(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "Investigation of improper activities in the labor or management field. Hearings before the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor or Management Field"

^jfo^LAlAkAl^ 



■Bi 




Given By 



m >i7-i0 



3^ 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 




HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SELECT COMMITTEE 

ON IMPROPER ACTIYITIES IN THE 

LABOR OR MANAGEMENT HELD 

EIGHTY-SIXTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 
PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTION 44, 86TH CONGRESS 



MARCH 23, 24, 25, APRIL 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, AND 15, 1»59 



PART 48 



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 

LIBOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 

EIGHTY-SIXTH CONGKESS 

FIRST SESSION 

PURSUANT TO SENATE RESOLUTION 44, 86TH CONGRESS 



MARCH 23, 24, 25, APRIL 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, AND 15, 1959 



PART 48 



Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Improper Activities in the 
Labor or Management Field 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
36751 WASHINGTON : 1959 



Boston Public Library 
Superintendent ot Documents 

JUL 2S IBbS 
DEPOSITORY 



SELECT COMMITTEE ON IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR OR 

MANAGEMENT FIELD 

JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas, Chairman 
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Vice Chairman 
JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts BARRY QOLDWATER, Arizona 

SAM J. ERVIN, Jr., North Carolina CARL T. CURTIS, Nebraska 

FRANK CHURCH, Idaho HOMER E. CAPEHART, Indiana 

Robert F. Kennedy, Chief Counsel 
Ruth Young Watt, Chief Clerk 

II 



CONTENTS 



The Coin-Operated Amusement and Vending Machine Industry 

Page 

Appendix 17681 

Testimony of — 

Anderson, Mrs. Annie May 17515 

Ayers, Warren 1 7498 

Baitler, Leonard 1 7335 

Bellino, Carmine S 17667 

Blatt, William _ 17357 

Breen, William 17306 

Brilliant, Joseph 17406 

Bufalino, William E 17608, 17640, 17643, 17650, 17657, 17672, 17677 

Carr, Myer 17310 

Cohen, Michael 17326 

Coleman, Morris 17576, 1 7586 

Constandy, John P 17231, 17670 

DeSchryver, Victor 17436 

Duff, Gerald 17560 

Dukes, C. D 17535 

Frechette, David 17384, 17396 

Gillen, Richard J 17245 

Goldman, Morris 17471, 17477 

Gorman, Richard E 17504 

Helow, Donald... 17348 

Holland, Neil 17426 

Hopkins, Carl F 17491 

Indellicato, Joseph 17377 

James, Eugene C 17483, 17490 

Jason, Edward... 17481 

Johnson, Sigf rid 1 7509 

Kaplan, Arthur G 17373, 17401, 17457, 17476, 

17489, 17578, 17587, 17590, 17593, 17602, 17641, 17649, 17676 

Karpf, Charles 17397, 17402 

Kohn, Aaron M 17217, 17233, 17251 

Lazewski, Eugene 17551 

Marcello, Carlos... 17257 

Marcello, Vincent 17325 

May, Walter R 17298, 17452, 17656 

Nemesh, Joseph 1 7568 

Norman, Robert 1 735 1 

Petz, Mrs. Eleanor 17675 

Priziola, John M 17452, 17467, 17469 

Richardson, Gus 1 7528 

Richardson, Walter 1 7237 

Salinger, Pierre E. G 17250, 17579, 17639 

Scaramuzzino, Tony 17549 

Scholle, Auguste 17443 

Seedman, George 17313 

Sheridan, Walter J 17393 

Siragusa, Charles 17454, 17468 

Sherry, Hal 17269 

Sica, Fred 17320 

Taran, Sam 1 7365 

Tocco, Samuel J 17595, 17602 

Vaughn, Thomas A 17282, 17291, 17299 

Watts, Cecil 17591, 17593 

Welsh, Lawrence 17587, 17590 

in 



IV 



CONTENTS 



EXHIBITS 

Introduced Appears 
on page on page 

64. List of individuals of interest— California area 17273 (*) 

65. Check dated December 11, 1957, payable to Michael 

Cohen in the amount of $1,850, signed by T. A. 

Vaughn, special agent 17297 17681 

65A. Check dated December 11, 1957, payable to Michael 
Cohen in the amount of $1,150, signed by T. A. 
Vaughn, special agent 17297 17682 

66. Check No. 5223, dated November 27, 1957, payable to 

George M. Seedman in the amount of $5,000 drawn by 

Rowe Service Co., Inc 17316 17683 

67. Check No. 5526, dated December 24, 1957, payable to 

George M. Seedman in the amount of $3,000 drawn by 

Rowe Service Co., Inc 17317 17684 

67 A. Check dated December 24, 1957, payable to Thomas A. 
Vaughn in the amount of $3,000, signed by George M. 
Seedman 17317 17685 

68. List of individuals of interest — Miami area 17336 {*; 

69A. Letter dated April 19, 1955, addressed to Mr. J. W. 

Haddock, AMI, Inc., signed by R. J. Norman, general 

manager. Southern Music Dist. Co 17357 (*) 

69B. Letter dated April 27, 1955, addressed to Mr. J. W. 
Haddock, AMI, Inc., signed by R. J. Norman, general 
manager. Southern Music Dist. Co 17357 (*) 

690. Letter dated June 6, 1955, addressed to Mr. J. W. 
Haddock, AMI, Inc., signed by R. J. Norman, general 
manager. Southern Music Dist. Co 17357 (*) 

70. Letter dated September 14, 1956, addressed to Mr. 

Frank Bonadio, secretary-treasurer. Building and Con- 
struction Trades Department, AFL-CIO, signed by 
Dennis Murphy, secretary-treasurer, Miami Building 

& Construction Trades Council 17388 (*) 

70 A. Letter dated April 18, 1956, addressed to Mr. Frank 
Bonadio, secretary-treasurer Building and Construc- 
tion Trades Department, from Dennis Murphy, 
secretary-treasurer, Miami Building & Construction 
Trades Council 17388 (,*) 

71. Letter dated March 18, 1958, addressed to James R. 

Hoffa, General President, International Brotherhood 
of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers 
of America, signed by Dave Frechette, local 290 17389 (*) 

72. Letter dated April 24, 1958, addressed to Mr. James 

Hoffa, Washington, D.C., signed bv Ben Cohen 17395 17686 

72A. Check No. 22853 dated May 15, 1958, payable to Ben 
Cohen in the amount of $10,000, drawn by Inter- 
national Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, 

Warehousemen & Helpers 17395 17687 

72B. Check No. 22648 dated April 30, 1958, payable to 
Teamsters Local Union No. 290 in the amovmt of 
$5,000, drawn by International Brotherhood of _ 

Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers. _ 17395 17688 

73. Letter dated March 21, 1955, addressed to Mr. Meyer 

Greenfield, president, local 598, Miami, Fla., from 
Sal B. Hoffmann, International President, Up- 
holsterers International Union of North America 17401 (*) 

73 A. Letter dated March 21, 1955, addressed to Dan Sullivan, 
Miami Crime Commission, Miami, Fla., from Sal B. 
Hoffmann, International President, Upholsterers 
International Union of North America 17401 17689 

73B. Card, Miscellaneous Workers of America, UTWA-AF 
of L., Charles Karpf, organizer, 2841 NW. Second 
Avenue, Miami 37, Fla 17402 17690 

73C. Letter dated May 11, 1955, addre.ssed to Miss Mathien, 
Electricians Union No. 349, Miami, Fla., from R. A. 
Gray, Secretary of State, State of Florida 17403 17691 

•May be found In the flies of the select committee. 



CONTENTS V 

Introduced Appears 
on page on page 

74. Report from Dr. Fabian L. Rouke re statement made 

by Mr. Neil Holland 1743-4 (*) 

75. Letter dated January 19, 1950, addressed to August 

SchoUe, president, Michigan CIO Council, from 
Richard Gosser, vice president, International UAW- 
CIO 17448 17G92 

76. Articles of incorporation of Bilvin Distributing Co 17452 (*) 

77. List of principals of interest, Detroit-St. Louis narcotic 

operation 17456 (*) 

78. Letter dated June 4, 1950, addressed to "Dear Toto," 

from John Priziola 17462 (*) 

79A. Letter dated August 5, 1947, addressed to Michigan 
Automatic Phonograph Owners Association, Detroit, 
Mich., from E. Jay Bullock, managing director, 
Southern California Automatic Music Operators Asso- 
ciation 17479 17603 

79B. Letter dated August 6, 1947, addressed to Mr. E. Jay 
Bullock, managing director. Southern California Auto- 
matic Music Operators Association from Morris A. 
Goldman, president, Michigan Automatic Phonograph 
Owners Association 17479 17694 

80. Subpoena No. L-6954, served on Mr. Ed Jason, Woodner 

Hotel, to produce certain records 17482 (*) 

81. Official order blank of International Brotherhood of 

Teamsters for James Langley, Secretary-Treasurer 

local No. 985, one charter and seal and stamp 17489 (*) 

81A. Letter dated June 3, 1957, addressed to James R. Hoffa 

from John English 17490 (*) 

81B. Memorandum to John F. English, general secretary- 
\jfi treasurer, from Norman C. Murrin 17490 {*) 

SIC. Application for certificate of affiliation with the Inter- 
national Brotherhood of Teamsters, listing names of 
applicants 17490 (*) 

82. Report dated March 14, 1959, listing number of days 

worked and amount of deductions 17540 (*) 

83. Memorandum of a meeting made by William Genematas, 

dated August 6, 1954 1758:5 17695 

83 A. Contract between Marathon Linen Service, Inc., and 

Kinsel Drug Co _ 175S4 (*) 

84. Memorandum dated August 19, 1954, written by William 

A. Genematas, re Kinsel Drug and Michigan Linen 

Supply Board of Trade 17584 (*) 

85 A. Memorandum dated September 3, 1954, addressed to 
Joseph Maiullo, re Kinsel Drug Co., from William N. 
Genematas, Marathon Linen Service 17584 **, 17696 

85B. Letter dated September 7, 1954, addvesed to James R. at, 

Hoffa, re Marathon Linen Service, Inc. and Kinsel 39 

Drug Co., from Joseph A. Maiullo 17584 17697 

85C. Letter dated September 17, 1954, addressed to Marathon 

Linen Service, Inc., from Kinsel Drug Co 17584 17698 

85D. Letter dated September 22, 1954, addressed to James 
R. Hoffa, re Marathon Linen Service, Inc., Kinsel 
Drug Co., from Joseph A. Maiullo 17585 17699 

86. Letter dated December 28, 1954 addressed to Mr. James 

R. Hoffa from N. W. Genematas, president, Mara- 
thon Linen Service 17586 (*) 

87. Letter with attachments, dated April 7, 1959, addressed 

to U.S. Senate Select Committee on Improper Activ- 
ities in the Labor or Management Field, signed by 

William E. BufaHno, Teamster Local 985 1760S (*) 

87A. Telegram dated April 9, 1959, addressed to U.S. Senate 
Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor 
or Management Field, signed by William E. Bufalino. 17608 (*) 

•May be found in the files of the select committee. 



VI CONTENTS 

Introduced Appears 
on page on page 

87B. Letter dated April 10, 1959, addressed to Senator John 

L. McClellan, signed by William E. Bufalino 17608 (*) 

87C. Telegram dated December 5, 1958, addressed to Senate 
Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor 
or Management Field, signed by William E. Bufahno. 17610 (*) 

88. Letter dated April 16, 1958, addressed to the Billboard, 

Chicago, 111., from William E. Bufalino 17619 (*) 

89. Testimony of William E. Bufalino before the Murphy 

grand jury, as printed in hearings of the Kefauver 

committee 17626 (*) 

90. Check No. 2328, dated July 19, 1957, payable to William 

E. Bufalino in the amount of $160 drawn by Service 
Drivers and Helpers Union Local 985, signed by Wil- 
liam E. Bufalino 17639 17700 

91. Employer's Quarterly Federal Tax Returns of local 

union 985, dated December 31, 1950; April 30, 1951; 

and July 31, 1951 17649 (*) 

92. Ledger sheets from Michigan Hospital Service- Michigan 

Medical Service in account with Meltone Music Co., 

Detroit, Mich 17657 (*) 

93. Dues deduction report dated March 11, 1959, report to be 

attached to dues deduction report, and blank appli- 
cation and dues deduction authorization form 17666 (*) 

94. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, 

Warehousemen & Helpers day book, local 985, Janu- 
ary 1 to July 31, 1957 17667 (*) 

95. Minutes of membership meeting of Teamsters Local 985, 

dated April 25, 1956 17671 (*) 

96. Minutes of board meeting of Teamsters Local 985, dated 

September 26, 1955 17676 (*) 

Proceedings of — 

March 23, 1959.... 17215 

March 24, 1959 17257 

March 25, 1959 17335 

April 7, 1959 17405 

Aprils, 1959. 17451 

April 9, 1959. 17513 

April 10, 1959 17515 

April 14, 1959 17595 

April 15, 1959 17643 

♦May be found in the files of the select committee. 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



MONDAY, MARCH 23, 1959 

U.S. Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper AcTmTiES 

IN THE Labor and jManagement Field, 

Washington, D.C. 

The select committee met at 2 : 20 p.m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 44, agreed to February 2, 1959, in the caucus room of the Senate 
Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select 
committee ) presiding. 

Present: Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Sena- 
tor Frank Church, Democrat, Idaho; Senator Carl T. Curtis, Re- 
publican, Nebraska. 

Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Walter R. May, 
assistant counsel ; John P. Constandy, assistant counsel ; Pierre E. G. 
Salinger, investigator ; Ruth Y. Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session were Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. The Chair will make a brief opening statement 
since we are beginning a new phase, or rather chapter, in this coin- 
machine investigation that we have been conducting. 

The committee looks today to a study of the coin-operated machine 
industry in the New Orleans area, and particularly with reference 
to operations in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, which has long been 
notorious for the continuing operation of gambling despite the ille- 
gality of these enterprises. 

In previous hearings on the coin-operated machine business the 
committee has developed testimony on varying patterns of labor and 
management control of this industry. We have found areas where the 
coin-machine industry was dominated solely by the labor unions. We 
have found areas where labor unions, in collusion with management 
associations, controlled the business. We have found areas where 
racketeers control the industry by association with labor unions or 
management or both. 

The Louisiana picture presents still another type of control of this 
industry. Certain key racket figures have achieved a degree of dom- 
ination over the coin-operated machine business where they are able, 
singlehandedly, to enforce their control over locations through 
threats, coercion, and in some cases through alliances with corrupt 
public officials, as we expect the evidence to show. 

17215 



17216 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Two attempts have been made to organize the coin-operated ma- 
chine business in New Orleans, one by the International Brotherhood 
of Electrical Workers, and another by the International Brotherhood 
of Teamsters. Interviews with union officials involved in these drives 
have indicated that, while in most areas of the country the employers 
have found it necessary to do business with labor unions in order to 
effect the type of control needed in this industry, in the New Orleans 
area these employers have actively fought unionization. The reason 
for this, according to these union officials, is the long-entrenched pat- 
tern of control over the industry already established by the companies 
in the business. 

The committee does not intend, nor does it wish, to convey the im- 
pression that all coin-operated companies in the Jefferson Parish area 
are controlled by racketeers. I may say, parenthetically, neither does 
the committee intend to convey that impression with respect to coin- 
operated machines throughout the country. They are certainly not 
all controlled by syndicates or by racketeers, but in some of these in- 
stances, certainly where we are investigating, we find that they are. 

The racketeers who are active in jukeboxes, and pinball and gam- 
bling machines in the Jefferson Parish area, however, seem to be as 
powerful as any in this country, and their influence over this indus- 
try, as well as over certain other legitimate enterprises in the com- 
munity, is of tremendous magnitude, as we expect the evidence will 
show. 

All right, Mr. Kennedy, call the first witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the first witness will be Mr. Aaron 
Kohn. But prior to the time that he begins his testimony, we have 
worked up an index of individuals w^hose names will come up during 
the course of the hearings, which I present to you and which might be 
helpful if it is placed in the record. It gives a description of some 
of the people that will be named during the course of the afternoon 
and tomorrow. 

The Chairman. This is just for information. This may be in- 
serted just for information. It will not be accepted as evidence but 
only for information, and as names are given in the course of the 
testimony, by reference to this it may help to identify who the pei'sons 
are who are being referred to in the sworn testimony. 

(The list referred to follows :) 

iNDIVIDtTALa OF INTEBEST — NeW ORLEANS AREA 

Allen, Edward M., also known as "Red" : Former member of St. Louis "Cuckoo 
Clan"; gambler. (New Orleans.) 

Arnoult, .Tames : Chief civil deputy, Jefferson Parish. 

Badalamatri, Louis: Brother-in-law of Carlos Marcello; public official. 

Bagneris, Louis E., "Buster" : Key figure in lottery and handbook gambling, 
St. Bernard Parish, La. 

Beverly Country Club, Jefferson Parish, former Costello-Lansky-Kastel gam- 
bling casino. 

Civello, Joseph, Dallas, Tex. : Participant in Apalachin, N.Y., mobster meeting. 

Coci, Malcolm "Red" : Chief criminal deputy, Jefferson Parish. 

Coci, William S. : Sheriff of .Jefferson Parish, La. 

Cohen, Dan, New Orleans : Former owner of cigarette, music, and pinball ma- 
chine companies. 

Costello, Frank, Now York : Nationally notorious racketeer. 

Corinne Club, St. Bernard Parish, La. : Operated by Will Guillot. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17217 

Culotta, James J., Jefferson Parish, La. : Business associate of Carlos Marcel- 
lo ; member of planning and zoning commission, Jefferson Parish. 

Dargis, Aloysius A., Jr., Jefferson Parish : Jukebox oi^erator. 

Dixie Coin Machine Co., New Orleans : Formerly area distributor for Mills 
slot machines, of which Marcello is a partner. 

Fredo. Anthony, also known as Tony Logan, Jefferson Parish : Officer in Bev- 
erly Club. 

Geigerman, William B., also known as "Bonny" : Related to Frank Costello ; 
boxing promoter. 

Gillen, Pat : Bar owner, Jefferson Parish, La. 

Guillot, Willard F., St. Bernard Parish : Guillot Amusement Company. 

Huey Distributing Co., Jefferson Parish : Run by Vincent Marcello, with Carlos 
as part owner. 

Huffine, Albert C, Jefferson Parish : Associate in coin-machine operations 
with Marcello. 

Jefferson Music Co., Gretna, La. : Owned by Vincent and Carlos Marcello ; 
jukes, pinballs, slots. 

Marcello, Anthony, Metairie, La. : Brother of Carlos. 

Marcello, Carlos, Metairie, La. : Notorious rackets boss in Louisiana, who 
has been fighting deportation since 1952. 

Marcello, Joseph, Metairie, La. : Brother of Carlos. 

Marcello, Pasquale J., Harvey, La. : Brother of Carlos. 

Marcello, Peter, Jefferson Parish : Brother of Carlos. 

Marcello, Salvadore, also known as Sam, Jefferson Parish : Brother of Carlos. 

Marcello, Vincent, Jefferson Parish : Brother of Carlos. 

Mull^er, Henry, New Orleans : MuUer Restaurant Supply Company, associate 
of Cai'los Marcello. 

Nastasi Distributing Co., New Orleans. 

New Southport Club : Former gambling casino in Jefferson Parish. 

Nola Printing Co., Jefferson Parish : Headquarters for Louisiana wire service. 

Occhipinti, Roy, and Frank, Jefferson Parish. 

Pecora, Nofio J., New Orleans : Narcotics ex-convict. 

Pecoraro, Joe, Jefferson Parish : Major gambling figure. 

Perez, Horace (deceased), Jefferson Parish. 

Poretto, Joseph A., Jefferson Parish : Manager of wire service for Marcello mob. 

Richardson, W^alter : Bar owner, Jefferson Parish, La. 

Southern Coin Machine Exchange, Jefferson Parish. 

Spataro, Joe, also known as "Spow-Wow," Shreveport, La. 

Town & Country Motel, Bossier City, La. 

Vac-Key Amusement Co., Jefferson Parish. 

Vuci, Frank L., Port Allen and Baton Rouge, La. 

Mr. Kennedy. All of the names of individuals there are not going 
to be named in a derogatory fashion, but it gives a little bit of back- 
ground and gives the name of some of those people whose names will 
arise during the course of the hearing. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Aaron Kohn. 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. KoHN. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF AARON M. KOHN 

The Chairman. Mr. Kohn, state your name, your place of residence, 
and your business, occupation, or employment, please. 

Mr. KoHN. Aaron M. Kohn, of New Orleans, La., managing direc- 
tor of the Metropolitan Crime Commission of New Orleans, Inc. 

The Chairman. Is that commission created by law ? 



17218 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. KoHN. No, sir; it is a civic agency consisting of business, pro- 
fessional, and clerical leaders of the community who have joined to- 
gether as citizens to fight organized crime. 

The Chairman-. It is a voluntary association that has been in- 
corporated, dedicated to the purpose of fighting crime and trying to 
preserve law and order, I assume ; is that right ? 

Mr. KoHN. That is correct. 

The Chairman. When was this organization established ? 

Mr. KoHN. It was incorporated in 1952, and it became active on 
the 1st of May of 1954. 

The Chairman. Have you been its director or manager since that 
time? 

Mr. KoHN. I have ; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. You waive counsel, of course? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy, proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kohn, you spell your name K-o-h-n; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. A-a-r-o-n ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were with the Federal Bureau of Investi- 
gation ? 

Mr. KoHN. For 9 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. During what period of time ? 

Mr.KoHN. From 1930 to 1939. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you do after that ? 

Mr. KoHN. I was the acting chief counsel and chief investigator 
for the Emergency Crime Committee of the Chicago City Council. 

Mr. Kennedy. 'V\'lien was that ? 

Mr.KoHN. That was in 1952. 

Mr. Kennedy. And after that ? 

Mr. KoHN. In New Orleans, I was first the executive director and 
chief investigator for the Special Citizens Investigating Committee 
of the New Orleans Commission Council. That was in 1953 and 1954, 
just prior to occupying my present position. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you became managing director of the Metro- 
politan Crime Commission ; is that right ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Kohn, you have a statement in connection 
with the growth of organized crime in the Louisiana area, that you 
have prepared to give to the committee ? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes, sir ; I have. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is just a short statement, Mr. Chairman, and he 
probably won't want to read it all, but he does have some information. 
We have had representatives from law-enforcement bodies through- 
out the country that have come before the committee and given the 
situation in their particular area, and as a prelude to Mr. Kohn's 
testimony, I would like to have him give this little bit of background. 

The Chairman. Do you prefer to read your entire statement? 

Mr. Kohn. No, sir; there is a brief section of it that perhaps you 
may want in specific form. 



I]VIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17219 

The Chairman. If it is brief, I would have it all printed in the 
record. You can just touch on the highlights of it, but if it is 
brief, just go ahead and read all of it. 

Mr. KoHN. The New Orleans area, as part of south Lrouisiana, 
has frequently been referred to in connection with the Mafia in the 
United States. The word "Mafia" has become a convenient, habitual 
and descriptive means of communicating the scope and viciousness of 
criminal groups in the Marcello mob category. If it is the only 
fitting word for that purpose, perhaps usage will lend it meaning 
and adapt it to change. 

Mr. Kennedy. Whom do you refer to there by Marcello? 

Mr. KoHN. The Marcello mob is a term which we apply to the 
group of persons who are active under the leadership of Carlos Mar- 
cello. 

The Chairman. Where are they located ? 

Mr. KoHN. They center their activities largely in Jefferson Parish, 
La., but range much beyond its borders throughout south Louisiana, 
and elsewhere. 

The Chairman. They practically operate out of Jefferson Parish, 
that is what you are saying. That is their general headquarters? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But it extends even beyond the borders of Louisiana ; 
does it not ? 

Mr. KoHN. We find their fingers in Texas, and in Mississippi, Ala- 
bama, and, of course, their contacts with fellow mobsters around. 

The Chairman. Do they reach up in Arkansas anywhere ? We are 
pretty close. 

Mr. KoHN. Hot Springs, Ark., is rather a popular gathering place 
for them, with their friends. 

The Chairman. Thank you. I didn't want to slight my own State, 
if it needs any attention. 

Mr. Kennedy. And also up into IMissouri ; isn't that right? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir; in the St. Louis area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Will you continue ? 

Mr. KoHN. To describe organized crime in our Nation at this time 
as "Mafia" is to mislead by understatement of the facts. Reported 
originally to have been organized in Sicily to extort money from 
wealthy landowners for redistribution among the poor, it was inevit- 
able that the leaders of this group became ruthless in their exercise of 
X>ower. Murder, brutality and terror became nonselective as to vic- 
tims. 

The Mafia was imported into the United States through New Or- 
leans, where "Black Hand" activities probably continued for some 
time after they had disappeared elsewhere in the Nation, primarily 
because economic and industrial development came later to New Or- 
leans than to most other parts of the countiy. 

The Mafia in south Louisiana was largely a self-contained group of 
Sicilian aliens and Sicilian-Americans, almost invariably victimizing 
persons of their own extraction, who by tradition were expected not to 
bear witness against these evildoers, under threat of death. They were 
fought by law-enforcement authorities, and they fought back. They 
murdered the New Orleans police chief, Dave Hennessy, in 1890, and 
there was difficulty in finding someone to replace him. 



17220 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

In the years that followed, police efforts to cope with the Mafia 
usually were baffled by the code of "silence or murder." Men were 
hanged then as identihable Mafia members. In at least one instance 
the militia was brought in to prevent an attempted release of Mafia 
killers. 

The organized racketeers and gangsters of our time resemble the 
Mafia to the degree the modem automobile may be likened to the 
model T Ford. The objective is the same, but the modus operandi is 
much more complex, far-reaching, and destructive. 

It is true, many key mobsters of our time are of Sicilian birth or 
extraction, but others derive from elsewhere in Italy, as did Al Capone 
and Frank Costello. And many are native-born Americans of na- 
tional origins as varied as the ingredients which blend into America's 
melting pot. 

The top mobsters of Louisiana maintain contact with and join in 
common objectives with their counterparts elsewhere. Freely and ex- 
pensively they move aroimd the country and are visited in turn. 
For years, unlike their Mafia predecessors, the Marcello mob has 
found little need to fight against officials charged with exercising 
police powers. They do not murder police, nor do police kill them. 
They sometimes enforce their code of control by killing each other, but 
the law imposes no final penalty. 

Unlike the Mafia leaders of yesterday, the Carlos Marcellos of 
today do not battle the long arm of the law, for they find that they 
last longer, grow richer, and look more respectable % linking arms 
with willing officers of the law, and they can reinforce their sense of 

power and security 

The Chairman. By doing what? 

Mr. KoHN. By linking arms with officers of the law. And they can 
reinforce their sense of power and security with their experiences in 
dealing with otherwise law-abiding citizens who are glad to share in 
their profitmaking skills. 

Mr. Kennedy. You would say in summary, then, the situation today 
is far more critical than it has ever been? 
Mr. KoHN. Yes, Mr. Kennedy ; by far. 
The Chairman. Do you mean in your area down there ? 
Mr. KoHN. This would be true in Louisiana, and would also be true 
from our knowledge of the growth of power in organized crime 
throughout most sections of the Nation. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you also say that it grows critical year by 
year, rather than the situation improving? 
Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir ; I would. 

Mr. Kennedy. You speak specifically about Carlos Marcello as 
being the one who is the leader of the mob or group in the Louisiana 
area. Would you tell us a little bit about the background of Carlos 
Marcx^llo? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir. Carlos Marcello, as Carlareo Manicir 

Mr. Kennei>y. C-a-r-1-a-r-e-o M-a-n-i-c-i-r? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir; that is one of the varied spellings of that 
name. He was bom in Tunis, Africa, in 1910. While he was still an 
infant, less than a year of age, he was brought to the New Orleans 
area and has resided there almost continuously ever since. Marcello 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 17221 

has never become a citizen of our country, althoupjh in his typical dis- 
dain for our laws, on at least one occasion he registered to vote. 

Mr. Kennedy. He has never become a citizen? 

Mr. KoHN. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has he some other brothers and sisters in the New 
Orleans area ? 

Mr. Kohn. He has five brothers and two sisters living in Jeffei-son 
Parish, principally, although one lives outside of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are those brothers active in one or more of his 
operations ? 

Mr. KoHN. Every one of his brothers and one brother-in-law have 
been continuously active in the gi'owth of the Marcello mob. 

Senator Curtis. You said that he had never bothered to become a 
citizen. Do you happen to know whether lie has ever asserted any 
protection of the Constitution in court proceedings or otherwise? 

Mr. KoHN. In his appearance before the U.S. Senate committee in- 
vestigating organized crime in interstate commerce, in public hear- 
ings in New Orleans in January 1951, he refused to answer more than 
140 questions on the ground that he might incriminate himself. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, he has asked for the benefits and 
protections of the Constitution, but he has not availed himself of the 
opportunity of assuming some of the responsibilities ? 

Mr, KoiiN. No, sir ; he has certainly not accepted the responsibilities 
either of a good alien or a good citizen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has he ever been arrested or convicted of any crime ? 

Mr. Koiin. He has quite a lengthy criminal record. When he was 
19 years old, which would have been 1929, he and a younger brother, 
Peter, about whom more will be mentioned later, were charged by 
police as accessories in comiection with a bank robbery in the Algiers 
section of New Orleans, and the district attorney later dismissed 
charges against him. 

Roughly 6 montlis later, in May 1930, Carlos was convicted of as- 
sault and robbery and sent to the State penitentiary for a period of 
9 to 14 years. There was some very interesting testimony in that 
trial, perhaps, if it is read into its later history. 

During press reports, Marcello was referred to as a "Fagin.'' 

The Chairman. As a what ? 

Mr. Kohn. Fagin, F-a-g-i-n, recalling the Dickens story. It ap- 
pears from the testimony tliat Marcello and a confederate induced two 
juveniles, wliom they met in a dancehall, to hold up a chain grocery 
store. ISIarcello supplied them with a gun, and with the know-how 
on how to steal a getaway car. 

The two youngsters were later apprehended and testified against 
Marcello in the proceedings. Marcello was paroled after his convic- 
tion and imprisonment, in September 1934, after serving less than 5 
years of his not less than 9-year sentence. 

Then the following j-ear he was pardoned by Gov. O. K. Allen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what the basis of the pardon was? 

Mr. KoHN. No, sir ; I do not. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was 1935 ? 

Mr. KoHN. That was 1935, in July 1935. 

Marcello's pardon came in the same year that Frank Costello and 
Dandy Phil Kastel made the agreement with the then Senator Huey 



17222 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Long to move their slot-machine operations from New York to New 
Orleans. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Dandy Phil Kastel ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy, And then they started an active operation in coin 
machines, with slot machines, in the New Orleans area; is that right? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir ; in 1935. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Marcello ultimately move in with them and be- 
come a partner ? 

Mr. KoHN. Not long thereafter, Marcello started showing up as a 
partner in various slot-machine enterprises which were stimulated in 
the Costello-Kastel syndication in the New Orleans area. 

Mr. Kennedy. So shortly after receiving his pardon he became a 
close associate, a business partner, of Frank Costello and Dandy Phil 
Kastel? 

Mr. KoHN. That is correct. 

During the late 1930's and early 1940's tlie rise of Marcello was co- 
incident with the expanding gambling interests of the Costello-Kastel 
group, and he w^as a partner in various of their enterprises. 

Marcello's pardon in 1935 kept him free for a few years, but within 
the time he should have been unprisoned, but for executive clemency, 
he was again in trouble with the law^ In January 1935 he was arrested 
by New Orleans police for assault and robbery and released. In Feb- 
ruary 1935 he was charged w^ith violation of the U.S. internal revenue 
laws. The case was later dismissed. 

Then Marcello was rounded up by Federal agents as part of what 
was then called the biggest marihuana ring in New Orleans history. 
He pleaded guilty on October 29, 1938, to the sale of more than 23 
pounds of untaxed marihuana and was sent to Atlanta Penitentiary. 

The Chairman. What year was that? 

Mr. KoHN. That was' 1938. He was also fined $76,830, which 
amount becomes important a little later, which included both the un- 
paid marihuana taxes and the penalty. 

Marcello was discharged by conditional release on August 18, 1939, 
from Atlanta, and in little more than a year he ran afoul of U.S. 
immigration authorities in 19-40, and in the same year was again ar- 
rested by New Orleans police for having no honest, visible means of 
support. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he pay the fine of $76,830 to the Federal Gov- 
ernment ? 

Mr. KoiiN. No, sir. He, while in the penitentiary, had an affidavit 
filed by his wife, pleading poverty, and when Marcello was released, 
he and his attorneys arranged to settle the $76,000 for $400. 

While Marcello was awaiting incarceration, after his narcotics con- 
viction, and was out on a $3,000 bond, which, incidentally, had l)een 
arranged for by his father, Marcello had two near misses with ]>olice. 
In June 1938 he was arrested for supplying marihuana to Clarence 
Cheramie, of Lafourche Parish. Cheramie had had a previous prison 
record for narcotics possession and this time was sent to Atlanta for 
21 months. The charge against Marcello, however, was dismissed. 

Then on September 8, 1938, Marcello and Antliony "Yaga*" Mustac- 
chia — Mustacchia was a fi-equent narcotics violator who had not 
long been out of Atlanta at the time we refer — they were arrested 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 3 7223 

after a high-speed, chase through the New Orleans streets. Mus- 
tacchia had been under surveilhince by police at the Circle Inn 
Bar and fled to avoid arrest. lie jumped on the running board of 
Marccllo's car and they drove away at terrific speed, escaping police 
for the time. Mustacchia later was apprehended with a gun in his 
possession, and then, not long thereafter, Marcello was arrested 
emerging from a vacant lot where a search developed that a gun had 
been secreted. 

I have been unable to find any record of the disposition of that 
arrest. Then in Januar}'- 1948 a news photographer, Larry Schoen- 
berger, snapped photographs of women demonstrating in front of 
the Gretna CourtJiouse against then Sheriff Frank "King" Clancy's 
interference with a political parade. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Gretna ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is the significance of Gretna ? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, Gretna is what might be called the parish seat, 
the courthouse for the parish, and the public officials of the parish are 
centered in Gretna for the entire Jefferson Parish area, which is large 
and sprawling. 

Then Gretna is the principal lieadqiuirters for the Marcello mob 
operations. Gretna might be likened in relationship to the Marcellos 
to what Cicero in the past had been to the Capone mob. It was a 
place to which they could always draw back and be sure that no law- 
enforcement action would be taken against them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you spoke about the fact that the women were 
demonstrating against Sheriff Frank Clancy. That is Frank "King'' 
Clancy ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He appeared before the Kefauver committee or 
ultimately appeared before them ? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, sir, he appeared before the Kefauver committee 
twice, first to lie and the second time to confess. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was a notorious figure in that area ? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened there ? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, as this photographer started to drive away after 
taking his pictures, he was stopped by Carlos Marcello and Ma'rcello's 
then bodyguard, Sal vatore Ma rciant i . After grabbing and destroying 
the newsman's camera, they backed him up against the wall and went 
through his pockets. There were deputy sheriffs standing by watch- 
ing the proceedings but they didn't interfere. The victim filed charges 
in Gretna against Marcello and Marcianti for robbery by force, but 
there is no indication of any prosecutive proceedings and these charges 
cannot be found in ISIarcello's official criminal record. As a matter 
of fact, although Marcello's life of crime has centered in and around 
Jefferson Parish, it has not be^n possible to locate any cuiTently avail- 
able record to indicate his arrests or charges in that parish. 

Mr. Kennedy. There is a new sheriff now, is there not, in Jefferson 
Parish? 

Mr. Kohn. In June 1956, following about 28 years of Sheriff 
Clancy's a drninist ration, a "reform" sheriff took office, whose name is 
William Coci. 



17224 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you spell his name ? 

Mr. KoHN. C-o-c-i. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has the situation improved in Jefferson County, 
in Jefferson Parish, since Sheriff Coci has taken over? 

Mr. KoiiN. From the viewpoint of the racketeers, yes. However, 
in terms of law enforcement it has deteriorated. 

The Chairman. Do you mean that is your present sheriff down 
there? 

Mr. KoiiN. Our new sheriff, a young lawyer who took office in 1956, 
had never, from my knowledoje, held any prior public office; has en- 
gaged in a very aggressive anti-good government movement, we might 
call it, since he has taken office. 

The Chairman. Is that this Coci ? 

Mr. KoHN. Coci. 

The Chairman, We have a television program, have we not, about 
the Sheriff of Cochise ? That is not the same sheriff you are talking 
about is it ? 

Mr. KoHN. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You do not feel that the majority of citizens of the 
parish favor lawlessness, do you ? 

Mr. KoHN. No, sir; I certainly do not. But I do believe that cer- 
tain traditions of collusion between key law enforcement officers and 
our racketeers over a long period of time has tended to create an atmos- 
phere in which citizens are fearful of law enforcement officers and, 
therefore, are very reluctant to openly or vigorously combat the 
alliances to which I refer. 

Senator Curtis. Perhaps sometimes at the polls they do not have 
a clear-cut choice. 

Mr. KoHN. Too often this is true. I might point out that in the 
case of their election of Sheriff Coci in 1956, they thought they were 
getting reform, and they found, however, the refoimation was of a 
totally different kind than they had voted for. 

Mr. Kennedy. He ran as a reform sheriff ? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes, sir; he was a part of a reform movement which 
was intended to bring in a new and efficient charter which, inciden- 
tally, after he took office, he bitterly fought against, and was sup- 
posed to replace the old patronage type of sheriff's office with modern 
police agencies, which he has refused to do, and has fouglit against 
moA'^ements of others to accomplish. 

Mr. Kennedy. He beat King Clancy, did he? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir. 

Ml-. Kennedy. He ran against him ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. May I ask another question ? 

This committee is charged primarily, and I guess solely, with in- 
vestigating improper activities in the field of labor-management rela- 
tions. Do you feel there is a connection between this underworld ap- 
paratus that you described and some of the problems in labor-manage- 
ment relations tliat this committee has dealt with ? 

Mr. KoiiN. Well, sir, as was well pointed out by the chairman of the 
committee, Senator McClellan, the absence of racketeering in labor 
unions is largely due to the absence of extensive organization of labor 
unions in the past. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17225 

I might point out that the New Orleans area is new as an industrial 
center. It was during a depression in the prewar years wlien other 
communities were finding industrial growth and getting their eco- 
nomic stability. 

So we suddenly in the New Orleans area found ourselves con- 
fronted with vast industrial expansion. This was sudden and quick, 
unlike the industrial development in other areas accompanied by, in 
many recent years, the growth of labor union organization. 

Our labor union organization has not yet caught up with the con- 
centration of people and industry in the area. One of the things that 
might logically discourage certain areas of labor union organization 
would be the fact that certain of the racketeer figures and public offi- 
cials who are feared by citizens who are also workers might well be 
discouraged from identifying themselves with anything which would 
be in conflict with the interests of corrupt officials and the racketeers 
in their alliances. 

This might well be said to be true, for example, in the present 
area of your inquiry, in the jukebox-pinball area. I am sure that 
many persons who might otherwise be interested in joining a labor 
union would think mighty, mighty long before identifying themselves 
with sometliing which might, just might, displease the Carlos Mar- 
cello mob, who have a major interest in that industry. 

The Chairman. In other words, the situation is kind of reversed 
liere. This is where the management or the ownership, the mob, has 
complete control, and there is a state of fear existing on the part of 
the employees ? 

Mr. KoHN. In collusion with public officials ; yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What labor union was involved in the instance you 
spoke of ? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, there have been two very timid attempts, one by 
the Electrical Workers some years ago, and then by the Teamsters a 
couple of years ago. They made no real, aggressive effort to continue 
organization. There has not been, I might point out, violence of any 
kind or racketeering of any kind in the New Orleans area by Team- 
sters, differing from what you have found in many other areas. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Kennedy. Because of this close tie-in that exists already be- 
tween management, gangsters and certain public officials, there has 
been no need to try to bring in, nor attempt to bring in, a corrupt 
labor union. No. 1, and the honest labor unions have a difficult time 
moving in because of the fact that there is such control and domina-- 
tion of the area by these groups. 

Mr. KoHN. I would say tliat to be accurate, Mr. Kenned}'. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, would you briefly give us the rest of Marcello's 
background, the difficulties he has had with law enforcement, with 
the Federal law enforcement? You mentioned that he appeared be- 
fore the Kefauver committee in 1951, and he resorted to the fifth 
amendment at that time. 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. Of interest to this committee may be the 
fact that Carlos Marcello's name came up in connection with at least 
one public bribery matter, 

Mr. Kennedy. Public what ? 



36751— 59— pt. 4S- 



17226 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. KoiiN. Bribery. This grew into a conviction in January 1955. 
Actually, there were two convictions of the same man. It was a man 
named Horace Perez, a notorious gambler. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Marcello was involved in this ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. There was testimony and wire recordings 
made by State police which connected Carlos Marcello with the gam- 
bling operations of Perez. Perez identified Carlos Marcello to a 
State police official as his bankroll. That was while 

The Chairman. His what ? 

Mr. KoiiN, Bankroll. This was while he was negotiating with a 
major of the State police for protection of certain gambling joints 
in Jefferson Parish. 

In addition, the testimony and evidence indicated that Carlos 
Marcello had on one occasion driven with Perez to the western part of 
Louisiana where a prearranged meeting had been made between Perez 
and this State police major for the purpose of furthering the nego- 
tiations to gain protection through the payment of graft. 

In connection with that, Perez was convicted both in the New 
Orleans and Baton Rouge courts. In both cases, however, he was 
placed on probation and fined, and was not sent to prison. 

Mr. Kennedy, What was his fine ? 

Mr. KoHN. $1,000 fine and in one case he was placed on probation 
for 5 years and he appealed unsuccessfully, and in another case grow- 
ing out of the same combination of events he paid a fine of $1,000 and 
was placed on probation for 2i/^ years. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is for bribing public officials ? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. This man Perez, with Marcello in the background 
as his bankroll, and Marcello putting up the money, according to the 
testimony for the bribery of public officials, in both of those cases he 
did not receive any jail terms, but just probation, is that right, and 
a fine? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes, sir, and not only that, but a year after his second 
conviction he was pardoned by Gov. Earl Long. 

Anotlier interesting fact was that we had been watching the estab- 
lishment of a new gambling casino at 996 Jefferson Highway, being 
equipped with all new equipment and the day after Perez was par- 
doned he was in the new casino, operating it. 

Another interesting aspect was the fact that he and his attorneys 
applied to both courts after his convictions and the courts returned 
to him the thousands of dollars placed in evidence by the State police 
official as having been paid as graft. This money was returned to 
Perez's attorney. 

The CiiATHiMAN. You mean the graft money; they impounded it. 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir, and then it Avas returned by the courts. 

The Chairman. After he was convicted ? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Who finally got the money, the corrupt officer or 
the man who paid the bribe ? 

Mr. Kohn. It wasn't a corrupt officer. 

The Chairman. Who did he bribe ? 

Mr. Kohn. Maj. Aaron Edgecomb was the State police officer who 
was approached in connection with this and then he talked to the 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17227 

superintendent and they made wire recordings of various conversa- 
tions. 

The CuAiRMAX. It was an attempt to bribe ? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir, and the money paid to xVaron Edgecomb and 
immediately turned over to the superintendent was then used as 
evidence. 

The Chairman. It was actually bribe money ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Although the man to whom it was paid was not 
taking a bribe, and he was simply letting the man commit his own 
crime. 

Mr. KoHN. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then that money was returned to Perez ? 

Mr. KoHN. That is right. 

The Chairman. "What was involved; how much was it? Do you 
remember ? 

Mr. KoHN. I don't recall the exact sum, but it was a number of 
thousands of dollars. 

The Chairman. More than one ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Nothing was ever done to Marcello in connection 
with that? 

Mr. KoHN. There were never any charges made against him in any 
way. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Marcello was cited for contempt for his testi- 
mony before the Senate committee in 1951, and he was convicted and 
that conviction was reversed in a higher court ; is that right ? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, I would like to have you tell the committee a 
little bit of the background of Mr. Marcello's coin machine businesses. 
He is active in the coin machine business? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir, and he has been for many years ; financially he 
has been very much involved. 

The Chairman. As we speak of coin machines now, let us ti-y to 
some extent at least to differentiate between pinball machines, or 
gambling devices, and vending machines which sell merchandise and 
jukebox machines, which take a coin and play a little music. 

Is he engaged in all of those ? 

Mr. Kohn. Until a rather new phenomena occurred in Louisiana, 
that is the appointment of a vigorous and honest State police super- 
intendent in 1952, Carlos Marcello w^as one of the key figures in slot 
machine distribution. 

The Chairman. That is the gambling device, the one-armed bandits 
■we call them. 

Mr. Kohn. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kohn. Since the State police organization at the time for the 
'first time in modern history proceeded to destroy thousands of slot 
machines and enforce the laws in connection with them, the number 
oi such gambling devices in the State was substantially reduced. 

However, in Jefferson Parish, since Sheriff Coci has been elected to 
office, there have been numerous instances of slot machines coming 
back into use, and at least one of the companies in which Marcello is 
.n partner has been one of the operators of these slot machines. 



17228 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

However, the recent historj; of Marcello's interest in coin devices 
lias been principally in relationship to jukeboxes and pinball ma- 
chines. One of the companies, the Jefferson Music Co., the largest 
operators in Jefferson Parish, is located in Gretna, La. 

