told me.
Mr. Kennedy. And you don't have any records showing that you
paid them ?
Mr. HoFi A. Xo ; I don't.
Mr. Kennedy. You didn't use any union funds to pay any of the
bills at your home ^
Mr. HoFiw. 1 don't know of any union funds that were paid for
my home. 1 can't think of any bills that were submitted to the union.
I think they were all sul)mitte(l to me.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't know of any union funds that were used^
Mr. HoFFA. I don't know of uny union funds. Unless you have some
records that can refresh my memory I would say no, because I don't
know of any ort'hand.
Mr. Kennedy. I^nfortunately, all the records for that period of time
of the union have been destroyed, so we don't have those.
What about at your home at the Lake 13 Hunting and Fishing
Club^ Did you use any union funds in connection with that?
Mr. HoFFA. I did not use any union funds j^ersonally, except to buy
some gasoline, probably, for my car to drive up there. But the re-
modeling of the i>lace, the business, I believe the records will show that
it came out of Hobren, to the best of my knowledge.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the salaries of the individuals who were
working up there, such as Mr. Alvy Bush and Mr. O'Brien, about
whom we had testimony la^;t year (
Mr. HoFFA. Bush worked at the Camp 13, so did O'Brien work at
Camp 13.
Mr. Kenneda'. During the period of time they were being paid out
of union fun.ds, their expenses for gasoline, et cetera, were also being
paid by the union, for a total of $3,771.25 ?
Mr. HoFFA. They worked at the camp. What the total was, I don't
know.
(At this i)oint. Senator McClellan entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kenneda". They were doing work for you and Mr. Brennan,
isn't that correct ?
Mr. HoFFA. They were doing work for the camp, which was to be
used as a recreation point for the business agents involved.
Mr. Kenneda*. ^^lio owns the camp ?
Mr. HoFFA. I told you. Hobren Co.
Mr. Kennedy. Who owns Hobren Co. ?
Mr. HoFFA. My wife and Mr. Brennan's wife.
Mr. Kenneda'. This is a camp that is owned by your wife, and Mr.
Brennan's wife, and union business agents while on salary were work-
ing there at the camp, isn't that correct ?
Mr. HoFFA. They did.
Mr. Kenneda-. This cost the union, to work at your wife's and Mr.
Brennan's wife's camp — that is the way you want to describe it —
has cost the union $3,771.25. Are vou going to reimburse the union
for this?
Mr. HoFFA. O'Brien and Bush took care of their obligations with
the union and kept their barns and their contracts up, and regarding
the question of them being up there, if they were actually on union
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13697
time and not on their time on the weekend or on a holiday, I will dis-
cuss the question and decide what I am going to do with it.
(Mr. Kennedy. It was developed last year. They were working up
there for a period of 3 months. It cost the union this amount of
money. I am just bringing it in in the context of Mr. Scott's testi-
mony, that the same kind, of thing was going on back in 1940, that you
were using union funds in connection with your own property. Here
is another situation where we can prove it by the records. Some
$3,771.25 of union funds were used in connection with your and Mr.
Brennan's camp.
Mr. PIoFFA. I think both of the individuals told you that they
worked up there. It wasn't any secret.
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. Are you going to reimburse the
union for the money ? Do you think that this money from the union
is just to use as you see fit, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. HoFFA. Money was used for the camp, and the camp is used for
the recreation of certain business agents who are part of the club, and
the others can join.
Mr. Kennedy. Are you. going to reimburse the union ?
Mr. HoFFA. I will discuss the matter with Mr, Brennan and decide
what to do about it.
The Chairman. Senator Kennedy ?
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoif a, a number of witnesses have taken the
fifth amendment before this committee, with whom you are involved
in transactions. The records are never in existence. Your deals were
always in cash. You refer us to the other witness and they take the
fifth amendment. It seems to me that you liave surrounded yourself
in this hearing with these witnesses, all of whom take the fifth amend-
ment, and you don't have any records.
We only have your word as to what happened. You operate in
cash. It seems to me, then, in a sense that you are taking the fifth
amendment. Tliat is the elfect of it.
Mr. PIoFFA. That isn't true. Senator.