The gathering of information about this company indicates that 
prior to January of 1942 the company was in the name of Carlos- 
mother, Mrs. Louise Marcello, and that about that time, however, she 
sold the company to another son, Vmcent Marcello, who was then a 
minor, who by court order was given the authority to engage in 
contracts. 

At that point the size of the company is somewhat indicated by 
the fact that Vincent paid $7,000 and reportedly took over the entire 
business which then included 49 slot machines and 50 music boxes, 
62 pin games, and other equipment spotted in about 84 locations, most- 
ly in the Algiers section of New Orleans. 

Then in 1944, it appears from records that Vincent and Carlos 
formed a partnership in the Jefferson Music Co., which has continued 
to be the key management figure. 

However, Carlos over the years has used this place for his head- 
quarters. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of course Carlos is the one we are principally in- 
terested in. 

Mr, KoHN. I meant Carlos continued to use Jefferson Music as his 
headquarters although Vincent is the major management figure there. 

In addition, other members of the Marcello family, other brothei^s, 
particularly Sam and Anthony, have drawn income and have worked 
for the Jefferson Music Co. It may be of interest that another 
brother, Pasqual Marcello has had registered Federal faming device 
stamps at the address of the Jefferson Music Co. In recent years, 
Carlos has been given to identifying himself as being in the real estate 
and hotel business. 

For public consumption, he and his brothers protest that Carlos has 
no interest in the Jefferson Music Co., or in the illegal horserace wire 
service or in any of the other Marcello mob rackets. 

One example of the recent extent of this attempt to conceal Carlos' 
participation 

Mr. Kennedy. And also to expand their own operations ? 

Mr. KoiiN. And to expand their ability to operate — might be found 
in an action taken by the metropolitan crime commission last Septem- 
ber. At that time we learned that the Federal Communications Com- 
mission had granted a citizen's radio license to the Jefferson Music 
Co. operating under the name of Vincent Marcello. This license was 
issued for a period from December 11, 1957, to December 11, 1962. 
^ The crime commission contacted Federal Communications Commis- 
sion and pointed out tliat the same ])eople involved in the ownership 
of this Jefferson Music Co., whicli now had a radio station and a 
license to operate it were also operating a horserace Avire service, sup- 
plying to illegal handbooks all through Ix>uisiana and elsewhere 
nearby, the results that were needed to operate e^nl, unlawful hand- 
book gambling. 

Now, we have never to this date been adAnsed of the result of the 
FCC investigation into the matter and we are still awaiting to hear 
about it. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17229 

However, when this was made ])ublic, Vincent Marcello protested 
the identification of Carlos Marcello with the Jefferson Music Co., and 
pointed out that Carlos had nothing to do with the radio station. 

(Members of the select committee present at this point in the pro- 
ceedings were Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the FCC ever explain to you why they would 
grant a license to such a notorious group of people ? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, one of their representatives called at our office 
and explained that there were no specific regulations which would 
prevent the issuing of such a license to the Jefi'erson Music Co. ; that 
unless it could be proven that the radio itself were being used for 
illicit pui-poses no action could be taken. They did, however, advise 
that any official of a corporation or organization, who was an alien, 
would make unqualified such an organization for this permit. Mar- 
cello is an alien. 

Mr. Kennedy. But also, as you point out, this radio is a perfect 
setuj) for distributing all information regarding gambling activities, 
Avhich they control in that area. 

Mr. KoHN. The fact that this group would stop at nothing in order 
to further their illicit enterprises can be found in the recent discovery 
of an illicit 15-mile telephone installation in Jefi'erson Parish, ema- 
nating from the Nola Printing Co., which is the wire service head- 
quarters. Here were these telephone lines installed running on the 
equipment of the telephone company and the telegraph company, 
dropping off at layoft' points, these layoff points being veiy busy spots 
which receive handbook bets, and which relay horserace information. 

Mr. Kennedy. What company was this? 

Mr, KoHN. Nola Printing Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. What connection does the Xola Printing Co. have 
with Marcello? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, sir, there is a rather long histoiy of the evolu- 
tion of the wire service which I am sure you wouldn't want to take 
this committee's time to go into. But I would like to point out that 
Carlos Marcello has figured in the wire service ownership ever since 
about 1946 when there was a muscling-out process of a long-time 
ware service group operated under the name of the Fogerty Service. 

Senator Curtis. Has this radio station ever been constructed ? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, sir, it is not a station. The license is for the use 
of portable radio sending and receiving stations, such as are used in 
motor vehicles. 

Senator Curtis. Are they using it? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. They are being used in connection with the 
servicing — this is at least the reason they give for the use of the 
license — used for the servicing of coin devices operated by the Jeffer- 
son Music Co. That is, to send messages back and forth to the service- 
man in the area. 

Senator Curtis. But it is operating ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Is it the type of operation that others can pick up, 
the ]3ublic generally, the broadcasts? 

Mr. KoHN. No, it would not be on the normal broadcast channels. 

Senator Curtis. Is it a closed-circuit telephonic arrangement? 



17230 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. KoHN. Yes. Of course, it could be monitored by someone 
goin<i: in on the same wavelen^h. 

Senator Curtis. Is the owner of the license a corporation or a part- 
nership ? 

Mr. KoHN. The license was taken by Vincent Marcello doing busi- 
ness as the Jefferson Music Co. 

Senator Curts. Is Vincent Marcello a citizen ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir, he was born in this country. However, his 
partner, Carlos Marcello, whose name did not enter, to my knowledge, 
certainly does not appear on the license, and probably did not enter 
into the application for this radio license, is an alien, and has quite 
a lengthy criminal record. 

Senator Curtis. When was this matter laid before the Federal Com- 
munications Commission ? 

Mr. KoHN. The crime commission wrote to the FCC in Septem- 
ber of last year. 

Senator Kohn. Did you get an acknowledgment of it? 

Mr.KoHN. Sir? 

Senator Curtis. Did you get an acknowledgment of your letter? 

Mr. KoHN. Received an aclaiowledgment and had a call from one 
of their representatives to whom we gave all the facts in our pos- 
session. 

Senator Curtis. Wliat is your miderstanding of the status of it ? 

Mr. KoHN. I don't know the present status. I haven't checked 
recently to learn their decision or the status of action they are taking. 

Senator Curtis. At the time you wrote, had the broadcasting appa- 
ratus already been activated? 

Mr. KoHN. It had been in use for quite a long time. 

Senator Curtis. So it probably is a matter of revocation rather 
than denial of the license. 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it your understanding that this was taken out 
by Vincent Marcello? That is, this radio station was to be owned 
by him ? 

Mr. KoHN. The license was issued to Vincent Marcello as an in- 
dividual doing business as the Jefferson Music Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. I wanted to make sure that was understood. Doing 
business as the Jefferson Music Co. The Jefferson Music Co. is owned 
by Vincent Marcello and Carlos Marcello? 

Mr. KoHN. As equal partners. 

Mr. Kennedy. So Carlos Marcello, who is not even a citizen of the 
United States, who has this extensive criminal background, is one 
of the owners of this radio station ? 

Mr. KoHN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have one of the reports from the 
Federal Communications Commission in connection with this com- 
pany. I would like to call a member of the staff to put it in, briefly. 

The Chairman. Come forward, please. 

Be sworn. 

Do you solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the tiTith, so help you God ? 

Mr. Constandy. I do. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17231 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN P. CONSTANDY 

The Chairman, State your name, your place of residence, and your 
present employment. 

Mr, CoNSTAxuY. My name is Jolm Constandy, I reside in New 
York City, I am assistant counsel for the committee. 

The Chairman, All ri^ht, 

Mr. Constandy, The FCC was in receipt of information wliich 
raised the question of whether the Jefferson Music Co. was not owned 
solely by Vincent Marcello as he stated in his application for a radio 
station license and whether the station was being used in accordance 
with rules <:yoverning its use. 

Therefore, on November 3, 1958, a letter was sent by the FCC to 
Vincent Marcello asking him to state whether he was the sole owner 
of Jefferson Music Co,, and to specify the interest, compensation, and 
duties of Carlos Marcello in the company, 

Mr, Vincent Marcello responded on December 2, 1958, by a sworn 
statement on the letterhead of the Jefferson Music Co., and his state- 
ment is to this effect : The Jefferson Music Co. is now and always has 
been a partnership between myself and my brother Carlos Marcello. 

As a result of this information that was received by the Federal 
Communications Commission, they instructed their office in New 
Orleans to monitor transmissions of this equipment. 

The Chairman, To do what ? 

Mr, Constandy. To monitor the equipment, the transmission of 
messages by this equipment, which, incidentally, was licensed for 13 
units, of which T were presently in operation, one being the base 
station at their home office and the other being portable miits con- 
tained within vehicles. 

It is interesting to know, too, that the equipment was to be used in 
the servicing of some 780 jukebox machines that are operated by 
Jefferson Music, and 270 other type coin machines that are operated 
by Jefferson Music. 

The Chairman. Do I understand that the Federal Communications 
Commission now is granting permits to operate radio broadcasting 
for jukebox machines and such? 

Mr. Constandy, The purpose of this type of equipment. Senator, 
is to enable 

The Chairman. I know, it is a two-way system where you can talk, 
back and forth, 

Mr, Constandy. Similar to that of taxicabs. 

The Chairman. It seems to me like the frequencies in this country 
can be used for a better purpose than for carrying on this sort of 
business. I am wondering if the Federal Communications Commis- 
sion was actually apprised of the nature of this business, and the 
kind of business that this permit is going to serve at the time it 
granted them ? 

Mr, Constandy, I believe the correspondence we have. Senator, 
is that they were aware that the Jefferson Music Co. was engaged 
in a route-type business, and the equipment would be used to dispatch 
mechanics and servicemen to the locations to provide service for their 
machines. 

I further believe from the correspondence that they had no indica- 
tion that there was any illegal activity in connection with it. 



17232 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. At the time they granted it, they had nothing to 
indicate any illegal activity ? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. That is correct. Nor was there any question raised 
in regard to the type of machines that were being used. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. They monitored the broadcasts then ? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. Yes ; they did. The initial monitoring commenced 
on the weekend of September 29, which I believe was a Monday, 1958. 
The report shows that the radio was used practically not at all. There 
were only three transmissions in the weekend period, including Mon- 
day. Subsequently, over a period of some 11 days, I believe, they had 
nine transmissions. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many did they say they expected to have? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. As Mr. Vincent Marcello related to them in a sworn 
statement, the average number of automatic music machines serviced 
as a result of communications from the station is approximately 630, 
for jukeboxes, and plus an additional 230 for the other coin machines, 
so tiie monthly average use would be 850 calls. 

Mr. Kennedy. After this complaint was made by the crime com- 
mission to tlie FCC and the FCC then began monitoring the station, 
how many broadcasts were made ? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. Well, as they term it, they say transmissions inter- 
cepted have been few and brief. In fact, they are conspicuous because 
the licensee is not using the facilities for which he is authorized. They 
attribu^^p that further to the publicity that was attended to the original 
complaints. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could they understand any of the broadcasts that 
were made ? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. The broadcasts at that time were being made by 
code, which was in keeping largely with a predetermined arrange- 
ment to use code letters that held down the amount of time that any 
particular person utilized the wavelengths. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did it fit into the code they furnished ? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. In some instances it did, yet there were a few oc- 
currences which the engineer monitoring was not able to understand. 

Mr. Kennedy. What sort of things? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. Well, the one that is given as an example is "Come 
in car 6, 228, and 2241/2," also 10 and 45, then "047 clear." 

Some of that is understandable in that one of the numl:)ers trans- 
mitted would conform to this list, which gives tlie numerical equiv- 
alent for each location, at which the Jefferson Music Co. operates a 
machine of one description or another. 

However, the engineer monitoring this made the statement that 
perhaps the 228, for Miiich there is no authorized use, according to 
the code, might conceivably be 1228 Jefferson Highway, which was 
the location of a place of business of theirs. 

So there is some confusion yet as to what the numbers are, being 
used as a code, what they really meant. 

Mr. Kennedy. They could not understand the code that was being 
used on the broadcasts, in some of the broadcasts that were made ; is 
that right? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. A number of these machines that were being serv- 
iced at best were operating illegally, were they not, Mr. Kohn? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17233 

TESTIMONY OF AARON M. KOHN— Resumed 

Mr. KoiiN. During the period that the license has been effective, 
we have found slot niacliines and horserace machines bearing the 
labels of the Jefferson Music Co. operating in Jefferson Parish, and 
assumedly they would have to be serviced by the same man. 

Mr. Kennedy. But in addition to that, though, the Jefferson Co. 
operates the pinball machines; do they not? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir; which are used almost entirely for gambling 
in our area. 

Mr. Kennedy. And isn't gambling illegal ? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir ; it is. 

Mr. Kennedy. This radio station granted by the Federal Communi- 
cations Commission is given in order to service, among others, these 
j)inball machines which are operating illegally ? 

IMr. KoiiN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. So at best that is the situation, and perhaps the 
station can be used for the other purposes, organized gambling and 
for disseminating information regarding handbooks and other out-" 
right gambling ; is that right ? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir. In addition to that, some of these devices 
are in gambling casinos, where other types of gambling are engaged 
in, and their machines become a part of an extensive gambling 
operation, 

Mr. Kennedy. Couldn't the FCC have found out quickly that this 
radio station was being used to service at least in part gambling 
machines, being operated illegally ? 

Mr. KoHN. I raised this question and was informed by their repre- 
sentative that they just don't have the personnel or staff to under- 
take investigations either before granting licenses or to verify, after 
the license is gi-anted, the legal use of them. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long would you have to stay in Jeffei-son Parish 
to find out that the pinball machines are being used as gambling 
devices? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, sir, just long enough to come to the crime com- 
mission, get a list of the spots, and go over and see them. 

Mr. Kennedy. It would take maybe an hour? 

Mr. KoHN. I would say an hour would be enough to make a reason- 
able investigation. 

Mr. Kennedy. We had an investigator down there and he found 
out in less than an hour. 

So I assume somebody from the Federal Communications Commis- 
sion could have done it in an hour. 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir ; he was well educated in a very short time. 

Senator Curtis. May I ask this question: Has the Commission 
ruled on the validity of the license by reason of the fact that the sup- 
plemental statement indicates that an alien brother is part of it? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. I believe that is still pending. 

Senator Curtis. You do not know how soon they are expected to 
move? 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. No ; I do not. 

Senator Curtis. I would like to ask you. Mr. Kohn, this question : 
Is it the belief that this radio license would be used to disseminate 



17234 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

gambling? information, that in other words it would be a direct part 
of the gambling apparatus ? 

Mr. KonN. In connection with the comments just made by Mr. 
Kennedy, their use in servicing gambling coin devices, this would 
exist. With reference to the wire service, whether or not they were or 
will use, in fact, the radio system for conveying horserace results, we 
believe, is not the issue. 

Placing a gun in the hands of a known killer by license is not a vei-y 
sensible thing to do in protection of others. Placing a means of com- 
munication, widespread communication, in the hands of those known 
to use means of communication for illicit ])urposes, we believe, lacks 
the same kind of defense. 

Senator Curtis. I have no quarrel with you on that. But I just 
wondered this: "Was it, we will say, the fear of those opposing these 
rackets that it would be used as part of the actual gambling apparatus 
by disseminating information, code or otherwise? 

Mr. KoHN. That is available to them for that purpose should they 
feel they had to use it ; yes, sir. In other words, if they were placed 
in a situation where they were having trouble using telephone facili- 
ties, even for a short period of time, it would be very sensible for them 
to send out their 12 vehicles into 12 spots for relay points on informa- 
tion ; placed in that position, this would be a logical thing for them 
to do. 

They have never, in their record of use of facilities, indicated any 
moral sense of obligation to regulations. 

Senator Curtis. I understand that. I am not quarreling with you. 
I think there might be a legal question of whether or not it would be 
a crime to send a message over any communicating system, to dispatch 
a mechanic, even though the mechanic's ultimate errand was upon a 
mission that was used in violation of the law. 

But it is also possible, I would think, that this could be used to dis- 
seminate information relating to the bets and the other features of 
gambling. 

Mr. KoiTisr. It could well be used for that purpose. 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that Mr. Carlos Marcello has been 
under orders of deportation from the United States since about 1953 ? 

Mr. KoiiN. Actually, on the very day that the new McCarran Act 
went into effect, Carlos Marcello was picked up and shortly thereafter 
ordered deported, under the new Federal law. Ever since then he 
has been fighting the deportation. 

I believe the last count is that he has been in court some 37 times 
in various appellate proceedings, and in various hearings. 

Mr. Kennedy. But certainly that order was in effect, or the situation 
regarding the order was in effect, in existence, at the time the radio 
station was granted? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes. He was under final order of deportation at that 
time. 

The Cir AIRMAN. At the time this license was granted ? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. But I do not think at the time the Federal Com- 
munications Commission knew of his interest in it, in the business; 
did it? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17235 

Mr, KonN. I would assume they had no knowledge probably beyond 
what was received in the application. 

The Chairman. That has developed since. 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That is, so far as their knowing. 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis ? 

Senator Curtis. May I ask the staff witness another question ? 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Senator Curtis. Did I understand correctly that this license was 
issued on the statement of Vincent that he was the sole owner operat- 
ing under a trade name of the music company, the Jefferson Music 
Co., in the original instance ? 

Mr. Constandy. In answer to that, Senator, the correspondence to 
the Jefferson Music Co. was in care of Mr. Vincent J. Marcello, dated 
November 3, 1958, which I believe is the initial correspondence be- 
tween the FCC and the company, and in it it reads : 

The Commission is in receipt of information indicating that the Jefferson 
Music Co., of which you were the sole proprietor in 1957, according to 
your application for a license, may now be a partnership or an unincorporated 
association, and that the radio station may not now be operated at all times 
for puriK)ses contemplated by the Commission's rules governing the citizens 
radio service. 

Senator Curtis. While you have not examined the original appli- 
cation, that would indicate that he applied on the basis of his being 
the sole owner ? 

Mr. Constandy. I believe that is so ; yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know whether in FCC the issue has been 
raised that the license was granted on the basis of a false application ? 

Mr. Constandy. No; I do not. The balance of this letter goes on 
to ask the applicant, Mr. Vincent Marcello, certain questions which 
he, in turn, answers by this sworn statement dated December 2, 1958. 
The first question reads, as a matter of fact : 

State whether or not you are still the sole proprietor of the business conducted 
under the trade name of Jefferson Music, and then state whether the business 
is now conducted under a partnership agreement or unincoi-porated association. 

Senator Curtis. What did he answer? 

Mr. Constandy. His answer to that specific question was he incorpo- 
rated A, B, C, and D. Maybe I better read the whole thing. 
Senator Curtis. Just the answer. 
Mr. Constandy. Well — 

As I indicated before, that Jefferson Music Co. is now and always has been 
a partnership between myself and by brother Carlos Marcello. Mr. Carlos Mar- 
cello has not been actively engaged in the business in any manner since I re- 
turned from the service in 1945. I have operated the business solely by my- 
self since that time to the present date. 

My agreement with my brother Carlos, as evidenced in partnership returns 
filed for Federal tax purposes, is that he is to receive 50 percent of the yearly 
net profit of such business which, in fact, he does receive. Other than the 50 
percent distribution of profit yearly, he receives no compensation. 

Senator Curtis. I am certainly unfamiliar with FCC law but it 
would appear that where an applicant makes a false statement in an 
original application, conceals the fact that he has a partner who is in- 



17236 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

eligible to receive a license, certainly might be grounds to revoke the 
license if they want to revoke it. 

Mr. CoNSTANDY. As I mentioned, Senator, that matter is still under 
consideration by the FCC and I do not believe they have reached any 
final rulmg on it. 

Mr. Kennedy. In connection with the gambling, do you say that 
the gambling is running wide open in Jefferson County ? 

Mr. KoHN. Almost continuously. There are momentary periods of 
comparative cessation following pressures from the press and civic 
groups. 

Mr. Kennedy. These pinball operations in Jefferson County are 
used as gambling equipment ? 

Mr. KoHN. In the entire area of metropolitan New Orleans, yes, 
sir, including Jefferson Parish. 

Mr. Kennedy. Including Jefferson Parish ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And other parishes as well ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. They have gambling? stamps ; do they ? 

Mr. KoHN. Some do. For example, just taking 1 area, in 1 check 
we found that out of approximately 1,400 pinball machines in the city 
of New Orleans, about 87 of them had gambling stamps. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what the situation is in Jefferson 
Parish? 

Mr. KoHN. No, sir; we haven't made that figure study. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you found from your investigation that the 
sheriff or any of his deputies have attempted to close down any of this 
gambling equipment ? 

Mr. KoHN. On the contrary, they totally ignore complaints received 
by the sheriff's office concernmg gambling of any kind in the parish. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you received reports that they have actively 
assisted and helped the companies which are owned by Carlos Mar- 
cello, or with wliom he has a close association ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. In addition to tlie Jefferson Music Co., one 
of the Marcello group interests is the Huey Distributing Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. H-u-e-y ? 

Mr. KoiiN. H-u-e-y. And which is on what is known as the east 
bank of Jefferson Parish. The Mississippi River runs in through 
Jefferson Parish and divides it into two areas, one known as the east 
and the other the west bank area. The Gretna Co., Jefferson Music, 
is on the west bank, Huey Distributing is on the east bank. The Huey 
Distributing Co., in which Carlos Marcello also derives — well, he is 
a partner in interest, has a financial interest — that is primarily man- 
aged, again, by Vincent Marcello, or was so managed, as is the Jeffer- 
son Music Co. 

Within a matter of weeks after Sheriff Coci took office, in Jime 
1956, his two chief deputies, liis chief criminal deputy and chief civil 
deputy, were calling on bai's and restaurants throughout the parish, 
especially on the busier highways and busier spots, ordering them to 
move out their present jukeboxes and pinball machines, and advising 
them that new ones would bo supplied by the Marcello-controlled 
companies. 

They were given the alternative of doing that or being harassed by 
police raids. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17237 

The Chairman. This is the case where the la\v enforcement officials, 
who are supposed to enforce the hiw, muscle in and tell the operators 
or the business owners that they have to change from one machine to 
another, or from one company to another, in order to operate? 

Mr. KoiiN. Yes, sir ; that is correct. 

The Chairman. Otherwise, they would be molested by the law en- 
forcement officials ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. But if they change and get in with the right com- 
pany, they will have no problem ; is that it ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did that happen ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir: it did happen. I might point out in passing 
that the same thing was done some years back in the city of New 
Orleans in connection with the organization of the operators of pin- 
ball machines, in order to force people to join an association. Law 
enforcement officers harassed operators' locations until the operators 
joined the association of operators. 

The Chairman. And this time it was to change machines? 

Mr. Kohn. To change machines. 

The Chairman. And to get in with the people who were going to 
run it, who would be the racket bosses, so to speak ? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes, sir. It was also interesting that many of the lo- 
cations that were involved in this muscling process were on record as 
having Federal gambling stamps at the location for coin-operated 
devices. One of the location owners was told, "Put in our machines or 
we will close up your handbook." 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, in that comiection, I would like to 
call a witness to give some firsthand information in connection with 
this. 

The Chairman. Will you want to further question Mr. Kohn ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

The Chairman. Very well. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Walter Richardson. 

The Chairman. Please be sworn. 

You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this Senate 
select commitee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Richardson. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WALTER RICHARDSON, ACCOMPANIED BY 
COUNSEL, ROBERT I. BROUSSARD 

The Chairman. Before we proceed further, I think I should state 
for the record that Sheriff William S. Coci was advised first by the 
staff that there would be derogatory testimony given at this hearing 
possibly against him, and then he was sent a wire in which he was 
invited to be present. 

The Chair has received a wire in reply from him saying: 

Re your telegram : Regret that due to prior important engagements will not 
"be able to accept your invitation to attend meeting. 

-Signed "William S. Coci." 



17238 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

I did not want anyone to be under the impression that Sheriff Coci 
was slipped up on on the blind side. 

State your name, your place of residence, and your business or 
occupation. 

Mr. Richardson. Walter Richardson, 2000 

The Chairman. AValter, did you say ? 

Mr. Richardson. Walter Richardson. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Richardson. 2,000 block of Shrewsbury Road, New Orleans. 

Mr. Kennedy. Jefferson Parish? 

Mr. Richardson. Jefferson Parish, New Orleans. 

The Chairman. What is your business? What do you do? 

Mr. Richardson. I have a bar and restaurant. 

The Chairman. A what? 

Mr. Richardson. A bar and restaurant. 

The Chairman. A bar and restaurant ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Have you counsel present ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, will you identify yourself for the 
record ? 

Mr. Broussard. Robert E. Broussard, Gretna, La. 

The Chairman. You are licensed to practice in Louisiana, a mem- 
ber of the Louisiana Bar ? 
' Mr. Broussard. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Richardson, how long have you been operating 
your bar and restaurant ? 

Mr. Richardson. About 8i/^ years. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had some difficulties in connection with your 
j ukebox a year or so ago, did you not ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You ultimately filed a case against some individuals, 
which case came to the attention of the staff of this committee; is 
that correct? Well, you wouldn't know that. The case came to the 
attention of the staff of the committee and you were interviewed by 
a member of the staff ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And ultimately you were given a subpena to appear 
before the committee ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I just want to make sure it is understood, Mr. Chair- 
man, that the witness is here after being subpenaed, and here is ob- 
ligated, of course, to give the facts and information to the committee 
in coimection with the matter. 

The Chairman. What we are saying is that you did not necessarily 
volunteer to get in touch with the committee to divulge the informa- 
tion ; (lid you? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. Tliey overtook you somewhere; is that right? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17239 

i\Ir. Kexnedy. Mr. Richardson, since opening your establishment 
you had used a jukebox which was owned by a man by the name of Al 
Dargis ; is that right i< 

Mr. KiCHAKDsoN. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was a Jeiferson Parisli jukebox operator and a 
bar owner ^ 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In June of 1956, Mr. William S. Coci was elected 
sheriff of Jefferson Parish ? 

^Ir. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are familiar with that. Following this, the 
sheriff's deputies in about August, around August of 1956, two of the 
deputy sheriff's came to see you, two of Mr. Coci's deputy sheriffs? 

Mr. Richardson. I disremember the date, but they did came. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, it was a couple of months after he was elected 
as sheriff? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Will you relate to the committee what they told you 
at that time? 

Mr. Richardson. Well, I was minding mj'- restaurant, lying in back 
of my bar, and they came into the place and asked the girl where 
I was, and slie said I was sleeping. The girl pointed out where I 
was sleeping at and they came to knock on the door and asked me to 
talk to them. So I came on out. 

Mr. KIennedy. You were sleeping, and they came and told you that 
somebody wanted to see you ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. They woke you up and you came out ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate what happened ? 

Mr. Richardson. They said they had some business to talk to me 
on the jukebox. I wanted to know what it was all about. They 
asked me how many jukeboxes do I have in my place, and I said I 
had Mr. Dargis' box. They told me, "You have to use our equipment 
because we are taking over." 

I said, "Xo, I will not deal with your equipment. I have been deal- 
ing with this man since I went into the jukebox business and I am 
not going to take his box out of my place." They said, "Oh, yes, you 
are, or we will put pressure on you." 

Mr. Kennedy. Said what? 

Mr, Richardson. "Put pressure on you." 

Mr. Kennedy. These deputies said they were taking over and from 
now on you would be using their equipment ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

IVIr. Kennedy. And you explained that you had used Mr. Dargis' 
equipment and you were going to keep Mr. Dargis' equipment m 
there? 

Mr. Richardson. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they said, "No, you aren't; you are going to 
use our equipment" ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

The Chairman. How long had you been using Mr. Dargis' equip- 
ment ? 



17240 IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Richardson. Since the first day I went into the barix)om busi- 
ness. That was about Sy^ years. 

The Chairman. You had been using that fellow's equipment for 
81/2 years? 

Mr. EicHARDSON. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You had an election down there and got a new 
sheriff? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

The Chairman. And a couple of months after he took office, you 
were advised by his deputies that you better get some other machines ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And to quit doing business with somebody else ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Senator Curtis. "VYliat were the names of these deputies ? 

Mr. Richardson. I wouldn't know their names. I would know 
them when I seen them. 

Senator Curtis. How do you know they were deputy sheriffs ? 

Mr. Richardson. Because one of them had a imif orm on. 

Senator Curtis. You had seen both of them around ? 

Mr. Richardson. I know one of them, Davy Green. I know one of 
them, but the other one I doesn't know his name. I know him when 
I see him. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know their names now ? 

Senator Curtis. What is his name ? 

Mr. Richardson. Davy Green. 

Mr. Kennedy. The first visit that you had 

Mr. Richardson. The first visit? 

Mr. Kennedy. Who were the deputies that came to see you the first 
time? 

Mr. Richardson. The first one was no deputy. It was two fel- 
lows — T know one of them if I seen him and the other one I would 
know him if I seen him. He had a scar on his face. 

Mr. Kennedy. When they first came in 

Mr. Richardson. Those were the ones that woke me up out of bed. 

Senator Curtis. Those fellows who woke you up, what made you 
think they were deputy sheriffs? 

Mr. Richardson. Because I know one of them was working over at 
headquarters. 

Senator Curtis. You had seen him working around the sheriff's 
office? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did they say they were deputy sheriffs? 

Mr. Richardson. Not the first time; no sir. 

Senator Curtis. But they referred to the Huey Distributing 
Agency as theire; didn't they? 

Mr. Richardson. I don't know what they are now. All I know is 
it was a Rockola box. I don't know where it come from or what nanne 
of the company or nothing. All I know is Rockola. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let me see if we can get this straightened out. 

Wlien these individuals came to see you, these were two deputy 
sheriffs? 

Mr. Richardson. The first two? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17241 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir; they wasn't deputy sheriffs. One of 
them was workiiio; around the deputy's office. 

Mr. Kennedt. The people who came knocking on your room? 

Mr. RicHARDsox. Them is the ones I am talkinf^ about. 

Mr. Kennedy. They were not? 

Mr. Richardson. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did Mr. Coci and Mr. Arnoult came to see 
you? 

Mr. Richardson. They come to see me, I would say, around about 
a month after that. 

Mr. Kennedy. The morning after that? 

Mr. Richardson. A month ; 1 month. 

Mr. I\j:nnedy. That is ]Mr. Coci ; he is a deputy sheriff ? 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Red Coci. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was one of the deputy sheriffs? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat relation is he to the sheriff? 

Mr. Richardson. I really couldn't tell you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Pie is a brother of the sheriff, and he is one of the 
deputy sheriffs. Then there was Mr. Arnoult ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Arnoult was another deputy sheriff ? 

Mr. Richardson. I don't know whether he is a sheriff or not. I 
wouldn't want to say it as I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. "WTiat did they say to you ? 

Mr. Richardson. They came in there and told me I had to use their 
equipment, otherwise they are going to put pressure on me, and start 
to raid me and close me up. 

Mr. Kennedy. They are the ones that carried on this conversation 
that you related to the committee ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. "What did the people say to you that first came to 
see you ? 

Mr. Richardson. They said the same thing, if I don't use their box, 
they are going to put pressure on me. 

Mr. Kennedy. So both gi'oups said approximately the same thing ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. About the fact that you would have to take their 
kind of equipment ? 

Mr. Richardson. Right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you told them at that time that you had been 
using Mr. Dargis' equipment and you weren't going to have anything 
to do with them? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You stood up to them at that time? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they then start raiding your bar? 

Mr. RicHAiwsoN. Yes, sir. Practically every weekend, Friday, Sat- 
urday, and sometimes on Sunday, but practically every Friday and 
Saturday around 3 or 4 weeks. 

Mr. Kennedy. Started putting on the pressure ? 

yiv. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And started searching your customers? 

36751 — 59— pt. 48 3 



17242 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. KiCHARDSON. Searching my customers; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they bring them down to the police? 

Mr. Richardson. One time. 

Mr. Kennedy. But other than that they never brought them down? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they come in there night after night and start 
searching your customers and making arrests ? 

Mr. Richardson. Mostly on the weekend and sometimes on Sunday, 
practically every Friday and Saturday. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever had that trouble ? 

Mr. Richardson. Never, with no law coming into my place. 

Mr. Kennedy, Was it connected directly with your not putting in 
this equipment ? 

Mr. Richardson. I told them I wasn't going to put it in, that I 
wasn't going to use it, definitely. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they ever come in and implug your machine and 
put in another machine ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. I wasn't there when they came in and 
unplugged it. The first time they brought the box I wasn't there. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of a box was it ? 

Mr. Richardson. Rockola. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the Rockola jukebox ; is that right? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened then ? 

Mr. Richardson. I wasn't in when they brought the box. The girl 
told me when I came that the box was there. That is when I called 
up Mr. Al Dargis and told Mr. Al Dargis what had happened. So 
Mr. Al Dargis came over there and wanted to find out what happened, 
why the box was there. 

I said, "That is why I called you, because the fellow wanted to put 
the box in there and I told him I wasn't going to use their box." Mr. 
Al Dargis said, "You don't want to use their box, you want to use 
mine?" I said, "Definitely, I have been dealing with you all these 
years" 



Mr. Kennedy. You will have to slow down. 

Mr. Richardson. "I never had no misunderstanding with you, and 
I want your box definitely." 

He said, Mr. Al say, "Well, unplug it." I said, "No, I don't want 
no misunderstanding. You unplug it. I am giving you the oi*der to 
unplug it." So Mr. Al did. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you talk about Mr. Al, you are talking about 
Dargis ? 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Dargis. 

Mr. Kennedy. To summarize, somebody came in and unplugged 
Mr. Dargis' machine? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Brought in a Rockola machine and plugged that in? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The exclusive distributors, IMr. Chairman, at that 
time, of the Rockola jukebox machine, was the Huey Distributing Co., 
which is Marcello owned. 

They came in and plugged this in, so you called up Mr. Dargis and 
told him about it? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17243 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. Mr. Dargis came down. His machine had been 
turned to the wall and the other machine was plugged in ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said, "AVell, why don't you unplug that machine 
and put my machine back in?" and you said, "Go ahead and unplug 
it yourself"? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he unplugged it, turned the Rockola machine to 
the wall and plugged his own back in ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Mr. IvEXNEDY. At this point, his machine is plugged in and the 
other machine is turned to the wall, right ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you are still holding fast against them ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody come to see you then ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, they came back. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they say anything to you, then ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. They said, "Wliat is the matter you 
don't want to keep my box?" and I said, "I told you at first I didn't 
want to have your box." 

Mr. Ivennedy. Who came in at this time ? 

Mr. Richardson. The same two that came at first. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did another deputy sheriff come in then, Mr. Baby 
Brown ? 

Mr. Richardson. Baby Brown. 

Mr. Ivennedy. He was a deputy sheriff ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat did he tell you ? 

Mr. Richardson. He and Mr. Arnoult came in together. 

Mr. Kennedy. He and who ? 

Mr. Richardson. Arnoult. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Wliat did they say ? That Mr. Arnoult being the 
other deputy sheriff ? 

Mr. Richardson. Arnoult didn't saying anything. He came in with 
Baby Brown. The box was playing like it always has played on a 
w^eekend, and when he walked in he said, "AVhat is the matter the box 

E laying so loud?" and I said, "The box is not playing so loud as it 
as been playing," and he said, "Yes?" and he walked over and cut the 
box off. When he cut the box off, I turned it back on, and from one 
word to another me and him got in an argument, and me and him got 
into a little misunderstanding, and me and him got to fighting, and I 
shoved him out of the place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he keep unplugging it and you plugged it back 
in? 

]Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir ; four or five times. 

The Chairman. The deputy sheriff? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you shoved him out of the place? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir, and he brought back and hit me and T 
grabbed him and went to tusseling, and two people in the place 



17244 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

grabbed him and I shoved him out the door. He said, "I will be back 
with more deputies." I stood there and waited and he never did came 
back. 

Mr. KIennedy. Did they continue to raid your place then? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. They kept on raiding. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. That was through September they kept raiding it, 
August and September? 

Mr. Richardson. They raided it along about a month and a half 
or so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Every weekend ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did they ever find any unlawful activity going 
on there that would sustain a charge ? 

Mr. Richardson. Never have. I never did have any trouble with 
them before they came there to see me about the box, and I have been 
in the bar business 81/^ years. 

Senator Curtis. And you were never tried and found guilty of any- 
thing arising out of evidence that they might have picked up when 
they raided you ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. It is your belief that the raid was not bona fide 
so far as your being guilty of any crime, but it was to harass you ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is what I think it is, to try to get the box in 
my place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in October 1956, or just prior to that, at the 
suggestion of Mr. Al Dargis, you went to see your attorney and vou 
filed suit? 

Mr. Richardson. A suit ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. On October 1, 1956 ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Trying to restrain the sheritf from this harassment? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And after that a temporary restraining order was 
granted ; is that right ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they have not bothered you since then ? 

Mr. Richardson. They never have bothered me since then up until 
today. 

Mr. Kennedy. Up until today ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, you really stood up, Mr. Richardson. 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have a lot of courage. 

The Chairman. Are you still operating the original machine you 
had? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know of anybody else that had trouble with 
them? 

Mr. Richardson. Not to my knowledge ; not since the suit. 

The Cttaikman. You just know about your own problems? 

Mr. RicHARnsoN. That is all, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17245 

Senator Curtis. May I ask your counsel in what jurisdiction that 
suit was brought ? 

Mr. Broussard. In the 24th Judicial District Court in Jefferson 
Parish. 

Senator Curtis. Under your system there, is that jurisdiction 
limited to Jefferson Parish or a part thereof ? 

Mr. Broussard. It is entirely Jefferson Parish. It is a district 
composed of Jefferson Parish. 

The Chairman. The witness will remain under his present subpena, 
under the jurisdiction of this committee, subject to being recalled at 
sucli time as the committee may desire to hear further testimony 
from him. 

Will you acknowledge that request of the committee, that direction 
of the committee, and agree to reappear before the committee upon 
reasonable notice to give further testimony if the committee desires 
it? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. Is it all right if I can leave today and 
be called back ? 

The Chairman. Yes, we are going to let you leave today but I 
wanted to keep you under the jurisdiction of the committee. If 
anyone undertakes to intimidate, molest, threaten you, cause you 
any inconvenience or trouble about your appearance here, and your 
testimony here today, I want you to let the committee know about 
it at once. 

Mr. Richardson. I sure will, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Gillen. 

The Chairman. Be sworn, please. 

You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before tliis 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Gillen. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF EICHARD J. GILLEN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please, sir, 

Mr. Gillen. Richard John Gillen, 409 Coolidge Street. I own 
Pat Gillen's Bars. 

The Chairman. Mr. Gillen, do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. Gillen. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is another type of operation, Mr. Chairman, 
which was going on during this period of time that IVIr. Kolm was 
discussing. I felt that Mr. Gillen's tesimony might be helpful in 
understanding the situation. 

You own two bars called Pat's No. 1 and Pat's No. 2? 

Mr. Gillen. Well, I bought another one since November of tliis 
year. That was last year. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was last year ? 

Mr. Gillen. Well, 1958. In November of 1958 I purchased Pat 
Gillen No. 3. 



17246 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, up until then you had Pat's No. 1 and Pat's 

No. 2? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were taverns and restaurants in Jefferson 
Parish, La. ; is that rij^ht ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had machines in these bars owned by the New 
Orleans Novelty Co., the Manhattan Amusement Co., and Clem 
Guillot? 

Mr. GiLLEN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. In July or August 1956, were you visited by Albert 
Huffine? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I was . 

Mr. Kennedy. General manager of Huey Distributing Co.? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I don't know whether he was general manager. He 
told me he owned it. 

Mr. Kennedy. He told you that he owned the Huey Distributing 
Co.? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he indicate to you or tell you that you should 
take out the other machines and put his machines in? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, the two operators from New Orleans. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you that you should take those machines 
out and put his machines in ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. He said inasmuch as I was making a living in Jeffer- 
son, I should patronize Jefferson Parish men. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he indicate to you that he was connected with 
the correct or right people and for your own operation and for your 
continuance in business you better take his machines ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. No; he didn't say he was right or anything. But I 
figured it was best to patronize Jefferson people. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he say to you in any way that he was connected 
with the correct people, or indicate to you ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. No; he just said he had the OK to put out machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well now, you had been operating. How long had 
you had these other machines in there ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Offhand, I couldn't say. My son had the machines for 
a while, and he sold out to the New Orleans Novelty. 

Mr. Kennedy. Approximately how long had you had these ma- 
chines of these other companies in there ? 

Mr. GiLLEN, Well, all during the war and up until the early 1950's 
I owned my own machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you had had them in there — what ; 4 or 5 years ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. No; I don't believe I had them in there a year or two. 

Mr. Kennedy. Up to when? Wlien did you give up your own ma- 
chines in your place of business ? 

Mr. Gir.LEN. When Gravenberg came in. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliat was the honest sheriff ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Tliat was the honest police chief. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you got rid of your own machines then ? 

Mr. GiLT>EN. I got rid of all tlie slots in 1052. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he have a big campaign on against them ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. A tremendous one. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17247 

The Chairman. Was it effective ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. As far as I was concerned, I got out of business. 

The Chairman. Effective enough to get you out of business? 

Mr. GiLLEN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. He would take the machines and bust them up; 
woukl he not ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Yes ; he would destroy them. 

Mr. Kennedy. He had a tractor come along with them and run 
over the machines ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I believe he used a sledge hammer. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long, approximately, do you think you had 
these other machines in there ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, my son wanted to go in business, so I bought him 
a few machines, and he just had them in my two locations. But they 
changed machines every month or two, and you buy a machine and 
pay $750 for it and when you trade it in you would only get $200. 

Mr. Kennedy. I don't want to go through all that. 

Mr. GiLLEN. We couldn't make any money. I don't recall when he 
sold out. You should have a record there, if you have the books. 

Mr. Kennedy. The records would appear to indicate that you had 
the New Orleans Novelty Co. in there for approximately 3 or 4 
years. 

Mr. GiLLEN. It could have been that. But I don't think my son 
lasted a year. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliy, when this other company came along, did 
you decide to change? What was it that made you feel you better 
change to the Huey Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, I mean I felt like I had to do business with 
Jefferson Parish business. 

Mr. Kennedy. You alwas felt that. You were always operating in 
Jefferson Parish. Why hadn't you felt that before? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, under the deal my son had sold 

Mr. Kennedy. Don't keep going back to your son. 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, I mean, that is the reason they were in there. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand that. Wliy did you decide to change? 
What was it that the man said to you that you felt it advisable to get 
the Huey Co.'s machines in there ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. He was from Jefferson. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were other people from Jefferson around. 

Mr. GiLLEN. He was from Jefferson. His machines are still in 
there. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did this man say to you that you felt made 
it advisable for you to change ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, I mean, he just said he was from Jefferson. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he indicate to you at all that he knew the right 
people or the people behind him knew the right people ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. No; he just said he had the OK, which was good 
enough for me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He had the OK ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. To put out machines. 

Mr. EIennedy. Who did he get the OK from? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I don't know. 



17248 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you think, when he said, "I got the OK" ? 
Who did you think he got the OK from ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I wouldn't know. I imagine he got it from somebody 
high up. 

Mr. Kennedy. High up where ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, it could be most anybody. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, who is high up ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, you got the district attorney, you got the sheriff, 
and most any one of those. 

Mr. Kennedy. You thought it was one of these people he had got- 
ten the OK from ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, I imagine so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who specifically did you think he got the OK 
from? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I don't know, to tell you the truth. 

Mr. Kennedy. It just sounded pretty good to you that he had got- 
ten the OK, so you went ahead and changed ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of machines do you have in there ? Just 
the jukebox ? 

Have you any pinball machines ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. "Wliat do you mean, what kind I have in there now ? 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of machines did the Huey Distributing 
Co. put in there ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Keening. Console machines, 

Mr. Kennedy. "V^Hiat are console machines ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. That is a slot-machine type. 

Mr. Kennedy. A slot-machine type ? A slot machine that is lying 
down flat? 

Mr. GiLLEN. That is correct. But it doesn't pay off. 

Mr. Kennedy. It doesn't pay off ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. No, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you arrange that ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. It works on free play. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you explain that to us, how it doesn't pay off 2 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, I mean, if you hit a combination or a winning 
combination, it registers free games. 

Mr. Kennedy. What if you have 50 iree games and you decide to 
go home ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, if we know you, we may pay you. If we don't 
know you, we will tell you we don't pay off. We have signs on the 
machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have signs saying you wouldn't pay off? 

Mr. GiLLEN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you only pay off to the people you know? 

Mr. GiLLEN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it is a sort of limited payoff? 

Mr, GiLLEN, Well, in a way. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much do you pay to play the machine? 

Mr, GiLLEN, What do you mean? 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you put in a quarter, a dime, or a nickel ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Five and twenty-five. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you got both kinds ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17249 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, you can put a nickel in one side and a quarter in 
the otlier. You can play double, if you want. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is one of the best kinds of slot machines going; 
is it not? 

Mr. GiLLEN. The best one was the one-anned bandit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is this almost as good? 

Mr. GiLLEN. No. 

Mr, Kennedy. Do you have a gambling stamp? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Do you mean for the machines ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. GiLLEN. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is gambling illegal ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I imagine so. 