Senator Kennedy, Mr. Hoffa, if you tell us about Mr. Bushkin, for
example, that he loaned you $5,000 in cash, and you paid him back in
cash, and we ask for records, and you don't have any. You refer us
then to Mr. Bushkin, and he takes the fifth amendment in regard to
that transaction. Mr. Keating, who we have just been inquiring about,
$1 ■4,000, once again you said there are no records. Then we ask Mr.
Keating, and he takes the fifth amendment. We go through all of
these witnesses.
Mr. Brennan takes the fifth amendment when we ask him about the
gambling. You don't have any records yourself. You don't tell us
who you bet on, what horses won, you have no records. It is all in
cash. We ask your partner in the transaction, and he takes the fifth
amendment. It seems to me what we have here, in a sense, is a per-
version of the fifth amendment in order to protect you.
If you want to be protected yourself, it seems to me you ought to
operate so that you will not be exposed to suspicion ; it seems to me that
you should operate and keep bills and write out checks and proceed,
as most people do who permit their financial transactions to be sub-
jected to ordinary scrutiny. Your accountant comes in and has no
records. All of the people that you do business with, most of them,
13698 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
whom we have interrogated, all take the fifth amendment. Then
you feel that the committee is carrying on a vendetta against you.
It seems to me you have exposed yourself to this inquiry by failing
to keep normal business records, and being associated with people who,
when asked the questions, have to take the fifth amendment.
Senator Ives. If the Senator will yield, I would like to remind the
Senator of an old mathematical axiom which should not be forgotten,
that things equal to the same thing are equal to each other.
Senator Kennedy. Do you want to comment, Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. HoFFA. I have no comment whatsoever on a man's right to take
the fifth amendment, except the statements I have already made, that
they have their own conscience and must decide whether or not they
want to discuss matters concerning questions asked here.
Senator Kennedy. But you have involved yourself in a number of
witnesses to whom you refer us, who take the fifth amendment on what
is happening to union funds. I have a list of about 13 witnesses with
whom you have been involved, who all come down to this hearing and,
whenever we ask them any questions they take the fifth amendment.
The point I am trying to make is that, in a sense, this multiple use
of the fifth amendment is, in a sense, a fifth amendment for you, be-
cause you either don't recall or have no records or you turn us over to
somebody who takes the fifth amendment.
Mr. Williams. Senator, I don't know whether that is a question
or not.
Senator Kennedy. No ; it is a statement, in a sense, Mr. Williams.
The ])oint I am attempting to make is that you suggested we are carry-
ing on from the beginning a vendetta against Mr. Hoifa. Tlie point
I am attempting to make is that he involved himself, keeps no records ;
his transactions are all in cash ; he destroys bills ; he refers us to his
opposite partner in the transaction ; and he takes the fifth amendment.
The $62,000 that he is alleged to have won, we have no records of it.
We ask Mr. Brennan about it and he takes the fifth amendment. That
is, year after year, Mr. Hoffa is winning. I know very few horse
winners who win year after year.
Mr. WiLLL\]MS. Senator, I have heard of people who do not agree
with the Supreme Court's feeling about the fifth amendment and who
subscribe to the feeling that guilt may be inferred from the invocation
of the fifth amendment. But this is the first time I ever heard of guilt
being inferred from somebody else's invocation of the fifth amendment.
Senator Kennedy. I am putting it forward as an original thesis
that Mr. Hoffa, surrounding himself with people who take the fifth
amendment, sugirests to me he is taking the fifth amendment because
he has no records, he cannot recall, or it was in cash and he has no
evidence of it, or he turns us over to a witness who takes the fifth
amendment.
The Chairman. iVll right. Proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you receive any kickbacks from Mr. Keating,
Linteau, Marosso, and Nicoletti, from local 614 ?
Mr. Hoffa. I received no money from the individuals mentioned on
any kickbacks because I don't know whether they received kickbacks.
Mr. Kennedy. A number of themi plead guilty for receiving money
from employers. Did you receive a part of that money?
Mr. Hoffa. I did not.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13699
Mr. Kennedy. AVhy were you so solicitous of these individuals who
destroyed their union trust, so that they received a total of $114,719.32.
After we made an investigation last year, some of these people — some
of them had been paid while in jail, and continued to receive the
money. So, the total as of this time is $114,719.32 in outright salary
that these people received after they were convicted of extortion ?
The Chairman. Is that exclusive of the legal fees that were paid?