Mr. Kennedy, Has anybody ever raided you since the honest 

Mr. GiLLEN. No ; no one has ever raided me on the machines ; no. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has anybody come around with a sledge hammer 
lately? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, let's see, I was raided once. Frank Clancy busted 
up all my slots. 

Mr, Kennedy. Since the new sheriff came in, since the man from 
Huey came in and said, "We have the okay," has anybody come in 
since then ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is there a handbook going in your place? 

Mr. GiLLEN. In my place ? 

Mr. Kennedy. In your place. 

Mr. GiLLEN. Of business? Well, I have different buildings that 
adjoin mine that are operating. 

The Chairman. You have what ? 

Mr. Kennedy. A building in back of your store that has a hand- 
book going ? 

Mr. GiLLEN, Y^'es. 

TheC/HALRMAN. You liave kind of compartmeuts ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, that is correct. In other words, it is a different 
address and everything else. 

The Chairman. But it is all right there handy. 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, I mean, you can go from my place to it. 

Senator Curtis. AAHio owns it ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. To tell you the truth, I don't know who owns it. I 
just collect rent. 

Senator Curtis. Wlio runs it ? 

Mr. GiLLEN, The guy's name, I believe, is Red Jambeau, 

Senator Curtis. Do you have any connection with it? 

Mr, GiLLEN. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. You sort of rent that out ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Y^'ou rent the right to rim the handbook there; is 
that it? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I rent the building. I don't care what they do in it. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chainnan. 

The Chairman. Thank you. Call the next witness. 



17250 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. One further question : Do you know why the sheriff 
or any of these other people do not try to close down the gambling 
in Jefferson Parish ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. I imagine he thinks the people are for it. 

Mr. Kjennedy. That the people are in favor of it ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. All the people I talk to are in favor of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about the fact that it is illegal ? 

Mr. GiLLEN. Well, he doesn't seem to think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is very nice. Thank you. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in recess for a few moments. 
We have just been called to the floor to participate in a vote. We 
will be back as quickly as we can. 

(A brief recess was taken. Members of the Select Committee pres- 
ent at the taking of the recess were Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the Select Committee present after the recess were 
Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger. 

The Chairman. Have you been sworn ? 

Mr. Salinger. No, sir. 

The Chairman. 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. Salinger. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF PIERRE E. G. SALINGER 

The Chairman. Proceed to identify yourself. 

Mr. Salinger. My name is Pierre Salinger. I am an investigator 
for the committee, and I reside in Washington, D.C. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger, have you made a study of the books of 
Mr. Gillen and Pat's No. 1 and Pat's No. 2 ? 

Mr. Salinger. I have, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you found that there was a switch over to the 
Huey Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. Salinger. We have, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what we know 
about the Huey Distributing Co. and what happened as far as Pat's 
No. 1 and Pat's No. 2 ? Just in brief what is it ? 

Mr. Salinger. The Huey Distributing Co. is owned, or was owned, 
by Mr. Vincent Marcello. The general manager of the firm is listed 
as Mr. Albert HufRne. The agent of the company for Louisiana and 
Mississippi was listed as Mr. Nastasi. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was a notice to that effect put out by ISIr. 
Marcello ? 

Mr. Salinger. It was. It appeared in the June 30, 1956, issue of 
Billboard magazine. 

The books of Mr. Gillen's Pat's No. 1 and Pat's No. 2 bars in Jeffer- 
son Parisli, La., showed that in 1955 his ])rincipal source of coin- 
operated machines, juke boxes, and pinball machines, was the New 
Orleans Novelty Co. In that year, the two bars together received from 
this company $10,878. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17251 

I should explain that this represents half of the total income from 
those machines, since they were on a 50-50 split. In other words, New 
Orleans Novelty got $10,*878 and Mr. Gillen's two bars got $10,878. 

As we heard his testimony, the Huey Distributing Company became 
a factor in his business in li)56. They had no business at all with him 
in 1955. 

In 1956, they received a total of $3,158 in Pat's No. 1 and Pat's No. 
2, while tlie New Orleans Novelty Co. business dropped to $9,971.50 
m that 3^ear. 

In 1957, the New Orleans Novelty Co. business at these two bars 
dropped further to $7,052.20. In that year, there was a new factor in 
Mr. Gillen's business, the Vac-Key, and from that company Mr. 
Gillen received a total of $4,357.50. The Vac-Key Amusement Co. 
was operated by Mr. Albert Huffine, who was at that time general 
manager of the Huey Distributing Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the Vac-Key Co. ? 

Mr. SalincxEr. The Vac-Key Co. was an operating company which 
operated pinbill machines and jukeboxes. 

Mr. Ivennedy. And the other is a distributing company ? 

Mr. Salinger. The other is a distributing company. That is 
correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can Mr. Kohn return to the stand ? 

TESTIMONY OF AARON M. KOHN— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kohn, would you identify the individuals who 
were named by Mr. Richardson as the deputy sheriffs ? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes. I believe Mr. Richardson referred to Red Coci, 
who is chief criminal deputy sheriff ; Malcolm Coci, popularly known 
as Red. 

The other man he referred to is James Arnoult, the chief civil 
deputy sheriff. Both of them are the primary assistants to Sheriff 
William Coci, who is responsible for both the civil and criminal func- 
tions of the sherift"s office. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Mr. Kohn, do we find that their operations spread 
beyond Jefferson County? That is, Marcello's? 

Mr. Kohn. Yes, in terms of the coin-device business. Actually, the 
area of Grand Isle is within Jefferson Parish, but it is divided from 
the rest of the parish by Lafourche Parish. Grand Isle is a community 
on the Gulf of Mexico where a narcotics ex-convict by the name of 
Tony Morella, very much tied with the Marcello mob, runs the coin- 
device business, and this is connected with the Marcello operations. 

In the distributorship of Huey for Rockola, they had the entire 
area, including part of Mississippi. 

However, the Rockola distributorship was given up by the Huey 
Distributing Co. last year. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about Mr. Will Guillot, in St. Bernard 
Parish, La., the Guillot Amusement Co. ? Do you find any connection 
between them and the Marcellos ? 

]Mr. Kohn. Yes, sir. There is one situation which connects the 
interests of the two. Will Guillot, whose full name is Willard F. 
Guillot, and his son Glen, run the Guillot Amusement Co. They op- 



17252 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

erate jukeboxes, pinball machines and slot machines. The head- 
quarters for their operation is in a bar known as Corrine Club, in 
which Guillot also runs a handbook and has other forms of gambling. 

Over a period of years gambling has been repeatedly found by our 
investigators. And, incidentally, as recently as January of this year 
Guillot was arrested and charged with handbook gambling. 

About 1953 or 1952, about the time, or perhaps immediately before 
Francis Gravenberg, the new state police superintendent, started 
smashing slot machines, Guillot bought some slot machines for deliv- 
ery to his place in St. Bernard Parish. I might explain for the 
benefit of the committee that Jefferson Parish adjoins New Orleans to 
the west and to the south. St. Bernard Parish adjoins New Orleans 
to the east. 

When these machines were delivered to Guillot, he paid part of the 
bill in cash, and the balance of it, believed to have been $4,000, was 
handled by issuing a check. The check bounced and there were per- 
sistent efforts made to collect on it, w^hicli failed. 

Then attorney for the vendor asked the sheriff of Jefferson Parish 
to issue a warrant for the arrest of Guillot in St. Bernard Parish, and 
he ran into a great deal of trouble in getting the warrant served. 

Then he received a telephone call from Carlos Marcello, who said, 
"Stay right where you are. I am coming over." 

When he came over to this lawyer's office, he demanded to see the 
check. It was shown to him. Marcello tossed, 1 believe it was, $4,000 
in cash down, tore up the check, dropped it on the floor, turned around 
and walked out. 

Guillot is ruthless in the control of his i^rivilege of distributing coin 
devices. Perhaps an outstanding example of this comes in connection 
with a New Orleans operator by the name of Mitchell Morehead, who 
has the M. & M. Amusement Co. About the end of 1956, Morehead 
went into Jefferson Parish and installed 12 target-type coin-operated 
machines. Not long after, he found that his locations were asking 
him — all of his locations were asking him — to take out the machines. 

Incidentally, these same locations were operating slot machines 
owned by Guillot. They told him he would have to take out his target 
machines unless he could get right with the right people, and then 
described the right man as Will Guillot. 

Morehead got in touch with Guillot and finally they worked out a 
compromise whereby Guillot would get half of the gross take of the 
target machines that he had installed in the parish, with Guillot being 
the one that was to collect the money and give Morehead his half. 

However, weeks went by and Morehead never got any money, and 
went down and argued with Guillot about it. They got to another 
compromise. He still received no money. 

^ He went back the next time to check and found out that there were 
little ])aper I O U's in these machines instead of money. Ho wont to 
see Guillot, who finally in substance told l^ini, ''Look,! really ought 
to be getting all this money. If the money weren't going into your 
machines, it would be going into my slot machines, so get them oiit of 
here or I will luvak thorn up." 

Finally Guillot's son, Glen, delivered all of the target machines 
back to Morehead's place of business in New Orleans. Morehead 
never again attempted to go back into St. Bernard's Parish, until a 
friend of his, a ]\Irs. Irma Lowe, came to see him and asked him if 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17253 

he "wouldn't sell her a ]uke box on a chattel mortgage. This oc- 
curred after Mrs. Irnia Barron Lowe and Mrs. liuth Sanders had 
started a small restaurant on St. Bernard Highway not very far from 
Guillot's Corrine Club, They were told to get their juke box from 
Will Guillot, which they did. ' 

But it never worked. They were having a lot of trouble with cus- 
tomers putting coins in and not getting their plays back. They would 
have to give the money back to tiie customers but they could never 
get the money from Guillot. 

About a month went by without the machine operating properly, 
and with Guillot telling them he was too busy with his handbook 
during the day to do anything about repairing the machine or have 
it repaired. 

They finally got Guillot's permission to bring in another machine. 
This is when tlie women went to Morehead in New Orleans. 

A few days after Morehead's new Seeburgh machine was installed, 
about 7 o'clock at night, the front door of their small restaurant burst 
open. At this time there were the two women and a male customer. 
In through the door came Will Guillot, his son Glen Guillot, and a 
man by the name of Clem Nunez, who worked as a mechanic in this 
coin device business. 

Glen Guillot had a gun in his hand and as he came in he started 
shooting at the juke box, 

Clem Nunez pulled out a blackjack and for the next 5 hours, ap- 
proximately, there was a reign of terror inside of this little restau- 
rant. When one of the women, having no phone available at the lo- 
cation, started to go out the door to use the phone at a fire station 
across the street, she was told that if she went out of the door, she 
would go out feet first. 

They broke up all of the stock, that is, Coca-Cola, beer, excepting 
for what beer they drank themselves they destroyed, broke mirrors, 
smashed the cigarette vending machine. During the course of this, 
on two separate occasions, pairs of deputy sheriffs walked in. When 
the first pair walked in, they recognized the men, and they immediately 
turned around and walked out again. 

Not very much longer afterwards another pair of deputies walked 
in and started to do the same thing, but as they reached the door on 
the way out one of these three men picked up a beer bottle, threw it 
at the back of the deputy sheriff. It shattered on the door jam. 

The deputy turned around and said, "You fellows better cut it out 
or you will get in trouble," and quickly walked out again. About mid- 
night another deputy sheriff came in in civilian clothes, wearing a 
gun, and threw the two Guillots and Nunez out of the place. 

The women attempted the next day to have a complaint accepted 
by the District Attorney's office and it was refused. They also went 
to the clerk of the court, wlio refused to accept a complaint. Finally 
they found one Justice of the Peace who was willing to accept the com- 
plamt. 

It was sent to the sheriff's office and the two Guillots and Nunez 
were then arrested and charged with disorderly conduct, threatening 
to do bodily harm with a pistol, and destroying private property, 

Morehead thereafter — I might point out that this place of business 
never opened again. The money available to these pr ople for operat- 



17254 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

ing their small business had been completely lost in the process of de- 
struction. They tried to sue Guillot for recovery of their loss, which 
-was several thousand dollars, and the woman, Mrs. Lowe, has stated 
that she had to drop the suit when Will Guillot in the presence of wit- 
nesses threatened that if she started walking into any courtroom to 
sue him, she would never reach the courtroom alive. 

The owner of the jukebox, Morehead, he attempted to sue for re- 
covery of damages. It cost something under $300 to repair the juke- 
box. He could find no attorney who was willing to initiate a suit 
against Will Guillot in St. Bernard Parish. 

That is where the matter stands today. This, incidentally, happened 
in 1957, gentlemen. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is in which parish ? 

Mr. KoHN. That is St. Bernard Parish, which lies across New 
Orleans from Jefferson Parish. 

Mr. Kennedy. From Mr. Marcello's holdings, it would appear that 
he is an extremely wealthy man. 

Mr. KoHN. He is probably one of the wealthiest men in Louisiana 
today. 

Senator Curtis, What does he own ? 

Mr. KoHN. His holdings are extensive, Senator. Marcello has 
many friends, family, lawyers, associates, dispersed over a wide area 
who appear to be very willing and closemouthed in their participation 
with him and his financial ventures. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you give us briefly a little bit about that? 

Mr. KoHN. Well, I think I pointed out before that about 20 years 
ago his wife claimed poverty when there was a $76,000 Federal penalty 
to be paid which was settled for $400. In 1944, Carlos and his younger 
brother Vincent became partners in this Jefferson Music Co. It wasn't 
very many years thereafter when each of them was drawing something 
in the neighborhood of $25,000 apiece from it. 

As was pointed out here today, they operate in the neighborhood 
of 1,000 coin devices. In addition to that, Marcello moved into the 
Costello-Kastel slot machine operations. He became a partner in 
1945 in the Dixie Coin Machine Co., the area distributors for the Mills 
slot machines, manufactured in Chicago. 

In November of 194(5 Marcello bought a 17-porcent interest in the 
Beverly Club for $45,000 in cash. Frank Costello and Dandy Phil 
Kastel held the major share of ownership in the Beverly, which de- 
veloped into one of the most lavish nightclubs and gambling casinos 
in the Nation. 

Incidentally, Meyer Lansky of New York, Florida, and Cuba 
gambling fame, was another owner of a piece of that club. Also in 
1948, Marcello and Victor J. Trapani bought the New Southport 
Club, another gambling casino, for $160,000. Marcello then got 
some interest in tlie Louisiana Quick Freeze & Storage C-o., of 
Morgan CAiy^ La., and there was business association involved in the 
Sea Slirimp Co. at Patterson. 

John Bellestri and Felice Golino, of the shrimp company, have 
continued through the years in tlie expanding investments of Mar- 
cello. His present residence in Metairie was ]Mirchased last year in 
the name of his mother for $110,000 cash. His previous residence 
in Marrero, La., acquired in 1946, for $42,500, was offered for sale 
last year by realty agents for $125,000. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17255 

In July 1958 the million-dollar-plus Town & County Motel went 
into business at Bossier City, near Shreveport, La., in which Marcello 
has an informally acknowledged, but formally denied, controlling 
interest. His attorne}^ in Shreveport is the president of that corpo- 
ration, Frank and Roy Occhipinti, wdio are in partnership with 
Marcello in the New Orleans area. 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you spell that name ? 

Mr. KoHN. 0-c-c-li-i-p-i-n-t-i. 

Felice Golino and John Bellestri are also major stockholders. 
Marcello has a substantial financial investment in the Ploliday Inn 
Hotel in Jefferson Parish, La., purchased in November 1958 for 
$1,800,000 in the name of Roy and Frank Occhipinti and others. 
Carlos' brother Anthony has since performed management functions 
in connection with the Holiday Inn and, as I pointed out, Carlos 
Marcello has at least $100,000 or perhaps more involved in it. 

Also in 1958 — and I am speaking now of just this last year — Carlos 
Marcello, his five brothers, his two sisters and his mother sold 183 
acres of land in the Gretna area of Jefferson Parish for 1 penny less 
than $1 million. The sale was made to nine separate corporations 
created for the purpose of buying the land. The president of each 
corporation is James J. Culotta, v/ho is a member of the Jefferson 
Parish Planning and Zoning Board. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which is an official government body ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, sir. This is an official government agency, which 
grants zoning permits and the like. Culotta is a building contractor 
that has long been connected with the Marcello activities. 

About 7 years before — that is, in August 1951 — this property was 
bought by Joseph Marcello, Sr., for $5,800, at a time when Carlos 
was under great pressure for contempt before the Senate investi- 
gating committee. Marcello, Sr., died in June 1952, and this property 
was valued at $40,000 for inheritance tax purposes when the estate 
was settled on July 1, 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was July 1, 1955. That was when it was 
valued at $40,000 ? 

Mr. KoHN. $40,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that is the property that was sold some 3 years 
later for $1 million ? 

Mr. Koiin. Yes. An interesting thing about it is that the father's 
estate, when it passed on to the members of the familj^, there were 
no inheritance taxes paid of any kind to either the Federal or State 
Government because the valuations involved were just barely below 
the figures beyond which taxes must be paid. 

Senator Curtis. Are we given to understand that the appraisement 
was low or the sale price was too high ? 

Mr. Kohn. Well, sir 

Senator Curtis. There is quite a difference between $40,000 and 
$1 million. 

Mr. KoiiN. Twenty-five times as much as it had been valued for 
tax purposes. I might say that this detailed information v.as sent 
to the Internal Revenue Service for their examination into possible 
intent to evade taxation. 



17256 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. How long ago? 

Mr. KoHN. We just came upon this combination of factors within 
the last couple of months. 

The Chairman. It might be that the Internal Revenue can look in- 
to this properly, and it might be that we will get enough recovery 
out of that one transaction alone to help pay the expenses of this 
committee for a year. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have some other examples of the assessed 
value as compared to the real value or the market value of this 
property ? 

Mr. KoHN. Yes, Mr. Kennedy. There are some very interesting 
contrasts. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 10 :30 to- 
morrow morning. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of recess: Sena- 
tors McClellan and Curtis.) 

(Whereupon, at 4:55 p.m. the select committee recessed, to recon- 
vene at 10 :30 a.m., Tuesday, Mar. 24, 1959.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



TUESDAY, MAECH 24, 1959 

U.S. Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper AcTIv^TIEs, 

IN THE Labor or Management Field, 

Washington, D,G . 

The select committee met at 10 : 30 a.m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 44, agreed to February 2, 1959, in the caucus room of the Senate 
Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the Select 
Committee) presiding. 

Present : Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Senator 
Sam J. Ervin, Jr., Democrat, North Carolina; Senator Karl E. Mundt, 
Republican, South Dakota ; Senator Carl T. Curtis, Republican, Ne- 
braska ; Senator Homer E, Capehart, Republican, Indiana. 

Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Walter R. May, 
assistant counsel; John P. Constandy, assistant counsel; Arthur G. 
Kaplan, assistant counsel; Pierre E. G. Salinger, assistant comisel; 
Ruth Y. Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of convening: 
Senators McClellan, Ervin and Capehart.) 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Carlos Marcello. 

The ChxUrman. 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 truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Marcello. I do. 

TESTIMONY OP CARLOS MARCELLO, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

JACK WASSERMAN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mr. Marcello. Carlos Marcello, 577 Woodbine, Jefferson Parish. 

The Chairman, What is your occupation, please, sir? 

Mr, Marcello. I decline to answer that on the ground it may intend 
to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. On the ground it may "intend" to incriminate you? 

Mr. Marcello. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman, You have counsel, do you? 

Mr. Marcello. Yes, sir. 

86751 — 59— pt. 48 4 17257 



17258 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, identify yourself for the record, 
please. 

Mr. Wasserman. Jack Wasserman, Warner Building, Washington, 
D.C. I am a member of the bar of the District of Columbia. 

Mr. Chairman, I have submitted some questions in the nature of 
cross-examination which I would like to be posed to Mr. Aaron Kohn 
before Mr. Marcello is questioned further. May I have a ruling on 
my request ? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir ; you may. 

The Chair has examined the questions, and the Chair wishes to 
ascertain to what extent coimsel's client is going to cooperate with 
the committee. We are very happy to reciprocate, if we can get the 
cooperation from you, from your client, that we desire. 

We would then be most happy to grant your request and interrogate, 
or cross-examine, as you please to call it. 

Mr. Wasserman. May I call the chairman's attention to the fact 
that no such condition is imposed pursuant to this committee's rales ? 

The Chairman. The Chair is making that condition. Tlie ques- 
tion of whether we permit any cross-examination is in the discretion 
of the committee under the rules. I am most happy, I would just be 
delighted, to submit the cross-examination questions to the other wit- 
ness if your client will cooperate with the connnittee. 

Mr. Wasserman. Should not cross-examination logically follow 
the direct examination of a witness before another witness is called ? 

The Chairman. Logically, yes; if it is going to be granted. But 
I haven't determined that I am going to grant it. 

Mr. Wasserman. All right. I understand your position. 

The Chairman. Have I made it clear ? 

Proceed, Mr. Counsel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Marcello, could you tell the committee what 
your major source of income is at the present time? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us whether you operate jukeboxes 
and pinball machines in the southern Louisiana area? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have there been attempts to organize your em- 
ployees bv the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workere, Mr. 
Marcello ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr, Kennedy. Plave there been any attempts by the Teamsters to 
organize your employees? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any financial arrangements, directly 
or indirectly, Avith Mr. William Coci, who is the present sheriff of 
Jefferson Parish? 

Mr. Marcello. T decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have there been any arrangements tliat have been 
made ])otween you and the sheriff', and any other officials of govern- 
ment, to keep unionization out of Jefferson Parish? 

Mr. Marcello. T dec! ine to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has there been any attempt between all of you to 
keep unionization out of the pinball and tlie coin machine business? 

INIr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same jrround. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17259 

The CiiAiuMAx. You better state your grounds occasionally be- 
cause "the same ground" might get monotonous. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Marcello, you were born in Tunis, Africa, in 
1910; is that right. 

Mr. Makcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you have never been naturalized. 

Could you tell us way it has been that you have been able to stay 
in this country even though you have been convicted twace of felonies? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Once in 1933 for robbery and once in 1937 for the 
sale of marijuana ? Would you tell us about that ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. Gould you tell us how many coin machines you have 
at the present time ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us why these pinball machines are al- 
lowed to operate as gambling machines even though gambling is 
illegal? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend 
to incriminate me. 

(At this point Senator Mundt entering the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. According to the information w^e have, you are an 
associate of j\lr. Frank Costello. Is that right ? 

Mr. ]\L\RCELLO. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Dandy Phil Kastel, also ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline on the same ground. 

]Mr. Kennedy. Joe Cibello, of Dallas, Tex., who attended the meet- 
ing at Apalchin ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy, Sam Carollo, who was deported in 1947 as a nar- 
cotics trafficker ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Have you been in touch with him at all lately? 

Mr. ]VL\rcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy, Do you know Mr. Ralph J. Adams, who was ap- 
pointed as deputy to Sheriff Coci in June of 1956 ? 

Mr. ISIarcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. Bonny Geigerman, do you know that, the brother- 
in-law of Frank Costello, who operates in New Orleans ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr, Kennedy. According to our information, you are an associate 
of his. 

Also, you have as a business partner ^Mr. Pliilip Smith, who is the 
Jefferson Parish attorney ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the Jefferson Parish deputy sheriffs assist you 
in o-etting; locations ? 



17260 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question on the ground it 
may intend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy, Have you been able to use law enforcement officials 
to assist you in your businesses, Mr. Marcello ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question. It may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. What funds have you received from the Huey Dis- 
tributing Co. ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question. It maj^ intend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In connection with law enforcement officials and 
your tie-in with the Jefferson Parish attorney, we have the informa- 
tion that a piece of property at 800 Baratari Boulevard was offered 
for sale for $125,000 and yet the tax assessment that was put on there 
was $8,000. Could you tell us how that happened? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the New Southport Club which you purchased 
in 1948 for $160,000 had a tax assessment value of $7,200. Would you 
tell us how that happened ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the Town and Countr}^ Motel, which was sold 
in 1958 for more than $1 million, had a tax assessment value of $17,500? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Even though when it was originally constructed in 
1953 it cost $350,000, and other units have been added since that time. 
Can you explain that to us ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

(At this point Senator Curtis entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you dominate and control, Mr. Marcello, the coin 
machine business in Southern Louisiana ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you are in many other businesses, the shrimp 
business, and real estate business, are you not? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. May I ask you a few questions? Through your 
counselyou have at least requested that certain interrogations be made 
of the witness Mr. Kohn, who testified yesterday. I think some of 
these questions would be quite appropriate to ask him, and I am per- 
fectly willing that he be asked these questions if you are willing to 
testify regarding the same subject matter. I note particularly the 
question : "to state whether, to your personal knowledge, Carlos Mar- 
cello, or his brother Vincent Marcello, were owners or employees of 
Huey Distributing Co. at the time of the episode described by Walter 
Richardson, alleging that two deputies demanded that he install juke- 
boxes owned by the Huey Distributing Co. If so, state the basis of 
your personal knowledge." 

I will ask you to state whether you were, you or your brother, either 
or both of you were, at that time, a part owner in any sense of the 
Huey Distributing Co. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. I refuse to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You don't want to testify. You want others to 
testify. You want to be fair and give this committee the information 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17261 

within your kiiowled^^e, do you? And at the same time you ask us 
to get information tliat may be within the knowledge of other wit- 
nesses ? Are you willing to tell the truth ? 

Mr, JNLvRCELLO. I am willing to speak to my attorney at this time. 

The Chairman. All right. Go ahead. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. Senator, can my attorney answer that question? 

The Chairman. No, sir. He is not under oath. I want to know 
if you will answer it. You are the one under oath. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. Senator, I am willing to consider it after Mr. Kohn 
answers these questions. 

The Chairman. You will have a long time to consider it as far as 
I am concerned, because I am not going to ask him these questions for 
your edification and information unless you are willing to cooperate 
with the committee and tell the committee what you know. 

Mr. Marcello. Thank you, sir. 

The Chairman. So we have an understanding about that. Now 
I will ask you the question : Were you at that time a part owner, you or 
your brother, a part owner, of the Huey Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. According to the record we have you were a part 
owner, and you received from this Huey Distributing Co. in the 
year 1955, according to this information we have, $12,286.75 income 
from that company. Do you deny it ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question. It may intend 
to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. For the year 1956, the information we have shows 
that you received $4,683.84 income from that company. Do you 
deny it ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. And our information further shows that in 1957 
you also received $674.74 income from that company. Do you deny 
that? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer that on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. This man Richardson who testified here yesterday 
said that he had some pinball machines, I believe they were — anyway, 
they were coin machines — in his place of business and he had them 
there for quite a long time, I believe. After this new sheriff was 
elected — what was his name; Coci? Is that his name? iVnyway, 
after he went in his office about 2 months, they came out there and 
undertook to put pressure on him to change from the business arrange- 
ment he had had regarding his coinboxes, and told him that they 
would put pressure on him if he didn't. Was that pressure put on 
in order to make him change and get the boxes from a company in 
which you had an interest ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you enter into an agreement with the sheriff 
that he would use his law enforcement powers, through himself and 
his deputies, to force your equipment on these people who engaged in 
this business ? 



17262 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. And did you agree to pay him something for that 
arrangement ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

The Chairman. That needs a little reflection here. I don't want to 
do that sherift' any injustice. But here comes in a fellow — two of 
them, yesterday — who testified, one in particular, about him being 
raided, things done to insult his customers and humiliate them, 
simply because he w^ould not change and get his equipment from a 
company in which, apparently, you were interested. 

Now, then, you can't testify, you say, without possible self-incrimi- 
nation about the incident. So that leaves reflection upon someone if 
there is something about it that you can't testify to without possible 
self-incrimination. Then I wonder if the sheriff is in the same situa- 
tion. Wouldn't you at least clear his name, if it isn't true ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I want it to be borne in mind that the sheriff has 
been invited to be present. I don't know but what it may be nex^essary 
to subpena him. But I thought he would be willing to come. I 
thought you would be willing to say, "No, I didn't do any such thing 
as that," if it isn't true. 

Do you still persist that you can't answer any of these questions 
without the possibility of self-incrimination ? 

Mr. Marcello. Yes, Senator. 

The Chairman. I have asked you here two or three of the very 
questions you want to ask somebody else. If you wouldn't answer, 
why do you expect someone else to answer, or why do you think this 
committee ought to require them to answer ? 

Mr. Marcello. Because they made the statement. 

The Chairman. Well, they made the statement. Do you deny it? 
Do you deny the truthfulness of the statement? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. I refuse to answer on the groimd it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis. 

Senator Curtis. How long have you lived in the United States! 

Mr. Marcello. Forty-eight years. 

Senator Curtis. "Wliere were you born ? 

Mr. Marcello. I refuse to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Are you more than 48 years old ? 

Mr. Marcello. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Senator Curtis. You haven't lived all your life in the United States, 
have you ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Are you a citizen of the United States ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Senator Curtis. If you were a citizen, would that incriminate you ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Senator Curtis. The fact is you have been here 48 yeai-s and you 
have never sought to become naturalized. Isn't that true ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17263 

Mr. ]\L\RCELLO. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Senator Curtis. Do you realize that you are claiming a privilege 
under the Constitution of the United States, a charter of our liberty, 
and still you haven't ever sought to assume the responsibilities of 
citizenship ? Isn't that correct ? 

JSIr. Marcello. Senator, my attorney could answer that question. 

Senator Curtis. No, I want you to answer it. Have you ever sought 
citizenship ? 

JVIr. INIarcello. I decline to answer the question. 

Senator Curtis. Have you always paid your just share of taxes to 
support the Government ? 

j\Ir. INIarcello. I decline to answer that on the ground it may tend to 
incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. If you have always reported your full income and 
disclosed all of your property for local assessment, how could that 
incriminate you ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Senator Curtis. I think this committee should take note of the fact 
of how you cling to the Constitution of the United States. You have 
that right. It is a basic charter of human liberty. But the other 
side of the ledger you have paid no attention to at all. 

That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, Mr. Chairman. 

On the question of the Huey Distributing Co., as the income fi^om 
that declined, according to the information that we have, he first had 
the income in the Jefferson Music Co., about which we had testimony 
yesterday which increased. For instance, in 1954, according to the in- 
formation we have, he had an income of some $9,000 ; then in 1955, it 
went up to $17,000; in 1956, it went up to $23,000; in 1957, to over 
$46,000 from that one source. 

The Chairman. What is the source of that ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The Jefferson Music Co., which is the company that 
distributes these juke boxes. 

The Chairman. You have heard the statement of counsel regard- 
ing the information the committee has with respect to your income 
from that source. 

Do you wish to deny it? 

Mr. INIarcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. Senator. 

The Chairman. If our records are incorrect, will you help us and 
get them corrected, set the record straight? 
(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend 
to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you honestly believe that if you answered that 
question truthfully, that a truthful answer might tend to incriminate 
you ? Do you honestly believe that ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer that. Senator. 

The Chairman. You are ordered, with the permission of the com- 
mittee, the Chair orders and directs you to answer the question. 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the grounds it may intend 
to incriminate me. 



17264 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. That order and direction will continue. 

I will ask you this question specifically again: According to the 
information the committee has, and this is another question, you re- 
ceived $12,286.75 in 1955; $3,683.84 in 1956; and $674.74 iii 1957, 
from the Huey Distributing Co. 

Is that information correct? 

( The witness conferred with his counsel. ) 

Mr, Marcello. I decline to answer the question, Senator, on the 
ground it may intend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you honestly believe that if you answered the 
question truthfully, that a truthful answer thereto might tend to 
incriminate you ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend 
to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The Chair, with the approval of the committee, 
orders and directs you to answer the question of whether you honestly 
believe that if you gave a ti*uthful answer to the question, that a 
truthful answer thereto might tend to incriminate you. 

Mr. Marcello. Can I consult my attorney, Senator ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. Yes, Senator, 

The Chairman. Thank you. I got one answer. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Marcello, has there been any testimony that has 
been given here before the committee in connection with you that you 
wish to deny? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question on the ground it 
may intend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has any testimony been given to the committee in 
connection with your activities which has not been true or accurate ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Are ;^ou a member of the Mafia ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the ground it may intend to 
incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You wouldn't even deny that? Is that right? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same groimds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Nelson Barrios ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr, Kennedy, Do you know anything about the American Transit 
Corp, of Missouri? 

Mr, Marcello, I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr, Kennedy, Do you know Mr. D. J. Giacomo ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr, Kennedy, That is all. 
Senator Mundt, Mr. Chairman? 
The Chairman. Senator Mundt. 

Senator ^Eundt. Mr. Marcello, I have been intrigued by listening 
to your record as you have written it into these hearings by failing to 
deny very serious allegations against you, and have been impressed 
by the point Senator Curtis emphasized, that you are an alien. You 
have never been naturalized. You have apparently been involved in a 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17265 

whole series of crimes. You have been given a chance to purge the 
record and clear it and deny them, but you have taken the fifth amend- 
ment, which is virtually tantamount, I am sure, in the public mmd, 
to admitting the charges. 

I would like to ask you this : This committee, a part of it at least, 
is comprised of four members of the Committee on Govermnent Op- 
erations, which is charged with checking the efficiency of operations 
of the executive branch of the Federal Government. I am curious to 
know whether or not the Federal Government is meeting its obliga- 
tion in your connection. 

I would like to ask you this question : Has the Federal Government, 
the Attorney General's office, instituted deportation proceedings 
against you ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. They have. 

That is all. 

Senator Ervin, Mr. Chairman, on that point I have an observation. 
According to the information in the possession of the committee, 5 
years, 9 months, and 24 days ago, an order for the deportation of this — 
I started to say witness, but since he has given no testimony I will say 
this person — this person was entered. 

I would like to know how you have managed to stay in the United 
States for 5 years, 9 months, and 24 days after you were found ordered 
deported as an undesirable person. 

Can you give me any information on that point? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. My attorney has the information. Senator. 

Senator Ervin. Don't you have the information yourself ? 

Mr. Marcello. Well, he is my attorney in the deportation case, 
Senator. 

Senator Ervin. I am asking you. You see, your attorney is not 
under oath, and he didn't come here to testify. 

Mr. Marcello. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ervin. He came here to protect your legal rights but not 
to testify. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Senator ER\aN. I would like to know how a man can manage to 
stay, a man who has been convicted of two felonies of such a serious 
nature as robbeiy and the sale of marihuana; how a man with that 
kind of a record can stay in the United States for 5 years, 9 months, 
24 days after he is found t-o be an undesirable alien. 

How have you managed to stay here ? 

Mr. Marcello. Senator, not being an attorney, my attorney could 
answer that question. 

Senator Ervin. Well, your attorney is not a witness. 

Mr. Marcello. I wouldn't know. 

Senator Ervin. Well, I am just curious. The American people are 
entitled to more protection at the hands of the law than to have an 
undesirable alien who has committed serious felonies remain in this 
country for 5 years, 9 months, 24 days after he is ordered deported. 
That certainly is an illustration of the fact that justice travels on 
leadened feet if it travels at all. 



17266 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

I don't know whether it is the fault of the administrative officers 
or the fault of the Department of Justice, or the fault of the Congress 
in not enacting laws under which more speedy action can be taken. 
But it seems to me that the American people's patience ought to riui 
out on this proposition, and that those who have no claim to any right 
to remain in America, who come here and prey like leeches upon law- 
abiding people of the country, ought to be removed from this country. 
It is bad enough to have to harbor our own self -raised, home-grown 
variety of racketeers. But to have them come in from other areas — 
it seems to me it is about time to put an end to it. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Chairman, I certainly share the curiosity ex- 
pressed by Senator Ervin as to why a clear-cut case like this has not 
resulted in deportation of Mr. Marcello. To have aliens come here 
and engage in crimes of that kind and then cringe successfully behind 
the fifth amendment in order to slow down the processes of judgment, 
is a very sickening anomaly. 

I would suggest, because of the implications made by Senator 
Ervin, and I do not object to it, that among the reasons why this de- 
portation proceeding is not moved is the conceivable possibility that 
the Department of Justice has been lethargic in its activity. He did 
not make that, I am sure, as a charge, but listed it as one of the pos- 
sible reasons, which it surely is. 

I would suggest that the Chair direct a letter to the Attorney Gen- 
eral inquiring as to why this deportation has not been implemented, 
and that the Attorney General's letter be made a part of the record 
when he replies. 

Senator Ervin, I think probably part of the responsibility rests 
on Congress, because I understand that Congress has thus far failed 
to enact any law under which an alien ordered deported can have one 
day in court to confine him to one opportunity to be heard, and to 
continue with writs of habeas corpus, one after another, without 
limitation. I lay that blame on Congress. 

Senator Mundt. I think the Senator is exactly correct. Because 
this is a committee, after all, interested in developing legislative 
remedies, I suggest that we write to the Attorney General a letter, 
so that he could write back and tell us precisely why in the instant 
case the Department of Justice has not moved. 

It may be illuminating when we come to meeting our legislative 
responsibility. I recognize that the Senator was not implying any 
criticism of the Department of Justice, but listing it as one of the 
conceivable reasons. I think we should have the record complete and 
public on this point. 

An exchange of letters should disclose the fault, wherever it lies. 
If it is the fault of Congress, I hope before this session adjourns we 
can correct such a glaring loophole in the law. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis? 

Senator Curtis. Information has come to me, Mr. Marcello, that 
you have resorted to the courts, appealing from orders in the neigh- 
borhood of 35 times. Is that correct? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. Senator, the only one who knowis that is my at- 
torney. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17267 

Senator Curtis. You cannot count to 35 ? 

Mr. JVLvRCELLO. No, sir, I couldn't count that many times that we 
have been in court. 

Senator Curtis. Is it true that you have a legal action pending in 
ItAly now ? 

Mr. Marcello. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. To resist the issuance of a passport on the ground 
of lacking of proof that you are a citizen of Italy ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Marcello. Senator, I do not know the details of it. 

Senator Curtis. How much money have you spent in resisting de- 
portation ? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer the question because it may 
intend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. It has been American money, too, has it not? 

Mr. Marcello. I decline to answer on the same ground. 

Senator Curtis. I notice your great fondness for American money, 
American protection to individual rights. But you say to tell us 
whether or not you have paid all your taxes would incriminate you. 

I think you ought to pack up your bags and voluntarily depart. 

That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Ervin. Mr. Chairman, I wouldn't mind — he says his counsel 
is willing to explain how he stays here 5 yeai*s, 9 months, 24 days after 
the order of deportation is in. t wouldn't mind his counsel explaining. 
I would like to know what Congress ought to do about it, to prevent a 
repetition of such things. 

The Chairman. It couldn't be accepted as proof unless he is sworn. 

Do you want him sworn or do you want him to make a general state- 
ment ? 

Senator Ervin. I would like to have a general statement. If there 
is something we can do about it, I would like to see it done. 

The Chairman. The statement may be made. It will be brief. It 
will not be regarded as evidence, but only as a comment from counsel 
for the information of the members of the committee. 

All right, Mr. Counsel, do you want to make any statement about 
how you are able to keep this man from going back to Italy for such a 
long period of time ? 

Mr. Wasserman. Initially, a habeas corpus action was brought, test- 
ing the constitutionality of the act under which he w\as ordered de- 
ported. He was ordered deported under a retroactive provision of 
the McCarran-Walter Act, and that particular provision was at- 
tacked on the ground that it was ex post facto. It went up to the 
Supreme Court and the Supreme Court held the constitutionality of 
the act by a divided vote. Thereafter, the Immigration authorities 
unlawfully attempted to deport him to Italy without first attempt- 
ing to ascertain whether he could be deported to France, wliich was 
the place that he designated as the place of deportation. 

In that litigation, Mr. Marcello was sustained in the courts on the 
ground that Immigration had proceeded illegally. Thereafter, he 
claimed that he would be persecuted if deported to Italy, and that he 
had not had a fair administrative hearing in connection with that 
phase of his case. 

The Immigration authorities resisted that, and one of the appellate 
courts directed that a rehearing be held on that point, apparently on 



17268 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

the ground that he had not been accorded fair procedures. That re- 
hearing has been held and it is still pending administratively. 

That is the situation in brief. I have never counted the number 
of times I have filed a paper in court or a motion in court. I know 
there have been maybe three or four, maybe five, actions in court. We 
have never resorted to the courts 37 or 35 times, as the newspapers seem 
to have stated. I assume that when Mr. Kohn made that statement 
yesterday, he was just repeating newspaper talk. 

Senator Ervin. How long has this last administrative proceeding 
been pending to determine whether he had a fair hearing ? 

Mr. Wasserman. No, that issue went into the court. The court 
disposed of it and it is now back administratively. 

Senator Era^en. How long has it been there ? 

Mr. Wasserman. We had a hearing in December, and the matter 
is still pending. I am just speaking from recollection. I don't have 
any of my notes here or my files here. 

Senator Ervin. In other words, what you have stated would indi- 
cate to me that Congress ought to pass a statute saying that when a 
deportation proceeding is brought, that a man has to set up all of 
his claims at one time, or forever be foreclosed from setting them up 
later. 

Mr. Wasserman. No, Senator. I think the first thing you should 
do is to tell the Immigration authorities to conduct all the adminis- 
trative proceedings at one time. They are the ones who break it up 
in separate parts. They make you pay additional fees each time you 
go to the separate types of remedies, and then you have separate court 
proceedings for each type of application that is involved. 

If it could be bundled together and streamlined administratively, 
I think you would go a long way to saving the Government money 
and saving the alien money as well. 

Senator Ervin. I agree with you in that. The proceeding should 
be to pass on all ])ossible issues once and for all. 

Mr. Wasserman. You see what happens : You have a deportation 
proceeding. Then you have a separate proceeding asking for a stay of 
deportation. It is entirely separate. If you go in to attack the de- 
portation order, you cannot attack the fairness of your application 
that you might be persecuted if deported, or in connection with the stay 
of deportation. 

Those are two separate applications, two separate fees have to be 
paid. That is why you have to have two separate lawsuits. There is 
nothing in the present bill for judicial review which you are referring 
to that would even remedy that situation. 

The initial way to attack this is administratively, to streamline the 
administrative proceeding. 

Senator Ervin. Thank you. 

Senator Mundt. Are you telling us that under the present law the 
deportation authorities, if they so decided, could present this as a 
single package as you have recommended, or does the law have to be 
changed ? 

Mr. Wasrertvian. The law does not have to be changed. It can be 
done administratively without any change in the law. 

Senator Mundt. It could be done now ? 

Mr. Wasserman. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17269 

Senator Ervin. The present law permits any number of habeas 
corpus writs to be applied for, doesn't it ^ 

Mr. AVasserman. Well, you can't change that, Senator. 

Senator Ervin. Laws of that nature have been changed in many 
States. In my State, a person, in order to apply for a writ of habeas 
corpus, has to file a petition saying whether he has ever applied for a 
writ on any previous occasion. 

Mr. Wasserman. Yes, sir. 

Senator Ervin. You can take and provide by law that any issue that 
arises on the habeas corpus proceeding, which is once determined, as 
to all times from then on and into the past is determined forever. 

Mr. Wasserman. Well, I have some doubts about that. As the 
Senator will know, you cannot suspend the writ of habeas corpus under 
the Constitution. 

Senator Ervin. You can't suspend it, but you can provide just 
exactly how it is going to be exercised, and you don't have to put up 
with a dilatory system under which a new writ can be applied for 
every day. 

Mr. Wasserman. That is correct. xVs a matter of fact, under the 
rules of some of the courts, in particularly I know under the rules of 
the southern district of New York, you must allege in your habeas 
corpus application whether or not you have previously applied for 
a writ. But I can assure you, Senator, in every instance that we went 
into court in the case of Carlos Marcello, we had justification, and it 
was done in good faith and at no time was it done for the purpose of 
delay. 

Senator Ervin. I don't blame attorneys for doing things for the 
purpose of delay, if a legislative body allows a law to exist which 
permits such delay. I don't blame an attorney for resorting to 
everything in the interest of his client, but I would say that Congress 
should step in. 

In North Carolina we have a statute that if you apply for a ruling 
on a writ of habeas corpus, it is res adjudicata as to the question of 
any ground of illegality that is adjudicated on in the first instance. 
That ought to be the Federal law, too. That is my opinion. 

The Chairman. The witness may stand aside subject to being re- 
called during the day. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we are going into a different matter 
at this time. I would like to call jNIr. Sherry as a witness. 

The Chairman. Mr. Sherry, come forward. 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Sherry. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF HAL SHERRY 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, INIr. Sherry. 

Mr. Sherry. My name is Hal Sherry. I live in Alhambra, a suburb 
of Los Angeles, Calif. I am now in the real estate business. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel, do 3^011 ? 



17270 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Sherry. I do, sir. 
The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr Kennedy. Mr. Sherry, you were involved in local 1052 of the 
IBEW? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that occurred back in 1946 ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is when you originally entered into that; is 
that right ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were invited, were you not, to attend a meeting 
of an association of operators of jukeboxes ? 

Mr. Sherry. I was, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Called the Southern California Music Operators 
Association ; is that right ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is that called ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is called SCMOA. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason did they invite you to attend? 
Were you in the jukebox business yourself at that time? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. I was manufacturing radios; coin-operated 
radios. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you had done some organizing for the Machin- 
ists Union during the war ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And at that time the association members felt they 
were having some difficulties as far as cutrate competition was con- 
cerned ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. They called me in to organize and a 
charter was issued. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they wanted you to organize a miion ? 