Mr. Kennedy. That is correct, and exclusive of some pensions they
were then put on, which we will now put in. Why were you so
solicitous of these people, Mr. Ploffa? Were you afraid they would
expose you ; that you had to pay their legal fees ; that you had to pay
them while in jail? Do you think they would come forward with
information and expose you ?
Mr. HoFTA. I was not charged with any crime connected with them,
nor was I on trial. I was not afraid they were going to expose me,
because they have nothing to expose. But, insofar as they were con-
cerned, we felt — I felt they had been with the union sufficient time,
worked the hours they had worked, knew their families, and decided
to recommend that they be taken care of, and we did.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, if you are looking around for charitable
organizations to contribute union funds to, I am sure you can get a
better group than four individuals who violated their union trust.
They received money from employers. This was not people out on
the picket line who got into a fight or something. This was people
who received money from employers. How can you possibly explain
your being so solicitous for them, unless you received some of the
money yourself ?
(At this point, Senator Goldwater withdrew from the hearing-
room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Can you explain that ?
Mr. Hoffa. I think I have made my statement.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't have anything else to add to it ?
Mr. Hoffa. Nothing.
Mr. Kennedy. Then, when they got out of jail, they continued to
receive their money, all from union funds? Do you have anything
to say to that?
Mr. Hoffa. I have made the statement that I care to make for that
answer, unless there is some other question.
Mr. Kennedy. I am trying to find out if you don't have some other
explanation for it, but you don't have any. Were you and Mr. Marosso,
or the union and Mr. Marosso, in any business after he got out of
jail?
Mr. Hoffa. I don't believe the union was in any business with Ma-
rosso. I think that I was in — I either — wait a minute. Either we
started to have some business arrangements together or we did have.
I am not quite sure.
Mr. Kennedy. What was this in connection with?
Mr. Hoffa. I think he was going to build some homes or something.
Mr. Kennedy. ^Yl^ere was that?
Mr. Hoffa. In Detroit, I believe it was. I am not sure whether or
not we ever went through with the situation.
(At this point, Senator Goldwater entered the hearing room.)
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know anything about the Comstock Corp.
in Las Vejras ?
13700 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Mr. HOFFA. No.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know of his interest in that ?
Mr. HoFFA. I knew that he worked there.
Mr. IvENNEDY. Did you know he was interested in getting financing
for that organization, for tlie Comstock Corp. ?
Mr. HoFFA. He didn't ask me for any.
Mr. IvENNEDY. He did not?
Mr. IIoFPA. He did not ask me for any.
Mr. Kennedy. Did he ask anybody in tlie union that you know of?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe he did.
Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if he was interested in getting any
financing from the union for the Comstock Corp. ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe he ever asked me for it. If he aske<d
somebody else, I don't know.
Mr. Kennedy. Were you told he was interested in it ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't think I was.
Mr. Ivennedy. You were not?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe so.
Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any conversations with anyone
regarding financing this organization out in Las Vegas ?
Mr. HoFFA. As a matter of fact, I didn't even know exactly what he
was building out there, except that I think he was working as a super-
intendent of a building. I met him in the airport one day and that
is what he told me he was doing.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Kennedy, Curtis, and Gold water.)
Mr. I^NNEDY. Did anybody from the union ever discuss this with
you then ?
Mr. HoFFA. I don't believe they did.
Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember that ?
]VIr. HoFFA. I don't believe they did. They may have but I don't
believe they ever did.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, can I put on the rest of the figures
that Messrs. Linteau, Keating, Marroso received in addition to the
$114,000?
TESTIMONY OF JEROME S. ADLERMAN— Resumed
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Adlerman, did any of these individuals receive
any additional money other than the $114,000 ?
Mr. Adlerman. We have a record showing that Mr. Louie D. Lin-
teau received $11,200.11.
Mr. Kennedy. "\^nien was that ?
Mr. Adlerman. That was in October 1957.
Mr. Kennedy. As what ?
Mr. Adlerman. That was supposed to be severance pay or pension
fund.
The Chairman, Wliat fund was it paid out of ?
Mr. Adlerman. It was paid out of a Joint Council 43 pension fund.
They had policies of insurance.
Mr. Kennedy. How much had the union paid into that ?
Mr. Adlerman. In the period 1953 to 1957, 4-year period, the union
premiums amount to $7,745.22 and the contributions of Mr. Linteau,
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13701
Mr. Kennedy. The union contributed how much again ?