Mr. Sherry. They did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they made arrangements, or arrangements were 
made for a charter to be issued ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Arrangements were made with the International 
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did an international organizer from the union come 
out to lielp organize it? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. It was done in this manner. There were a few 
operators, possibly 20 or 25, who belonged to Local 11, IBEW, Inter- 
national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and they felt they were 
not having their grievances processed properly. 

So an international representative was invited out to sit in at one 
of the meetings. lie sat in at the meeting, and shortly thereafter a 
charter was issued to local 1052 for the coin-machine industry in 
southern California. 

Mr. Kennedy. The primary purpose at that time was to protect 
the locations of the various operators ; is that right? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. They had an agreement amongst themselves that 
they would not jump one another's location? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17271 

Mr, Sherry. Yes. 

Mr, Kennedy. The union was set up and established in order to 
protect these locations; is that right? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The union %yas going to place a picket line in front 
of a tavern where a group which was not a member of the association, 
therefore not a member of the union, came in and tried to take a 
location ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir ; for the label. 

Senator Curtis. Would you yield at that point? 

Who belonged to the union ? 

Mr. Sherry. You had both servicemen and the owner-operators 
themselves. They worked on machines and were mechanics, they be- 
longed to the union. If they were owners and did not work on them, 
they did not belong. 

Senator Curtis, If they owned the place of business 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir ; if they owned the machines, not the place of 
business. 

Senator Curtis. Suppose they owned both the machine and the 
place of business ? 

Mr. Sherry. Then, if such occurred, which was not too often, a 
serviceman would give them service at so much per month. As a rule, 
it was $7.50 per month. They had to display — that is a harsh word, 
"had to" — we asked them to display a union label. 

(At this point Senator Mundt left the hearing room.) 

Senator Curtis. Did you compel the owners to join the union? 

Mr. Sherry. Wliich owners are you referring to ? 

Senator Curtis. The owners of the machine. 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir ; we asked them to put a label on. They couldn't 
join if they wanted to. We couldn't let them join. 

Senator Curtis. Do you mean to say that no one joined except they 
were employees ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir; we had owner-operators of machines who 
joined. We had mechanics who joined, but a man who owned a tavern 
and owned his machine, he couldn't join. 

Senator Curtis. Is it true that you required an individual who 
owned his own machine and serviced it himself to join the union? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Even though he had no employees ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir ; regardless. 

Mr. Kennedy. I t:hink you recognize, looking back on it, that it was 
probably an improper way to handle this. 

Mr. Sherry. Very much so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Finishing up with a person who owned his own ma- 
chine, what he would have to do is he would have to pay for a label for 
the machine each month ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he would have to pay maybe $7,50 to the man who 
serviced the machine ? 

Mr, Sherry, To the serviceman, 

Mr, Kennedy. And which was for the permission to have a label on 
the machine ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 



17272 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. If he didn't have a label on the machme, he couldn't 
get service? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. But we also tried to stop his deliveries 
if he didn't have a label on it. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was even a person who owned his own ma- 
chine ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. In order to finance this union, you sold these labels 
generally ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes ; we did. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't have enough members in the union to 
finance the union, to finance the pickets, so you would sell these labels ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. All the operators, in order to get the servicing, this 
help and assistance from the imion, had to have a label on their ma- 
chines ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir ; they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Originally they would get fewer labels than they had 
machines ? 

Mr. Sherry. They would tear them in four pieces and put them on 
four machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just put them on a few machines ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. But then you wised up to that so you made them 
submit a list of their locations ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Therefore, they would have to have labels on all 
their machines? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much did you charge for the labels ? 

Mr. Sherry. Twenty-five cents per label per quarter, and then we 
raised it to 10 cents per label per quarter. In other words, the label 
covered 3 months. 

Mr. Kennedy. When the union was originally set up, the associa- 
tion members and the union members were one and the same ? 

Mr. Sherry. They were, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was at the same meeting that the officers for the 
association were selected as the officers for the union were selected? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. The officers for the union were selected via 
an election that was held by the international man. 

To begin with, before local 1052 was established, that is true. The 
people in Local 11, IBEW, were also the powers that were in the 
SCMOA. 

Mr. Kennedy. But if the meeting was not one and the same, the 
individuals who made up the association, the employers, were the 
same as the people who made up the union ? 

Mr, Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. And you were then elected as the leader? 

Mr. SiiKRRY, Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. What was your official position? 

Mr. Sherry. Business manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were the one who operated, who made this 
whole arranfjement ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17273 

Mr. Sherry. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. As you say, looking back on it now, you feel it was 
an improper way to handle the labor-management relations ? 

Mr. Sherry. Improper. 

Mr. Kennedy. The local actually stopped selling labels in about 
February of 1952 because the Los Angeles Central Labor Council 
brought pressure to bear and refused to recognize the picket line ; is 
that right? 

Mr. Sherry. Right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There are situations I want to discuss with you. 
There were attempts, were there not, of hoodlums and gangsters to 
take over this union ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

(At this point Senator Mundt left the hearing room.) 

Mr. I{j:nnedy. I would like to discuss some of those. 

You had some relationship with a man by the name of Sugar Joe 
Peskin? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we are going to be discussing some 
people now. Tlieir names appear on this mimeographed sheet, which 
might be of help and assistance to the committee in following the 
hearing. 

The Chairman. I believe these have already been distributed to 
the press, 

]\Ir. Kennedy. Can we have it made an exhibit ? 

The Chairman. It will be exhibit No. 64 for reference. 

(List referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 64" for reference, and 
may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. I understand that the fact that a person's name 
is on here does not mean that there is something derogatory to be 
testified to about him, but it is simply an aid in identifying him if 
his name is mentioned. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Ivennedy. I would like to discuss with you the four incidents in 
connection with gangsters and hoodlums to take over this industry 
through your union. One of the first was an effort made by Sugar 
Joe Peskin ; is that right ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know who he was ? 

Mr. Sherry. Not at the time ; I did later. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tell us what contacts you had with him ? 

Mr. Sherry. Well, shortly after the local union was granted the 
charter — when I say "shortly," Mr. Kennedy, I am not sure whether 
it was 2, 3, 5, or 6 months — but along about that period a man came 
to us and introduced himself as Joe Peskin, that he was from Chicago. 
He represented AMI or had AMI machines — tliat is a better way to 
put it. He wanted to join the union. 

He stated he was going to operate in the Los Angeles metropolitan 
area to begin with, and then spread out. We were to take him into 
the union, and each one of our union members were to pledge to buy 
so many AJMI's per month. We didn't take him in. At least, I told 
him 

}6751— 59 — pt. 48 5 



17274 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. What is AMI ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is a music machine, a coin-operated jukebox. 
That is one of the manufacturers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he attempt to put pressure on you at that time ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. Mr, Kennedy, there were two separate little 
meetings with Joe Peskin. He came in first of all to me and made 
his proposition, and we turned it down. At least I turned it down. 
So he insisted upon meeting with the executive board. A meeting 
was set up. He came in to the executive board. He stayed about 8 
minutes. 

Once again he gave them an ultimatum that they would buy these 
machines, and the ultimatum was that if they didn't, and if we didn't 
permit him to join the union, he would really create havoc in our 
territory, what we considered our territory. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you find out then anything about Sugar Joe 
Peskin ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. The executive board members then told me who 
he was, that he had been in Chicago. 

Mr. Kennedy. May I just give a little of his background, Mr. 
Chairman ? 

The Chairman. Wlio did they tell you he was, first ? 

]\Ir, Sherry. They told me he was the man that furnished the 
sugar to Capone during the prohibition era. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is how he got the name Sugar Joe. 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr, Kennedy. In 1923 he was arrested, convicted and sentenced 
to 20 days in jail for the possession and sale of liquors. In February 
1981 he was charged with violation of the National Prohibition Act. 

On February 16, 1933, he was indicted for possessing and manu- 
facturing intoxicating liquors. Dispositions of both of these cases 
are unknown. During prohibition he was a wholesale grocer doing 
business as the J. P. Food Distributors, Inc., of Chicago. He sold 
over $1 million wor'^h of corn sugar to the alcohol stills belonging 
to the Al Capone mob. It was from this activity that he gained the 
name of Sugar Joe. 

He later owned the Universal Automatic Music Co., a jukebox 
operator, and became a power in the Illinois Phonograph Owners 
Association, which acted in collusion with Local 134 of tlie IBEW, 
which we developed during the course of the hearings that we have 
held earlier. 

In 1941 he was arrested in connection with the beating of a former 
employee who attempted to start his own business. It was a juke- 
box business. This employee tried to start his own jukebox business. 
Peskin stated to the court at that time, "Judge, if I did, I'd tell you. 
This thing is bum publicity for me and no good for the industry. 
These men worked for me and did take some jukebox spots away 
from me. This is not allowed by the union, and with the union's help 
I have gotten all b\it 5 of the 50 spots they took," indicating the situa- 
tion as far liack as the early 1940's, 

In tlie summer of 1948 accompanied by Greasy Tlunnb Guzik's 
son-in-law, Frank Barnett, Peskin went to Los Angeles. On Auixust 
1, 1948, he formed the J. Peskin Distributing Co. at 2603-67 West 
Pico Boulevard, franchised distributor for the AMI jukeboxes in 
^*Ufornia and Nevada. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17275 

The Chairman. Did you know about that ? 

Mr. Sherry. I knew his address was up on Pico. I didn't know 
exactly where it was. 

The Chairman. You knew he formed that company, did you ? 

Mr, Sherry. Xo, I didn't know any particular company, Senator. 

The Chairman. But you knew he was representing this distributing 
agency ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir, I knew he was representing them, because he 
insisted we take xVMl's, so he must have been representing them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Once again, Mr. Chairman, it shows the big com- 
paniCvS using people with these criminal backgrounds in order to get 
their machines distributed. 

What was the final disposition of that? Wlien you wouldn't let 
him in there, he tied up with the Teamsters Union ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. You see, he appeared with a man by the 
name of Jaffe at the Board. 

Mr. Kennedy. "What is Jatfe's first name? 

Mr. Sherry. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. J-a-f-f-e, a former strongarm man for the Chicago 
Tavern Association, Mr. Chairman, who also came out of Chicago, and 
who has a police record. 

Mr. Sherry. At any rate, we turned him down. We didn't accept 
him. So he went over and joined the Teamsters, When he joined 
the Teamsters, they began to raid all of the IBEW locations, so we 
put pickets on the Teamsters building. 

Mr. Kennedy. What Teamster union was that? 

Mr. Sherry. 396 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 
run by Frank Matula, Jr. He was in the Teamster building with all 
the other Teamster locals, and we placed pickets on their building and 
ke})t them there for 9 months. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did that picketing go ? Was that successful ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. We ran out of money. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did it go at the beginning? What kind of 
pickets did you have? 

Mr, Sherry, We put 21 men on. 

Mr, Kennedy. This is when you were picketing the Teamstei-s 
iiead(|uarters? 

Mr, Sherry. The Teamsters headquarters. We put 21 men on the 
first day. The next day the Teamsters put an equal number in be- 
hind each one of our pickets with spikes in their shoes. They ripped 
our men's legs and sent most of them to the hospital. So we re- 
placed those in a short time with girls. We put a lot of girls on. 
Then they dated the girls on and took them out to lunch until finally 
we ended up with ladies 55 to 60, We kept them on and they didn't 
bother them. They didn't take them to lunch, 

Mr. Kennedy. So that was successful ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, it was not. 

Mr. Kennedy, At least .you were able to keep your pickets on the 
picket line, 

JNIr, Sherry, Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. And that went on for some 9 months? 

Mr. Sherry. Nine months, yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy, Then you ran out of money ? 

Mr, Sherry. That is right. 



17276 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. So local 396 then took over ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have already had testimony re- 
garding the activities of Mr. Frank Matula, Mr. Matula being the 
one who controlled the cartage industry in the Los Angeles area on 
behalf of certain selected cartage companies. 

He was the one who had made this arrangement with Peskin back 
in 1948 in connection with the juke boxes. 

Mr. Sherry. That is right ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy How long did Peskin stay out there, or remain in 
California ? 

Mr. Sherry. I don't know, Mr. Kennedy, sincerely how long he did 
stay. We had plenty of troubles of our own in the union and we 
weren't watching Peskin. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any other attempt to take over your 
union ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. There was an attempt one time when six men 
walked into the union office, and pulled a .45, and told me that Mickey 
Cohen had said that he was taking over, I was to step out of the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you say ? 

Mr. Sherry. Well, I was sick, so it didn't matter much one way or 
another to me. So I told him to use the gun. But they didn't. I 
didn't hear any more about them. 

Mr. Kennedy. They just walked in and said that? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you said you refused to give up your position, 
to go ahead and shoot you? 

Mr. Sherry. That is "right, I did, Mr. Kennedy. But it is also 
equally true that many times when things are done in Los Angeles, if 
someone wants to impress you, they will say it is from Mickey Cohen, 
whether it is or not. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't know personally ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had no direct connection with Mr. Mickey Cohen 
yourself ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir, I did not. I didn't meet him until yesterday 
in the corridor here. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was his name used at another time ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, his name was used at another time. ^ We had sev- 
eral cases in court against the Teamsters. Once again it was money 
troubles. We couldn't maintain an attorney. So a Jack Fox con- 
tacted me, and would arrange for us to get a good attorney, a fellow 
by the name of Glen Lane, attorney in Los Angeles. 

Mr. Kennedy. Jack Fox also came out of Chicago, did he not? 

Mr. Sherry. Yos, he told me he came from Chicago. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you understood, or did you learn later, that 
he was a member of the syndicate in Chicago ? 

Mr. Sherry. I don't know about a syndicate part, but he told us 
that ho was connected with the delicatessen people in Chicago. 

Mr. KicNNEDY. I am talking about the underworld figures in Chi- 
cago. Did he tell you or indicate to you that he had been connected 
with some of the people who were remnants of the Al Capone group? 

Mr. SriERRY. Not only to me, but he made the statement to the entire 
membership, to impress them. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17277 

Mr. Kennedy. That he had these contacts and connections ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy, What did he tell you specifically about the delica- 
tessen ? 

Mr. Sherry. That he could show us how to organize it the way 
they did the delicatessen people there, a pipe wrapped in a newspaper. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the way they operated in Chicago? 

Mr. Sherry. Evidently. That statement was made publicly to the 
membership. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he said that he could employ the same methods 
for organizing for you in the Los Angeles area? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was your answer to that ? 

Mr. Sherry. Well, we didn't go for the organizing, but he brought 
a man by tlie name of Larry DiCaro. It was a package deal to us. 
Lari-y DiCaro was to go out and organize for us, bring us in members, 
and at the same time he would get us Glen Lane to fight the Teams- 
ters in court. 

Mr. Kennedy. He would get who ? 

Mr. Sherry. Glen Lane. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who is Glen Lane ? 

Mr. Sherry. Glen Lane is an attorney in Los Angeles. He was 
taking our cases into court. We had three or four of them there. 
It wound up with Jack Fox staying in the oflice there for 2 or 3 weeks, 
and it finally wound up in tliis way : That Mr. Lane, supposedly, had 
made the statement, and that had come supposedly from Mickey 
Cohen at a pool conference, a swimming pool conference. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are going to have to explain that a little bit. 
When Fox came in, and offered this sort of package deal, he was 
going to give you Larry DiCaro and put him on the payroll ? 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Larry DiCaro was put on the payroll? 

Mr. Sherry. He was. 

Mr. Kennedy. He had a number of underworld coimections, did 
he not? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. In fact, he was an associate of Sica ? 

Mr. Sherry. That we didn't know, sir, and I didn't know it until 
this minute. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. The package deal was Larry DiCaro going on the 
payroll. Then you had this lawyer who was going to be able to ar- 
range for you to win these cases ; is that right ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And in back of this whole arrangement was sup- 
posed to have been Mickey Cohen ? 

Mr. Sherry. It was supposed to have been made by Mickey Cohen 
at a poolside conference. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who related to you that this decision had been 
made ? 

Mr. Sherry. Jack Fox. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said that he had the backing of Mickey Cohen, 
that they had arranged this, Mickey Cohen and himself at this con- 
ference, and this was what was going to happen? 



17278 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Sherry. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went into that so far as hiring Lawrence Di- 
Caro, who is also known as Greaseball, and Bianco, is he not? 

Mr. Sherry. We never Imew it. This is the first I ever heard of it. 
Incidentally, Mr. Kennedy, DiCaro was put on the payroll in this 
manner : The union was very poor, so DiCaro was paid according to 
the members he brought in, actually a commission deal. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did that work out ? 

Mr. Sherry. We had to let him go for the simple reason that Fox 
gave us an ultimatum, and the ultimatum was that he and Glen Lane, 
the attorney, had decided that Fox was to come in there and take over 
the union, or at least be in there on an equal basis, or Lane would 
drop our cases in court, which he did do, because we wouldn't accept 
Fox and we immediately discharged, fired DiCaro. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know he had been involved in organizing 
the delicatessen and barber shops? 

Mr, Sherry. He told us he had — no. I thought you were referring 
to Fox. 

Mr. I^nnedy. Just Fox ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't know about the organizing work of 
DiCaro? 

Mr. Sherry. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was three incidents. The fourth was when 
you went to San Diego. Would you relate that to the committee? 

Mr. Sherry. That I would rather not relate to the committee. 

I made a trip down to San Diego to oi-ganize, and on a particular 
day when I arrived down there I registered at the U. S. Grant Hotel. 
I called two or three of the operators in the afternoon to let them 
know that we would hold a meeting, either that day — pardon, either 
the next day or the day after. We hadn't quite made the decision 
what day it would be. 

Mr. Kennedy. What year is this ? 

Mr. Sherry. This would be 1951. This particular meeting I am 
referring to down there was a meeting that mc were going to call the 
operators together to attempt to organize them. We had been in- 
structed by our international representative, Les Morrell, to do so. 

Well, I registered at the Grant Hotel and had called several of the 
operators. I went to bed, I guess, along about 9 or 9 :30. I was in 
bed a while. It was around midnight Avhen the teleplione rang. I 
got up and answered the phone and I was instructed to come down 
to the Brass Rail and talk to Frank — I can't say the name — Bompen- 
siero. I declined because I was in bed. I was told I hnd better not 
decline, that I had better come down and come down ri^ht awav, which 
I did. 

I went down to the Brass Rail. It was either the street right 
opposite the Grant or the next one over. At any rate, I went over 
there. I got over there about 12:30. I was tnken upstairs to a little 
room that was made from the lobby of a bar. That was the Brass Rail 
bar. And there were seven or eight people around tliere, big people, 
and I am a little man. They informed me that I could not come into 
San Diego and organize unless tliey were cut in 50-50. 

The Chairman. What were you going to organize there? 



IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17279 

Mr. Sherry. I was going to organize these operators into the union, 
bring them into local 1052 as members. 

The CiiAiKMAX. That wasn't a business association? That was a 
labor union ? 

Mr. Sherry. This was a labor union I am referring to. 

The Chairman. 1052. All right. Go ahead. 

Mr. Sherry. The conversation went about like this: I told Frank 
Bompensiero that he looked like a pretty smart man, he must know that 
a labor union couldn't do anything like that. We had to send per 
capita tax into the International, that there would be no way of 
splitting that if we wanted to; that we would go ahead with the 
organizing. 

They warned me not to, and I left. 

The next day I called several of the operators. I was going to hold 
the meeting that day, but several that I wanted to reach I couldn't 
reach, so we put it off. We put the word out that we would hold it 
the next day, I think at 3 or 3 :30. 

But that night, the night before the meeting, several of the operators 
came up to the room, in two's and three's, to talk to me. 

Finally about 9 :30 the last one left. Then about 45 minutes later, 
a rap came at the door and there was three big, I would say, Italians. 

The Chairman. Big what? 

Mr. Sherry. Italians, I would say their nationality was, big men. 
They came in, and once again there was a gun brought into evidence. 
I told them they wouldn't dare use the gun because it would be heard 
all over the hotel. 

So one of them pulled a knife and said, "No, we don't intend to use 
the gun, Sherry." 

With that they manhandled me a little. They had a hammer, and 
they had a large object. They took my clothes off, inserted the object, 
and used the hammer and handle, at which time I passed out. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was a cucumber? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir, it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. A large cucumber ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. And about 6 :30 in the morning I came to. 
I was laying on the floor. I had laid there all night, in a pool of blood. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had been knocked unconscious and you were in 
a pool of blood ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. So I called my doctor. They were going to send 
an ambulance down. 

Naturally, I canceled the meeting, but I drove back. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know what had happened to you then? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. I had a good idea what happened, because I 
could feel excruciating pain in my body. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know what they had inserted at that time? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. I saw it before they inserted it. 

The Chairman. Did they tell you they were going to insert it? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. They told me exactly what they were going to 
do, and they did it. They told me now I would reconsider before I 
went ahead with any organizing plans without taking them into it. 
That was not the end of Frank Bompensiero. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tell us what happened to you. Did you start driving 
back? 



17280 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. I drove back. My doctor told me not to drive 
in that condition, that he would send an ambulance down. I phoned 
to the family doctor, which was up there in Alhambra, actually. In- 
stead of waiting for the ambulance, I drove back, drove to his office. 
He got me over to the Huntington Memorial Hospital in a hurry and 
they operated. That was it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any talk about your going back again? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes. Frank Bompensiero sent a couple of telegrams 
up to the local union, insisting that, in the first telegram, that if we 
came down to organize, he would insist that he go in 50-50. Then he 
sent another telegram to the local stating that he would come up to 
talk the matter over, but he never arrived. That was the end of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever go back ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. The executive board insisted that I not go 
back. 

The Chairman. Are they still unorganized ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. The Teamsters have them down there. 

The Chairman. The Teamsters have them ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bompensiero is now in the penitentiary. He 
had nine arrests for charges, including violation of the State poison 
act. National Prohibition Act, kidnaping and murder, conspiracy, 
common gambling, possession of firearms after conviction, conspiracy 
to ask or receive bribes by public officers. 

He had three convictions, 1930 for the Wright Act, in which he was 
fined $50 ; 1931 for the National Prohibition Act, 13 months at McNeil 
Island on four counts, and 3 years in the Federal penitentiary, sus- 
pended sentence; 1955, conspiracy to ask or receive bribe by public 
office, a six month to 14 years, a sentence he is presently serving. 

The Chairman. He was not a member of any union, was he? 

Mr. Sherry. Not to my knowledge, sir. 

The Chairman. What was he, just a common thug or gangster? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. He had, I believe, a little association down 
there. At least he was reputed to own about nine taverns and control 
41. 

The Chairman. He was a businessman ? 

Mr. Sherry. He was a businessman. 

Senator Capehart. Did you know the three men that attacked you 
in the hotel that night? 

Mr. Sherry. No. sir ; I did not. 

Senator Capehart. You did not know any one of the three? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. I didn't even recognize them as being any 
of the group I had seen that one night. They may have been there, 
but I didn't recognize them. 

Senator Capehart. You didn't recognize any of them ? 

Mr. Sherry. Definitely not, sir. 

Senator Capehart. None of them were ever arrested ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir. In fact, I didn't even report the matter to the 
police. I was too ashamed of it. 

Senator Capehart. You did not. You didn't know any of them? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir; I didn't know any of them. 

Senator Capehart. What business were you in before you became 
business manager for this union ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17281 

Mr. Sherry. Well, I was immediately prior to that manufacturing 
coin-operated radios for motels and hotels. 

Senator Capehart. You were a businessman ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

"VSHiat do you do now ? 

Mr. Sherry. I am selling real estate, sir. 

The Chairman. You are out of the union business ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. The union closed on January 15, 1953, and 
it was left for the Teamsters and the Teamsters have since taken 
everything. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was after the strike against the Teamsters was 
unsuccessful ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The IBEW came in and lifted your charter ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And turned the jurisdiction over to the Teamsters? 

Mr. Sherry. Well, they didn't exactly turn it over. They left it 
for anyone who would take it. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Teamsters now have it ? 

Mr. Sherry. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is the situation as you know it today similar to what 
you have described ? 

Mr. Sherry. It is much worse, sir. Very sincerely, Mr. Kennedy, 
we cleaned up the area a great deal. We had a pretty good operation 
there, and we didn't have any known hoodlums in our local. It was 
pretty clear. But things have gone back to where they were now, 
I am so told. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your method of procedure was hardly a proper one. 

Mr. Sherry. It was wrong. I will agi-ee there. But nevertheless, 
it was an evil that did some good. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they indicate to you in San Diego what would 
happen to you if you came back a second time ? 

Mr. Sherry. "Yes. I was used to hearing that. Several of them 
threatened to kill me. But I guess my hearing was bad. 

Mr. Kennedy. No. After they inserted the cucumber, did they in- 
dicate what would happen to you? Was there any discussion of a 
watermelon if you came back ? 

Mr. Sherry. No, sir ; not to my knowledge. 

]Mr. Kennedy. There was no discussion about that ? 

Mr. Sherry. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You haven't been in the labor movement since 1953 ? 

Mr. S 1 ierry. No, sir. I am very happy not to be. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

If not, thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Vaughn. 

The Chairman. Be sworn, sir. 

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 truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I do. 



17282 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS A. VAUGHN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

EMIL N. LEVIN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Vaughn. My name is Tom Vaughn. I live in New Orleans, La. 

The Chairman. Where ? 

Mr. Vaughn. New Orleans. And I am president of the New Orleans 
Cigarette Service Corp. 

The Chairman. Thank you, sir. You have counsel ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I do, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Levin. Emil Levin, 31 South Clark, Chicago. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Vaughn, prior to World War II you were in 
the insurance business in Delaware; is that right? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And during the war you worked in the Office of 
Civil Defense, Washington, D.C., as Acting Deputy Director? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. And in Chicago, 111., as Civilian Mobilization Ad- 
visor ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1944 you became associate director of the Na- 
tional Automatic Merchandising Association of Chicago? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And while there, you became friendly with Mr. 
George Seedman ; is that right ? 

Mr, Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was then an officer and director of the Eowe 
Corp. in New York City ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In March 1946, you went to New Orleans, and pur- 
chased your present minority interest in the New Orleans Cigarette 
Service Corp. ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you purchased that interest from the Rowe 
Cigarette Service? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was a subsidiary of the Rowe Corp. ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, Eowe Corp. — Rowe Cigarette Service later be- 
came Rowe Corp. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in partnership with Rowe, you operate ciga- 
rette vending machine companies in Lafayette and Baton Rouge, La., 
at the present time? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the National Automatic Merchandisers Associ- 
ation convention — you attended that — which was held in Philadelphia 
on October 10, 1957 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kenni.dy. At that time did you speak with Mr. Harold Roth 
of the National Vendors Corp.? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17283 

Mr. Kennedy, That is a major company, is it not, the National 
Vendors ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. One of the biggest in the country ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. They distribute what? 

Mr. Vaughn. Cigarette merchandising machines, principally. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, Harold Roth mentioned George Seed- 
man, who had been a friend of yours, of the Rowe Co., who was then 
stationed in Los Angeles. Did he complain about the tactics that 
Seedman had been using? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "VVliat did he say ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, he just said that George was aggravating him 
and that he was a little unhappy about it 

Mr. IvENNEDY. And that they were having some difficulties at that 
time? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The two companies then? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And at the convention, you spoke to Seedman about 
it, did you not ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. And Seedman told you there was nothing to worry 
about ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You told him that you would help him if he felt 
that your help would be of assistance ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. On November 11, 1957, which you remember because 
it was your wedding anniversary, you had launch in New Orleans 
with Harold Roth ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was there on a business trip; is the right, sir? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And at that time, it was once again mentioned that 
Seedman was causing some difficulty in Los Angeles? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. The struggle that was going on was men- 
tioned ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that Seedman had been taking locations from 
this company, from Roth ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I think it was mutual sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Each one had been taking locations ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who were the two companies that would be in- 
volved out there ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I believe it is Coast Cigarette Service, and that is 
Mr. Roth's company, and Rowe Service, which is Mr. Seedman's 
company. 

Mr. Kennedy. You then telephoned Seedman shortly afterwards 
and volunteered to go to Los Angeles to help him if he needed any 
assistance ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I did, sir. 



17284 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. IvENNEDY. He declined that offer at the time ? 

Mr. Vaughn, Yes, he did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Several days later, or within a short time, he did 
call you and ask you to come to Los Angeles ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He wanted to discuss the whole matter with you; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, you indicated that you would bring 
Mr. Lou Angelo, who was your manager, with you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He is my sales manager in New Orleans ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You knew from reading in the newspapers that a 
man by the name of Babe McCoy was then in New Orleans ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you make arrangements to talk to Babe McCoy ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes. I sought an interview through mutual friends 
with Mr. McCoy. 

Mr. Kennedy. McCoy at that time was a disbarred fight manager ? 

Mr. Vaughn. What his position was I don't know at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you seek an interview with Mr. McCoy? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I knew I had friends who knew Mr. McCoy and 
I knew Mr. McCoy was from Los Angeles and probably, from what I 
read in the papers, well versed in the Los Angeles area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat do you mean, "well versed" ? The fact that 
he had these close associates with the underworld and he had been a 
disbarred fight manager ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I know nothing about that, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of contacts did you think he had? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, usually anyone who would be a matchmaker or 
promoter of fights probably would have a wide acquaintanceship with 
barrooms and taverns where cigarette machines are usually installed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Anyway, you arranged to meet with McCoy ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did McCoy indicate to you at that time ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That he would be back in Los Angeles within the next 
few days, and that when I got there I should call him. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that he would help you if he could ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on November 17, 1957, you and Angelo flew 
to Los Angeles and checked into the Ambassador JHotel ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Correct, sir ; that is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. On November 18, Seedman came to see you at the 
hotel, did he not ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he indicated to you that the Coast Co. had not 
been able to hurt them too much ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you that Coast had some 20 men out there 
that were working in the dispute that was going on ? 

Mr, Vaughn. I believe that came out at that time ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. These were all locations for cigarette machines, were 
they not ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17285 

Mr. Kennedy. He said that they were gettinjj some of Coast's loca- 
tions and Coast in turn was getting some of their locations 'i 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennp:dy. And Angelo was going to help and assist in trying 
to get some of these locations back, get new locations ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then for the next few days you called on some of 
the locations to try to assist ? 

Mr. Vaughn, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on November 19 you called Babe McCoy and 
arranged to meet him the following morning at the Ambassador Hotel ? 

Mr. Vaughn. It was at the Mayan Hotel. I was living at the Am- 
bassador, but we made a breakfast date at the Mayan Hotel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on November 20 you and Seedman had break- 
fast with McCoy ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he indicated to you that he might be able to 
help ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He said that he would do what he could, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you were in Seedman's office on November 22 
when you talked to McCoy, who said he had something serious to tell 
you, and he wanted to talk to you again ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he told you that it couldn't be discussed over the 
telephone ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you should come to his apartment? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You and Angelo visited McCoy at his apartment ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he tell you at that time ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, he said that he had received a call from Mr. 
Michael Cohen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Michael Cohen ? Does he go by any other name ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I think he is known by "Mickey." Mickey Cohen or 
Michael Cohen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Go ahead. 

Mr. Vaughn. And Mr. Cohen asked him what his interest was in 
helping people in the cigarette business, and indicated that Mr. Cohen's 
friend, Mr. Sica, had been offered a position by the competitive com- 
pany to help them. So Mr. McCoy responded that he had no interest 
in it wliatsoever except to help me because of personal friends, and 
he suggested that Mr. Cohen should come over to his apartment and 
meet me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that arranged then ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who suggested that he should come over to the 
apartment and meet you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I couldn't answer on that directly, sir. I don't 
know whether Mr. Cohen suggested he should come over or Mr. McCoy 
suggested he should come over. I wasn't there. 

Mr. Kennedy. But Cohen indicated that he was interested in this 
business, and arrangements were made for him to meet with you ; is 
that riffht ? 



17286 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So did you generally meet at McCoy's apartment? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it was that evening, was it? 

Mr. Vaughn. The same evening. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate what happened at that time ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, Mr. Cohen and Mr. Sica came in. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who is Mr. Sica ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Mr. Sica, the first time that I had met him or the 
first time that I had met Mr. Cohen — I knew nothing about them. Of 
course, I knew Mr. Cohen by reputation, but I had never met him 
before that. Mr. Sica, I had never known up to that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Cohen and Sica came in ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did Cohen tell you at that time ? 

Mr. Vaughn. The substance of it was that Mr. Sica had been ojffered, 
I believe the amount was, $2.0,000 to work for Coast Cigarette Service 
in securing Mr. Seedman's locations. 

Mr. Kennedy. Go ahead. 

Mr. Vaughn. And 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you tell him ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I told him certainly — I said I knew him by reputation 
and that I certainly didn't want him to go against my friend's com- 
pany, and that it wasn't that big a battle to begin with. 

I said it was just a competitive battle between two companies and 
I am sure it was nothing big enough for him to be interested in. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it indicated in his conversation that this was 
going to be a joint venture on the part of Sica and him to try to get 
locations for the Coast Co. 

Mr. Vaughn. I believe it would be this way, that he said that Mr. 
Sica had been offered the job, and that naturally, since Mr. Sica was 
a friend of his, that he would help him. 

Mr. Kennedy. But from your conversation with him, in which you 
stated, "I know your reputation, and I wouldn't want somebody like 
you opposing me," you indicated or knew that the opposition that was 
going to come was coming from Mickey Cohen, and not Fred Sica? 

Mr. Vaughn. That would be my assumption ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the impression tliat he attempted to convey 
to you in the course of the conversation, or did convey to you in the 
course of the conversation ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I would say that is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what was finally decided at that time? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I decided — he said — well, I asked for him to 
certainly give me a couple of days to think it over, that I was a friend 
of Mr. McCoy's, and that he knew that, and that I wished he wouldn't 
do anything for a. few days or make any decision until I had a few 
days to think it over. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he seem to know what the facts were in connec- 
tion with tlie matter? 

Mr. Vaughn, He seemed to know all about the competitive battle 
very, very much, yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he mention, for instance, a particular account 
called Tony Naylor's? 

Mr. Vaughn. He did, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17287 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was an account Mr. Seedman had taken 
away from Coast ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any discussion at that time about Tony 
Naylor's ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I asked Mr. Cohen if he could secure for Coast that 
location again, if he thought he could, and Mr. Cohen replied, "I don't 
think I could. I know that I could." 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he say anything about Seedman — Mr. Cohen? 

Mr. Vaughn. He said only that he didn't know Mr. Seedman, of 
course, and that he had heard that he was very friendly with the 
police officials in Los Angeles, and had Chief Parker's picture in his 
office, or Mr. Hamilton's picture in his office. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Captain Hamilton ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I have never met either one of the gentlemen. 

Mr. Kennedy. But he indicated that Seedman had their pictures 
in his office. Captain Hamilton and Chief Parker? 

Mr. Vaughn. He so indicated; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was another reason that he didn't like 
Mr. Seedman? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So ultimately you asked Cohen not to do anything 
right at that time? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he indicate that he would hold off? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes. The inference was that he would wait until 
he had a chance to think it over, yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliat same night, November 22, you, Angelo Cohen 
and Sica went to dinner; is that right? 

Mr. Vaughn. I believe that is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. With Max Tannenbaum and others? 

Mr. Vaughn. There was a large party, sir. A large group. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Then the following evening you went to dinner 
with him again? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was taking you all to dinner; is that right? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. No business was discussed on those two occasions? 

Mr. Vaughn. At no time, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. On Sunday evening, November 24, did you have 
some discussions with Mr. Seedman at the Ambassador Hotel ? 

Mr. Vaughn. At what time, sir ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Sunday morning, November 24, discussions with 
Mr. Seedman at the Ambassador Hotel? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Did you tell him then about vom* discussions with 
Mr. Cohen? 

Mr. Vaughn. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you decide to do then? 

Mr. Vaughn. Mr. Seedman agreed with me that he felt Mr. Cohen 
was a power in southern California and he certainly didn't want 
Mr. Cohen or Mr. Sica to interfere with this relatively small com- 
petitive battle that was going on, and that it would be much better 



17288 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

for the industry if they would remain neutral and take no part in 
it whatsoever, either for or against us. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you talk about industry, you are talking 
about your company, it would be much better for your company ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I think for the industry as a whole, too, sir. 

Mr. I\JENNEDY. That is what you were thinking of ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I would say so. I would say so. 

Mr. KjiNNEDY. So what did you decide to do for the industry ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I am a former association man, as your record 
indicates, and I do think of the industry. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you decide to do then ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, we agreed that since Mr. Cohen told that Mr. 
Sica had been offered a fee for helping him, he probably would expect 
a fee to stay neutral. 

We agreed to pay up to $5,000. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. To kccp him neutral ? 

Mr. Vaughn. To keep them neutral is right, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. So did you meet with Mr. Cohen that evening? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had dinner with him, on November 24 at LaRue 
Restaurant, did you not ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

INIr. Kennedy. Then after dinner, as you were leaving, did you 
have a talk with him, with Mr. Cohen, a personal talk? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes. We walked across the street together, and as 
I was going back to the hotel I asked him for a meeting with him, 
a luncheon meeting with him, for the next day. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat conversation did you have with him then ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He said he would be glad to meet me at my hotel, 
the Ambassador, around 2 :30 for Imich. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then what did he say ? 

Mr, Vaughn. He said he had a call that day, and that he was 
offered $50,000, a contract for $50,000, 1 believe was the phraseology, 
to put Mr. Seedman's lights out. 

Mr. Kennedy. To put Mr. Seedman's lights out ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was your reaction to that ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I just thought it was very ridiculous. I didn't think 
he meant it. I treated it very casually, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The impression was — did he say it seriously? 

Mr. Vaughn. I would say that he wasn't smiling; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said that he had received a call and was offered 
a contract for $50,000 to put Mr. Seedman's lights out? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is exactly right, sir; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You are talking about his business lights, I assume. 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't know, sir. 

The Chairman. You didn't think he was going to put his eyes 
out. That wasn't what you thought, Avas it? 

Mr. Vaughn. I didn't take it seriously. I didn't dwell on the point 
with him, Senator. 

The Chairman. I know, but you couldn't help having some kind of 
a flash in your mind of what he meant by putting his lights out. What 
did you think he meant ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17289 

Mr. Vafgiix. Well, it didn't sound like anything particularly pleas- 
ant. But I didn't dwell on the point. I thought he couldn't be serious. 

The Chairman. You thought he might put him out of business com- 
pletel}'^, alive and otherwise ? 

Mr, Vaughn. It could have meant that, Senator. 

The Chairman. That is what you thought it meant ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, as I said. Senator, I treated it very lightly. I 
didn't dwell on the subject with Mr. Cohen, did not discuss it with 
him. 

The Chairman. You don't treat threats of death too lightly, do you ? 

Mr. Vaughn, Under the circumstances, all I can do is relate what 
happened. 

The Chairman. You were hoping it wasn't true ? 

Mr. Vaughn, I said that that was ridiculous, that I know something 
like that couldn't happen. 

Senator Ervin. Was this on Christmas Eve ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. It was on Sunday night. I don't remember 
the exact date. It was the Sunday night after I arrived in Los Angeles. 

Senator Ervin. Just before Thanksgiving? 

Mr. Vaughn. It was the Sunday before Thanksgiving. 

Senator Ervin. It wasn't the kind of conversation that you thought 
was very appropriate for that season of the year or an}?- other season 
for that matter, was it ? 

Mr, Vaughn. Well, as I say, I didn't pay a great deal of attention 
to it, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. I don't want to belabor the point, but there was no 
question in your mind, was there, that what he had in mind was hav- 
ing Mr. Seedman killed ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That would be the inference that I drew, sir. 

Senator Ervin. I thought you were rather mild in your understate- 
ment. I would think that that was a serious business, myself. 

Mr. Vaughn. I was more concerned with the neutrality of the par- 
ties concerned than I was with anything else at that particular time. 

Mr. Kennedy, The neutrality of the parties ? 

Mr, Vaughn, Yes, 

Mr, Kennedy, On Monday, November 25, you met in the French 
Room at the Ambassador Hotel with Cohen for lunch; is that right? 

Mr, Vaughn, Yes, sir, 

Mr, Kennedy, And Sica was in and out of the room, and did he 
come there ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I believe so, yes. 

Mr, Kennedy, Was he present ? 

Mr, Vaughn, I was there on two consecutive luncheons with Mr. 
Cohen, on Monday and Tuesday, and I know on one of those two days 
Mr. Sica was in and out, 

Mr, Kennedy. So at that time, or anyway, you had lunch with 
Cohen? 

Mr, Vaughn, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you started discussing this situation, the com- 
petition that was going on ? 

Mr. Vaughn, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You said for the $20,000 Cohen was to secure from 
the company he would have to do some work ; is that right ? 



3S751— 59— pt. 48- 



17290 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you would like to offer him a counter- 
proposition ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And at that time, you said what ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I offered him $5,000 just to forget that there was such 
a battle, and I offered it for Mr. Sica, and it was Mr. Cohen's person 
I was talking to. 

Mr. Kennedy. You offered them $5,000 for Mr. Cohen and Mr. 
Sica to stay neutral ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was his reaction to that ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Mr. Cohen said that that was ridiculous, that he 
could not ask Freddy to take $5,000 when he had been offered much 
more. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it was discussed what you might pay him, or 
that he wanted $10,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No. Mr. Cohen offered to loan me $5,000, so that 
at least $10,000 could be paid to Mr. Sica. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he wanted $10,000, and if you were stuck for the 
extra $5,000, he would be willing to loan you $5,000, so you could pay 
Mr. Sica $10,000? 

Mr. Vaughn. That was what he told me. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was your reaction to that ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I said, "If you loan me $5,000 that would have to be 
paid back," and so we talked about $10,000, and I said I don't have 
enough money in our business to pay $10,000, and said I certainly 
couldn't give you an answer to that, today. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go back and then discuss it with Mr. 
Seedman ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was it decided at that time that he should be 
given $5,000 and an I O U for another $5,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, we agreed to give him $5,000 then, and then 
I gave him an oral I O U that I would pay him an additional $5,000 
within 90 days. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you agreed to pay him the $10,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. $5,000 in cash immediately, and $5,000 to come sub- 
sequently ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That money was paid to him ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He received the $10,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

The Cjiaikman, I understand from counsel it will take a little while 
longer to conclude with this witness, and I don't believe we can con- 
clude at this time, and it will be necessary to recess. 

Senator Catehart. T have one question. What service did Mr. 
Cohen render for tliis $10,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughan. No sei-vice whatsoever, sir. 

Senator Capeh art. None whatsoever ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17291 

Senator Capehx\rt. Did you know he was going to render no service 
when you gave it to him ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That was the purpose, for neutrality. 

Senator Capehart. To keep him from doing anything ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 

(Members of the select committee present at the taking of the recess 
were Senators McClellan, Mundt, Ervin, Curtis, and Capehart.) 

(Whereupon, at 12 :25 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 
2 p.m., the same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION 

The select committee reconvened at 2 p.m. in the caucus room of 
the Senate Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan, presiding. 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
afternoon session were Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Mr. Vaughn, will you resume the stand, please? 

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS A. VAUGHN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
EMIL N. LEVIN— Resumed 

The Chairman. We will proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, we were up to November 26 ; you had the meet- 
ing at 2 :30 with Mickey Cohen, and you had the agreement with Mr. 
Seedman that you would give him $3,000 in cash and a $5,000 I O U. 
That night, on November 26, you attended another of Mickey Cohen's 
parties at the Rivioli, along with certain other people ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr, Kennedy. And no business was conducted at that time. 

On Wednesday, November 27, Seedman came to your room at the 
Ambassador Hotel and gave to you an unsealed envelope containing 
$5,000 in cash? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was on Wednesday, November 27 ; is that not 
right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You and Seedman then met Cohen and Sica for 
lunch at the Brown Derby ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. On the same day ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you discussed some general matters and 
then the question of the $5,000 came up and would you relate to the 
committee what happened ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I just said I had it with me and Mr. Cohen said, 
"Give it to Mr. Sica," which I did, and that was all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there anything about you raising a question as 
to whether you should give it to him there or under the table ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I said, "When do you want it?" And he said, 
"Right jiow," and I just handed it across the table to him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you expected that he would want it passed under 
the table? 



17292 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Vaughn. I didn't know, sir, and I asked him when he wanted it. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time it was also agreed that you would give 
another $5,000 to Sica and Cohen in March of 1958 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That package just had $5,000 in it ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was to have Mr. Cohen and Mr. Sica remain 
neutral in the fight between the vending machine companies ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, you returned to New Orleans the following day, 
November 28 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I flew that night, sir, and I got in in the morning. 

Mr. Kennedy. You got back to New Orleans on November 28 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you informed Mr. Arthur Gluck, who was tne 
head of the Kowe Co. in New York, as to the situation ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No ; I would have to say that I hadn't. 

He knew that I was there, but we never discussed any of the details 
other than the battle, and so forth. I may have told him, or the 
answer is "No." 

Mr. Kennedy. You told him that you had to make some arrange- 
ments with Mickey Cohen and Sica, did you not ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No ; I didn't say that to him, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't say anything like that to him? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you subsequently tell him ? 

Mr. Vaughn. After it was all over, he knew the details. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say to you at that time ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He said I was stupid. 

Mr. Kennedy. Anything else ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That was all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he say that was the best you could do ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He gave me credit for making the best decision at that 
particular time, and he said he felt that was the thing to do. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, let me see, you were in New Orleans from No- 
vember 28 to December 8 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. During that period of time, you received a telephone 
call from Mickey Cohen ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that telephone call came to you at what time of 
the day? 

Mr. Vaughn. It was in the middle of the night, in New Orleans, 
and it was probably 3 o'clock in the morning, or 2 to 3 o'clock in the 
morning in New Orleans. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did Mr. Cohen tell you then ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He said something very important had developed, 
and that he felt that he didn't want to bother Mr. Seedman at his 
home, but I should call him and tell him to call Mr. Cohen at a certain 
telephone niunber. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said all hell was breaking loose ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Words to that effect; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he mention to you the work of a private 
investigator? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17293 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't believe anybody's name was mentioned, but 
I think it was a question of recordings being mentioned. 

Mr. Kennedy. Recordings ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Some recordings being made, and that he wanted 
to get in touch wdth you about this right away ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir ; it was with Mr. Seedman right away. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you then put a call in to Mr. Seedman? 

Mr. Vaughn. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you told him to get in touch with Mr. Cohen ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Seedman subsequently report to you that he 
had heard some recordings that had been made by a private 
investigator ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He told me that he heard them ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He heard them in the company of Mickey Cohen? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what did he say ? What did he report to you 
about the recordings ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He said they were unintelligible and he could not 
distinguish the conversation, and it seemed to be of no value 
whatsoever. 

Ml-. Kennedy. Now, the location war between the Coast and the 
Rowe Co. continued ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you went back to Los Angeles on December 8 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. We will come back to these recordings in a few 
moments, but I want to bring it up to the proper time. 

You checked into the Beverly Hills Hotel and you stayed there 
until December 14, 1957 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. From Sunday night to Saturday morning, and I be- 
lieve those were the dates, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. During that period of December 8 through Decem- 
ber 14, you were in contact with Cohen and Sica on occasions socially, 
and then Mr. Cohen visited your room at the hotel, did he not ? 

]VIr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Quite frequently during that period of time ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was just social visits ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. I^nnedy. Then around December 11, you, without contacting 
Mr. Seedman, contacted the head of the Coast Co., Mr. Carr, and 
suggested ending the battle for locations ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I knew that a meeting had already been set for 
Wednesday, and I was just trying to anticipate in advance that there 
would be no difficulties in reaching arbitration. 

Mr. Kennedy. So there was an agreement made, that arose out of 
your efforts ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I wouldn't say it was out of my efforts, but I was 
helpful. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were helpful ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 



17294 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And the agreement was that each side would cease 
offering unduly high commissions to locations; and two, each would 
retain the locations they had and were servicing; and three, each 
would refrain from taking the others' locations; and four, each 
would in the future engage in only "normal competition." 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't know that phase of it, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDT. Was that generally along those lines ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I knew both companies were losing money in all of 
their transactions and they were just going to stop doing all of these 
things that they were losing money on. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. These were the sort of things causing the difficulty 
between the companies ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Some of those things ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there anything that I mentioned that wasn't 
causing difficulty ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I didn't get them, and I didn't get them all. 

Mr. Kennedy. But generally you were going to stop this jumping 
of locations ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I was going to be a third party. 

Mr. Kennedy. The two companies were going to stop ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the war was going to cease ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. And then somewhere between December 11 and 
December 12, that agreement was made ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Between the two companies ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. About this time did Mr. Cohen come to you about 
paying for these recordings, and for the price of hearing these re- 
cordings ? Did he come to vou in connection with that ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, he did, sir. He mentioned it to me and I don't 
think that he made a specific trip for that, but he did tell me that 
in the course of conversations. 

Mr. Kennedy. That you should pay for the fact that Mr. Seedman 
heard the recordings ? 

Mr. Vaughn. He felt that Mr. Otash should be reimbursed for 
letting Mr. Seedman hear the recordings. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much did he want for that ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Now, this is an item that I completely forgot about 
until last week, and so much liad happened, but to the best of my 
knowledge the amount was $1,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did you get that? Did you agree then to 
pay Cohen $1,000 for Mr. Seedman hearing these recordings which 
were unintelligible? 

Mr. Vaughn. I discussed it with Mr, Seedman, of coui-se, and the 
money that was spent was Mr. Seedman's and his company's money,, 
and T naturally would discuss it with him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did he say ? 

Mr, Vaughn. He said, well, since the whole thing was over with, 
probably rather than antagonize anybody, even though the record- 
ings wore worthless, the money should be paid. 

Mr. I^nnedy. So did you give Mr. Cohen the $1,000? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17295 

Mr. Vaughn. To the best of my recollection ; I did. 

Mr. ICennedt. What is the question ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Did I give him the money ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Is there any question in your mind that you gave 
him the $1,000? 

Mr. Vaughn. There is an area, and I was talking to one of your 
staff members, there is an area of doubt there, but that is why I say 
to the best of my knowledge I gave it to him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is the area of doubt on the question of whether 
you gave him any money or the amount of money ? 

Mr. Vaughn. The amount of money. 

Mr. Ivennedy. You gave him some money and you don't know, 
or you believe it was $1,000, but it could have been $500? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But your best recollection is that you paid him 
$1,000? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. I^nnedy. You know that you did pay him ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Wlio was present at the time that you gave the 
$1,000 or whatever amount it might have been, which we will call 
$1,000, with the question that you have raised about it. Wlio was 
present at the time that you gave him this money ? 

Mr. Vaughn. To the best of my recollection, there were people in 
the living room of the suite, and I went with Mr. Cohen to the bed- 
room of the suite, and gave him the $1,000 at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Whose suite was that? 

Mr. Vaughn. It was my suite, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You called him in and gave him $1,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was this in an envelope or cash ? 

Mr. Vaughan. To the best of my recollection, it was cash. 

ISIr. Kennedy. In an envelope ? 

Mr. Vaughan. No; just cash. 

Mr. Kennedy. In $100 bills? 

Mr. Vaughan. To the best of my recollection ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you cash a check to get the $500 of the $1,000? 

Mr. Vaughan. Yes, sir ; I did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that your own personal check ? 

Mr. Vaughan. No ; it was a check of the Rowe Service Co. in Los 
Angeles. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did you get the other $500 from ? 

Mr. Vaughan. Well again, to the best of my recollection on this 
other $500 Mr. Seedman gave that to me at the same time. 

IVIr. Kennedy. Now, did you ever meet the investigator who han- 
dled these recordings ? 

Mr. Vaughan. Yes, sir; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was that ? 

Mr. Vaughan. Mr. Fred Otash. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any conversations with him about the 
recordings ? 

Mr. Vaughan. No, not to my knowledge, we didn't discuss that 

Mr. Ivennedy. What were the recordings supposed to have been ? 



17296 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Vaughan. I didn't hear them, and so I can't say ; it would be 
conjecture on my part, and I actually don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did Mr. Seedman report to you as to what 
the recordings were ? 

Mr. Vaughan. He said they were unintelligible and he could not 
make them out. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee why you paid $1,000 
to listen to unintelligible recordings, which you didn't know anything 
about, and you didn't know what they were supposed to be? 

]Mr. Vaughan. It is a very good question, and the only answer I 
can give to you on that was that we wanted to end the whole thing 
once and for all at that particular time. 

Mr. Kennedy. If anybody had come into the hotel room that day, 
and said, "I have a group of recordings in my box, and nobody can 
understand them, but I will let you listen to them for $1,000," would 
you have done it ? 

Mr. Vaughan. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you do it in this case ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, at the time that the recordings were offered 
to be hired, no one knew what they contained, that would be my best 
answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you foimd out what they contained, which was 
nothing. 

Mr. Vaughn. But I believe Mr. Cohen probably, or I would say 
made a commitment on that. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't make a commitment? 

Mr. Vaughn. No; I made no commitment. 

Mr. Kennedy. If they didn't contain aynthing, why did you pay 
him $1,000, Mr. Vaughn? 

Mr. Vaughn. Only to end the thing, and Mr. Cohen suggested 
that Mr. Otash be reimbursed for letting Mr. Seedman hear the 
recordings. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you feel that because it was Mickey Cohen who 
made the suggestion, you should pay the $1,000? 

Mr. Vaughn. I would say it would have to have some bearing on 
it, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you didn't give the money to Otash anyway. 
You gave it to Mickey Cohen. 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't know whether Mr. Otash received the 
money; do you? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, I don't, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You just wanted peace; is that right? 



Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Kennphjy. And you felt that Mickey Cohen could give it to 



you 



Mr. Vaughn. No. I just didn't want any — ^he had no part of it. 
We just didn't want Mr. Cohen interfering with our business one 
way or the other. 

IVIr. Kennedy. You thought if you didn't pay him the $1,000, he 
could cause you some trouble? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, I don't think that he would have caused trouble 
because of the $1,000, but rather, just to bring to an end the whole 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17297 

thing, and if that is what it took to make him happy, then the $1,000 
at that moment was of small consequences. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that what it costs in Los Angeles to make Mickey 
Cohen happy— $1,000? 

Mr. Levin. Mr. Kennedy 

Mr. IvENNEDY. You can see why this point would be raised, do you 
not? 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't know, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But that is how much you had to pay? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is what was paid; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy, Did you have any other financial dealings with Mr. 
Cohen? 

Mr. Vaughn. Sometime during that second week Mr. Cohen called 
me and asked me to loan him $3,000 for a few days, which I agreed 
to do. And that same night his attorney came to my room and secured 
two checks totaling $3,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. His attorney was Mr. Edward Gritz? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He came to your room that night ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you gave him two checks, one for $1,150 and 
one for $1,850? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Each made payable to Michael Cohen ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The checks were endorsed over as loan to Michael 
Cohen ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You drew those two checks against your personal 
account ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I present to you what purport to be photostatic 
copies of the two checks to which you have referred. I ask you to 
examine them and state if you identify them as such. 

(The documents were handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Vaughn. They are correct, Senator. 

The Chairman. They may be made exhibit No. 65. The smaller one 
will be No, 65 and the larger one will be 65-A. 

(Checks referred to were marked "Exhibits 65 and 65-A" for 
reference and will be found in the appendix on pp. 17681, 17682.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you loan $3,000 to Mickey Cohen ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, in the back of my mind I guess one of the 
reasons was that I knew I had a commitment to him or Mr. Sica in 
March, and that if he didn't pay me back that the $3,000 would be 
part of that $5,000 that had to be paid in March. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any conversation with him at the time 
you made the loan of $3,000 to that effect? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, not at the time the loan was made ; no, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently you did ? 

Mr, Vaughn. At the end, just before I left Los Angeles, I told Mr. 
Cohen that that could be considered part of the $5,000 that I owed in 
March. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was going to originally pay you back within a 
few days, but then it was arranged when you were leaving Los Angeles 



17298 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

that he would apply the $3,000 to the $5,000 that you were going to 
give him for remaining neutral, the second $5,000; is that right? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the last occasion on which you saw Mr. 
Cohen ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, that was the last occasion that I saw Mr. Cohen. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were subsequently repaid by a personal check 
for $3,000 from Mr. Seedman for that loan that you made to Mr. 
Cohen ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were paid that $3,000 on December 24, 1957 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He, in turn, was reimbursed by the Rowe Service 
Co. for that $3,000? 

Mr. Vaughn. That I don't know, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He will be a witness. 

Did Mr. Sica ever suggest — this was the colleague of Mr. Cohen 
who, incidentally, has 20 arrests and 7 convictions, and was going to 
remain neutral also — did he ever suggest that his son be placed 
on the payroll of the Rowe Co. ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I was very fond of his son. I thought he had a 
fine boy. I thought that he would make a good salesman. He did 
suggest it and I recommended him to Mr. Seedman. 

Mr. Kennedy. So was Fred Sica's son placed on the payroll of the 
Rowe Co.? 

Mr. Vaughn. It is my understanding that in late January he was 
placed on the payroll ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. This would be January of 1958; is that right? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did he remain ? Do you know ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I believe a relatively short time, sir; under a month. 
That is my understanding. 

Mr. Kennedy. From January 18 until February 4; would that be 
correct ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I couldn't talk as to dates on that, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what salary he received ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir ; I do not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could we call an investigator on that matter Mr. 
Cha i rman ? Mr. May. 

The Chairman. Come forward, Mr. May. You have not been sworn 
in this series of hearings have you ? 

Mr. May. No. I have not, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chah^man. Be sworn. 

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. May. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WALTER R. MAY 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. May. Walter R. May, Arlington, Mass., assistant counsel for 
this committee. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17299 

The CiiAiRMAisr. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do the payroll records of the Rowe Co. show 
as far as Jerry Sica is concerned ? 

iSIr. May. The payroll records show that Jerry Sica received $300 
in s-alary and $103.15 in expenses for a period embracing 11 working 
days, a total of $408.15. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it is $108 

Mr.I^L^Y. $108. 

Mr. Kennedy. For expenses ? 

Mr. ]VIay. For expenses. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know why his employment was terminated ? 

TESTIMONY OF THOMAS A. VAUGHN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
EMIL N. LEVIN— Resumed 

Mr. Vaughn. Mr. Seedman said he was not satisfactory, is my 
imdei-standing. 

The Chairman. TVliat? 

Mr. Vaughn. That he was not satisfactory. 

The CH.S.IRMAN. In other words, his services were not satisfactory. 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right. 

The Chairman. He was discharged? 

Mr. Vaughn. I believe that is right, sir. 

The Chairman. Either that or you can say fired. 

Mr. Vaughn. I didn't have anything to do with it, sir, so I couldn't 
answer directly. 

Mr. Kennedy. In March of 1958, did you return to Los Angeles? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you had a telephone conversation with Mickey 
Cohen prior to that time ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was that in connection with? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I had this oral lOU due in March, and I said 
that I was coming out to Ix)s Angeles to honor my obligation. Mr. 
Cohen said that he would not be in JjOS Angeles, but since the 
money was Mr. Sica's, I should give it to him anyway. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you only owed now some $2,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. I^nnedy. You paid $8,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you arrived in Los Angeles. Did you visit with 
Fred Sica ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And at that time you had dinner with him, and Nel- 
son Barrios, and Tony Giacoma ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't recall that Mr. Sica had dinner with us, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You all were not there together ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlien did you see Mr. Sica then? You didn't see 
him at diner at all ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I saw him that night. He came to the table where I 
was dining, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were dining with these other individuals ? 



17300 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Vaughn. These other two gentlemen ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What conversation did you have with him that 
night? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, the result was that we went in to the bar and I 
handed Mr. Sica $2,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was in cash ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And how were you reimbursed for that money ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Mr. Seedman reimbursed me for that money. 

Mr. Kennedy. You received a $3,000 check on March 13 

Mr. Vaughn. Excuse me. Originally I borrowed the money from 
my own company, and then later on I borrowed $3,000, and then later 
on Mr. Seedman reimbursed me for the $2,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. For how much ? 

Mr. Vaughn. For $2,000 that I owed. I borrowed $3,000 for the 
expenses, et cetera, as a personal loan to me from my company. 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be $2,000 to pay to Sica and another 
$1,000 for your expenses ; is that right ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Ultimately Seedman reimbursed you for $2,000? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any other financial arrangements with 
Mr. Cohen? 

Mr. Vaughn. One more. In May of 1958 Mr. Cohen called me and 
told me that he needed some money for a short period of time, and 
asked if I would loan it to him. I couldn't loan him the amount that 
he asked, but I did loan him $1,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. He asked for how much ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, he wanted more than $1,000. I got the impres- 
sion that he wanted perhaps $2,500 or so. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you agreed to loan him $1,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you forward him a check for $1,000 ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he said at that time he would repay you in 10 
days? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he repay you in 10 days? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Did you telephone him then to try to get the money 
back? 

Mr. Vaughn. He called me in 10 days and volunteered to pay it 
back at that time, but he asked me if I could wait a short while 
longer. I said that I could. He said he would pay me in July. 
Then in July I did call him to repay the money. 

Mr. Kennedy. So did you then receive a check from him? 

Mr. Vaughn. Not from Mr. Cohen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was the check from? 

Mr. Vaughn. I believe the check was from his sister. 

Mr. Kennedy. A clie.ck drawn on the Carousel ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't have a copy of that check, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Carousel is an ice cream parlor operated by 
Cohen's sister, Lillian Weiner. The check was from Lillian Weiner, 
was it not ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17301 

Mr. Vaughn. The check was from Lillian Weiner ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the check bounce? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you redeposit the check ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, 1 did. 

Mi\ Kennedy. And it was good then? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You received $3,558.53 from the Rowe Service Co. 
to cover your expenses incurred on behalf of Rowe in Los Angeles 
from November 17 through December 14, 1957? 

Mr. Vaughn. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I have just a couple of other questions. "V\niy did 
you go to JjOs Angeles in the first place ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, as I have said before, I volunteered to go out 
and help my friend, and after I volunteered twice then he called me 
and said he would like to have me come out. 

Mr. Kennedy. The other question I would like to ask you is : Did 
you believe that Mickey Cohen and Sica were actually working for 
the Coast Co.? 

Mr. Vaughn. In retrospect ; no. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you at the time? 

Mr. Vaughn. I had no way of knowing at the time, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But yet you would be willing to pay out $10,000? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kennedy. If you weren't sure of it, you would still be willing 
to pay out $10,000 to have him remain neutral ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I assumed it was true, and I certainly didn't want 
to take the risk of having Mr. Sica and Mr. Cohen working for 
Coast. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you consider $10,000 in your business a large 
amount of money ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. Wasn't that a considerable amount of money to pay 
for someone to remain neutral in this kind of a fight? 

Mr. Vaughn. In view of the story that I had been told, that he 
had been offered $20,000, that Mr. Sica had been offered $20,000, it 
was the best deal that I could make, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever check to find out if he had, in fact, 
been offered $20,000? 

Mr. Vaughn. Not to my knowledge, sir. I have never asked any- 
one. I tried to keep quiet. 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't you at the time, before you put out $10,000, 
didn't you try to find out then ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was all deducted, was it not, as an expense on 
your company books ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't know how that was handled, because it was 
not my money. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, the Rowe Co. gave you a company check. 
You received a company check from the Rowe Co. ? 

Mr. Vaughn. The Rowe Service Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Rowe Service Co. ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 



17302 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you ordinarily, under circumstances such 
as this, if somebody came to you and said, "I am going to possibly 
work for another company," would you pay them that amount of 
money or a similar amount to remain neutral in a fight like this? 

Mr. Vaughn. It would depend upon the circumstances at that 
time, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you done anything like that any other time? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir ; never before, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you done it since then ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think it is a practice that you feel should be 
followed ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis ? 

Senator Curtis. What could Mr. Cohen and Mr. Sica do if they 
didn't remain neutral? What was the practical situation you were 
facing ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I felt that I didn't know Mr. Sica and I knew 
Mr. Cohen only by reputation, and I felt that he had a great deal of 
influence in southern California. 

Senator Curtis. With whom ? 

Mr. Vaughn. With the types of establisliments where cigarette- 
machines are ordinarily placed. 

Senator Curtis. What type of establishments are those? 

Mr. Vaughn. Cocktail lounges, restaurants, nightclubs, neighbor- 
hood barrooms. 

Senator Curtis. How did he exercise that influence? 

Mr. Vaughn. That I do not know, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You don't know whether he had a trade 
association ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Or a union, or what he had? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did he have them organized in any way, to your 
knowledge ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you have any knowledge, directly or indi- 
rectly, how he enforced his influence ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You hadn't heard any reports ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. But you had an idea that if you were going to 
have vending machines in coclctail lounges and bars and so on, you 
should make your peace with Colien and Sica ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I thought it would be advisable at that time, Senator; 
yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Would you say that the information you had was 
proJDably available to anyone who might have been close to the same 
business that you were in ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I don't know exactly what you mean by the question^ 
sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you get any special information direct to you t 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17303 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, as I say, I only know Mr. Cohen by reputation, 
what I have read in the newspapers and so forth. Mr. Seedman, on 
Sunday, verified to me that Mr. Cohen 

Senator Curtis. What is that reputation of Mr. Cohen in the news- 
papers ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, that he has been extremely active in southern 
California. 

Senator Curtis. Active in what ? 

Mr. Vaughn. "VVliat he has done, I don't know. But he has had 
the reputation, according to the newspapers, of being a tough guy. 

Senator Curtis. Sometimes in rackets ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I think the newspapers said that. I didn't know, 
myself, by personal knowledge. 

Senator Curtis. May I ask the staff? Do we know that Cohen^s 
and Sica's organization for enforcing their influence was? Was it 
a trade association? Was it a union? What was involved? 

Mr. Kennedy. I think, Mr. Senator, that Fred Sica's attractiveness 
was the fact that he was out of jail and had been arrested 20 times 
and had 7 convictions. Mickey Cohen's attractiveness was the fact 
that he was tied up with all the leading gangster figures and indi- 
viduals in the Hollywood and southern California area, who feel 
that it is smart and helpful to be associated with gangsters. There- 
fore, they have influence on those kinds of people. 

Senator Curtis. But what was their apparatus to reach out and 
make that influence known to these business places that might put 
in a vending macliine? 

Mr. IvENNEDY. This is a perfect example of it. Here is a large 
company that is willing to pay $10,000 for him just to stay out of 
the company. There are large companies in the United States who 
want to be associated and who have become associated with gangsters 
in order to help their business. 

That is the reason that these kinds of people can survive. They 
get payments from management in order to get further business for 
themselves, in order to take away stops, locations, business from their 
competitors. Management in the United States is willing to make 
these kinds of payoffs because these men have criminal and under- 
world connections. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator Capehart. 

Senator Capehart. Did you approach Mr. Cohen or did he ap- 
proach you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. The meetmg was arranged, I think quite 
accidentally 

Senator Capehart. Accidentally, did you say ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. My friend McCoy was helping me and 
it came to Mr. Colien's attention and he called Mr. McCoy and asked 
him why he was helping me. 

The specific answer I should have answered was that I did not seek 
Mr. Cohen out. 

Senator Capehart. My question was : Did you approach Mr. Cohen 
to hire him to help you, or did Mr. Cohen approach you to sell his 
services to you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. The answer to both those questions, sir, is no. 



17304 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES, IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Capehart. How could it be no on both ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, we never sought Mr. Cohen's help, nor did 
he at the time of the first interview — the first interview, now — seek 
ours at that time. He related to me that Mr. Sica had been offered 
a position by the competing company. 

Senator Capehart. See if I understand the situation. 

There was very, very rough competition in Los Angeles between 
two companies, Rowe and Northeast Cigarette Vending Machine Co. 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Capehart. They were competing for business ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Capehart. They were competing for business. 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Capehart. And you went out there to help the Rowe Co. ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Capehart. My question is: Did you approach Mr. Cohen 
to help the Rowe Co., or did Mr. Cohen approach you ? 

Mr, Vaughn. To that specific question, I would have to say no, 
again, to both questions, because it came out of a discussion at no time, 
and the money was only paid for neutrality. 

Senator Capehart. But you did approach Mr. McCoy to help you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. To help me ; yes, sir. 

Senator Capehart. And Mr. McCoy was a friend of Mr. Cohen's ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I did not know that at the time, sir. 

Senator Capehart. You did not know that ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Capehart. What did you know about Mr. McCoy that led 
you to believe he could help you in Los Angeles ? 

Mr. Vaughn. I had only met him the week previously to my being 
in California the first time. 

Senator Capehart. What did he tell you at that meeting that led 
you to believe that he could help you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, he didn't offer any promises, sir. He said, be- 
cause we had mutual friends in New Orleans, he said that he would do 
all that he could to help me, that if there was anything that he thought 
he could do he would be glad to do it. 

Senator Capehart. Then you employed him ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Mr. McCoy? No, sir. 

Senator Capehart. You asked him to help you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Asked him to help us ; yes, sir. 

Senator Capehart. Then he brought Mr. Cohen to you ? 

Mr. Vaughn. My understanding, sir, is that Mr. Cohen called him 
on the phone. 

Senator Capehart. How would Mr. Cohen know anything about 
you looking for help or needing help ? 

Mr. Vaughn. We weren't looking for help, except 

Senator Capehart. How would Mr. Cohen know that you were out 
there if somebody didn't tell him ? 

Mr. Vaughn. The only answer I could think of would be Mr. 
McCoy's efforts on my beJialf came to the attention of Mr. Cohen. 

Senator Capehart. I see. Then Mr. Cohen came to you and offered 
his services? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir ; he did not offer his services. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17305 

Senator Capehart. Do you mean — well, you did pay him money ? 

Mr. Vaughn. That was not to accept another offer that he told me 
that he had, that Mr. Sica had. 

Senator Capehart. In other words, he offered you his services by 
agreeing not to go to work for the other company ? 

Mr. Vaughn. Not to do anything at all, stay neutral; don't help 
us ; don't hurt us. 

Mr. Kennedy. I might say, Senator, that McCoy has a very bad 
backgroujid. He is a disbarred fight manager, an important figure 
out there, and an associate of such notorious figures, including 
Mickey Cohen and the Sicas, Frankie Carbo, Blinky Palermo; Cecil 
G. Imes, who spent some time in the penitentiary for robbery and a 
second case of robbery; and Barney Geigerman, who is Frank 
Costello's brother-in-law — most of the notorious big gangsters in the 
country. He is the one you went to to make these contacts on the west 
coast. 

Senator Capehart. Was there any connection whatsoever between 
your activities out there any time and any labor organization? 

Mr. Vaughn. At no time, sir. 

Senator Capehart. At no time; there was no connection with any 
labor organization ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Senator Capehart. Do you have any suggestions to make to this 
committee as to what sort of legislation we might pass, enact, to clear 
up the matter we are investigating and studying ? 

Mr, Vaughn. No, sir. I know there are more limber minds than 
mine working on that problem. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of course, you don't know the connection that 
Mickey Cohen had with labor organizations ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you laiow what union the employees of the com- 
pany were in in Los Angeles ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. You don't know anything about the labor connection 
then ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Or any of the activities of Frank Matula or any 
other Teamster official ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So in answer to Senator Capehart's question, the 
answer would have been better that you don't know, rather than that 
there was no labor connection. 

Mr. Vaughn. Well, I knew nothing of it. It never came to my 
attention, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. And you knew nothing of Mickey Cohen's connec- 
tions as it was testified to this morning ? 

Mr. Vaughn. No, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Vaughn ; thank you very much. You 
may stand aside. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. William Breen. 

The Chairjman. Mr. Breen, come forward. 

Mr. Breen, be sworn. 

36751— ,&9 — pt. 48 7 



17306 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

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. Breen. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM BREEN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ARTHUR J. CROWLEY 

The Chairman. Mr. Breen, state your name, your place of resi- 
dence, and your business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Breen. William E. Breen, 5919 Overhill Drive, Los Angeles. 

The Chairman. What is your business or occupation ? 

Mr. Breen. I am a salesman for Coast Cigarette Vendors. 

The Chairman. Salesman ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes. 

The Chairman. You have counsel, Mr. Breen ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Counsel, identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Crowley. My name is Arthur J. Crowley. My office is at 515 
Taft Building, Hollywood and Vine, Hollywood, Calif. I am counsel 
for Coast Cigarette Vendors, by which this gentleman is employed. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Breen, you are employed as a salesman, is that 
right ; for Coast Cigarette Vendors ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You met Fred Sica and Mickey Cohen in the middle 
of 1957? 

Mr. Breen. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that time, you had had some talk with 
certain individuals, including a man by the name of Aubrey Stemler 
about putting some money in a route of coifee vending machines, 
for which Mr. Stemler was a franchised dealer; is that right? 

Mr. Breen. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were considering taking over a route if 
you were able to get such a company going; is that right? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you visited Stemler in the middle of 1957, 
Mr. Sica was present ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were talking about the possibility of get- 
ting into such a company or establishing such a company? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Breen. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, was there some oonvei'sation in con- 
nection with Mr. Sica and Mr. Cohen going to work for the company 
and attempting to get routes or get locations? 

Mr. Breen:. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there subsequently ? 

Mr. Breen. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any discussion about Mr. Sica and Mr. 
Cohen having anything to do with the company ? 

Mr. Breen. No. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17307 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there ever any discussion along those lines? 

Mr. Breen. No. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Was Mr. Cohen's name brought up ? 

Mr. Bkeen. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. In connection with what ? 

Mr. Bkeex. Well, it seems he had some money to invest, but it was 
just general conversation. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was going to come in the company, and it was. 
a question of having him give his money and to invest in the company I 

Mr. Breen. Not as far as I was concerned. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there some discussion along those lines? 

Mr. Breen. There was some discussion. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it also discussed that he would help you get 
business ? 

Mr. Breen. It was discussed ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all I asked you a couple of minutes ago. 
It was discussed that he would help and assist, he and Mr. Sica 
would help this company get some business. 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That ]Mr. Cohen would invest some money and also 
attempt to get some locations for the company. 

Mr. Crowley. Are you talking about the coffee vending business 
or Coast, now? 

Mv. Kennedy. The coffee vending. 

Mr. Cowley. Which had nothing to do with Coast. 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't that correct? 

Mr. Breen. What is the question? 

Mr. Kennedy. There was discussion about Mr. Cohen investing in 
this company, and also Mr. Cohen and Mr. Sica getting some locations 
for this company. 

Mr. Breen. Yes, there were discussions. 

Mr. ICennedy. Then did you decide you would go and visit with 
Mr. Cohen and discuss this^ 

Mr. Breen. Well, that was during the time I met Mr. Cohen. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go and visit with Mr. Cohen? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Cohen at the first meeting in Mr. Stemler's 
office ? 

Mr. Breen. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then it was the first meeting that you had with 
Mr. Cohen, in Mr. Cohen's home? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went out there, and who else? Mr. Sica was 
there? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. And youi*self ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Stemler? 

Mr. Breen. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And at that time, it was discussed about Jklr. Cohen 
and Mr. Sica doing some work for the company; is that right? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was any final decision made at that time? 



17308 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Breen. No, 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, in November of 1957 did you have another 
conversation with Mr. Stemler and Mr. Sica? 

Mr. Breen. Mr. Sica and not Mr. Stemler. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time there was this dispute going on between 
the Coast Co. and the Rowe Cigarette Service Co. ; is that right? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What conversation did you have with Mr. Sica in 
connection with that? 

Mr. Breen. He said he could get Coast some locations, for 
cigarette machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Sica said that? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He could get some locations? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell him that you would be willing to hire 
liim to help get the locations? 

Mr. Breen. No, I said I wouldn't, no. 

Mr. Kennedy. What conversations did you have? 

Mr. Breen. He wanted me to set up an appointment with Mr. Carr, 
of our company. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he indicate to you at that time? How 
much would you pay ordinarily for a location, for somebody who got a 
location ? 

Mr. Breen. $25, $50, or $100. 

Mr. Kennedy. For each location they were able to obtain? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you how much money he wanted to go 
to work? 

Mr. Breen. He said he wasn't interested in that at all, and that he 
was interested in to meet Mr. Carr, and fifty or one hundred dollars 
wasn't anything to him and he was interested in something about 
$25,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. Something like $25,000? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what did you say? 

Mr. Breen. Well, I said that I would speak to Mr. Carr. 
Mr. Kennedy. And you went and talked to Mr. Carr and he was 
the head of the company? 
Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went and had a conversation with Mr. Carr? 
Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat did Mr. Carr say to you? 
Mr. I^reen. He asked me who Fred Sica was, and I told him that 
I thought he was an associate of Mickey Cohen, and Mr. Carr said 
he wasn't interested. 

Mr. Kennedy. He didn't want to hire him? 

Mr. Breen. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were to go back and to inform him as 

fently as possible that the company was not willing to pay him the 
25,000? 
Mr. Breen. That is rijrht. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17309 

Mr. KENNEDY. And subsequently, you did relate this to him, that 
the company would not pay him the $25,000 ? 

Mr. Breen. No, that wasn't that conversation. He called and he 
wanted to know if I had set up an appointment for him and I told 
him no. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you relate to him subsequently that no financial 
arrangements could be made? 

Mr. Breen. We didn't discuss it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You just told him that you couldn't set up the 
appointment? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. What did he tell you then ? 

Mr. Breen. He told me to relate to Mr. Carr, to get busy and do 
something about it, because he didn't want to waste his time. 

Mr. Kennedy. What steps did he indicate he was going to take if 
Mr. Carr did not hurry up ? 

Mr. Breen. He intimated that somebody else would be interested in 
their services if we weren't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you who these people were ? 

Mr. Breen. Well, not in so many words. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he tell you about them ? 

Mr. Breen. He just said that somebody else would be interested in 
the services if we weren't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you that some people had come into the 
area? 

Mr. Breen. He said there are some people in from the East, and he 
wanted to impress Mr. Carr that if he wanted to do anything to get 
busy. 

Mr. KENNEDY. And these people from the East they would go to 
work for Mr. Carr and your company didn't hire them ? 

Mr. Breen. No, I don't think that was the idea. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he say anything to the effect, or did he call 
them, "The boys are coming in ft-om the East to do this job? 

Mr. Breen. My impression was that "the boys from the East" had 
to do with our opposition. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Carr better make up his mind quickly ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. As far as you know, Mr. Carr nor the Coast Co. ever 
paid any money to Mr. Cohen ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Breen. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that the end of it as far as you were concerned ? 

Mr. Breen. That was the end. 

Mr. Kennedy. You never went into the coffee machine business? 

Mr. Breen. No. 

Mr. ICennedy. Nor did Mr. Sica or Mr. Cohen ever come to work 
for the Coast Co. ? 

Mr. Breen. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. And as far as you know, the Coast Co. never paid 
Mr. Cohen or Mr. Sica any money ; is that right ? 

Mr. Breen. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you never made any offer to Mr. Sica or to Mr. 
Sica and Mr. Cohen to do any work for the Coast Co. ? 

Mr. Breen. No. 



17310 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions ? Thank you very much. 

Senator Cuktis. I want to ask, Did any difficulties follow by reason 
of your rejection of this proposed connection with Cohen and Sica? 

Mr. Breen. Not to my knowledge. 

Senator Curtis. For the record, tell us how the Coast cigarette 
vending business operates. It is purely a merchandising operation 
and there are no prizes or anything ? 

Mr. Breen. No. 

Senator Curtis. The company owns the machine; is that right? 

Mr. Breen. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. And you place it in somebody's business? 

Mr. Breen. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. iVnd then you have someone service it that fills it 
with cigarettes and checks out the cash ; is that right ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What compensation does the owner of the location 
receive ? 

Mr. Breen. He gets a percentage of his sales. 

Senator Curtis. Percentage of his sales ? 

Mr. Breen. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And you went ahead so far as you know, the Coast 
Cigarette Vendors, without being molested in any way because you 
rejected this connection with Sica and Cohen? 

Mr. Breen. Nothing whatsoever. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Carr. 

The Chairman. 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. Carr. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MYER CARR, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ARTHUR J. CROWLEY 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mr. Carr. My name is Myer Carr, and I am also known as "Mike" 
Carr, and my address is 6546 West Olympic Boulevard, JjOS Angeles, 
Calif., and I am vice president of the Los Angeles Cigarette Service, 
Inc., doing business as Coast Cigarette Vendors. 

The Chairman. Let the record show that same counsel appeared 
for this witness as appeared for the previous witness. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, as background for your company, as of De- 
cember 31, 1957, the company had 1,632 machines and 267 jukeboxes 
on location. 

Mr. Carr. Tliat is approximately correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been connected with the Coast Co. for 
some 6 years ; is that right ? 

Mr. Carr. That is correct. 



IRIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17311 

Mr. Kennedy. This company was previously known as the National 
Vending- Co., until it merged with Continental. 

Mr. Carr. Xo, sir; this is an independent California corporation. 
Both Nationail and Coast were taken over by the Continental 
industries. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, you started, or Rowe started to take away some 
of Coast locations in approximately October of 1957; is that right? 

Mr. Carr. Yes, sir ; and prior to that also. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they did this by offering bonuses and what you 
feel were excessive commissions ? 

Mr. Carr. That is true, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there were contracts that you had with various 
locations that were broken b}^ the activities of this other company? 

Mr. Carr. That is true. 

Mr. Kennedy. You in turn then had to offer somewhat higher 
commissions in order to keep these locations or get new locations? 

jNlr. Carr. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the battle started between the two companies ? 

Mr. Carr. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. That went on through October and November and 
December of 1957? 

Mr. Carr. That is true, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. For instance, from October 1, 1957, through Decem- 
ber 11, 1957, the company paid a total of $164,665 as advance com- 
missions or bonuses to secure some 121 music or cigarette locations; 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Carr. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you always pay some bonuses, you always pay 
some advance ? 

Mr. Carr. That is a practice in our business. 

Mr. Kennedy. This figure would have been higher than you would 
ordinarily have paid if this kind of a battle had not been going on, 
but you always pay some advance and some bonuses ? 

Mr. Carr. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, were you told by your salesman, Mr. Breen, 
that Fred Sica had offered to obtain locations for Coast? 

Mr. Carr. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Would you relate to the committee what you were 
told about that, and what you did ? 

Mr. Carr. I was told that they wanted to get locations for us, and I 
believe he stipulated a price of $25,000, but I am not sure of that, 
because as soon as I heard who Fred Sica was, I was horrified, and 
told him, "Look, our company doesn't do business with people like 
that," and just to tell them no, and tell him in a way so that he wouldn't 
become angry at us, because I didn't laiow what he could do, or what 
he would do. 

IVIr. Kennedy. You were told at that time that he had been an 
associate of ]\Iickey Cohen ? 

Mr. Carr. Yes, I asked him who Fred Sica was, and I didn't know 
the name. 

Mr. Ivennedy. And you turned down the offer of Mr. Sica to come 
to work for the company, and obtain locations for the $25,000 ? 



17312 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Carr. Definitely, we wouldn't have anything to do with it. 
That is against the policy of our company, to dead with people like that. 
Mr. Kennedy. Did you pay directly or indirectly any money to 
either Mr. Cohen or Mr. Sica ? 
Mr. Carr. At no time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, you hired a private investigator by the name 
ofMr.FredOtash? 
Mr. Carr. Yes, sir, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the purpose of that was, or — what was the 
purpose ? 

Mr. Carr. To obtain information as to the manner in which they 

were taking locations from us and definitely breaking our contracts. 

Mr. Kennedy. And in the course of that investigation that he made, 

Mr. Otash made miniphone recordings or recordings on miniphones? 

Mr. Carr. Yes, sir, he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you contacted by Mr. Otash or by anyone that 
Mr. Mickey Cohen was interested in listening to these recordings ? 

Mr. Carr. Yes, Mr. Otash called me one night and told me that 
Micked Cohen and one high official of the Rowe Co. were at his place, 
and had offered him some money to let them hear the recordings. 
I told him it was okay with me to go right ahead and do it because this 
would convince them that I had a good case in case I wanted to go to 
law, and this might resolve our situation. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that Mr. Otash then received 
some money for allowing these recordings to be heard? 
Mr. Carr. Yes, sir, I underst^d that. 
Mr. Kennedy. How much money did you understand ? 
Mr. Carr. Five hundred dollars. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know from whom he received that money? 
Mr. Carr. No, sir, I do not know the party involved. 
Mr. Kennedy. Was it your understanding that Mickey Cohen and 
Mr. Sica were then working for the Rowe Co. ? 
Mr. Carr, That was my impression, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, in December of 1957, a meeting was arranged 
between George Seedman of the Rowe Co. and yours; is that right? 
Mr. Carr. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they decided there wasn't any good coming of 
the battle that you were conducting, and that peace would be made ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Carr. That is true, also the fact that we were both, that is in 
our case at any rate with inadvertently breaking contracts. 

Mr. Kennedy. So Rowe paid Coast some $13,000 ; is that right ? 
Mr. Carr. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And peace was made between the two companies? 
Mr. Carr. The payment of the money was merely for the sums 
owing on contracts that we had with various locations, in which we 
both had equipment and in which Rowe was operating and our equip- 
ment was either turned to the wall or we had not been able to put 
it in at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Anyway, this $13,000 was paid over to your com- 
pany? 

Mr. Carr. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kjinnedy. And peace reigned in Los Angeles ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17313 

Mr. Carr. As far as the cigarette industry was concerned, that is 
true. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. That is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions ? 

All right. Thank you. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Seedinan. 

The Chairman. Be sworn. 

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 tlie truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Seedman. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF GEOKGE SEEDMAN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

EMIL N. LEVIN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Seedman. My name is George Seedman. I live in the Los 
Angeles area. I am in the business of operating cigarette-vending 
machines. 

The Chairman. You have counsel ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Counsel, identify yourself for the record, please. 

Mr. Levin. Emil Levin, 31 South Clark Street, Chicago. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Seedman, you are president of the Kowe Serv- 
ice Co., Inc. ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. TVliich is a New Jersey corporation ; is that right ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Operating in the State of California at 2620 South 
Hill Street? 

Mr. Seedman. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How big a company is that, Rowe Service ? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, it is a fairly 

Mr. Kennedy. How many machines do you have ? 

Mr. Seedman. Approximately 2,700. 

Mr. Kennedy. They are all in California or are they throughout 
the country ? 

Mr. Seedman. No, just in California, in the Los Angeles area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that the biggest company in California ? 

Mr. Seedman. It is rather difficult to tell. We think we are one of 
the largest, but I don't know how many machines other people have. 

Mr. Kennedy. The principal business is the sale of cigarettes 
through the automatic merchandising machines ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is about the only thing we sell. 

Mr. Kennedy. You do not operate any other type of automatic 
machine; is that right? You don't operate jukeboxes, or drink 
machines, or sales of food ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is correct. 



17314 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Kennedy. In September or October 1957, you were engaged 
in a competitive situation with the Coast Cigarette Service Co. of 
Los Angeles ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the course of which you had taken the Tiny 
Naylor account from the Coast Co. ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is the Tiny Naylor account about which we 
have had testimony m connection with Mr. Cohen earlier this morn- 
ing; is that right? Mr. Vaughn mentioned the Tiny Naylor account. 

Mr. Seedman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the meeting of the National Automatic Mer- 
chandising Association in Philadelphia, you were advised by Mr. 
Vaughn that the Coast Co. expected to go all-out in their battle 
with you ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he told you that he had spoken to Mr. Harold 
Roth, who was president of Coast, and they said that they were 
preparing for a real fight with you ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Vaughn at that time offered to assist you in 
any way he could ? He was a longtime personal friend of yours ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Soon after this, the company attempted and was 
active in taking away locations, as you were active in taking away 
locations from that company ; is that right ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you had some further conversation with Mr. 
Vaughn, and it was arranged for him to come to Los Angeles on 
approximately November 17, 1957 ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And a few days after his arrival, he introduced you 
to Babe McCoy ; is that right ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is right, sir. 

Mr. ICennedy. Did you know anything about Babe McCoy at that 
time? 

Mr. Seedman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But he explained to you that Babe McCoy could 
be of help in securing locations ; is that right ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir ; that is about right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Babe McCoy had been disbarred as 
a fight manager in the State of California? 

Mr. Seedman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Vaughn also tell you that Mr. Sica and 
Mr. Cohen had contacted Mr. McCoy ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes. That was some time later. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he suggest that you have an interview with 
Sica and Mickey Cohen? 

Mr. Seedi^fan. Not at that time; no, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy, Did McCoy set up an interview ? 

Mr. Seedman. This I don't know, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17315 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Vaughn report back to you that he had 
seen Mickey Cohen and Sica, and that he had asked them to stay out 
of this fight in Los Angeles ? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, in the course of talking with him, I was told 
that. 

(At this point Senator Curtis withdrew from the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you also told that they had been approached 
by the Coast Co. ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What had you understood were the financial ar- 
rangements with the Coast Co. ? 

Mr. Seedman. Just what I was told, that they were offered a cer- 
tain amount of money to assist them getting our locations. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much money ? 

Mr. Seedman. I think, if I remember correctly, it was about 
$25,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the end of November 1957 you met with Vaughn 
again at the Ambassador Hotel. Did Mr. Vaughn tell you at that 
time that a payment could be made to keep Mickey Cohen out of the 
situation ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much of a payment ? 

Mr. Seedman. $5,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go along with that ? 

Mr. Seedman. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, sir, he told me that this group was ready to 
work for Coastj and Vaughn assured me that that was so. I had had 
a newspaper clipping from the New York Post which indicated that 
Mr. Harold Rotli had had certain connections previously with a group, 
this type of individual, and that sort of convinced me that perhaps 
Coast was interested, although frankly it was hard to believe. 

Mr. Kennedy. That j\fr. Harold Roth had used as distributors in 
that company people with backgroimds of 

Mr. Seedman. I just don't remember the article, but I think it is 
in the possession of the committee, an article written in the New York 
Post. 

Mr. Kennedy. That the company had used underworld connections 
for the distribution ? 

Mr. Seedman. I am not sure just what the article says, but it had 
that implication. 

Mr, Kennedy. And you thought that was sufficient for you to pay 
$5,000 to Mickey Cohen? 

Mr. Seedman. Frankly, I didn't think it was sufficient, but Mr. 
Vaughn had made the arrangements and I went along with them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did j^ou then make out a check for $5,000 cash ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, I did. I made out a company check to myself, 
deposited it in my account, and I believe — no, I cashed the company 
check made payable to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was for $5,000 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. On November 27, 1957 ? 

Mr. Seedman. If that is the date on the check ; yes, sir. 



17316 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. I present to you a photostatic copy of the check, 
I believe, about which you are testifying. Examine it and state if 
you identify it. 