Mr. Adlerman. $7,745.22.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Linteau ?
Mr. Adlerman. $418.50.
Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Linteau pay into the fund after he went to
jail? , ,
Mr. Adlerman. No. During the time he was m jail
Mr. Kennedy. He did not pay ; is that correct ?
Mr. Adlerman. He did not pay.
Mr. Kennedy. Did the union pay during that period of time ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, they did. They paid premiums in 1955, the
premium amounted to $1,721.16. The same in 1956. And in 1957.
since it was cut off before the end of the year the amount only came
to $860.58.
Mr. Kennedy. So after Mr. Linteau had gone to prison for receiv-
ing money from the employers he received not .only his salary but the
union continued to pay into this pension fund for a total of more than
$3,500 ?
Mr. Adlerman. I would say it was probably about $4,000.
Mr. Kennedy. And during the period of time he paid nothing?
Mr. Adlerman. He paid nothing during those 3 years.
Mr. Kennedy. Then he received this amount of money of $11,000
in 1957; is that right?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Now anybody else ?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes. We find that Mr. Daniel Keating received
$17,697.55 through the joint council.
Mr. Kennedy. When was that ?
Mr. Adlerman. 1953. The best I can tell it was to December 1956
or the middle of December.
Mr. Kennedy. How much had he paid into that ?
Mr. Adlerman. The year 1955, in the year 1954 while he was in
jail only the latter part of the year, he only paid $184.50, whereas, the
union paid $1,721 — I am sorry^
Mr. Kennedy. He did not go to jail, I don't believe, until October
1954?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, pardon me. This is Mr. Keating we are on ?
Mr. Kennedy. Yes.
Mr. Adlerman. The union paid $1,823.56 and Keating paid $184.50.
In 1955 Mr. Keating paid nothing. The union paid $1,823.56. In
1956 Mr. Keating paid nothing and the union paid $1,367.67.
Mr. Kennedy. Then he received the total amount?
Mr. Adlerman. He received the total amount of $17,697.55.
Mr. Kennedy. Anybody else?
Mr. Adlerman. No ; we don't have any record right now for any-
body else.
Mr. Kennedy. Now were they legally entitled to that money after
1954?
Mr. Adlerman. Well, going to the trust agreement they were sup-
posed to pay their share of the contribution. Since they paid none,
I would say they were not entitled to it.
21243 O— 58— pt. 36 28
13702 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Tlie Chairman. What you mean is that it was paid for them but
it was paid out of union money ?
Mr. Adlerman. The payment was supposed to be deducted from
their salaries. There was no deduction from their salaries; there-
fore, they made no contribution to the trust agfreement. I would say
under those circumstances they were not entitled to any money.
The Chairman. But the money was paid into the trust fund ?
Mr. Adlerman. By the union.
The Chairman. It was paid out of union dues and not out of their
salaries?
Mr. Adlerman. That is right.
The Chairman. Anything further ?
Mr. Kennedy. So these 4 individuals received about $142,000 —
is that correct — after they had been found guilty of receiving money
from employers?
Mr. Adlerman. Yes, approximately.
Mr. Kennedy. Also their legal bills were paid; isn't that correct,
Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. HoFFA. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. You paid the legal bills of many of these individuals
who had gotten into difficulty with the law ; is that correct ?
Mr. Hoffa. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Even when they were charged with extortion ?
Mr. HoFFA. Whatever they were charged with, we defended them
with the lawyers that we hired for them.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call on Mr. Bellino
to place in the record what we have found as far as legal bills are
concerned of the various unions that we have been interested in.
Mr. Hoffa. Mr. Chairman, could we have about a 3-minute break ?
The Chairman. You may. We will take a 5-minute recess.
(A short recess was taken.)
(At this point, members of the committee present were: Senators
McClellan, Curtis, and Goldwater.)
TESTIMONY OF CARMINE S. BEinNO— Resumed
The Chairman. Let us proceed.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bellino, just so that we get the picture. As far
as the situation involving local 614 in Pontiac, these individuals were
indicted for receiving moneys from various employers, is that right?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. The union membership had protested against these
individuals, is that correct ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Then the union was put in trusteeship ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And these individuals were taken out of their posi-
tions of power, Mr. Keating and Mr. Linteau ?
Mr. Bellino. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And then Mr. Holfa was made trustee ?