( A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir, this is the check that I had photostated my- 
self and turned over to the committee investigator. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit 66. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit 66" for reference and 
will be found in the appendix on p. 17683.) 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you relate to the company that that $5,000 
was for? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, frankly, I didn't tell them anything about it 
at the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, subsequently ? You told them it was to keep 
Mickey Cohen neutral? 

Mr. Seedman. I told them the complete story. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what they charged this to on the books ? 

Mr. Seedman. It wasn't charged to expense and has not been taken 
as a deduction. 

Mr. Kennedy. It has not ? 

Mr. Seedman. No, sir ; it has not. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was it charged to one the books? Do you 
know ? 

Mr. Seedman. I can't tell you exactly what it was charged to on the 
books. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel that it was an improper expenditure ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Mr, Kennedy. Subsequently, you had lunch with Mr. Vaughn, at 
which time Vaughn handed the envelope containing the $5,000 to 
Mickey Cohen ; is that right ? 

Mr. Seedman. I think the envelope was handed to Mr. Sica. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were all at lunch together ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the $5,000 was handed at that time, you believe, 
to Mr. Sica? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Vaughn tell you subsequently that it was 
going to cost you another $5,000 ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir ; he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you approve of that ? 

Mr. Seedman. I still don't approve of it, but I paid it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you pay a total of $10,000, to keep Mr. 
Cohen neutral? 

Mr. Seedman. For several reasons, sir. First, I wanted to keep 
Cohen and his crowd from in any way infiltrating into our industry. 
That was the main and principal reason. 

Secondly, I did it because of the commitment made by Mr. Vaughn, 
which I felt I had to back, and I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. The check for the second $5,000 was, first, a check 
that was drawn for $3,000, payable to yourself, which you deposited 
in your own account, and M^hich is shown on the books as a loan to 
yourself, and then on the same day you mailed a check for $3,000 to 
Vaughn ; is that correct ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17317 

Mr. Seedman. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. On your personal account ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. I hand you photostatic copies of the two checks. I 
ask you to examine them and state if you identify them. 

(Documents handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, sir. These are the checks that I drew. I had 
them photostated and turned over to the investigator for the com- 
mittee. 

The Chairman. The one that is made from your company to you 
may be made exhibit 67 ; the other one may be made exhibit 67A. 

(Checks referred to were marked "Exhibits 67 and 67A" for refer- 
ence and will be found in the appendix on pp. 17684^17685.) 

Mr. Kennedy. So that gave the first $5,000, and this transaction 
here, on November 24, 1957, covers the $3,000 out of tlie second $5,000 ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Seedman. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Aromid December 14, 1957, were you telephoned in 
the early morning hours ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, I w\as, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. By whom were you telephoned ? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, my memory has been refreshed on that. It was 
Tom Vaughn that called me from New Orleans. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he relate to you at that time ? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, it was pretty early in the morning. 

Mr. IO:nnedy. Well, generally. 

Mr. Seedman. He told me that there were some important record- 
ings that I should listen to, and he gave me a telephone number, Mr. 
Cohen's phone number, for me to call him, which I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what did Mr. Cohen tell you ? 

Mr. Seedman. He told me to meet him at a certain place, and I 
met him. He drove me in his car to ISlr. Otash's place. 

Mr. Kennedy. What time in the morning was this ? 

Mr. Seedman. It was around somewhere between 2 and 3, 1 believe. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were asleep in your bed, you got out of bed, 
got dressed, and went down to Mr. Cohen to hear these recordings. 
Where did he take you to ? 

Mr. Seedsman. He took me to Mr. Otash's apartment. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you listen to the recordings ? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they interesting ? 

Mr. Seedman. I don't know, because you couldn't hear anything on 
them. 

All-. Kennedy. Did you ever pay anybody for the privilege of lis- 
tening to the recordings ? 

Mr. Seedman. I didn't pay anyone for the privilege of listening to 
them, but a commitment had been made, as I understand it, by Mr. 
Vaughn to pay Mr. Cohen for that privilege, and I reimbursed Mr. 
Vaughn. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much was that for ? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, to the best of my recollection it was $500, but 
they tell me that it was $1,000. I know the check was made out for 



17318 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

$500. I am trying to think whether or not there was an additional 
$500 paid. It may have been, but I am not certain. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why would you pay $500 to listen to jumbled 
recordings ? 

Mr. Seedman. I wish I had the right to answer to that question, 
jVIr. Kennedy, but I think it was just stupid. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you characterize the payment of the $10,000 
to Mickey Cohen and Mr. Sica the same way ? 

Mr. Seedman. More so. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were stupid for $11,000 ? 

Mr. Seedman. I was very stupid for $11,000. 

The Chairman. What do you think the purpose of it is? Has 
Oohen such a reputation out there that everybody is afraid of him 
and thinks they have to pay him off ? Is that what it is ? 

Mr. Seedman. Senator, Mr. Cohen has a reputation on the west 
coast. 

The Chairman. For what ? 

Mr. Seedman. Well, the newspapers carry his stories all the time. 

The Chairman. About what ? 

Mr. Seedman. About his various activities. 

The Chairman. All legitimate, I assume. 

Mr. Seedman. Senator, I think that would be an erroneous 
assumption. 

The Chairman. That would be an exaggerated statement? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, let's talk about some that are not. What 
is his reputation about those that are not ? 

Mr. Seedman. I don't miderstand your question, sir. 

The Chairman. Well, you say he has a reputation. 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I asked you what about, and you said, "Well, the 
papers carry a lot about Ms activities." I asked, "Are they all legiti- 
mate?" and you said, "No." I said, "Let's talk about those that are 
not." 

What are his activities that are not legitimate that the papers 
report ? 

Mr. Seedman. I don't know, because I don't pay too much attention 
to them. 

The Chairman. You paid $11,000 worth of attention. 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir ; I did, and I am soriy I did. 

The Chairman. I know, but that is enough to cause you to make a 
little imprint on your memory. What was involved here ? You are 
paying off because you are afraid of the guy? Is that the truth 
about it? 

Mr. Seedman. The truth about it is that we didn't want him operat- 
ing for (yoast Cigarettes Service. We had eveiy reason to believe at 
that time that he and liis group, Avhoever they were, and I don't know, 
would join forces with Mr. Breen and Mr. Carr and Coast Cigarette 
Service. 

The Chairman. So you just bought him off ? 

Mr. Skedman. AVell, tliat is one way of putting it, Senator. 

The Chairman. Have you got another Avay of putting it? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17319 

The Chairman. All right, let us hear it. 

Mr. Seedman. We paid this money out which, in our opinion, would 
keep these people out of this situation. 

The Chairman. You bought him out, then, instead of off ? Is there 
a difference? 

Mr. Seedman. Any way you put it, I tliink you would be right, 
Senator. 

The Chairman. Either way? 

Mr. Seedman. Yes. 

The Chairman. All right; proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently, you paid Mr. Vauglm for the other 
$2,000; is that right? 

Mr. Seedman. Do you mean the final $2,000 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Seedman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he was reimbursed for the whole $10,000? 

Mr. Seedman. That is exactly right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think it is wrong for a company such as 
yours or any company to make these kinds of payments ? 

Mr. Seedman. I think it is very wrong for any company under any 
circumstances to pay anyone except for legitimate services. Our com- 
pany is no exception. 

The Chairman. Do you regard this as legitimate services ? Or did 
you feel you had to do it for self-protection of your business ? That 
is what I am trying to find out. 

Mr. Seedman. Senator, it wasn't 

The Chairman. Has this man Cohen such a reputation out there 
that he instills fear and terror in ])eople ? 

Mr. Seedman. May I say this : that I met with Mr. Cohen on three 
occasions, and on each occasion he acted in a very gentlemanly man- 
ner, with no threats of any kind. As far as I was concerned, the times 
I met with him he was a gentleman in every way. 

The Chairman. That is a pretty good price to pay a gentleman for 
a shakedown. 

Mr. Seedman. Sir, we didn't regard it as a shakedown in that way, 
but perhaps it was. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. When he was described as a gentleman at all times, 
did you feel he was a gentleman when he said he had been offered a 
contract for $50,000 to put your lights out ? 

Mr. Seedman. I was told that, Mr. Kennedy, along about March, 
and I didn't believe it. I thought it was so much poppycock. It might 
have been a little puffing. I don't think there is a thing in the world 
to it. I just didn't believe it, because there was no occasion for that. 
He already was getting the money. 

Mr. Kennedy. No, he hadn't gotten the money as of that time. This 
was prior to the time that he was going to have the meeting on the 
money. 

Mr. Seedman. Well, I don't know the exact date when the statement 
was supposed to have been made, but I took it as more or less of a 
puffing. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did it change your opinion of Mr. Cohen at all ? 



17320 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Seedman. My opinion of Mr. Cohen was just on the three occa- 
sions that I met him. As far as I can say, he has never acted in any 
other way toward me. I haven't seen him since. As far as I am con- 
cerned, he is all right. What I read in the paper is something else, and 
I don't always believe everything I read in the paper. 

Mr. Kennedy. Also what Mr. Vaughn related to you about what he 
said about you, that he was going to put your lights out. 

Mr. Seedman. Mr. Vaughn macle that in a sort of a joking way 
some time — in March of 1958, 1 believe ; somewhere around that time, 
Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just wondering if you would consider that in 
the same category as somebody who is always acting like a gentleman. 

Mr. Seedman. Well, he acted like a gentleman in my presence. What 
was told to me was pure hearsay. I didn't hear it. 

The Chairman. Arc iiere any other questions ? 

If not, call the next ^ itness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Fred Sica. 

The Chairman. Mr. Sica, come forward. 

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. Sica. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF FRED SICA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ABRAHAM J. LEVY 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
your business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Sica. My name is Alfred Sica. I own a company called the 
Active-Aire of Los Angeles. I live at 7766 Hollywood Boulevard, 
Hollywood, Calif. 

Tlie Chairman. You have counsel. 

Counsel, will you identify yourself ? 

Mr. Levy. Abraham J. Levy, Philadelphia, Pa. 

The Chairman. All right. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Sica, you are presently in the hand-dryer busi- 
ness ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Sica. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Plow many hand dryers do you have? 

Mr. Sica. Approximately about 80 to 90. 

Mr. Kennedy. And are they in the Los Angeles area? 

Mr. Sica. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. These are the machines that you press the button 
and then they dry your hands ? 

Mr. Sica. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any employees ? 

Mr. Sica. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You do all the work yourself? 

Mr. Sica. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Cohen assist you in getting any of these 
locations ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the groimds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17321 

The Chairman. What is wrong with this Cohen ? He goes out here 
and acts like a gentleman and shakes down somebody for $11,000, and 
here you have a business that, as far as I have observed, is legitimate. 
When we ask you if he helped you with it, you have to take the fifth 
amendment. 

What is wrong with the guy ? You are putting him in an awfully 
bad light, if he is all right. Don't you realize that? We just men- 
tioned his name and you take the fifth amendment. 

Wliat is wrong with him i Could you tell us, or would that in- 
criminate you? 

Mr. SicA. I refuse to answer on the groimds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Going back to the machines for a moment, you rent 
the machines out, do you? I am just going to talk about the ma- 
chines. You rent the machines ? 

Mr. SiCA. Yes, I do. 

Mr. Kennedy. You rent them for what — for 20 cents a day ? 

Mr. SicA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any shop or business establishment? 
Where do you operate out of ? 

Mr. SiCA. I operate out of my automobile. I do most of my work 
out of my automobile. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you service these machines yourself ? ' 

Mr. SiCA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you been in this business ? 

Mr. SiCA. Approximately about 4 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had you had any other business other than the 
hand-dryer machines? 

Mr. SiCA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What other businesses ? 

Mr. SicA. I owned a shirt shop in Los Angeles. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind ? Shirt shop ? 

Mr. SiCA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us the name of it ? 

Mr. SiCA. Savoy Shirt Shop. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you had that ? 

Mr. SiCA. Approximately 2 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you own that by yourself ? 

Mr. SiCA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it is in your name, is it? 

Mr. SiCA. I don't own it now. It is closed. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you dispose of that ? Just approximately 
how long ago ? 

Mr. SiCA. 1951. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1951. You had that for a couple of yeai-s back in 
1951? 

Mr. Sic A. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you had any other business since 1950 other 
than the shirt shop and the hand drj^ers ? 

Mr. SicA. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let me see if I can get this. After 1951 would you 
tell us what businesses you were in ? 

36751 — 59— pt. 48 8 



17322 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. SiCA. I refuse to answer on tlie grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are there any businesses other than the shirt shop 
and the hand dryer that you could tell us about since 1950 ? 

Mr. Sic A. I refuse to answer on the grounds that it might tend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were bookmaking, were you ? 

Mr. SiCA. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it because of the fact that you were in these 
hand dryers and that you had this friendship with Mickey Cohen 
that you thought also that your services would be worth a consider- 
able amount of money to one of these two companies that were in- 
volved in this competition war in Los Angeles ? 

Mr. SiCx\. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that why your services, you felt, would be worth 
some $25,000 rather than some $25, $50 or $100 for each location that 
you were able to obtain ? 

Mr. SiCA. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it correct that you have been arrested some 20 
times and have seven convictions, Mr. Sica? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate ma 

Mr. Kennedy. Loitering, found guilty, in 1934; assault and battery, 
with robbery, suspended sentence in 1934; another robbery, sentenced 
to 12 months in 1934, New Jei-sey Penitentiary. You went there on 
January 18, 1935 ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then stickup and robbery, and you received a sus- 
pended sentence. Then in 1935, receiving stolen truckload of 
umbrellas, 4 to 6 years in the State penitentiary, Trenton, New Jersey? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Sica. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can we talk about the truckload of umbrellas? Will 
you tell us about any of the other ones? Assault and battery, were 
you found guilty on that, in 1934? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember ? 

Mr. Sica. I don't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. All right. 

The record appears to indicate that. Loitering, 1934 ; then assault 
and battery in 1934; then robbery in 1934. Did you go to Essex 
County Penitentiary in New Jersey in 1934 ? 

Mr. Sica. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you were in the Trenton Penitentiary in Tren- 
ton in 1935 ; is that right? 

Mr. Sica. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then the last conviction was conspiracy to commit 
bookmaking, 1951 ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17323 

Mr. SiCA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known Mickey Cohen, Mr. Sica ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

The Chairman. Are you trying to stay out of the pen again? Is 
that why you hesitate ? Is that the reason you don't answer ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any information on the Divinian nar- 
cotics matter ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. The key witness in that case on January 28, 1950, 
Divinian, was murdered by certain people unknown before the case 
came to trial. Do you know anything about that ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you arrested in an effort to obstruct justice in 
connection with the killing, with killing Mr. Divinian ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Sica. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. In fact, you have been arrested in connection with 
several murders, have you not, with no convictions ? You have been 
arrested in connection with them ? 

Sam Hummel, for instance ? Were you arrested in connection with 
that? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Sica. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were released because of lack of evidence; is 
that right? 

Mr. Sica. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Louis Dragna ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And James "Weasel" Pratiano ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Could you tell the committee what it was that made 
the Kowe Co. pay you some $10,000 or $11,000, you and Mickey Cohen ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it correct you related to them that you were going 
to receive $25,000 from the Coast Co. ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was really just a shakedown, was it not, by you 
and Mr. Cohen ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they really paid off, did they not ? 

Mr. Sica. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 



17324 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. How much did old Mickey pay out of it ? 

Mr. SicA. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any other questions ? 

If not, you may stand aside. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. I have a couple other questions. I am sorry, Mr.. 
Chairman. 

Could you tell me this: According to the information we have, we 
don't have any information in connection with 1955, but in 1957, for 
instance, we underetand that you declared only some $2,500 as income. 
Is that correct ? 

Mr. SicA. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the highest income you have declared in the 
last 5 years. 

Mr. SicA. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was considerably more than your friend Mickey 
Cohen declared in any year. Is that correct ? You were the highest 
paid of the twosome ? 

Mr, SicA. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1956 you declared some $1,800 ; is that correct? 

Mr. SicA. I refuse to answer on the grounds it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr, Kennedy, As I say, I don't know about 1955, In 1954, $1,000 ; 
and in 1953, some $600? 

Mr. SicA. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr, Kennedy, Has anybody in the Internal Revenue Service ever 
made an investigation of your activities, your tax activities ? 

Mr. SicA, I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me, 

Mr, Kennedy, Could you relate to the committee why you were go- 
ing to this one company and expecting a fee of $25,000, in view of these 
returns ? 

Ml". SicA. I refuse to answer on the ground it might tend to in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman, All right, you may stand aside, 

Mr. Marcello, come forward, and your brother, Vincent Marcello. 

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. Vincent Marcello. I do. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17325 

TESTIMONY OF VINCENT MARCELLO, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 

JACK WASSERMAN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Vincent Marcello. Vincent Marcello, 28 Smith Way, 

The Chairman. What is your occupation ? 

Mr. Vincent Marcelix). I refuse to answer the question on the 
ground it will tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Is this your attorney sitting next to you ? 

Mr. Vincent j\L\rcello. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Let the record show the same attorney appears for 
Vincent as appears for his brother this morning. 

Is Carlos your brother ? 

Mr. Vincent ]\L\rcello. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Are you an American citizen ? 

Mr. Vincent Marcello. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is he ? 

Mr. Vincent Marcello. I refuse to answer that on the ground it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Have you any questions at this time, Mr. Coun- 
sel? 

Mr. Kennedy. Not in vievr of the fact that we are finisliing up 
with this other hearing. 

The Chairman. I understood you were going to take the Fifth 
Amendment on everything, but I wanted to bring you aromid here 
and put you under the jurisdiction of the committee, because I want 
to continue both of you under the same subpena that you appeared 
under here today. 

1 continue you under the jurisdiction of the committee subject to 
being recalled at such time as the committee may desire to hear 
further testimony from you. There can well be developments in 
the coui-se of the committee's investigation that will require further 
interrogation of you. 

With that understanding, I am placing you under that recogni- 
zance to reappear at such time as the committee may desire to hear 
further testimony from you upon reasonable notice being given to 
you of the time and place where the committee desires to hear you. 

If I can have you accept that recognizance, I will be able to take 
care of your release for the day. Do you accept such recognizance? 
Carlos? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Carlos IVL^rcello. Yes, sir. Senator. 

The Chairman. You do. You agree to return and give further 
testimony at such time as the committee may desire your presence 
again upon reasonable notice being given to you or your attorney at 
the time and place where your presence is desired ? 

Mr, Carlos Marcello. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you accept the same conditions, Mr. Vincent? 

Mr. Vincent Marcello. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. It is agreed. All right, you may stand aside. 
You are excused for the day. 

Call the next witness. 



17326 IMPROPER ACTIVITIESi IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Michael Cohen. 

The Chairman. Be sworn, 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. Cohen. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL COHEN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
ABRAHAM J. LEVY 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Cohen. Michael Cohen. 

The Chairman. Who ? 

Mr. Cohen. Michael Cohen, 705 South Barrington. 

The Chairman. Where? 

Mr. Cohen. Los Angeles. 

The Chairman. All right. What is your business or occupation, 
please ? 

Mr. Cohen. I refuse to answer on the grounds that it may tend 
to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Somebody testified here that you were a very 
polite gentleman. Can't you say, "I respectfully decline to answer" 
instead of "I refuse" ? 

Mr. Cohen. I can, but I don't know if I will remember it. Senator. 

The Chairman. Have you something down that will help you? 

Mr. Cohen. Well, I will put it down. 

The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. 

Counsel, identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Levy. Abraham J. Levy, Philadelphia, Pa. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr, Cohen, would you tell the committee about 
the dispute between the Coast Co. and the Rowe Co., the cigarette 
companies in Los Angeles and your participation in it? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee why you received 
the $11,000? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee any other instances 
where you have received money for remaining out of a fight of this 
kind? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was it, in your estimation what was it, that 
the Rowo Co. was actually paying for when they paid the $10,000? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I^o you think that is an ordinary procedure, that a 
com}>any such as this would pay $10,000 for you to just remain neu- 
tral in a fight of this kind? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where were you bom, Mr. Cohen? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17327 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it may- 
tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Well, where were you born? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to our information, you were born 
September 4, 1913, in Brooklyn, N.Y. ; is that right? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it may 
tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Shortly afterward, or sometime afterward, you 
went to Cleveland, and at that time began a friendship with Frank 
Nicoli by sticking up a cafeteria in Cleveland? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You pled guilty to embezzlement at that time by 
involving the cashier in the stickup, is that right, and received a 
2-year suspended sentence? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me, and I don't remember. 

The Chairman. Let us have order, please. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, maybe you can help us out. Wlien was the 
first time that you were arrested? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Cohen. I don't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, when was the first time you were convicted? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Cohen. I don't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember that either? 

Mr. Cohen. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't remember the first time you were con- 
victed? How many times have you been convicted? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You can't give us that? Do you remember how 
many times you have been convicted for crimes? 

Mr. Cohen. I don't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't recall that? Do you remember if you 
were convicted in Cleveland, Oliio, in 1934? 

Mr. Cohen. I don't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you deny that you were convicted in Cleveland, 
Ohio, in 1934? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1934? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Did you stick up a cafeteria ? Maybe that will re- 
fresh your recollection. Did you stick up a cafeteria in Cleveland,. 
Ohio? 

Mr. Cohen. I decline to answer on the same grounds. 



17328 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. You went on to Chicago, then, after your visits in 
Cleveland, and there you worked for Greasy Thumb Guzik; is that 
right? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then left for Ix)s Angeles after having been 
involved in pistol- whipping an acquaintance; is that coiTect? 

Mr. Cohen. I resj^ectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1942 you were involved with Mr. Joe Sica in 
the assaulting of one Mr. Kussell Brophy, who operated a competing 
race wire service; is that right? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Mr. Joe Sica, who is the brother of Fred 
Sica, the previous witness. 

Then you began this gambling empire. In 1945 you killed one 
Max Shaman, and you pled successfully self-defense; isn't that 
correct ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answ^er on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

(At this point Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in 1946 you were questioned in the murder of 
Parley Gibbons and Benny "Meatball" Cramson, George Levenson, 
and in 1947 in connection with the murder of Bugsy Siegel; is that 
right? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully refuse to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us about any of those murders? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then when the police raided the LaBrea Social Club, 
which was a club that was at least partially owned by you, they 
discovered an assortment of dishonest gambling devices. 

Can you tell us anything about that? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. The information we have is that you pist-ol-whipped 
another man by the name of James "Jimmy" Utley ; you beat a waiter 
in a restaurant and assaulted the chief of the Los Angeles Office of 
the Federal Narcotics Bureau. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yet when you were a professional boxer, according 
to the information we have — Mr. McCoy was your manager — you had 
three fights and you were knocked out in all three of tliem; is that 
right? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Several of your close friends have been killed. 
Neddie Herbert was your bodyguard. Was he shot and killed? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incrimmate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17329 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. And Sam Rummel, who was your attorney, and 
business partner ? He was killed ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Harry liothman, who was on your payroll, was 
killed? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. There have been approximately 10 attempts on 
your life, is that right, and you have been womided once ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And three other of your close associates, Dave Ogul, 
Frank Nicoli, and Bill Howard, have all disappeared and have never 
been heard of? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. All were on bail at the time, waiting disposition of 
certain criminal charges against them ; is that right ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And recently — tliis is background — you stated that 
"the people of Los Angeles ought to get down on their knees and thank 
God for Mickey Cohen." Is that right ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Cohen. I didn't get that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you make a statement recently, publicly, that 
"the people of Los Angeles ought to get down on their knees and 
thank God for Mickey Cohen"? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been arrested 32 times altogether, have you 
not? 

Mr. Cohen. I don't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that right ? 

Mr. Cohen. I don't remember. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, let me ask you about this: According to the 
information that we have, you declared less than $1,500 as income in 
1957. Is that right? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And some $1,200 in 1956? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. What year was that $10,000 paid? 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1957. 

The Chairman. How much of that did you get, from the $10,000 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Sica declared in 1957, according to our informa- 
tion, from the reports that we have, some $2,500, and Mr. Cohen in 
1955 declared less than $1,500. 

The Chairman. What was the company that paid the $10,000 ? 

Mr. Kennedy. TheRoweCo. 

The Chahiman. How much of that $10,000 did you get, Mr. Cohen ? 



17330 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer, Senator, on the 
grounds tliat it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You got more than you reported as income, didn't 
you, just a little? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you get any other payoffs that year besides 
that $10,000? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You couldn't remember the number of arrests and 
convictions you have had. Can you remember the number of shake- 
downs you have made, extracting money, extorting money from 
people ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Despite that, you just purchased within the last 10 
days a 1959 Cadillac convertible, did you not, Mr. Cohen? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that I 
believe it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you at one time had a $25,000 especially bullet- 
proofed automobile, 300 suits, 1,500 pairs of socks, 60 pairs of shoes, 
and $275 you spent for silk lounging pajamas. Is that right? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that I 
believe it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Have you ever earned an honest dollar in your life ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy, Actually, you were convicted of income tax violation 
in 1951 and served until October of 1955 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Cohen. That is true. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what your source of income is now ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have a flower shop, do you not, Michael Cohen's 
Flower Shop ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us any source of income that you have 
now? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that I 
believe it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you presently owe the U.S. Government some 
$512,000 in back taxes? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. With this as background, we have the testimony of 
Mr. Vauglui that you stated that you had received a telephone call 
froni an individual who had offered you a contract for $50,000 to put 
the liglits out of Mr. Seedman ; is that correct ? 

Mr. CoriEN. I got nothing to do with electricity. T don't know. I 
respectfully decline to answer on the gromids that it may tend to 
incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17331 

Mr. Kennedy. That is very f uimy. 

Now, would you tell us whether you made that statement ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what you meant by that, Mr. 
Cohen ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the gromids it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. About the time that many of these things were going 
on, you were described, out in California, by a minister who had great 
hopes for you, as one who "is sincerely interested in spiritual things 
and leading a new life."' 

In view of that, could you tell us a little bit about what your income 
is, and whether you mentioned that you had been offered $50,000 to 
put Mr. Seedman's lights out ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. If you want to show that you are sincerely interested 
in spiritual things and leading a new life, you could help us with giving 
us that information, Mr. Cohen. 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the gromids that I 
sincerely believe that it may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohen, are you sincerely interested in spiritual 
things and leading a new life ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Mundt. Your answer to that must be no, then, because it 
couldn't incriminate you if you said yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Amongst your associates are Mr. Fred and Joe Sica ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. jNIax Tannenbaum, a former New York hoodlum ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. William K. Howard, a former prison inmate at 
McNeil? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Philip Packer, formerly of Joliet and San Quentin? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Harry "Happy" Heltzer, who served in the Federal 
Prison, Atlanta ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Seymour Pellar, who was sentenced to 10 years at 
Joliet, for kidnaping ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Itchy Mandel, of the Stagehands Union ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 



17332 IMPROPER ACTIVITIESi IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And Babe McCoy, who has been barred from boxings 
is another one of your associates ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He is the one who made the arrangements for you to 
meet with Mr. Vaughn ; is that right ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it may 
tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Originally, you laughed at the idea that you would 
need only $5,000 for remaining neutral and offered to loan Mr. Vaughn 
another $5,000 so a total of $10,000 would be paid; is that right? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it may 
tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently it was agreed that you would be paid 
$10,000; is that right? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it may 
tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. We also had the testimony this morning by Mr. 
Sherry in connection with various efforts to take over his union. 
Could you tell us anything about that? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it may 
tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Sherry stated before the committee that he was 
approached by somebody on two occasions who said they were repre- 
senting you. Were they in fact representing you ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what connections you have had with 
any union or union officials in the Los Angeles area ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what your relationship has been 
with Mr. Itchy Mandel of the Stagehands Union ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have also had a close association with Mr. Babe 
Triscaro, of Cleveland, Ohio, of the Teamsters? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the gi'ounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. As a matter of fact, Triscaro has been out to visit 
with you, has he not ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He is second in charge of all of the Teamsters in the 
State of Ohio and declared some $133,000 on his income tax in 1956, 
most of it coming from trucking companies. Do you know anything 
about that? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you had any business dealings with Triscaro ? 

Mr. CoiiEN. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17333 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee why he came out to 
visit you? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Cohen, it was testified, I believe, in the Kefauver 
hearings, that you borrowed some $5,800 from Tony Milano of Cleve- 
land. Did you ever repay him the money ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know either John or Thomas Scalise, 
of Ohio? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe that is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? 

Mr. Kennedy. I do have a couple of other things, Mr. Chairman. 

We also understand you are an associate of Frank Ericson, Frank 
Costello, Joe Adonis, and Tony Accardo. Is that right ? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds it may 
tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you also have made visits around the country. 
You tried to move in even down in Nashville, Tenn., did you not, 
several years ago? 

Mr. Cohen. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds that it 
may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. All right, you may stand aside. 

The committee will stand in recess until 10 :30 tomorrow morning. 
The meeting tomorrow morning will be in room 1202. That is in the 
new building. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of recess : Senators 
McClellan, Mundt, and Capehart. 

(Whereupon, at 3 :48 p.m. the select committee recessed, to recon- 
vene in room 1202, Senate Office Building, at 10 :30 a.m. Wednesday, 
March 25, 1959.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 1959 

U.S. 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 Resolu- 
tion 44, agreed to February 2, 1959, in room 1202, Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Members of the select committee present : John L. ]\IcClellan, Demo- 
crat, Arkansas ; Karl E. Mundt, Eepublican, South Dakota ; John F. 
Kennedy, Democrat, Massachusetts; Frank Church, Democrat, Idaho; 
Homer E. Capehart, Republican, Indiana; Carl T. Curtis, Republican, 
Nebraska ; also present : Robert F. Kemiedy, chief counsel ; Walter R. 
May, assistant counsel ; John P. Constandy, assistant counsel ; Arthur 
G. Kaplan, assistant counsel; Sherman S. Willse, investigator; Ruth 
Young AVatt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of convening: 
Senators McClellan and Capehart.) 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we are starting this morning on the 
Miami phase of the coin machine business. The first witness is Mr. 
Leonard Baitler. 

The Chair:man. Mr. Baitler, come forward, please. Be sworn. 

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. Baitler. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF LEONARD BAITLER 

The Chairman. Mr. Baitler, state your name, your place of resi- 
dence, and your business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Baitler. My name is Leonard Baitler. I reside at 1361 North- 
west 133d Street, INIiami, Fla. I am a coin machine mechanic. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You spell your name B-a-i-t-1-e-r; is that correct? 

Mr. Baitler. That is correct. 

17335 



17336 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. You are what — 37 years old? 

Mr. Baitler. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Unmarried, and you were in the Army Air Corps 
between 1942 and 1946? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was when you started residing in the Miami 
area; is that right? 

Mr. Baitler. I first came to Miami just prior to my enlistment in 
the Air Force in January 1942, but I returned there after the war. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been in the coin machine business for 
approximately 20 years, starting at the age of about 16 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Baitler. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are now a coin machine mechanic ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. From 1956, for approximately 2 years, you were in 
Japan as a salesman for the Bible and for other holy educational 
books; is that right? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went back into the coin machine business in 
1946, is that right, after you got out of the Air Corps? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were you doing? lYhat kind of work were 
you doing then? 

Mr. Baitler. I was employed as a mechanic on jukeboxes, coin- 
operated phonographs, and amusement machines, vending machines. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Did you have any dealings then with a Mr. Harvey 
Campbell? 

Mr. Baitler. This was at a later date, Mr. Kennedy. This would 
have been in 1949, 1 believe. 

The Chairman. We have a mimeographed list of people whose 
names will be referred to today. I will make this exhibit 68 for 
reference. 

The fact that a name appears on this list does not mean, necessarily, 
that derogatory testimony will be given against them, but it is to 
help identify the people who may be refeired to in testimony. 

(List referred to was marked "Exhibit 68" for reference and may 
be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Would you tell us briefly what your connections 
with Mr. Harvey Campbell were, who fonned the Miami Beach 
Amusement Association ? 

Mr. Baitler. I will try to recall as well as possible my dealings 
with Mr. Campbell. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just briefly. 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

In 1949, I believe it was, my employer on Miami Beach sold out to 
a company lieaded by Mr. Campbell. This company was known as 
the Capital Vending Co. Immediately following that, I went into 
the coin macliine business myself. 

I developed a route of phonographs and amusement games. Tliis 
route comprised mainly locations that had been purchased by Mr. 
Campbell from my former employer. Subsequently I sold my route 
to Mr. Campbell and the Capital Vending Co. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17337 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Campbell at that time indicated that his part- 
ner or the one that was backing him was Mr, Joe Massei; is that 
right ? 

Mr. Baitler. He did make that statement, but I never had any 
dealings with Mr. Massei. 

Mr. Kennedy. Directly, but Mr. Campbell indicated that the one 
behind him was Joe Massei ; is that right ? 
Mr. Baitler. He did say that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Massei has the reputation of being a very prom- 
inent figure in the underworld, at least in the past; is that correct? 
Mr. Baitler. I would say so. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time there had been a considerable amoimt 

of interest in the Miami area in obtaining locations for coin machines 

because there was legislation pending in the State legislature dealing 

with legalizing certain kinds of gambling equipment; is that right? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that the locations where j^ou had coin machines 
became unusually attractive, because it was possible then for these 
companies to place in this gambling equipment; is that right? 

Mr, Baitler. In the event that legislation was passed, the loca- 
tions would become valuable. 

Mr. Kennedy. So there was a considerable amount of interest by 
certain notorious figures in. attempting to gain these locations during 
this period of time ? 
Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That legislation was subsequently defeated? It 
Avas not passed ? 
Mr. Baitler. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy, In 1949 Mr. Campbell also w^ent into business with 
Mr. Joe Mangone ? 

Mr. Baitler. I am not sure of the chronology of that, Mr. Kennedy. 
Mr, KJENNEDY. This is just background for some of these individ- 
uals whose names arise later. 

Mr, Baitler. Yes, it was somewhere around that time; perhaps 

1950. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. 'V^Hiat kind of business did they go into together? 

]Mr. Baitler. This, as I recollect, was not an operating business, 

but a distributing business ; that is, involving the sale of coin-operated 

machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. And about this time also the association that had 
been formed by Mr. Campbell in order to control the industry, the 
Miami Beach Amusement Association, began to fade out itself; did 
it not? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, you must imderstand, Mr. Kennedy, I was 
never a member of this organization. 

Mr. Kennedy. But the organization — you were aware of the fact 
of the organization ? 

Mr. Baitler. The organization existed ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then faded out during the early 1950's or 
late 1940's ; is that right? 
Mr. Baitler. I would say so. 

Mr. Kennedy. About 1950 you went to work for a man by the 
name of Sam Taran ? 

36751— 59— pt. 48 9 



17338 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Taran has had a considerable number of dif- 
ficulties himself with the law throughout the United States? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, I have read something of this in the newspaper. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you a member of any union during this period 
of time ? 

Mr. Baitler. Now, again, I am not sure on the dates. But I would 
say that my original initiation into the Electricians Union goes to 
1950 or 1951. I am not positive of that, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the International Brotherhood of Electri- 
cal Worker; is that right? 

Mr. Baitler. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did you begin, during the 1950's, 1953, and 
1954, begin to attempt to organize your fellow mechanics? 

Mr. Baitt.er. I did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you approach the International Brotherhood 
of Electrical Workers about taking them into that union ? 

Mr. Baitler. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there some difficulty initially by the Interna- 
tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. There was some reluctance regarding accept- 
ing them, but ultimately they were accepted and they were initiated 
into the Miami local of the. Electricians Union. 

Mr. Kennedy. What local was that ? 

Mr. Baitler. No. 349. 

Mr. Kennedy. What period of time are we talking about now? 

Mr. Baitler. This would be about 41^ years ago, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be 1954; is that correct? 

Mr. Baitler. I would say the summer of 1954. Again, I am not 
positive on these dates. 

Mr. Kennedy. These mechanics had been working 60 or 70 horn's 
a week and you were trying to get it down to a 40-hour week ; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Baitler. That is correct, sir. Well, not 

Mr. Kennedy. How many mechanics did you get into the \mion ? 

Mr. Baitler. I believe the amount was under 100. I am not 
positive of the figure. I would estimate about 80 or 85. 

Mr. KENNEDYr This was Local 349 of the IBEW ? 

Mr. Baitler. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have your own section of it ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. A unit was established — that is, a parlia- 
mentary unit — known as unit 6. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any official position with it? 

Mr. Baitler. I Avas the cluiirman, ns differentiated from the Gen- 
eral President of the entire union. Each unit comprising a specific 
branch of tlie trade would liave a chairman. 

Mr. Kennedy. The assmnation itself — this was the activity in the 
union field. Around 1950 an associati(m called the Amusement Ma- 
chine Operators Association of Miami was formed; is that right? 

Mr. BAiTiiER. Yes. I am not sure of the exact nomenclature. It 
was referred to with the traditional initials, "AMOA". It stood 
for Amusement or Automatic Machines. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Fj-oui tlie i-e<-oi(ls the name appears to be Amuse- 
ment Machine Operatoi-s Associat ion of Miami. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17339 

Tliat had Mr. William Blatt as president ; is that right? 

jMr. Baitlek. He had been the president. A^Hiether he was the 
president at the time you referred to, I am not certain. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1954, when you began your organizational work 
for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, was there 
some activity on the part of another union or another group to try 
to organize the employees into a union ? 

Mr. Battler. Yes. Again, I am not certain of the chronology, 
but I thinlv it was a short while following the initial drive on my part 
to organize the men into the Electricians Union. I became aware of 
some organizing activity on the part of the Upholsterers Internationa] 
Union. I am not certain of tlie local number, but it was the Up- 
holsterers International Union, Miami local. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did the Upholsterers Union get into this 
field? What interest could the Upholsterers Union have in the field 
of mechanics working on coin machines ? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, the question of jurisdiction in trade unionism 
is a moot one, but frankly at that time I could not see w^here they had 
aiiy jurisdictional rights at all. However, they were active in signing 
up people. 

Mr. Kennedy. What local number was this of the Upholsterers 
Union ? 

Mr. Baitler. I am not certain if it was 398, perhaps. I am not sure 
of the number. 

Mr. Kennedy. Local 598 of the Upholsterers ? 

Mr. Battler. That sounds familiar. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was running this miion. Local 598 of the 
Upholsterers ? 

Mr. Battler. The business manager and the most active organizer, 
I would say, was a gentleman named Charles Karpf. The president 
of record was a man named Frank Tacetta. Who the others were, 
I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Charles Karpf 

Mr. Battler. No, I stand corrected. Frank Tacetta, to the best of 
my recollection, was not the president of the Upholsterers local. 

Mr. Kennedy. But Charlie Karpf was the one that was behind it ; 
was he not ? 

Mr. Battler. Well, yes. He did the organizing work. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know anything about his background ? 

Mr. Battler. At the initial stage of this, I did not, but I made 
certain inquiries. 

Mr. Kennedy. He has been arrested eight times and has three con- 
victions ; does he not ? 

Mr. Battler. So his record indicates. 

Mr. Kennedy. Starting in 1944 for the possession of policy slips, 
to 1951 for grand larceny in the second desfree in New York,"^ where 
he received 1 to 2 years in the State prisonT Then he w^as convicted 
of assault and battery in 1955, which was subsequent to this ; was it not ? 

Mr. Battler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was a dispute that arose out of this disagree- 
ment or his activities in Miami ? 

Mr. Battler. Yes, sir. 



17340 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know how he happened to come in and start 
to organize for the Upholsterers Union ? 

Mr. Baitler. I do not know this for a fact, Mr. Kennedy, but it 
would be an opinion if you would like me to venture it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Based on your experience at that time, and based 
on your contacts with these people, what did you learn about why 
he was in there ? 

Mr. Battler. The business manager of the employers association, 
that is, the AMOA, was a gentleman named Anthony Randazzo. It 
is my understanding that he made the contact with the Upholsterers 
Union. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did Anthony Randazzo happen to get in with 
the association 2 

Mr. Baitler. The exact details I do not know. Again, it is my 
understanding that there were certain difficulties within the coin- 
machine business, excessive and unethical competition, and the organi- 
zation employed Randazzo as their business agent to act as an arbi- 
trator or public relations man. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that was an operation of the 
association, with Randazzo running it as a public relations man, to 
bring stability and control to the industry in the INIiami area ? And 
that it was going to be done through the setting up of this union, the 
Upholsterers Union ? 

Mr. Baitler. This was the general impression. 

Mr. Kennedy. I want to get something more specific. Based on 
your own experience — you were working in the field yourself — is that 
what the operation seemed to be ? 

Mr. Battler. If I may offer an opinion again, in my opinion I 
don't think Mr. Randazzo could accomplish that. However, he was 
hired for that purpose ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all I am asking you. 

Mr. Battler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. The fact that he didn't accomplish it shows the best 
answer to that. But the fact was that at that time there were efforts 
by the association to try to gain conrol over the industry, to bring 
stability to the industry, aTid the way that they were going to operate 
was through the formation of this union ; isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Baitt.er. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you learn that Mr. Randazzo and Mr. Karpf 
would go around together, to organize together, to try to get the oper- 
ators and the employees to join the union ? 

Mr. Battler. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you learn that they were telling the operators 
that they were not interested in the wages or hours or conditions of 
the employees, but that they were there to offer stability in the 
industry ? 

Mr. Battt.t^r. I did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, of course this fits into the general 
pattoT-n that has been folloAved and which we have found throughout 
the other cities of the United States, and this is why the Miami area 
again is of some interest to us. 

Did you complain to the Upholsterers Union about the activities 
of Mr. Karpf? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17341 

Mr. Baitler. Yes ; I did. 
Mr. Kennedy. When did that happen ? 

Mr. Baitler. I am trying to recollect the date to the best of my 
ability, sir. I believe it was four and a half years ago. That would 
have been in the early winter of 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you see Mr. Hoffman, Mr. Sal Hoffman, presi- 
dent of the International Upholsterers Union ? 

jNIr. Baitler. I did. AVhen I was convinced that the so-called or- 
ganizational drive under INIr. Karpf was not a true organizational 
effort, that it had no particular interest in the workingmen who 
were to become members of that union, I contacted the international 
president of the Upholsterers, and he came to Miami Beach and met 
with myself and a business agent of the Electricians Union. When 
I made him aware of the situation, with documentary evidence, he 
said he would take action. Within the next few days he revoked the 
charter of the Upholsterers Union. 

Mr. ICennedy. Did that stop Mr. Karpf ? 

Mr. Baitler. Not at all. It appears that he had another charter. 

Mr. Kennedy. From whom did he receive that charter? 

Mr. Baitler. From the United Textile Workers of America. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did the United Textile Workers of America 
have to do with organizing employees in the coin machine business? 

Mr. Baitler. Absolutely nothing. 

Mr. Kennedy. To the same extent as the Upholsterers Union ? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, even less. The Upholsterers assume juris- 
diction over furniture workers. A jukebox has a wooden cabinet, 
but it has no textiles whatsoever in it. However, this is a moot point. 
The fact is that the shift was made from the Upholsterers' charter, 
which was revoked, to a charter of the Textile Workers. Those men 
who had been signed up for the Upholsterers suddenly become 
Textile Workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the beginning of 1955 — well, first, going back a 
little bit, had there been some concern by some of the operators in 
the Miami area about the fact that they had linked up with Randazzo 
and with Karpf ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did some of the operators, because they objected 
to this operation, did they secede from the association? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was at the end of 1944, was it not? 

Mr. Baitler. 1954, sir. 

The Kennedy. The end of 1954 ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. This activity took place in the early winter, 
to the best of my recollection. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on March 17, 1955, or thereabouts, the two 
associations came back togetlier; is that right? The Automatic 
Music Guild and the Amusement Machine Operators Association 
merged as the Amalgamated ]\Iachine Operators Association ? 

Mr. Baitler. I am not certain of the date, but that is what hap- 
pened. There were two factions and then the two factions merged 
back into one. The exact date I am not sure of. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was the president of that ? 



17342 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Battler. I believe the first president of this Amalgamated, 
so-called, that is, the merger of the two factions, was Harry Simand. 
I am not positive, but I am reasonably certain. 

Mr. Kennedy. He is the former manager of the Grand Hotel? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which has a close association, once again, with Mr. 
Massei ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Baitler. That is rumored. 

Mr. Kennedy. This merged association agreed to enter into an 
arrangement first with local 598 of the Upholsterers Union? 

Mr. Baitler. I think, sir — again, the chronology eludes me after 
4 years, but I think at the time of the merger the Upholsterers local 
was nonexistent. So the recognition would have taken place between 
the Amalgamated and the Textile Workers. Of this I am not certain. 

Mr. Kennedy. I thinlv the record shows that first they joined up 
with local 598 and subsequently they went in with the United Textile 
Workers of America, local 296. But in any case, they did make an 
agreement with Charlie Karpf ? 

Mr. Battler. That is right. Exactly what union it was, I am not 
certain. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was this union charging money for these stamps, 
the Tinion stamps, the uiTion labels? 

Mr. Battler. I am not certain of this, sir. They issued labels, and 
it is highly unlikely that they would have been issued without charge. 
I am not certain what the charge was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat happened to you in your operation during 
this period of time? 

The United Textile Workers is active, with Mr. Karpf, and what 
about your operation ? 

Mr. Battler. Well, prior to recognition by the majority of oper- 
ators of the United Textile Workers, Mr. Karpf obtained from the 
business manager of the Electricians Union a disavowal of juris- 
diction. In other words, despite the fact that some 75 or 80 coin 
machine mechanics had been accepted into the Electricians, had been 
formally initiated and paid their initiation fee, they were expelled, 
shall we say, from the Electricians. 

The business manager of the Electricians issued a written state- 
ment to the effect that the Electricians had no desire to represent 
these men and that they would not exercise jurisdiction over these 
men. Consequently, on the basis of this letter, IVIr. Karpf was able 
to obtain recognition from the employers. 

Tlie Chairman. How much initiation fee was charged? 

Mr. Battler. In the Electricians Union, sir ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Baitler. I believe it was $15. 

The Chairman. What were the dues ? 

Mr. Battler. I believe at that time — it has been changed many 
times since. I believe at that time it was $5 a month. 

The Chairman. As I undei-stand, they accepted them into the 
Electrical Union and then they kicked them out? 

Mr. Battler. Yes. 

The Chairman. Did thev refund their initiation fee? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17343 

Mr. Baitler. On request of any man they did refund the initiation 
fee. 

The Chairman. They just would not accept them ? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, according to the constitution and by-laws of 
the Electricians Union, they were formally accepted when they took 
the oath of obligation and paid their initiation fee, and they should 
not have been expelled except under certain processes that are de- 
scribed in the constitution. 

The Chairman. In other words, expelled for cause. 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. But they were just sunnnarily dismissed and 
the jurisdiction was turned over to Mr. Karpf and the TextileWorkers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was it that agreed to this in the International 
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers ? 

Mr. Baitler. I was not consulted in regard to it. The first thing 
I knew about it was when a certain operator who was about to recog- 
nize the Electricians Union called my attention to the existence 
of this letter, which Mr. Karpf had shown him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was it that wrote the letter? 

Mr. Baitler, Mr. William Johnson, the business manager of the 
Electricians Local 349. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat possible explanation is there for his turning 
over those 75 members of his union to the Textile Workers? 

Mr. Baitler. I do not know. Most unions strive to obtain members. 
Here was a block of 75 or 80 members who had been recruited and 
now were thrown out. Mr. Johnson's explanation to me and to the 
executive board for this action was that the stigma attached to the 
coin machine business was not desirable for the Electricians, which 
is a prosperous and highly respected union in Miami. My conten- 
tion was that the men were accepted in good faith, they paid their 
initiation fee, they were bona fide workingmen, and they were en- 
titled to representation by the union. However, Mr. Johnson 
prevailed. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Of course, what this amounted to was to turn them 
over to what amounted to a racket union, run by a racketeer. 

Mr. Baitler. Exactly, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And set up by the operators rather than by the 
union members themselves ? 

Mr. Baitler. Exactly. 

The Chairman. Were the men helpless in that situation? Could 
they not do anything about it ? 

Mr. Baitler. Xo, sir, they could not. I appealed to the interna- 
tional president of the Electricians, with no favorable results. 

The Chairman. Were the men given a free choice as to which 
union they should belong to or should not ? 

Mr. Baitler. No, sir. 

The Chairman. In other words, they were just pawns being traded 
around ? 

Mr. Baitler. I would say, sir, that every one of the men that I 
recruited into the Electricians Union came in voluntarily and of 
his own free will, realizing that the wage scale that the Electricians 
have obtained in Miami is the highest in the area, that their degree 
of skill is the equivalent of an electrician and that their work is 
basically electrical work. They came of their own free will into the 



17344 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Electricians, but they entered the Upholsterers and subsequently the 
Textile Workers under duress pure and simple, because the contract 
that was agreed to by the Textile Workers called for a $50 a week 
pay scale with no specification as to hours or working conditions. 

Now, every man that joined the Upholsterers was getting in excess 
of $50 a week. So it was quite obvious that union membership in 
the Upholsterers or the Textile Workers offered no benefits what- 
soever. 

The Chairman. In other words, kicking them out of the Electrical 
Union and forcing them into the Textile Union certainly was not 
for the benefit of the employees ? 

Mr. Baitler. Definitely not, sir. 

The Chairman. And it did place them in the position of great dis- 
advantage because they were receiving greater wages than was being 
paid under the Textile contract ? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, let me point out that no one, neither union nor 
employer, paid any particular attention to the contract. In other 
words, if an experienced mechanic were earning, let us say, $85 or 
$90 a week, his wages were not reduced because of the contract. The 
contract was merely a scrap of paper. 

The Chairman. Merely a what ? 

Mr. Baitler. Merely a scrap of paper. It had no significance. 

The Chairman. Just an excuse for collecting dues and that is all ? 

Mr. Baitler. I would say so, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Baitler, did you understand that the association 
was collecting 50 cents per machine, which was to be split amongst 
the association ? 

Mr. Baitler. I have heard this, sir. I am not certain of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you approached by Karpf or anyone else on 
his behalf to get out of the business yourself prior to the time the 
Electrical Workers lifted the charter ? 

Mr. Baitler. I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. By whom were you approached ? 

Mr. Baitler. While this, shall we call it, jurisdictional dispute was 
going on, Mr. Karpf contacted me by telephone. It should be under- 
stood that at this point I was doing this organizational work on a 
part-time basis, that I was actively employed as a coin machine 
mechanic. But Mr. Karpf contacted me on my service number and 
asked to see me, so I paid liim the courtesy of a visit in his ofTice. 

At that time we had a talk that was — I don't know, not particularly 
unfriendly. At that time he offered me a job as an organizer ancl 
business agent for his Upholsterers, or Textile Workers. Again, I 
am not certain whether it was the Upholsterers or Textile Workers 
on that day, but it was one or the other. 

Mr. Kennedy. What Avas your answer to that ? 

Mr. lUiTLER. Well, my answer could only be negative, because it 
was obvious what this was all about. He realized that I had the con- 
fidence of the men, that I was their elected leader, and I could bring 
them in docilely into his organization. My objection was obvious. 
Their organization offered nothing to the men, it was strictly a pro- 
tective device for the employers. 

Mr. Kennedy, ^^'ere you approached at all by Randazzo, or by 
anybody from tlie association ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17345 

;Mr. Baitler. Yes. This comes a little later, chronologically, but 
I did liave one meeting with Mr. Randazzo in a restaurant that he 
managed. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was related to you? What was said to you 
at that time ? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, generally the same thing, that if I would go 
along with this other movement, it would perhaps be advantageous 
for me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you also approached by Joe Indellicato? 

Mr. Baitler. No. I have never met Mr. Indellicato in my life, nor 
have I ever had any dealings with him that I know of. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Textile Workers assumed jurisdiction and the 
Electrical Workers lifted jurisdiction, and there were still some of 
the operators who were holding out against this organization and this 
operation. Was there some violence around Miami? 

(At this point Senator Mundt entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Baitler. There was one specific instance of violence. 

Mr. Kennedy. What occurred? There was a stinkbombing, was 
there not ? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, again, sir, I must point out that this is, again, 
hearsay. This was never conclusively laid to union activity. Yes, a 
stinkbomb, so-called, was dropped into the premises of one of the 
distributors. The culprit was never apprehended. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are very careful. It was during the time that 
this dispute and this controversy was going on ? 

Mr. Battler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And somebody was beaten up ? 

]Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were beaten up by individuals on the oppo- 
site side in this controversy ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. Would you lay that to the controversy ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, definitely. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened in that case ? 

Mr. Baitler. This specific instance is founded on fact, of course. 
One of the distributors, Taran Distributing, specifically, distributing 
for tlie Rockola phonograph, and this would be in the spring of 1955, 
April of 1955, the Rockola Manufacturing Co. came out with a new 
model of a jukebox. This jukebox was being displayed on a certain 
Sunday in April at the premises of the Taran Distributing Co. Every 
employee, every service employee, every qualified mechanic in Taran 
Distributing was a member of the International Brotherhood of 
Electrical Workers, having ]:)aid their initiation fee, and having been 
obligated, according to the bylaws of the Electricians Union. 

On tliat Sunday when this factory showing took place, I arrived 
there as did many other people to see the new machine, and there were 
pickets walking in front of the premises of Taran Distributing Co., 
carrying placards which said, "Unfair to organized labor," and 
"UTWA Local" something or other. These pickets were not known 
to me. 

They were definitely not any people who worked in the coin machine 
industry locally. But they were being supervised by Mr. Karpf and 
Mr. Tacetta, the president of the Textile Workers Local. 



17346 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Shall I proceed ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, briefly. 

Mr. Baitler. The picketing was orderly. It was obviously with- 
out legal basis, as this union had no representation, nor any interest 
in this establishm,ent. However, it was a Sunday. It would have 
been impossible to obtain an injunction to enjoin the picketing. So 
they walked up and down quite peacefully. 

And the picketing, shall I say, was effective, by nature of enforcing 
a boycott. 

Remember, at that point the majority of the operators, the em- 
ployers, had recognized the Textile Workers. Therefore, they would 
not cross the picket line to attend this showing of the new machine. ^ 

To go a little further, one young man, a coin machine mechanic 
and a member of the Electricians Union, started a little discussion, 
which proved unwise, with one of the pickets. This discussion was 
not violent, but it concerned exactly what we have touched on, in 
what manner did the Textile Workers assume jurisdiction over the 
coin machine mechanics. Specifically, this man asked the picket if 
he were a coin machine mechanic and how the Textile Workers came 
into the coin machine business, and so forth and so on. 

This conversation continued for a few minutes. The picket finally 
said, "I can't talk to you while I am picketing, while I am carrying 
the sign." He said, "Let's go up the street and discuss this thing," 
or words to that effect. This was in my hearing. 

The picket removed his picket signs and walked up the street with 
this man. It was perhaps 100 yards from the premises, within full 
view, though, that the assault took place; whereby this yovmg man 
was assaulted by Mr. Karpf and the pickets. 

Subsequently arrests were made and convictions were obtained. 
That was the incident of violence. 

The Chairman. How many assaulted him ? 

Mr. Battler. Four, sir. 

The Chairman. Four to one ? 

Mr. Battler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Karpf, and Mr. Randazzo were present also? 

Mr. Battler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who were the other individuals ? James Ramares ? 

Mr. Battler. It turned out that the picket that initiated this dis- 
pute was a young man named David Wolosky, I believe, Mr. Karpf 's 
stepson. The other picket — I don't recollect his name. I had never 
seen either of the pickets prior to that day. 

Mr. Kennedy. The other one was James Ramares, who was a 
painter, who evidently was picketing ? 

Mr. Battler. Yes, and a nonunion painter, incidentally. 

Mr. Kennedy. A nonunion painter ? 

Mr. Battler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequent to this, there was so much controversy 
about their activities and the beating of this man, and there was great 
public pressure in the Miami area on this activity, was there not? 

Mr. Battler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there was a considerable amount of public 
interest that was generated by the press ? 

Mr. Baiti.er. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17347 

Mr. Kennedy. And the activities of the Crime Commission in 
Miami as Avell as the newspapers led to the termination of these 
activities by Mr. Karpf ; is that right? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, sir. 

INIr. Kennedy. Subsequently, these employees were taken over by 
the jurisdiction or into the Teamsters Union; is that right? 

Mr. BArrLER. No. Prior to that, sir, because, as Senator McClellan 
pointed out, these men felt that they were mere pawns of union bosses, 
several of them appealed to m,e, and we obtained an independent 
charter, a State charter, from the circuit court, and we formed an 
independent union known as the Coin Machine Servicemen's Union. 
All members of this union were bona fide coin machine mechanics, of 
considerable experience, and we obtained recognition for that union 
from several of the operating companies. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently you went into the Teamsters Union? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And you became on organizer for the Teamsters 
yourself ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes, that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you remained for some time and then left for 
personal reasons ; is that right ? 

Mr. Baitler. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Teamsters Union in Miami now has jurisdic- 
tion over these individuals ? 

Mr. Baitler. Well, Mr. Kennedy, I resigned my position as an 
organizer for the Teamsters in September of 1956. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many people did you have in at that time, 
in the coin macliine business ? 

Mr. Baitler. Total membership? 

Mr. Kennedy. In the Teamsters. 

Mr. Baitler. The total membership, when I left, I think was about 
1,000. How many coin machine people? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Baitler. Now, again, this is merely an estimation. I would 
say at the time of my departure from Miami, and resignation from 
the Teamsters, the membership of coin machine people might have 
been about 60 or TO. I am not certain of this, sir, and I would have 
no way of knowing unless I would have access to the records of that 
time. 

JMr. Kennedy. And the rest of the employees, the rest of the people 
in the Miami area were not in any union ? 

Mr. Baitler. As far as I know, they were not. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Tlie Chairman. Are there any questions ? 

If not, sir, thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Helow. 

The Chairman. Be sworn, 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. Helow. I do. 



17348 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OP DONALD HELOW 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
occupation, please. 

Mr. Helow. Donald Helow, 1361 Northwest 133d Street ; coin ma- 
chine mechanic. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right ; proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr, Kennedy. At the end of March 1955, you were self-employed, 
operating the Union Coin Machine Service? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had started that some 2i/2 years previously? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were engaged in servicing and repairing coin 
machines, and had some seven accounts with a total of about 500 
pieces of equipment ? 

Mr. Helow. That is right. 

Mr, Kennedy. One of your accounts told you that you should see 
Charlie Karpf about joining Karpf's union, local 298 of the United 
Textile Workers of America ? 

Mr. Helow. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You then attended a meeting of the coin machine 
technicians at the United Textile Workers Building in Miami in April 
of 1955; is that right? 

Mr. Helow. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Karpf addressed the group at that time ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. After the meeting, Karpf approached you and an 
employee of yours, a man by the name of Wyckoff about joining the 
union ; is that right ? 

Mr. Helow. That is right. 

Mr, Kennedy. What did he say to you at that time? 

Mr. Helow. He said that we had to join his union to stay in 
business, and to guarantee $42 a week plus paying him $1 a week clues. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much was this employee getting at that time ? 

Mr. Helow. I was paying him $90 take-home pay. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr, Karpf said he would guarantee him $42 
a week ? 

Mr. Helow, That is right, 

Mr. Kennedy. And he would have to take $1 out to pay the dues? 

Mr, Helow. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So there wasn't much interest shown by you, because 
you were self-employed, or by your employee, because he was making 
twice as much as they even offered ; is that right ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some urging on the part of some of 
the accounts that you serviced to join the union? 
Mr. Helow. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you told them that you were not interested; 
is that right? 

Mr. Helow. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you lose some of your accounts then when you 
refused to join the union? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17349 

Mr. Helow. I did. 

Mr, Kennedy. So there was pressure on the part of the employers 
for you to join the union ? 

Mr. Helow. Definite. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had an application in for Local 349 of the 
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers; is that right? 

Mr. Helow. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that organizing was being done by Mr. Baitler, 
the previous witness. 

On April 24, during this time that you had your application in 
with the Electrical Workers, the Taran Distributing Co., for whom 
you did some work, or for whom you had once worked, I believe, 
was having a showing for a new kind of machine ? 

Mr. Helow. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you attended the showing, did you not? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were pickets in front ? 

Mr. Helow. There was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go into the building ? 

Mr. Helow. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you came out ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was in order to service the account ? 

Mr. Helow. I had an account to service that day. That is the reason 
Heft. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you run into any difficulty when you left the 
building? 

Mr. Helow. I sure did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what happened ? 

Mr. Helow. Well, the picket was walking by the door. I stopped to 
ask him where he was from. I had never seen him in the business. 
He told me he is from the Textile Workers. I asked him, "What are 
you picketing here f or ?" 

Mr. Kennedy. Speak up a little louder, please. 

Mr. Helow. I asked him what he was picketing there for from the 
Textile Workers. He said, "We are organizing the coin machine men," 
and at that time one of his leaders, Tacetta, he told the picket to take 
a walk up the street, it is against the rules for a picket to stop and talk. 

So I walked up the street and we kept talking about the jurisdiction 
of the Textile Workers. There was no arguments or anything. About 
300 feet up, I got hit behind the neck and in the head, and my feet just 
went paralyzed. 

This fellow walking up the street, later I found out he was a boxer, 
he jumped on me, we rolled into the gutter, he stuck his knees into my 
neck and chest, while Mr. Karpf and Eandazzo and the other two 
pickets started beating me up. 

Mr. Kennedy. They knocked you on the ground ? 

Mr. Helow. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were four of them? 

Mr. Helow^. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Karpf and Randazzo were two of them ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. I found out later this Ramares, who was a 
painter, and the stepson of Karpf, who was imported from Xew York 
to carry the signs. 



17350 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. He had been a boxer, had lie not ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you knocked unconscious ? 

Mr. Helow. No, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Did you go to the hospital afterwards ? 

Mr. Helow. I did. The police took me right to the hospital. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some difficulty then ? 

Mr. Helow. I did. I wasn't able to work for approximately 2 or 3 
weeks. I didn't feel right for about 3 months and I lost all my accounts. 
I was completely out of business. 

Senator JNIundt. Did this occur during daylight hours ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Did the police intervene ? 

Mr. Helow. They weren't there. 

Senator Mundt. Did the police pick up the people who beat you ? 

Mr. Helow. They didn't until I swore out a warrant for them. Then 
they did ; yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. They picked up all four of them ? 

Mr, Helow. Not four of them. I didn't know the names of the other 
two, but I did know Kandazzo and Karpf and they were picked up. 

Senator Mundt. Was this in a pretty well populated part of town ? 
Were you attacked in broad daylight ? 

Mr. Helow. It was populated. 

Senator Mundt. Out on the outskirts of town ? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, it is on the outskirts of the city. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently you preferred charges against these 
people ? 

Mr. Helow. I did, with the help of Dan Sullivan of the crime com- 
mission. We had them convicted with a six-man jury. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And Randazzo and Karpf were convicted; is that 
right? 

Mr. Helow. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it in your estimation because of the fact that you 
had gone in there and were not interested in joining the union that this 
occuiTed ? 

Mr, Helow. No. I had been threatened right along, and I gi'adually 
kept losing my accounts. I just wouldn't pay attention to them. I had 
found out about Karpf's background and Eandazzo's association. I 
didn't want to have anything to do with theuL 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think that was the reason you were 
beaten up? 

Mr. Helow. I believe so. I thought they would use me for an 
example. 

Mr. Kennedy. You thought they used you as an example? 

Mr. Helow. I thought so. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that is why you were beaten up ? 

Mr. Helow. I thought so. That was my opinion. 

Mr. Kjinnedy. Prior to that, you had lost some accounts and you 
lost more accounts af t«r that ? 

Mr, Helow. I ended up with one. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was because of the close arrangement that had 
existed between the association, the employers and this union ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17351 

Mr. Helow. I believe so. Well, you see, the people I did work for, 
they had an investment in their machines. My only investment was 
my knowled<:^e of repairing equipment. 

Mr. Kennedy. In your estimation, was this union an employer-dom- 
inated union, the Textile Workers? Was the union controlled by the 
association ? 

Mr. IIelow. I really don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Randazzo present at the time the picketing 
was taking place ? 

Mr. Helow. He was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know why he was present ; why he was there ? 

Mr. Helow. I understood later he had something to do with the 
union also. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Norman. 

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. Norman. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT NORMAN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, 

Mr. Norman. My name is Robert Norman. I reside at 2284 South- 
west 6th Street in Miami. I am in the coin-machine business. Until 
recently I was general manager for Southern Music Co. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel, do you ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. About November of 1954, Mr. Tony Randazzo and 
a man by the name of Tom Mura approached you ; is that right ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. With the proposition about organizing a union in 
the jukebox industry ? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. As background, the Southern Music Co. has about 
2,500 machines ; is that right ? 

Mr. Norman. Throughout the State of Florida. 

Mr, Kennedy. Jukebox amusement machines? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it is operated and owned by a man by the name 
of Ron Rood ; is that correct ? 

Mr, Norman, That is correct, 

Mr, Kennedy. What did Mr. Randazzo and Mr. Mura say to you 
at that time? 

Mr. NoR]MAN. They suggested that they might be instrumental in see- 
ing that we would do more business if we were to join the operator's 
association, 

Mr. Kennedy. The Amusement Machine Operator's Association ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 



17352 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they say if you joined the association, as an in- 
ducement they would see to it that the operators would buy more of 
your machines? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. TVTiat did you say about that ? 

Mr. Norman. I told them I had no authority, that I was not inter- 
ested, and I referred them to my employer, Mr. Rood. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, did you know anything about Mr. 
Randazzo ? 

Mr. Norman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He worked with the association, though ; is that what 
you understood? 

Mr. Norman. No, sir ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVell, he was there representing the association ? He 
was trying to get you to join the association ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, but at the time he came in there, I knew nothing 
about him whatsoever. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know anything about Mr. Tom Mura ? 

Mr. Norman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know that Mr. Mura, who accompanied him 
on this trip, had been arrested nine times with four convictions ? 

Mr. Norman. I know nothing about him at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1931 he was charged with burglary, reduced to 
unlawful entry; 1932, assault and robbery with a gun, which was 
changed to robbery, for which he received 3 to 6 years in Sing Sing ; 
1936, in Concord, N. H., larceny, sentence suspended; 1936, in New 
York, robbery with a gun, for which he received 5 to 10 years. In 
addition to that, he had been arrested some three, four or five times, 
in addition. But these were the men who came to see you, Mr. Ran- 
dazzo and Mr. Mura ? 

Mr. NoR]\r AN. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You told them to see Mr. Rood ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was Mr. Rood's reaction ? 

Mr. Norman. Mr. Rood refused to entertain a proposal in any shape 
or form. 

Mr. Kennedy. But they did go to see Mr. Rood ? 

Mr. Norman. They did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did Mr. Rood relate to you that they told him? 

Mr. Norman. They told him that they would see that the business 
was increased if they would sign up with the organization. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have to speak up. 

Mr. Norman. I say they told Mr. Rood that our business would be 
increased if we were to join with the organization. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was it explained to Mr. Rood at that time that 
Mr. Mura would be the one that was going to handle the union 
affairs? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Randazzo was going to be there represent- 
ing the association, and Mr. Mura was going to be there representing 
the union ; is that right? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they indicate at that time what union Mr. 
Mura was with ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17353 

Mr. Norman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in November of 1954, the association members 
voted by secret ballot to relieve Randazzo of his $100 per week job 
that he had held for just a few months ; is that right ? 

Mr. Norman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. The next day a group of the association members 
pulled out of the association and formed a new association called the 
Automatic Music Guild ; is that right? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr, Kennedy. And they hired Randazzo as a public relations man? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Some of those that pulled out were Mangone and 
Blatt, Petrocine, X. Y. Zevely, Dave Friedman, Sam Marino ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Norman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the beginning of 1955, Mr. Karpf appeared in the 
picture ; is that riglit. 

Mr. Norman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mura went out of the picture and Mr. Karpf started 
to go around with Mr. Randazzo ? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And started to organize the employees ; is that right? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the pressure was started to be put on all the 
employers to join up and become a member of this association, and 
make this arrangement with Mr. Randazzo and make the arrangement 
with Mr. Karpf? 

Mr. Norman. Well, I have no actual knowledge of that. I have 
heard it from various sources, but I actually don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Randazzo come to speak to you again? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir ; he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you what a mistake you were making 
by not joining up with the association ? 

Mr. Norman. He told me that conditions would improve if we were 
to join the association. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in the latter part of March 1955, a meeting was 
called of both the old and the new associations, and they joined to- 
gether, amalgamated ; is that right ? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it was further decided then that they would 
recognize Charlie Karpf's union, which was the Bedding Workers 
Local of the Upholsterers International Union ? 

Mr. Norman. Well, I heard that from various sources, but I didn't 
actually have knowledge of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know how they came to call it the Bedding 
Workers local of the Upholsterers Union? Do you know what the 
Bedding Local would have to do with the coin machine business? 

Mr. Norman. No. I thought it was amusing at the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Randazzo came to see you accompanied by Charles 
Karpf and asked you to sign with the union ? 

Mr. Norman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was Randazzo that came to see you, and Karpf, 
and told you that you should join the union ? 

3675,1—59 — pt. 48 10 



17354 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Norman. Well, he asked me about if I had considered joining 
the association. 

(At this point Senator Mundt left the hearing room.) 

Mr. Kennedy. You told them you would have nothing to do with 
them? 

Mr. Norman. I told them again that I would have nothing to do 
with it, and again referred them to Mr. Rood, because I didn't have 
the authority. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they also urge you, Mr. Karpf , and Mr. Ran- 
dazzo, to join the union, or was it just the association ? 

Mr. Norman. Just the association. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know why Mr. Karpf, who was a union 
official, would be coming to you to urge you to join the association? 

Mr. Norman. No, sir ; I have no idea. 

Mr. Kennedy. Several days later, on April 13, 1955, your place 
of business was stink-bombed ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee what happened? 

Mr. Norman. Well, I don't actually know what happened, except 
that Monday morning when I came to the office and opened the 
door, I had to close it and go right out again. We have 8,000 square 
feet of space. I called the police and they came in and investigated 
the matter and asked me if I had any idea who did it. I told them 
I had no idea. They asked me a number of questions. I told them 
that we had had some difficulty with the associations and so on, and 
perhaps 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you believe that your place was stink-bombed 
because of your opposition to the association and the union ? 

Mr. Norman. Sir, I have no way of telling if that was the cause. 
It just seemed peculiar to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am asking what you believe. I know that nobody 
was apprehended, nobody was arrested and convicted. Do you believe 
that that was the reason your place was stink-bombed ? 

Mr. Norman. I believe that. I can think of no other reason for it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you remember writing a letter to Mr. John Had- 
dock, who was the president of AMI, Inc., on April 19, 1955 ? 

Mr. Norman. I wrote to Mr. John Haddock. 

Mr. Kennedy. In which you stated : 

I know you fully realize what a grave situation we are in. In my opinion, 
this was only a warning, and I think we may look forward to other things to 
come, along the same line. The preliminary gesture in the way of a stink bomb 
only tended to make me realize that if we agreed to go along with this hoodlum 
organization it would place us in the position of being forced to accept any 
terms they might dictate from then on. 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the way you felt at the time ? 

Mr. Norman. Definitely. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was to the president of the AMI ? 

Mr. Norman. That is riglit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Whose machines were you handling ? 

Mr. Norman. We are State distributors for the AMI music machine. 

Mr. Kennedy (reading) . 

I know for a definite fact that it is the ultimate object of the parties Involved 
to eventually attain the point where they can bargain with the distributors, by 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17355 

exercising the control which they expect to have over the operators and their 
employees, by using their usual strong-arm methods. 

In this particular case they are merely resorting to the labor organization 
method as a subterfuge for their nefarious activities. 

Mr. Norman. That is the way I feU, about it, and wrote Mr. Had- 
dock, who was very much interested in the situation. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the situation at that time ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then there was a great deal of havoc amongst the 
industry, and normal sales fell off ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes. We were doing very little in the way of sales. 

Mr. Kennedy. You also wrote in the letter that : 

Normal sales are entirely out of the picture. Under present conditions we 
would have to rely on the dictatorship to advise their followers if, when, and 
how many machines to buy, and from whom. 

This Avas an attempt, was it not, to gain complete control of the 
industry in the Miami area ? 

Mr. Norman. That was my opinion. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were using the union as a method of enforc- 
ing their will ; is that right ? 

Mr. Norman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was this collusive arrangement between certain 
employers and the union, and the union was dominated and controlled 
by gangsters and racketeers at that time ? 

Mr. Norman. Well, that was the general picture. 

INIr. Kennedy. You have not been able to get rid of the stench com- 
pletely from 3'our place of business ? 

Mr, Norman. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I don't like to place in the record that your place 
still smells 

Mr. Norman. It does on damp days. 

The Chairman. How long ago did this occur ? 

Mr. Norman. Approximately 4 years ago, to the best of my 
knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently, were you approached and was it sug- 
gested to you that there could be a mediator who could arrange peace 
in the industry. 

Mr. Norman. No, sir, I was not approached. My employer came 
down fi'om Orlando, A meeting had been arranged. I was invited to 
come along. The preliminary things were already arranged, and I 
merely went along with my employer. 

Mr. Kennedy. So there was a meeting held, was there not ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

IMr. Kennedy. And the mediator, the man who was going to — this 
was Mr. Karpf's setup, he set up the meeting, is that right, or Mr. 
Karpf was present? 

Mr. Norman. Mr. Karpf was present ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he had as a mediator a man by the name of 
Joe Scootch ; is that right ? 

Mr. Norman. "Well, I don't know who introduced Mr. Scootch. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Scootch was introduced as a mediator? 

Mr. NOR3IAN. He was ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was Joe Scootch? Did you know anything 
about him ? 



17356 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Norman. I didn't know anything about him until afterward. I 
had never heard of him. I didn't know who he was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know he was also known as Joe Indellicato ? 

Mr. Norman. I had no knowledge until later on. I didn't know who 
he was or what he represented. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he had been arrested some four times and has 
three convictions. Is that right ? 

Mr. Norman. I know nothing whatsoever about the man. 

Mr. Kennedy. The last conviction coming in 1932 for assault and 
robbery, where he received a sentence of 10 to 20 years in the State 
prison in New York. 

Why would a man with that background be selected as a mediator 
in the industry ? 

Mr. Norman. Sir, I frankly do not know. That was the only time 
I ever saw the man. He left there. I read something about him later 
on, and I have never heard anything about him since. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliy were there so many people with criminal 
records who were involved in this activity ? Do you know ? 

Mr. Norman. No, sir ; I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. The meeting was broken up by reporters finding out 
about it ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And everybody ran ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The reporters brought photographers with them, 
did they? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it broke the meeting up ? 

Mr. Norman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in June 1955 you wrote another letter to 
Haddock : 

In spite of all this unfavorable publicity, it seems that although the associa- 
tion is disposing of Karpf and his union they Insist upon retaining Raudazzo; 
although Rood and I offered strenuous objections to their policy, the association 
apparently insists upon pursuing the same course. 

It would seem to me that under the circumstances, all of the parties concerned 
should be grateful for the opportunity which is offered at this time to break away 
from the stranglehold which they as well as we have been confronted with. 

So you continued to resist the organizing efforts of Karpf; is that 
right? 

Mr. Norman. We definitely continued to resist the efforts. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were your employees at the time you terminated 
your relationsliip with the company membere of any union? 

Mr. Norman, No, sir. We liad nothing whatsoever to do with any 
union or association. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Cliairman, I quoted from several letters. Could 
we liave those identified ? 

The Chairman. I hand you three letters, pliotostatic copies of 
letters, one dated April 19, 1955; another April 27, 1955; and a third 
of June 6, 1955, all three of them addressed to Mr. J. W. Haddock, 
Grand Ray)ids, Mich. They all appear to be signed by R. J. Morgan, 
who I believe is the witness. 

Will you please examine these letters, these photostatic copies, and 
state if you identify them as such ? 

(The documents were handed to the witness.) 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17357 

Mr. Norman. Those are letters that I wrote to ]\Ir. Haddock. 

The Chairman. They may be made exhibit 69-A, 69-B and 69-C, 
in the order of their dates. 

(Letters referred to were marked "Exhibits 69-A, 69-B, and 69-C" 
for reference and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions of this witness ? 

If not, thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Blatt. 

The Chairman. Mr. Blatt, come forward, please. Be sworn. 

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. Blatt. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM BLATT 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business, please, sir. 

Mr. Blatt. My name is William Blatt. I live at 654 North Shore 
Drive, Miami Beach. My business is jukeboxes and cigarette machines. 

Tlie Chairman. Jukeboxes and what ? 

Mr. Blatt. Cigarette machines. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel ? 

Mr. Blatt. I do. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, Mr. May will question the witness. 

The Chairman. Very well. 

Mr. May. Mr. Blatt, how^ long have you been in the coin operated 
machine business ? 

Mr. Blatt. About 30 years. 

Mr. May. What is the name of your company at the present time ? 

Mr. Blatt. Music Makers. 

]\Ir. May. How many employees do you have, Mr. Blatt? 

Mr. Blatt. Six. 

Mr. May. Have you been a member of various associations while 
in Miami ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. 

Mr. ^L^Y. Would you list them for us? Would you list the asso- 
ciations with which you have been connected ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, I can only tell you the last group. The others I 
couldn't remember. 

Mr. May. Are you presently associated with an association? 

Mr. Blatt. No. I am a member of it. 

Mr. May. What association is that ? 

Mr. Blatt. The AMOA. 

Mr. ]\L\Y. What is the full name of that? 

Mr. Blatt. I think it is the Amalgamated Machine Operators 
Association. 

Mr. JVIay. Amalgamated Music Operators Association? 

Mr. Blatt. Or machine operators. I am not sure. 

Mr. May. Were you a director of that at one time ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. 



17358 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. May. Wlien was that ? 

Mr. Blatt. At various times on and off for the past few years. 

Mr. May. In 1950 an association was formed called the Amusement 
Machine Operators of Miami, and you became president, is that true? 

Mr. Blatt. That could be. I don't remember that far back. But 
it is possible. 

Mr. May. In 1954, the operators belonging to that association began 
to have some trouble with the distributors; is that correct? 

Mr. Blatt. That is right. 

Mr. May. Which distributors, Mr. Blatt ? 

Mr. Blatt. All of them on and off. But particularly with Ron 
Rood. 

Mr. May. Ron Rood? 

Mr. Blatt. Right. 

Mr. May. And did other members of the association have some 
difficulty with Mr. Bush ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. 

Mr. May. Was there another distributor involved? Mr. Sam 
Taran? 

Mr. Blatt. At one time or another we always had trouble from 
the distributors. 

Mr. May. What were these distributors doing, Mr. Blatt, that 
caused concern to the operators ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, they would set out like grandfather, or something. 

Mr. May. Grandfather? 

Mr. Blatt. Grandfather is a name for somebody that they finance, 
and give them equipment to go out and set other operators. 

Mr, May. Is it also called a whip company ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, you could call it that. 

Mr. May. How did it operate ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, you get an employee out of your own distributing 
outfit, or a tie-in with somebody else. You give them equipment 
without a downpayment and they just go out and set machines whether 
they are profitable or not in order to promote sales. 

Mr. May. This is a move on the part of the distributors to force the 
operators to buy new machines ; is that true ? 

]Mr. Blatt. Occasionally, yes. 

Mr. May. In the course of their activity, did you lose some locations 
yourself? 

Mr. Bl.\tt. Yes. 

Mr. MvY. About how many ? 

Mr. Blatt. About 30. 

Mr. May. And other members of the association also lost locations 
to these distributors? 

Mr. Blatt. At one time or another, yes. 

Mr. May. What action did the association take to combat the 
activity on the ]iart of the distributors? 

INIr. Br.ATT. Well, you had to go in and buy equipment. 

Mr. IVFay. Did you hire INIr. Randazzo about that time? 

Mr. Bla'it. Mr. Randazzo came in, yes, just about that time. 

jNfr. May. Could you tell us how Mr. Randazzo happened to be 
hired bv the association ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17359 

Mr. Bi^vTT. At one of the nieetin<^s that I presided over, the dis- 
cussion came about how could we stop the raiding of these locations. 
I was not a paid emploj^ee of any kind, and I could give vei-y little 
time to it. 1 would preside over a meeting maybe once every 2 weeks 
or once every 4 weeks. During the course of the discussion, Mr. 
Mangone suggested 

Mr. May. Mr. Joseph Mangone? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. Suggested that he had one of his locations and 
the man would be willing to undertake the job of trying to straighten 
the things out. 

Mr. ]\iAY. Did you interview Mr. Randazzo? 

Mr. Blatt. The members voted that I and a committee interview 
Mr, Randazzo. I told Mr. Mangone to make an appointment, which 
he did. 

I, Mr. Mangone, and probably a few others — I don't remember who 
they were — interviewed Mr. Randazzo. I asked him if he had no 
record, and he said no. 

Mr. INLiiY. You asked him if he had a criminal record? 

Mr. Blatt. That is right. And I asked him how much he wanted. 
He said he would take $100 per week. 

Mr. IVIay. He said he had no criminal record ? 

Mr. BL.VTT. That is right. I said that I would bring that before 
the next meeting. At the next meeting, which was probably 2 weeks 
or a month later, I told the members about it, and somebody made a 
motion and it was voted on that we hire Randazzo on a temporary 
basis at $100 a week. 

Mr. May. What was Mr. Randazzo doing at the time you hired him ? 

]Mr. Blatt. He was running a restaurant. 

Mr. May. Did he continue to operate the restaurant? 

Mr. Blatt. That I can't tell you. I don't know. Well, he was 
in the restaurant. 

Mr. ]May. Did he have any previous experience in the coin-machine 
field? 

Mr. Blatt. Not that I know of. 

Mr. ]\L\Y. Was he given a title ? 

Mr. Blatt. Business manager. 

3^Ir. ]\L\Y. WTiat was he specifically supposed to do for the asso- 
ciation ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, when locations are lost by operators, he was sup- 
posed to go out, talk to the owners, and try to convince them that they 
ought to take the operator back. 

Mr. May. This was a period when the distributors, through their 
whip companies, were taking locations from the association members? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. Well, at that time I know that I had trouble with 
Ron Rood, but I don't know if the other distributors were also trouble- 
some at that particular time. 

Mr. May. Mr. Randazzo was just supposed to go out and talk to the 
location owners and persuade them to retain the machines of the asso- 
ciation members ? 

Mr. Blatt. That is correct. 

Mr. May. How could he induce that? 

Mr. Blatt. Maybe he would be a good salesman. Who knows ? 



17360 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. May. Shortly after ]Mr. Randazzo was hired, isn't it true that 
a vote was taken and the membership of the association voted to 
release Mr. Randazzo ? 

Mr. Blatt. After Mr. Randazzo was hired, I resigned as presi- 
dent. Randazzo was there several weeks or a month after he was 
hired and I resigned. 

Subsequently — I don't know. There is a possibility. You see, I 
have a partner, and if I don't attend the meeting, he does. There 
is a possibility that a vote was taken that he be fired at that particu- 
lar meeting that my partner attended. 

Mr. May. Why was he fired ? 

Mr. Blatt. I don't know. He probably didn't do his job. 

Mr. IVIay. He wasn't successful in retaining locations ? 

Mr. Blatt. Probably. That must have been the cause, if he was 
fired. 

Mr. May, What happened after he was fired ? Did the association 
remain as it was 'i 

Mr, Blatt, The association was split up into two. I didn't attend 
several meetings. But the next meeting I attended was at Mr. 
Randazzo's restaurant. At that time there was more or less a com- 
plete set of new officers, presided over by a fellow named Eddie 
Petrocine. I think he was the president at that time, 

Mr. May. And they formed the Automatic Music Guild? 

Mr. Blatt, That is correct, 

Mr. May. And you became a member of that? 

Mr. Blatt. That is right. 

Mr. May. Did the Electrical Workers Union become active about 
this period ? 

Mr. Blatt. The union came into being just about that time. 

Mr. May. Did Mr. Karpf became active also, with his Upholsterers 
Union ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, I don't know what union he had at that time, 
but whatever union he had at that time, he became active. 

Mr, May, Did some of the operators favor Mr, Baitler and the 
Electrical Workers Union and others favor Mr, Karpf ? 

Mr. Blatt, Yes; because Baitler organized one segment of the 
workers, and Karpf organized another segment. They were just like 
split in half almost, 

Mr. May. That is when the association was split and the Auto- 
matic Music Guild was formed. It then signed a contract with Mr. 
Karpf 's union ? 

Mr. Blatt. I don't believe there was a contract signed until both 
associations got together. 

Mr. May. Both associations eventually merged again in March 
1955. 

Mr. Blatt. I don't believe there was a contract signed with them 
during that time. I am not sure. 

Mr. May. Well, at least after the merger did the association sign 
a contract with Mr. Karpf ? 

Mr. Blatt. That is right. 

Mr. May. How did that come about? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, he said he organized all the employees, and at a 
meeting he negotiated a contract with the association. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17361 

Mr. Mat. He said he signed the employees ? 

Mr. Blait. That is right. I know he signed mine. I don't know 
about the others. 

Mr. May. He showed you the application cards from the 
employees ? 

Mr. Blatt. For my men ; yes. 

Mr. ]May. You saw the application cards of your own employees? 

Mr. Blatt. No, but he told us he did. I never looked at them. 

Mr. JVIay. The employees wanted this union ? 

Mr. Blatt. Whether they wanted it or not, they were signed up 
by him. 

Mr. May. Did the operators want this union ? 

Mr. Blatt. That is again the same thing. I really don't know. 
I know as far as we are concerned, my men were signed up by Karpf 
and that was it. 

Mr. May. This morning, Mr. Blatt, you told me it was sort of a 
mutual desire on the part of both the operators and the employees 
to take Mr. Karpf 's union. 

Mr. Blatt. I will still say the same thing. You know, when a 
man drowns, he grabs at a straw. We figured as long as he did sign 
our men, it might be good for the organization. Who knows? At 
that time, there were no troubles. 

Mr. May. Who was drowning at this time, Mr. Blatt ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, the men that were losing locations were drown- 
ing. We were. 

Mr. May. Was it the purpose to sign a contract with this union 
or to reach an agreement that it would help in retaining and obtain- 
ing some locations for the operators ? 

Mr. Blatt. That is right, because I believe — I don't know much 
about unions, but I believe that one union man cannot take locations 
from another union man. 

Mr. May. The association members were having trouble with the 
distributors, and they liired Mr. Randazzo to retain and obtain loca- 
tions. He was unsuccessful. The association eventually signed a 
contract with Mr. Karpf 's union in an attempt to become more suc- 
cessful and retain locations ; is that true ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, that wasn't the sole purpose. 

Mr. May. It was one of the purposes ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. 

Mr. May. What other purposes ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes, it could be. 

Mr. ]May. Was there another purpose? 

Mr. BlzVTi. Yes. The men were signed up by him. What could 
we do? 

Mr. May. Did they obtain additional benefits through the contract ? 

]\Ir. Blait'. I believe they did. You see, hours were very bad for 
employees, and I think he got better hours. 

]\Ir. May. Did your employees obtain higher wages as a result of 
the contract? 

Mr. Blatt. They did. We paid the highest wages in the city. 

Mr. May. You did before the contract ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, we did before the contract, but now we pay still 
more because we have men who take $100 or more home. 



17362 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. May. You pay more than the contract actually calls for? 

Mr. Blatt. Today, yes. 

Mr. May. And you did then ? 

Mr. Blatt. Then, too. 

Mr. JVIay. What benefit do the employees receive ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, like I said, I believe there was a settlement for 
shorter hours. 

You see, the peculiarity in the coin machine industry — I don't 
Iviiow if you want me to go on with anything like that, because you 
don't want to go into the coin machine business, but the peculiar 
business about the coin machine industry is that a man works a day 
and then he takes calls at night. He may not get a call during the 
entire evening, but he has to be subject to stay home in order that if 
a call does come in he has to go out and do it. 

Mr. May. How does this contract with Mr. Karpf's union rectify 
that? 

Mr. Blatt. They have to get additional pay for staying home. Or 
we had to change them this way : We had to scatter them. Instead 
of a man coming in at 9 o'clock in the morning, he would come in, 
say, aromid 10 or 11 o'clock and be on service until 11 o'clock that 
night. 

Mr. May. Did you continue to lose locations after the contract was 
signed ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. 

Mr. May. How did you resolve that situation with Mr. Rood? 

Mr. Blatt. We eventually made a deal and bought some equipment. 

Mr. May. How much equipment ? 

Mr. Blatt. I think 10 machines. 

Mr. May. And after that he stopped taking the locations ? 

Mr. Blatt. That is right. 

Mr. May. Mr. Karpf changed unions. Did the arrangement be- 
tween Mr. Karpf and the association continue after Mr. Karpf left the 
Upholsterers Union and went with the United Textile Workers of 
America ? 

Mr. Blatt. I believe so. 

Mr. May. Was a contract signed ? 

Mr. Blatt. Tliere was only one contract signed. I think that same 
contract remained in effect. 

Mr. May. It became sort of an oral agreement, then, with Mr. 
Karpf, when he went with the United Textile Workers ? 

Mr. BL.\'rr. That I can't — well, probably. 

Mr. May. Who paid the dues for your employees to Mr. Karpf? 

Mr. Blatt. My employees. 

Mr. May. Did the company pay any ? 

Mr. Blatt. Tlie company made out a check, but we deducted $1.25 
per week from them. 

INIr. May'. Did the company pay anything to Mr. Karpf in addition 
to dues? 

Mr. BL.\T'r. There was some kind of an assessment for sixty-some- 
odd dollars and seventy-some-odd dollars, a total of about $150. 

Mr. May. Wliat was that for? 

Mr. Blatf. It must have been an assessment for something. I don't 
know. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17363 

Mr. May. How can the union assess the company ? 

Mr. Blatt. I don't know. 

Mr. May. Did you deduct that as a business expense ? 

Mr. Blatf. It was done. What ? 

Mr. May. Was it deducted as a business expense ? 

Mr. Blatt. It must have been, as a union expense, yes. 

Mr. May. And you don't know why you paid Mr. Karpf the money ? 

Mr. Blatt. No, I don't. 

Mr. May. Did you have any Libels or stickers at that time? 

Mr. Blatt. I was under the impression we didn't have any. I 
don't think we had hibels. I might be wrong. It is 4 years. 

Mr. May. You just can't give us a reason for paying Mf. Karpf 
the money ? 