Mr. Bellino. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Hoffa placed these same individuals, Keat-
ing and Linteau, back in as business agents to run the union for him ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13703
Mr. Kennedy. That was been developed 'i
Mr. Belli NO. Yes.
Mr. Kennedy. That was after they got into difficulty ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Then a number of them, several of them, pleaded
j2:uilty to receiving money from the employers ?
Mr. Bellino. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Scott has testified that Mr. Keating- was one of
them, tliat he had to kick back $85,000 to Mr. Hoffa, is that correct,
the testimony was to that effect ^
Mr. Bellino. I believe there was some testimony. I don't recall that
was the amount.
Mr. Kennedy. During that period of time when these individuals
went to jail their salaries were continued in their wives' names ?
Mr. Bellino. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. In addition, they received these pensions, is that
right ?
Mr. Bellino. That is right.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us sj^ecifically about Mr. Keating, how
much money he I'eceived totally? Do you have that?
Mr. Bellino. Mr. Keating received, including the pension,
$47,675.76.
Mr. Kennedy. That was after he had stated he was guilty ?
Mr. Bellino. That is correct.
Mr. Kennedy. What about Mr. Linteau ?
Mr. Bellino. He received a total of $45,252.22.
Mr. Kennedy. Were there legal bills paid also in addition to this ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Can you give us the approximate amount as to what
that cost the union ?
Mr. Bellino. The legal bills at that time were commingled, more or
less, with the Bufalino trial. But there is approximately $20,000 in
legal bills and cost of transcript which can be directly chargeable
against Keating and Linteau, Nicoletti case.
(At this point Senator Ives entered the hearing room. )
Mr. Kennedy. Now, have you examined generally the situation as
far as the legal bills that are paid by the unions that we are inter-
ested in ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. What specific ones ?
Mr. Belling. We have examined the records of the Michigan Con-
ference of Teamsters, the joint council 43, locals 247, 299, 337, 376,
614, 985, and also the records of the Central States Conference of
Teamsters.
Mr. Kennedy. Have you made a compilation as to what their legal
bills have been from these units of the Teamsters in that area for the
years 1953 through 1957 ?
Mr. Bellino. Yes, sir. The legal bills which were paid exclusive
of those items which we could definitely identify as arbitration matters.
Mr. Kennedy. You deducted the ones for arbitration matters, the
regular union business ?
Mr. Bellino. The usual legal bills, not all of them — I would say
this would be the major portion of the legal bills — amounted, from
1953 to 1957, to $625,726.76.
13704 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
(At this point the following members were present: Senators
McClellan, Ives, Kennedy, Curtis, and Goldwater.)
Mr. Kennedy. That was for their legal bills ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. And you deducted, where we could tell from an ex-
amination of the records, that the legal bill was in connection with
an arbitration proceeding?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir. We did not have all of the paid bills which
we could scrutinize in every instance and, therefore, we did not know
exactly why the payment was made to the attorney. But where it
could be identified as arbitration matters we deducted it.
Mr. Kennedy. From what you could tell, was the majority of this
in connection with criminal matters ?
Mr. Belling. A substantial amount of it ; yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. Could you give us any examples, other than the one
you have given us, of Mr. Keating, Linteau, Marosso, and Nicoletti ?
Mr. Belling. We have the case of Mr. Gerald Conley, on whom testi-
mony has already been submitted. There we have a total of, I believe
it was, $59,000 on Gerald Conley.
Mr. Kennedy. $59,000. That was in connection with three cases
that Mr. Conley was involved in ; is that right, sir ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kennedy. He was involved in the dynamiting case, but he was
also involved in two other cases, receiving money from employers —
is that right ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir. A total of $59,881.55. In addition, there
was a check in the amount of $3,000, which you may want to make
evidence, payable to joint council 43. The endorsement on it is
"Joint Council 43, donation to Gerald Conley."
This was dated February 21, 1956.
The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 26.
(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 26" for refer-
ence and will be found in the appendix on p. 13726.)
The Chairman. What is the amount of the check ?
Mr. Belling. $3,000.
The Chairman. That is a donation ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Made out of what ?
Made out of what fund ?
Mr. Belling. It is drawn out of the account of joint council No. 43
defense fund.
The Chairman. Defense fund?
Mr. Belling. Defense fund. ; yes, sir.
The Chairman. What is the source of the defense fund ?
Mr. Belling. It was contributions from other locals into the joint
council 43.
The Chairman. Is that defense fund made up out of union funds
or is that a voluntary contribution ?
Mr. Belling. Basically it comes out of union dues.
Senator Goldwater. Could I ask a question before you go further ?
The Chairman. Senator Goldwater.
Senator Goldwater. This seems to be probably a general pattern
where the union pays, in nearly every case that I can recall, the legal
fee, and in many cases pays the salary while the person is impounded.
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13705
Mr. Counsel, do you have any list or compilation of the union con-
nected charges that we have heard in the last year and a half and
non-union-connected charges for which union funds have been used to
pay these legal fees ?
Mr. Kennedy. No, I do not, Senator.
Senator Goldwater. Would it be possible for the staff to compile
a chart showing the union-connected charges, non-union-connected
charges, together with the unions involved ?
Mr. Kennedy. I would think so, Senator.
Senator Goldwater. Could I request that that be done?
Mr. Kennedy. May we have a period of time ?
Senator Goldwater. For the whole year, yes.
Mr. Kennedy. You will give us a little time to get that together?
Senator Goldwater. Yes.
Any time in the next 2 or 3 months. Also I would like to ask if
Mr. Bellino has made a total of how much has been spent by unions
for legal fees to defend people in either union-connected cases or non-
union-connected cases.
Mr. Belling. I do not have the total for all of them, but just this
particular group we are working on. We. of course, have it on all of
the locals we have investigated, but we don't have a total.
Senator Goldwater. Would you also have access to figures that
would give you a total of salaries that have been paid to people while
they have been in jail, by the unions out of the general funds ?
Mr. Belling. I believe those we have looked into we would have;
yes, sir.
Senator Goldwater. Mr. Chairman, if it would be possible to have,
I think it would be a valuable addition to list the total legal fees, the
total salaries paid while these men have been in jail in connection with
union-connected charges and non-union-connected charges, and to
break them down by unions.
I am convinced that this is a general pattern. This is nothing un-
usual. We have found it, to my memory, in every union where we
found the members of the union going to jail for either a union-
connected or non-union-connected charge.
I believe the membership of the unions as a whole would like to see
the extent to which this practice has gone on.
The Chairman. The staff will, at its earliest convenience, prepare
the chart, undertaking to make the compilation putting these figures
in their proper perspective, so it will give us a picture look at the
information.
Mr. Kennedy. What about the legal expenses for Louis Berra ?
What was the case involving Mr. Berra ?
Mr. Belling. That was an income-tax case that he was involved in.
Mr. Kennedy. How much in legal fees were paid in connection with
Mr. Berra ?
Mr. Belling. A total of $37,323.09.
Mr. Kennedy. Did some of that money come from Mr. Harold Gib-
bons as well as from Mr. Hoffa ?
Mr. Belling. I believe most of this was from the Central Conference
of Teamsters.
The Chairman. Is that the one that Mr. Gibbons is the head of ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
13706 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
The Chairman. Do you mean the money came out of the central
conference fund ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Is that out of dues-paying money ?
Mr. Belling. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa, why were Mr. Berra's legal bills paid ?
Mr. Hgffa. I am not in a position to tell you why they were paid.
They were paid, I believe, because the lawyers felt that he was inno-
cent, and that the individual who was accusing him was accusing him
unjustly. We attempted to defend the individual.
Mr. Kennedy. There Avere a number of individuals who testified
against him, Mr. Hoffa, and one of the legal bills, $5,000 of the legal
bills, was for an appeal to the Supreme Court, so that the attorney
could argue that illicitly received funds do not constitute income.
That was not a question of his innocence. It was just a question of
his paying tax on the money that he received as a kickback.
Mr. Belling. AVell, I am not too familiar with all of it. I know
it was an income-tax case, but I am not too familiar with all of the
information.
The Chairman. That is the signal for a vote. It will be too late
for us to return, so we will stand in recess until 10 : 80 in the morning.
(At this point, the following members were present: Senators Mc-
Clellan, Ives, Kennedy, Goldwater, and Curtis.)
(AVhereupon, at 4:30, the hearing recessed, to reconvene at 10:30
a. m., Wednesday. August 13, 1958.)
APPENDIX
Exhibit No. 1
r
1/3
il
m
t,
c
Ifi
i
/""-
*<
-It.
44
r^
vn
N
<M
O
^
^
w
^
02
x: r
«-• tj
— .«
fQ r.
4; J
^1
0 i;
13707
13708 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 2A
■i?-^-^"'"/
<^..
Or
'>
N.
-dsi
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 2B
13709
, ~ Kaa
If
13710 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 2C
z
a.
Q b,
Z T
33 C
O i
»- i
I-
Z <».
J- !: a
Q
"id
J^iiD
/"
0
'/
i.^:!!
itf^;^2^^g^■^ ,-^^^'''-\S?,i'^^^'''- jT""
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13711
Exhibit No. 5 A
13712 I]VIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 5B
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13713
Exhibit No. 5C
13714 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 6A
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 6B
13715
13716 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 6C
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13717
Exhibit No. 6D
21243 O— ^8— pt. 36 29
13718 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 10
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13719
Exhibit No. 18
ELMER J. RYAN
COUNSELLOR AND ATTORNFsf- AT-LAW
89 Virginia
ST. PAUL 2, MINNESOTA
CApital 7-1404
September 26, 1957
Kr. Arthur Morgan
116 W. 32nd Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Dear Kr, Morgan:
I talked with Sid Brennan in Florida a couple
times within the last few days, and he feels that you
rendered a good service in telling the truth about
the Connelly matter in your testimony.
He suggested that I talk with you, and I would
appreciate your giving ms a call at your convenience.
Sincerely
EJR:rk
13720 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 21 A
;:m(:
CO
01
r-i
OO
•«H
0 '
'"'~"N
V .
Q''
<T>
^^ )
~
o
2
1
0
\
if)
Z
z
V
o
1
1
>/
o
z
z
c
zi -
8l:.
(^,>
-
CD
>
(-
u
■IJ
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13721
P^XHIBIT No. 21 B
1318
»
.,"^. V
1319
:\4~-^x 3^ ^<^ oo
1320
C)
I u
■ft y^o
Cr.Y »AN^ DETROIT
13722 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 22
r
^y
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 13723
Exhibit No. 23
AM AVItI I
.S 1 .\ • 1
'2m*00^-^-.l -1— :
,u.. of th. •-.;., I. r
This is a photofjrapnic copy
of the orifjinals-
13724 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 24
iH W «
rM wM m4 r^ i-^ **^ r- "
1.
H
n
<^ c\r
oe oc
<N CM (^
ll^^^^
<^ C^
i ^i 1^ ^;;; I
s? I
tp C- 00 OJ o
CiA» o» Simvict
unlru 111 it^nmt chxc-
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 25
?M.9 la ^ photographic cott
of the originals
WESIERN UNION
p^^- TELEGRAM
13725
NL-N«il« U»»
W. p. MAnsHAU.. pi>a«
TMMhtrt.*.^"'" *. *« W m. J.m«te .^.n>. U STANOAUD TlMf «r^olo^n. TWo^r^^.. STAWPAtDTlMt .. po.,.. o« d«<«tM
T
I-0EA177
»l45!j<i'"i:'-
DE LLC5g5 PD^^DETROIT MICH 16 22!?PME==
'RCSERT T SCOTT REPORT DEUlVERY "
BONT FOME DtR AMD REPORT CHARGES 31 BLOOMFIELD
TERRACE POWtlAC MICH*
:THE TRIAL COI.If.n.TTEE.vS REPORT COMCERNTNG YOU W;MjL BE READ
I AMD ACTED OfJ AT THE REGULAR E.IEETlHG OF BARBERS UHIOM
' LOCAL 592 MONDAY EVEilll-iG HAY 1S>.TH t?5'8 AT 830 Pl.l IN THE
LABOR TEMPLE 62 WEST HOWTCALM* ONIiY MEMBERS WILL BE
I PERMITTED TO ATTEND THIS MEETIHG* IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK
BEFORE THE WEMBERSHfiP ACTS, YOU MUST BE PRESENT AT THIS
MEETTNG-
ELLIER ALBRECHT SECRETARY TREASURER LOCAL i5.52'
TBI COMMMT Will. AmCCIATt «U<Nn9XtON« HIOM IT* »ATIW>«« COHCttHfNO n» HKVICf
13726
IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD
Exhibit No. 26
X
6°^,
^ot
pO'
,e^\?.
\y^^.
Io0i
^'^36^
0^6
;i^^-=^5f Hj
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11