Mr. Blati'. Do you mean for that $150 ? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. Blatt. If there were labels, it could have been for the labels. 
But I don't remember any labels on any of our machines. 

Mr. May. Eventually Mr. Karpf lost the charter of the United 
Textile Workers Union, too. 

Did Mr, Baitler organize your employees about that time ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. 

Mr. May. With which labor union was Mr. Baitler associated at 
that time? 

Mr. Blatt. The Teamsters. 

Mr. May. Are your employees now in the Teamsters Union ? 

Mr, Blatt. Right. 

Mr. ]May. Who pays the dues ? 

Mr. Blatt. They pay their dues. 

Mr. May. Do you have a contract with the Teamsters Union ? 

Mr. Blatt. We had a contract that originally was signed through 
Baitler, I think. It has never been renewed. 

Mr. May. At the present time you don't have a contract ? 

Mr. Blatt. I don't think so, unless it renews itself. 

Mr. May. You don't know ? 

Mr. Blatt. No, I don't. I can't remember anything we signed 4 
years ago or 5 years ago. 

Mr. May. As far as you know at the present time you have no con- 
tract with the Teamsters Union, yet your employees are paying dues? 

Mr. Blatt, We have never signed a new agreement. 

Mr. ]\Iay, According to our information, you pay some $30 a month 
dues, and that is deducted from the wages of your employees? 

Mr. Blatt. That is correct. 

Mr. May. Your employees work on both jukeboxes and cigarette 
machines ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes, sir. 

Mr. May. You have about how many of these ? 

Mr. Blatt. About 225, or something like that, and a few more or 
less, total. 

Mr. May. How many jukeboxes? 

Mr. Blatt. About 150. 

Mr. May. You have 75 cigarette machines ? 

;Mr, Blatt. About that. 

Mr. May. How much a month does each employee pay ? 



17364 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Blatt. Five dollars. 

Mr. MiVT. Your employees work on both jukeboxes and cigarette 
machines ? 

Mr. Blatt. That is right. 

Mr. Mat. You told me this morning, Mr. Blatt, that you also belong 
to a cigarette employers association. 

Mr. Blatt. That is right, I did. 

Mr. ]\iAY. You mentioned that fairly recently they wanted to hire 
a man to help obtain locations. Will you tell us about that situation ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, the man's job is not just to straighten out locations. 
It turned out that they did hire a man and I just found out, but he is 
an inside man and he takes telephone calls. 

Mr. May. You told me about their wanting to hire a man to obtain 
locations and you said you would have nothing to do with it. 

Mr. Blatt. That is the man that would straighten out locations, 
but they did hire a man, I found out, that was an inside man and he 
answers calls. You see, I resigned from the Cigarette Machine Asso- 
ciation, and the man was hired after I resigned. 

Mr. May. Why did you resign ? 

Mr. Blatt. Well, I just resigned. 

Mr, May. You had some trouble with Frankie Dio ? 

Mr. Blatt. Trouble? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. Blatt. No trouble. 

Mr. May. Do you know Frankie Dio ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes, sir. 

Mr. May. Is he the brother of Johnny Dioguardi of New York ? 

Mr. Blatt. I believe so, and I read about it. 

Mr. May. Was Frankie Dio in the cigarette business ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes, sir. 

Mr. May. Did he take some locations ? 

Mr. Blait. Yes. 

Mr. May. How did he obtain the locations ? 

Mr. Blatt. He went out and I suppose he knows some people, and 
others he gave gifts, probably $50 or $100. 

Mr. May. Did he take locations from the association members ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes. 

Mr. MvY. About how many ? 

Mr. Blait. About 50. 

Mr. May. Did you go to see him ? 

Mr. Blatt. I did. 

Mr. May. What occurred ? 

Mr. Blatt. The association at the time I was in the association, de- 
cided that maybe we ought to buy the route and divide it among the 
members as to who lost liow many locations, and I went in to see him. 

He said, "Yes, he would sell it at about $3,000 per case." I went 
back to the association and they said, "All right, let us buy it and 
each one will take the locations that he lost." 

I went back to see him, but nothing came of it, and then I resigned, 
and that is it. 

Mr. May. This was a situation where Frankie Dio went out and took 
some 40 locations ? 

Mr. Blatt. Fifty locations. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17365 

Mr. May. From the association members ? 

Mr. Blatt. Yes, sir. 

Mr. May. And you went to see him with the idea of buying back 
your own locations ? 

Mr. Blatt. No, buying the entire route. 

Mr. May. The entire route, including the locations that he took from 
you, and his price was too high? You don't consider that an extor- 
tion of any type? 

Mr. Blatt. Call it what you want. 

Mr. May. You didn't go through with it ? 

Mr. Blatt. No, we didji't. 

Mr. May. You mentioned that Mr. Randazzo was fired from the 
association initially, and yet when the Automatic Music Guild was 
formed, Mr. Randazzo was hired again. You said he was fired be- 
cause he was unsuccessful in the first instance, and why was he rehired 
by the second association ? 

Mr. Blatt. That I can't tell you, because when I came to the meeting 
there were several meetings held prior to my attending that particular 
meeting, and I said I missed a couple of meetings. 

Mr. May. Was he somewhat more successful when he began to col- 
laborate with Mr. Karpf ? 

Mr. Blatt. Not that I know of. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock. 

( Wliereupon, at 12 :20 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 
2 p.m., the same day. Members of the select committee present at the 
taking of the recess were Senators McClellan and Capehart.) 

ATTERNOON SESSION 

(The select committee met at 2 p.m., in room 1202, Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan, chairman of the select commit- 
tee, presiding.) 

Tlie Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
afternoon session were Senatoi'S McClellan and Capehart.) 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Sam Taran. 

The Chairman. 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. Taran. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF SAM TARAN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
EDWARD N. MOORE 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mr. Taran. My name is Sam Taran, and I live in Miami Beach, 
Fla., 715 Fairway Drive, Miami Beach, and my place of business is 
3401 Northwest 36th Street, Miami, Fla. I am in the general coin 
machine business and music business and a wholesale record business. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Do you have counsel ? 

Mr. Counsel, will you identify yourself for the record, please. 



17366 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Moore. My name is Edward N. Moore, of the law firm of 
Walters, Moore, and Costanzo, in Miami, Fla. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Moore, thank you. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Taran, you have been in the coin machine busi- 
ness for how many years, approximately ? 

Mr. Taran. Approximately 23 or 24 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. During the course of your life you have had some 
difficulties with the law, the last one being a conviction back in 1937 ; 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you have been convicted on a couple of other 
occasions ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, when did you first get into the coin machine 
business, Mr. Taran ? 

Mr. Taran. Sometime in the middle 30's. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is that? 

Mr. Taran. In the middle 30's. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the middle 30's ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what were you doing then, at that time? 

Mr. Taran. I was in the automobile finance business. 

Mr. Kennedy. What coin machine business did you have ? 

Mr. Taran. General distribution. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of what kind of machines ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, w^e started handling the Wurlitzer product, the 
Bally Manufacturing Product. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where were you handling Wurlitzer ? 

Mr. Taran. In Minnesota. 

Mr. Kennedy. Whereabouts? 

Mr. Taran. In St. Paul, Minn. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Mr. Hammergren at that time? 

Mr. Taran. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently, did you meet Mr. Hammergren ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hammergren gave you the exclusive distributor' 
ship of the Wurlitzer machine in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area? 

Mr. Taran. In the Minnesota area ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, he also made a financial arrangement 
with you that you would pay him a certain amount of monej' for ob- 
taining that distributorship ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir, but he didn't do it, but one of his associates did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was that ? 

Mr. Taran. Alvin Goldberg. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much did you have to pay to Mr. Hammergren 
and Mr. Goldberg ? 

Mr. Taran. To the best of my knowledge I think it was, we started 
with 15 percent, and wound up with 25 percent. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that a general procedure that was followed by 
Mr. Hammergren, when he gi-anted a distributorship that he would 
take a percentage of their earnings? Did you understand that was 
a general procedure ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17367 

Mr. Taran. I wouldn't want to say it was a general procedure, but 
it was common discussion in the trade. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVas there any reluctance on the part of Mr. Ham- 
mergren by the fact you had had this difficulty or these difficulties 
with the law enforcement? Was there any reluctance on his part to 
give you the distributorship for tlie Wurlitzer ? 

Mr. Taran. There was no reluctance on any manufacturer's part 
to give me the distributorship. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did you have the distributorship in 
Minnesota then ? 

Mr. Tar.\n. Until 1945. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Did you also go into Buffalo and obtain a distributor- 
ship there? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy, "Wlien was that ? 

Mr. Taran. I believe it was in 1941. 

Mr. Kennedy. And how long did you have the one in Buffalo? 

Mr. Taran. To the best of my recollection, I would say it would be 
October of 1944. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any difficulty when you were in 
Buffalo, with any union operation ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, at one time. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was that, just briefly ? 

Mr. Tar.\n. At one itme, it was either in 1941 or early in 1942, and 
I don't recall the exact date, where a union was being formed over 
there headed by a fellow named Ben Kulick, who was the Seeburg 
distributor, and I understood that Bill Presser was the big man behind 
it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, do you know how to spell his name? 

Mr. Taran. I do not know exactly, and I think it is 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you spell his name ? 

Mr. Taran. I don't know, and I just imagine it is P-r-e-s-s-e-r. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am not talking about him. I am talking about 
the other man. 

Mr. Taran. Kulick, I doubt I can spell his name. 

Mr. Kennedy. K-u-1-i-c-k? 

Mr. Taran. Possibly so. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was a distributor for what company ? 

Mr. Taran. For the Seeburg Manufacturing Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you understood that behind him was Mr. 
Presser ; is that right? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this was an attempt by that company through 
Mr. Kulick and Mr. Presser to gain control of the industry in the 
Buffalo area? 

Mr. Tar<\n. In some respect ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, that was the purpose of it ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did j^ou in order to combat that, form your own 
union? 

Mr. Taran. After I got most of the operators in the area together, 
and they feared that unless they had some protection against boy- 
cotting, or what do they call it, picketing, that they would have no 



17368 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

protection. They might eventually lose a lot of locations, and so I 
decided to get someone to help me to get another charter, and we did 
form a union and we brought up the operators, one of us had more and 
one a little less, but anyway 

Mr, Kennedy, You were able to stop the operation of Mr. Presser ? 

Mr, Taran, Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy, Now, that is the same Mr. Presser who is presently 
active as president of the Ohio Conference of Teamsters, is it not? 

Mr. Taran. To the best of my knowledge, I think it is. 

Mr. Kennedy. He has been very active in the coin machine opera- 
tions for approximately 20 years ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, in addition to having the distributorship in 
Buffalo, did they offer it to you 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess for about 20 
minutes. 

(A brief recess was taken. ) 

(Members of the select committee present at the taking of the recess 
were Senators McClellan and Capehart.) 

The Chairman, The committee will come to order. 

Proceed, 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr, Chairman, if I may interrupt this witness, we 
have some testimony in connection with Frank Dioguardi taken this 
morning, and the record was incomplete, I thought I would place 
into the record the fact that he has a company called the Sunny Isle 
Cigarette Co,, 7444 Biscayne Boulevard ; that he originally had a third 
interest in his wife's name, but on June 26, 1958, 100 percent of it 
went to his wife's name, Camille Dioguardi, 

The permit that was originally ussued was issued on January 8, 
1958, for 25 machines, and as of February 1959, there are 61 machines. 
They sold, as of February 1959, some 28,000 packages of cigarettes. 
He, of course, has a felony conviction, as did his brother, Johnny 
Dioguardi. 

We were talking about Buffalo, Mr. Taran. Were you also offered 
the franchise in New York City ? 

Mr. Taran. There was some discussion on it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had a discussion on it. What did you decide 
about New York City ? 

Mr. Taran. I turned it down even if it was offered. 

Mr. Kennedy. You turned it down ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr, Taran. I didn't want to be in New York. 

The Chairman, You didn't want to what ? 

Mr. Taran, I didn't want to be in New York, I didn't want to face 
the element, 

Mr, Kennedy, You didn't want to b© in New York ? 

Mr. Taran, That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy, What is the reason that you didn't want to be asso- 
ciated with New York ? 

Mr, Taran, I didn't want to face the element, the unions and the 
tough guys, and I wanted to stay out of there. 

Mr. Kennedy, Are they supposed to be tougher in New York than 
Minnesota ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17369 

Mr. TARiVN. Well, that is generally accepted. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you speak of tough guys, you mean the ele- 
ment that used force, violence, and carry guns? Is that correct; that 
kind of group? 

Mr. Taran. I think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't mean just the regular tough fellows who 
are able to protect themselves, but you mean the group that are in- 
volved in violence ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Involved with the so-called underworld; is that 
right ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about Detroit? Had you also had some dis- 
cussions about getting the franchise in Detroit ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir; there was also a discussion about Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you turn that down for the same reason ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir; for the same reason, and reasons that I didnt 
want too many ventures. I didn't want to go out and kill myself. 

The Chairman. Wliat was that about killing yourself? 

Mr. Taran. I didn't want to go out and kill myself by having 10 
offices. I told them it was difficult to manage two or three offices. 
Wlien I say "kill myself," I mean to overwork. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't mean to get yourself killed ? 

Mr. Taran. No. I meant to overwork; you know, you can kill 
yourself working. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Angelo Meli have the franchise in Detroit? 

Mr. Taran. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who had it? Did he ultimately get the franchise? 

Mr. Taran. Yes ; I understand that he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you get the franchise in Pittsburgh ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did you have that ? 

Mr. Taran. Pretty much about the same time a^ we did in Buffalo. 
I think we sold Pittsburgh a little sooner. 

Mr. Kennedy. What other cities did you go into ? 

Mr. Taran. Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, and Buffalo, N. Y. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you also expand into Florida ? 

Mr. Taran. No. That was apt to be completely out of the others. 

Mr. Kennedy. You got out of the Wurlitzer Co. ? 

Mr. Taran. No, I didn't get out of the Wurlitzer Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. You broke your relationship off with the Wurlitzer 
Co.? 

Mr. Taran. Mr. Hammargren canceled me out in 1945. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had a dispute with him ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. And I completely stepped out from all these 
offices. He finally sent word to me that as long as I was moving to 
Miami, would I be interested in the Florida territory, and after I 
looked it over and saw there were possibilities, I thought I might as 
well get in action and take it. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you took Florida then ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that for Wurlitzer ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. 

36751— 59— pt. 4S 11 



17370 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you still have it for Wurlitzer in Florida? 

Mr. Taran. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who do you have it for now ? 

Mr. Taran. Rockola. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you get Rockola ? 

Mr. Taran. 1953. 

Mr. Kennedy. You also have Cuba, do you not ? 

Mr. Taran. No, sir ; we don't have the franchise in Cuba. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of machines do you have in Cuba? 

Mr. Taran. At this time I don't know what. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, prerevolution, what machines did you have? 

Mr. Taran. I didn't have any. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, your family. 

Mr. Taran. Combined, a combination of Wurlitzer, Rockolas, and 
Seeburgs. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just jukebox machines ; is that right ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. 

Mr, Kennedy. Did anybody else have a franchise in Cuba otlier 
than you ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "VVho else had the franchise ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, various persons have different franchises. One 
has the Seeburg, one has the Rockola. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. How were you able to have the franchise for two 
or three different machmes? You had Rockola, Seeburg and 
Wurlitzer? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I never had them at the same time. 

Mr. Kennedy. At various times ? 

Mr. Taran. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do you have down in Cuba at the present 
time ? 

Mr. Taran. Nothing. 

Mr. I^nnedy. T\^at franchise did you have in Cuba prior to the 
revolution ? 

Mr. Taran. No franchise. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you have ? 

Mr, Taran. Just an operation. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were just selling machines, distributing 
machines ? 

Mr. Taran. That is not me. That is my family or the office. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were an operator, then, in Cuba; is that right? 

Mr. Taran. An operator and they're also selling machines out there, 
jobbing and selling. 

Mr. Kennedy. Ilave there been attempts by any individuals to 
come in and take over your business since you have been in Miami? 

Mr. Taran. No, not that I know of. 

Mr. Kennkdy. Was there an attempt back in 1053 or so? 

Mr. Taran. Well, there was an attempt, and Bush came in in 1948 
and took over the Wurlitzer franchise. 

Mr. Kennkdy. Who was that? 

Mr. Taran. Bush Distributing, Ted Bush. 

Mr. Kennedy. First in 1947, didn't you have a visit by two men who 
came in and said that they were going to take over your business? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17371 

Mr. Taran. No, tliey didn't want to take over by business. They 
wanted to get a portion of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did they say they represented ? 

Mr. Taran. They said they represented a group of people ; they did 
not tell nie exactly wlio they represented. 

Mr. IvENNEDY.'Did you understand that they were "tough guys" ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. I took that for granted. 

Mr. Kennedy. I^id you refuse to go along with it? 

Mr. Taran. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did j^our building burn down shortly afterwards? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And one of the people that was involved in burning 
the building down was caught inside and was burned to death himself ? 

Mr. Taran. So I understand. I was not there when it took place. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you consider that the burning of your building 
had something to do w^ith the fact that you refused to turn over part 
of your business or bring them in as partners? 

Mr. Taran. It was m}' opinion. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time also did they tell you that they would 
set up a union, and the union would furnish you protection ? 

Mr. Taran. They said they would furnish me protection. They 
didn't say exactly which way. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any discussion about a union ? 

Mr. Taran. Xo. I didn't go into it far enough. I was just not 
interested in taking in people with me, to give up any portion of the 
business. Nor was I interested in the business that they were inter- 
ested in. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was an attempt, about which we have had 
testimony this morning, on the part of Mr. Karpf , together with some 
other distributors, to gain control of the industry in the Miami area. 
What part did you play in that ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I don't know whether there was an attempt to gain 
control. They wanted to form a union. 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Kennedy. What was Tony Randazzo, Charlie Karpf, and Joe 
Scoot cli doing down there ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I told you Randazzo and Charles Karpf were 
interested in forming a union in Miami, Florida. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what purpose ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I don't know for what purpose. 

Mr. Kennedy. Didn't they come to see you and have some discus- 
sions with you ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. AA^iat did they explain to you at that time ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, they thought they could better the business in 
Miami, could better the business for the distributor, for the operator. 
However, I would not go along with them. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did they say they were going to do that? 

Mr. Taran. Well, by getting better percentages, by not raiding 
locations of one another, and by various means they thought they 
could improve conditions. 

Mr. Kennedy'. What was the union going to do? What did they 
think the union was going to do to help them ? 



17372 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Taran. Well, if everybody belonged to the union, naturally 
there would be a lot of money saved, and a lot of locations, when they 
open up, everybody fights for them. They give them as much as 
$1,000 and $1,500 for a location. 

Mr, Kennedy. The union was to bring stability ? 

Mr. Taran. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And to prevent jumping from one location to an- 
other? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, that was the general thing. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you for or against the union? 

Mr. Taran. I was against it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I was against it on a general principle. I didn't 
want them in a coin machine business, and I didn t want any two or 
three people to get control of the operators in our area. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you think that this would give the control to 
the so-called tough guys ? 

Mr. Taran. I thought it might. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis? 

Senator Curtis. Wliat union was it ? 

Mr. Taran. I do not recall what union it was. I think it was 
mentioned, the Textile Union. 

Senator Curtis. The Textile Union ? 

Mr. Taran. I think so. 

Senator Curtis. Who was expected to join the union? 

Mr. Taran. All of the operators. 

Senator Curtis. How do you define an operator ? 

Mr. Taran. An operator is a person who puts machines out on 
locations on a percentage basis or on a guaranty or on a rental. 

Senator Curtis. Does he own the machines ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, the operator buys the machines from the dis- 
tributor. 

Senator Curtis. He is not an employee? 

Mr. Taran. No. 

Senator Curtis. So this was not a move to organize employees into 
a union, was it? 

Mr. Taran. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. It was using the union idea to further control the 
industry, wasn't it? 

Mr. Taran. At least that was the way I took it. 

Senator Curtis. You weren't in anybody's employ, were you ? 

Mr. Taran. No, sir . 

Senator Curtis. Had you gone for the idea, you would have had to 
join the union? 

Mr. Taran. No, I wouldn't join the union because I was a distribu- 
tor, not an operator. But if I did want to operate, I would have to 
join the union. 

Senator. Curtis. And you would operate if you placed machines 
on locations? That would make an operator out of you? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. I could be a distributor and an operator. 
I mean there is no discrimination. 

Senator Curtis. That is aU. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17373 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Tai'can, as it was explained to you, this union 
was not being formed to help the employees? 

Mr. Tar-vn. That is right. 

Mr. JvENNEDY. The union was being formed by the employers to 
give control over the industry ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, at least that is the way I took it. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. They promised you that you would be able to get 
more locations and make more money if you went along with this idea? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I understand they promised me and I understand 
they promised my competitors. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just asking you. They promised you that? 
They told you that? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. If I may interrupt there, who promised you that? 

Mr. Taran. Eandazzo and Karpf. In other words, they wanted 
me to incorporate and they would incorporate with me. 

Senator Curtis. Were they distributors? 

Mr. Taran. No, they were not distributors. They were the gentle- 
men who were forming the union. 

Senator Curtis. Were they operators? 

Mr. Taran. No, they were not. 

Senator Curtis. Then it is not true that the employers were forming 
a union, because these two men you have talked about were neither 
distributors nor operators. 

Mr. Tar.\n. Well, they said that they were representatives of the 
employers. That is how they came to talk to me about it. 

Senator Curtis. They were representatives of the union? 

Mr. Tar,\n. Yes, they were the representatives and the organizers. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the same time Randazzo was supposed to be 
representing the associatoin, was he not ? 

Mr. Taran. I know that he had represented the association at one 
time or another. "Whether it happened at that same time or not, I 
cannot tell you. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to the testimony we had this morning, he 
went around as a representative of the association at the time Karpf 
was representing the union. 

Mr. Tar^vn. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, if I could call Mr. Kaplan, we have 
some information on what Mr. Eandazzo'S official position was at that 
time. 

The Chairman. Have you been sworn ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. Do we find that Mr. Randazzo received a license 
as a union organizer at the same time he was representing himself as 
a public relations man of the association? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir; we do. 

On May 21, 1955, he was issued a license as a labor representative, 
which licenses are required by the State of Florida if you are going to 
engage in any labor organizing activity. 



17374 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

He was issued a license to be a representative for the Miscellaneous 
Textile Workers, local 296, United Textile Workers of America, AFL. 
That automatically expired in December 1955, and was not renewed. 

Senator Curtis. Did he have any credentials from the union ( 

Mr. Kaplan. None that we know of, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did he represent the union? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir; he did. 

Senator Curtis. He did represent the union? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What we know. Senator, is that, according to the 
testimony this morning, he went around and said that he was repre- 
senting the association, and he went around with a Charlie Karpf , who 
has this long criminal record, who was supposedly representing the 
union, first the Upholsterers Union, then he got kicked out of that, 
and then he got a charter for the Textile Workers Union, ultiniately 
getting involved in a controversy and he lost that. 

But Randazzo, at the time he was supposedly representing the asso- 
ciation, we find that he also took a license out for the miion. 

Senator Curtis. A license wouldn't make him a representative of 
the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. No. 

Senator Curtis. But he did represent the union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The association. I don't know if he ever went 
around representing the union. 

Mr. Kaplan. This is what we found from the many people we in- 
terviewed. His representation by himself 

Senator Cur'its. I don't care what he represented. I want to know 
whether the union that he did have authority to speak for the union — 
did he represent the union, the local, this man ? 

Mr. Kaplan. We don't know that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Cliarlie Karijf was the union, and he is going to be a 
witness. We can ask him. 

Senator Curtis. A one-man union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Practically; yes. Virtually, it was set up by the 
association. 

Senator Curtis. Who issued the charter ? 

Mr. Kennedy. First they received a charter from the bedding di- 
vision of the Upholsterers Union. Then, after that charter wjis 
lifted, they received a charter from the United Textile Workers to 
organize the coin-machine business. None of it makes any sense. 

Senator Curtis. If they are issued a charter, they represent the 
union. 

Mr. Kennedy. But it was issued to Mr. Karpf. Mr. Karpf was 
set up by the association, this group of associations, and he and Mr. 
Randazzo went around together and told the association members 
that they should belong to the union, that the union would give them 
this ])i-(>tection. 

Tlie Chairman. Karpf did represent the union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Karpf did represent the union. Karpf was the man 
who got the charter. 

The (yiiAiRMAN. And this man went with him ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17375 

The Chairman. The}' went around together and made that 
represetitation i 

Mr. Kenxedy. Yes. 

nie Chairman. Did they both come to your place together? 

Mr. Taran. Sometimes they were both together and sometimes one 
would see me. They saw me on several occasions. 

The Chairman. Were they both talking about the same thing, 
t lying to get you to do the same thing ? 

Mr. Taran. Apparently so. 

The Chairman. Apparently so? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. 

The Chairman. When they first came, did they come together? 

Mr. Taran. I think the first time it was Mr. Randazzo by himself. 

The Chairman. He was by himself ? 

Mr. Taran. I think the first time he visited me it was only for the 
association and not the union. 

The Chairman. I am talking about when they started tliis union 
■business, organizing the union. Who came to you fii-st ? 

Mr, Taran. I cannot recall at this time. I am inclined to believe 
that he might have come by himself the first or the second time, and 
at some later date he brought in Mr. Karpf with him. 

The Chairman. In other words, they both tried to do the same 
thing? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. 

The Chairman. Part of the time they were together and part of 
the time they were not ; is that right ? 

Mr. Taran. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you want to have anything to do with 
this operation, Mr. Taran ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, as I said before, I felt that the distributing and 
the operating business should remain between the operator and the 
distributor. 

]Mr. Kennedy. Can a miion do anything for the employees, in your 
estimation ? 

Mr. Taran. I didn't think so then. 

Ml'. Kennedy. You did not think so ? 

Mr. Taran. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Some of your employees ultimately joined the elec- 
trical workers ; did they not ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you oppose that ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I don't think I opposed it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel that there was a different operation 
between the Elex^trical Workers on one hand and this operation of 
Karpf on the other ? 

Mr. TAR.VN. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, one of them — I could not stop and employ if they 
thought they coulcl better themselves. First of all, I believe my 
company paid more than the union scale. We did have a great deal 
to lose. " The union scale did not provide for the salaries that we were 
already paying. What is more, I could not stop them from joining, 
so I thought I might as well be a good guy and go along with it. 



17376 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Taran, why do you feel that there are so many 
racketeers, or whatever you might call them, in this business ? 

Mr. Taran. I didn't say there are so many racketeers. I think 
there are as many racketeers in every business. 

Mr. Kennedy. In what other kind of businesses are there as many 
racketeers ? 

Mr. Taran. No matter what business. Any business can be made 
a racket of. It all depends on who is running it. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of businesses do they get into? 

Mr. Taran. Every business, including banking business. If they 
want to make a racket of it, they can and they have and they have 
done it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you find as many racketeers in the banking 
business as in the jukebox business? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I have never made an examination of it. 

Mr. Kennedy. But from your experience that you have had around 
the country, do you find that there is an equal amount ? 

Mr. Taran. There is plenty of them right in the banking business 
and the top business field. 

Mr. Kennedy. Senator Curtis asks what you think as far as com- 
parisons with politics are concerned. 

Mr. Taran. Well, I would rather not go into that. 

Senator Ctjrtis. I withdraw the question. He is a willing witness 
and I don't want to force him to decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. But there has been an infiltration, certainly, into 
certain phases of the coin-machine business, as far as the jukebox 
is concerned, some of the game machines, and to some extent the 
cigarette machines, has there not, Mr. Taran ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes ; I think there has been. 

Mr. Kennedy. Also, haven't you found that this same element gets 
into the providing of paper towels and the laundry business and dry 
cleaning, and that kind ? 

Mr. Taran. As I said before, no matter what business 

Mr. Kennedy. I am just asking you from your experience, and you 
have had a considerable amount of experience with all sides, some 
very personal experiences 

Mr. Taran. Thank you for the compliment. 
_ Mr. Kennedy. If you haven't found that there has been an infiltra- 
tion into these kind of businesses, where there is servicing involved. 

Mr. Taran. Yes ; I think there is. 

Mr. Kennedy. You opposed the Karpf operation and ultimately it 
failed in 1955 ; is that right? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are any of your employees members of any union 
now? 

Mr. Taran. I really cannot tell you whether they are or not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a contract with any union ? 

Mr. Taran. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. How many employees have you ? 

Mr. Taran. Approximately about 20. No, it is better than (hat. 
Including the record department, we have over 30. 

The Chairman. You have over 30 ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17377 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. As I understand, you believe that what Karpf and 
Randazzo were trying to do was simply to muscle in and exploit a 
situation ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, I don't want to say that they wanted to muscle 
in. I just didn't approve of the method. 

The Chairman. Well, there was something about the method you 
didn't approve of. What was it ? 

Mr. Taran. I just didn't want the control of the coin-machine 
business to go out of the hands of the distributor and the operator. 

The Chairman. You knew that is what they were undertaking 
to do, to get control of it. That is what you thought ? 

Mr. Taran. That is my opinion. 

The Chairman. That is what you were afraid of ? 

Mr. Taran. Yes. 

The Chairman. You didn't send for them ; did you ? 

Mr. Taran. No, sir. 

The Chairman. They came there to muscle in on you; isn't that 
correct ? 

Mr. Taran. Well, they didn't threaten me. 

The Chairman. I didn't say they threatened you. But they came 
there to try to take over that business, the control of it. That is 
what they were after, according to your judgment ? 

Mr. Taran. That was all of our distributors' opinion. 

The Chairman. That was the opinion of all of you? 

Mr. Taran. Of all of them. 

The Chairman. They hadn't been sent for but just came volun- 
tarily and told you they wanted to take over in that fashion. That 
is what it amounted to ; isn't it? 

Mr. Taran. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you any interest in the Jet Amusement Co.! 

Mr. Taran. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You haven't had an interest, either ? 

Mr. Taran. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. I have nothing further. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Joseph Indellicato. 

The Chairman. 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. Indellicato. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH INDELLICATO 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mr. Indellicato. My name is Joseph Indellicato. I reside at 330 
85th Street, Miami Beach, Fla. 

The Chairman. "Wliat is your business ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Unemployed. 

The Chairman. Did you ever have a business ? 



17378 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes. I just got out of the transportation business. 

The Chairman. You have been in the transportation business? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel, do j^ou ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat phase of the transportation business were vou; 
in? 

Mr. Indellicato. I was running refrigerated trucks. 

Mr. Kennedy. For how long a period of time ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Two years. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the name of the company ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Sunshine State Transports, Inc. 

Mr. Kennedy. Sunshine State Transports, Inc. ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that located in Miami ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many trucks did you have ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Four. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were your drivers members of the Teamsters Union ?' 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there ever any attempt to organize them ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I guess so. 
' Mr. Kennedy. That was not successful ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Well, they go on the road, and it is hard to organ- 
ize that kind of a driver. 

Mr. Kennedy. Over the road ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What business were you in prior to that ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Salesman. 

Mr. Kennedy. For whom? 

Mr. Indellicato. Falcone & Sons. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Falcone & Sons ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do they do ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Retail and wholesale grocers, Italian products^ 
mostly. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the Miami area ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are they related to the Falcones in Utica ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ken nedy. Is that Joseph Falcone ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Salvatore. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long were you witli him ? 

Mr. Indellicato. About 3 or 4 yeai-s. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is tliat company still operating in Miami ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Salvatore attended the meeting at Apalachin, did he 
not? 

Mr. Indellicato. I don't know, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Jose])h, I guess. Joseph is a brother ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Well, he has a brother Joseph and a son Joseph. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were a salesman for that company ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17379 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And prior to that time, what did you do ? 

Mr. IxDELLicATO. 1 Avoiked for a ship scaling and painting company 
in New York. 

Mr. Kennedy. What Avas the name of it ? 

Mr. Indkllicato. N at ional Ship Scaling & Painting Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you do for them ? 

Mr. Jndellicato. Timekee])er. 

Mr. Kennedy. Kow long did you work for them ? 

Mr. Indellicato. A couple of years. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you a member of a union then ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat union did they have a contract with ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I have no idea, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any union in the Falcone business ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are you related to the Falcones ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Not at all (■ 

Mr. Indellicato. Well, our parents come from the same part of the 
colmtr3^ 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you known them a long time ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you ever had any interest in anj' coin machine 
business ( 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Karpf ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you known him ? 

Mr. Indellicato. A short while. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Not too long. A couple of years, I would say. 

Mr. Kennt:dy. Did he relate to you what he was doing in connec- 
tion with the coin machine business in Miami ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He never discussed that with you ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever help or assist him in any way ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ImoAv that he was connected with any 
union ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, I read about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. But other than reading about it, you didn't know 
about it? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know Mr. Randazzo ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you associated with him in any way ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you attend this meeting of the operators in 
Miami in 1955 ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may intimidate me — incriminate me. 



17380 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. We were doing so well, Mr. Scootch. 

The Chairman. What is you real name? 

Mr. Indellicato. Indellicato. 

The Chairman. I see something here about Joe Scootch. Does 
that refer to you ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is that your alias ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I guess so. 

The Chairman. How did you get that name? 

Mr. Indellicato. I have no idea. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you had it all your life ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Since childhood. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have no idea where Scootch came from ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you use Scootch ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I use my proper name. 

The Chairman. What was that you thought might tend to incrim- 
inate you ? 

Mr. Indellicato. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. I said what was it. I didn't understand you. 

Mr. Indellicato. About attending a certain meeting, I don't 
know. 

The Chairman. About who ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Attending a certain meeting. 

The Chairman. Wliether you attended a certain meeting? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes. 

The Chairman. Which meeting was that ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I don't know what meeting. 

The Chairman. I didn't understand you. 

Mr. Indellicato. He mentioned a meeting. 

The Chairman. Do you remember which one it was? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

The Chairman. You don't know which one he mentioned ? 

Mr. Indellicato. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, maybe he would answer if he knew 
which meeting you were talking about. He says he didn't under- 
stand which meeting you were talking about. Ask him. 

Mr. Kennedy. The meeting that occurred in 1955 of the operators 
in the Miami area. Did you attend that meeting? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the gi'ounds 
that it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Now you know which meeting he was talking 
about, do you ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us if you had anything at all to do 
with the coin machine business ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Absolutely nothing, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any conversation with anybody 
in connection with the coin machine business ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, did you ever attend a meeting where the 
coin machine business was discussed, where you participated? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminat-e me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17381 

Mr. IvENXEDY. You have me there. I don't undei*stand. You 
have never been involved in the coin machine business at all and 
when I ask if you attended a meeting in connection with it, you take 
the fifth- amendment. 

Would you explain that ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds 
that it may incriminate me. 

The Chaikmax. You mean an explanation might tend to incrim- 
inate you ? Is that what you are saying ? 

Mr. Indellicato. That is what I am saying, sir. 

The Chairman. I didn't understand you. 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the groimd 
that it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. All right. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee what led up to your 
going to that meeting? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Randazzo ever ask you to come to any 
meeting ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Karpf ever ask you to come to any 
meeting? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Mr. Taran? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Are you mixed up with that bunch of thugs? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Did you ever represent any labor organization? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Did you ever receive any income from a labor 
union ? 

;Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Were you ever an officer in a labor union ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Indellicato, the information that we have had 
this morning is that you attended a meeting and it was explained that 
you were to be the go-between, the one that was going to straighten 
out the difficulties. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Trigger Mike Coppola? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to our information, you are reported 
to be an associate of his, and an associate of Charlie "The Blade" 
Wliite; is that correct? 



17382 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. John "Peanuts" Tronolone? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the grounds 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you pronounce his name? Can you tell me 
that? How do you pronounce his name? 

Mr. Indellicato. Whose name? 

Mr. Kennedy. Tronolone. 

Mr. Indellicato. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know him? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the gi'ound 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Joseph and Sam DeCarlo, we also understand you 
to be an associate of theirs, and Joe Massei and Joe Mangone; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have anything- to do with the Paper 
Doll Night Club in Miami Beach ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And in the Restaurant of Palange at Sunny 
Isles, Fla.? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Sunshine State Transportation Co.? 

Mr. Indellicato. The what, sir? 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever have any interest in the Sunshine 
State Transportation Co.? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that the one that you mentioned earlier? 

Mr. Indi:llicato. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You owned that one? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about Doc's Bar? Did you ever have an in- 
terest in that? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

The ('iiAiRMAN. Is the Sunshine Stute the only one that was an 
honest business ? Is that why you can't answer ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Well, was the Sunshine State an honest business? 

Mr. Indellicato. I res|)ectf ully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. We thought, from the way you were testifying, 
that maybe you had been in a legitimate business at one time in your 
life. Have you ever? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

The (^/HAiRMAN. All right. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Kuth Brougher? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17383 

Ml". Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incrimmate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Barney Baker? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that 
it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Ruth Brougher has told us that you and Charley 
Karpf and Barney Baker shook somebody down in the Miami area, 
-and tliat she was present when you split up the money, and that at that 
time 3'ou received $2,500 of the money that you had shaken down, the 
money you received from this employer. Could you tell us if that 
testimony is correct? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You liave been arrested how many times ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Two or three times. 

Mr. Kennedy. How^ many convictions do you have ? 

Mr. Indellicato. One. 

Mr. Kennei>y. You were an uicorrigible cliild. Then later on you 
were a delinquent child. Then in 1932, you were convicted of assault 
and robbeiy and received a sentence of 10 to 20 years. Is that the 
one that you had in mind ? 

Mr. Indellicato. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Did you ever work for the Teamsters Union? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Do you recognize these names that have been 
mentioned, such as Barney Baker, as being of the Teamsters Union ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Did you ever make any money out of any type of 
labor-management relations ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. If you did make any money in such manner, did 
you report it in your income tax ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever hear of the Lorrain Co. in Miami ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know anything about the Georgia Broilers 
of Florida, Inc. ? 

Mr. Indixlicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you suggest to the representatives of the Team- 
sters Union and the Butchers Union, wliich were making a joint 
organizing drive in the winter of 1956, that they leave the Georgia 
Broilers of Florida alone and not try to organize them ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us what money you received for 
that? ' ^ ^ 



17384 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Tndellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what your income has been over 
the period of the last 3 or 4 years ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us if you received, since 1955 — 1956 
and 1957 — if you received any money, if you have had any income 
other than dividends ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that you have not reported income 
over $2,500 in any 1 of those 4 years ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that would be for 1954, 1955, 1956, and 1957. 
In 1954 you worked for the Fabulous Homes, Inc., Coral Gables, is 
that right, and you had an interest also in a company called the 
Swing & Putt Co. of Miami, Fla. ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And except for 1954, where you had evidently some 
means of income, all the rest of your income for the remaining 3 
years has all come from the sale of stock, all of which amounts to 
a total amount of money that you received in any 1 of those 4 years, 
the most that you received, to some $2,500 ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. How have you been able to live in Miami, Fla., for 
instance in 1957, on about $1,200? Can you tell us how you have 
been able to do that ? 

Mr. Indellicato. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You would be giving away a trade secret, do you 
think? 

Well, all right. 

Stand aside. 

Call tlie next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Frechette. 

The Chairman. Do 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. Frechette. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID FRECHETTE, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFOED ALIDER 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. FRECHE-rrE. My name is David Frechette. I live at 1835 North- 
west 185th Terrace, Miami 60, Fla. 

The Chairman. Have you a business or occupation? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17385 

The Chairman. Would you say your business or occupation is 
legitimate ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You couldn't state that under oath, that your 
business is legitimate without possible self-incrimination? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Counsel, identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Allder. H. Clifford Allder, Washington, D. C. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kenned3^ 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Frechette, you are secretary and business rep- 
resentative of Local 290 of the International Brotherhood of 
Teamsters ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that is the local that was chartered in March 
of 1956 to cover Teamster members in the building and construction, 
alcoholic and carbonated beverage, and processing and distribution 
businesses ; is that right ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the local covers the territory from Key West 
north to Fort Pierce; is that right? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us how many members that local 
has? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. This local covers the coin machine operation in the 
Miami area 

Mr, Frechette. I respect- 



Mr. Kennedy. And this was an operation, according to the testi- 
mony that we had this morning, the jurisdiction or area that had 
been covered originally by the Upholsterers Union, the Electrical 
Workers Union, the United Textile Workers, and now the Teamsters 
are in it ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell the committee how many employees 
of the coin machine business you have in your local? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to what I understood, the public state- 
ment that you have made lately, it is that you only have some 12, 
15, or less than 20 people in the coin machine business that are 
actually in your local. Is that statement correct? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the Teamsters Building in Miami, where you 
have your office, there are vending machines, are there not? 

36751— 59— pt. 48 12 



17386 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kexnedy. And these machines are all — they all have stamps 
on them, do they not, Teamstei-s labels? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And they are owned by one of Miami's largest 
operators, Sam Marino ; isn't that correct ? 

Mr. Freciieii'e. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he has an interest in the S & M Music, H & S 
Music Co., and the Jet Music Co.; is that right? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He does not have any contract with the Teamsters 
Union, does he? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell the committee how he has been able 
to get stamps and labels for his machines in the Teamsters head- 
quarters if he does not have a contract with the Teamsters Union ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He w^as brought into the business in 1946 by his 
uncle, James Passanante, who had formerly been a partner of Angelo 
Meli ; is that right ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. His machines are also located at the Miami Airport 
and these, too, have Teamstei"s labels affixed to them. Can you explain 
that to us ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I understand that he states that he received those 
labels from the association. Could you tell us what your relationship 
is with the association that they can pass out union labels? 

Mr. Freciietits. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know anything about the Continental In- 
dustries, which belongs to Mr. Harold Roth in the Miami area? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. A number of Teamsters labels were found on the 
jukeboxes of Walter Zarzyski. Could you tell us about that? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he operates some 28 jukeboxes. He has told 
us that ho got his Teamsters stickers from the association when he 
I)aid his dues of 35 cents per month per machine. Can you explain 
that to us? 

Mr. Frechetto. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You originally came down from New York, Mr. 
Frechette? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17387 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr, Kennedy. Weren't there a considerable amount of complaints 
at that time by other unions in the Miami area of the fact that you 
were encroaching on their jurisdiction when you made sweetheart 
contracts with employers ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
Iwlieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you live in New York for a while, or work 
there ^ 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

TliB Chairman. Have you ever lived anywdiere or done anything 
decent that you can talk about ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

The Chairman. That is a question. 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
}>elieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Is there anything else ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Here is a letter of September 14, 195G, to !Mr. 
Frank Bonadio, secretary-treasurer of the building and construction 
trades department, AFL-CIO, dated September 14, signed by Den- 
nis Murphy, secretary-treasurer of the Miami Building and Con- 
struction Trades Council. It says: 

We are again protesting to you at this time the signing of sweetheart agree- 
ments by Mr. Frecliette, covering worlc historically and traditionally i)erformed 
hy members of the Building Trades Craft Council, especially insofar as he is 
signing long-term agreements for ridiculous wage scales with employers who 
apparently are very willing and happy to sign such contracts. 

One pregnant feature of all of these contracts seems to be the checkoff of 
<lnes and other payments to Mr. Frechette's union. 

Can you tell us anything about that ^ 

Mr. Frechetit:. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tencl to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then another letter of April 18, 1956, in which one 
of the paragi-aphs states : 

Inasmuch as these raiding tactics of local union No. 290, their "sweetheart" 
airreements which are being offered tx) certain unscrupulous employers are 
adversely affecting many of the legitimate crafts which comprise the Miami 
Building and Construction Trades Council, we are api)ealing to you to help 
rectify the situation at the international level. 

That letter is also to Mr. Frank Bonadio from Dennis Murphy, 
secret ary -t reasurer. 

The Chairman. Mr. Frechette, I present to you a photostatic copy 
of the letter referred to by counsel, dated September 14, 1958, ad- 
dressed to Mr. Frank Bonadio. It appears to be signed by Dennis 
Murphy. 

I will ask you to examine it and state if you recognize the letter or 
if you can identify it. 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 

( The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

The Chairman. Have you examined the letter ? 

Mr. Frechette. Yes, I have. 

The Chairman. Do you identify it ? 



17388 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Frechette, I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Let this letter be made exhibit No. 70. 

(Letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 70" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. Now I hand you a second letter, dated April 18, 
1956, address to the same man, from Dennis Murphy, apparently. 

I ask you to examine that photostatic copy and see if you identin' 
it. 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

The Chairman. Have you examined the letter? 

Mr. Frechette. Yes, I have. 

The Chairman. Do you identify it? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

(At this point Senator Church entered the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 70-A. 

(Letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 70-A" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the Select Committee.) 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. In connection with these letters in your general 
organizing procedure, would you tell us anything about that, Mr. 
Frechette? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of system do you generally use in an 
attempt to organize the employers ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestlj' 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Rather than to go to the employees, do you go to 
the employers and attempt to organize ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. What other tactics do you use, Mr. Frechette, other 
than that? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You have been asked several questions about your 
local organization, your union. It is a very serious reflection, I think, 
on any organization or group who are in an association or organiza- 
tion together to carry on some presumably legitimate purpose and 
objectives where we find among their officers those wlio say they 
cannot say anything about it, talk about it, or answer questions about 
it, without possible self-incrimination. 

Are you stating hei-e. or do you mean to state that there is some- 
thing so bad about this union, local 290, or the International with 
which it is affiliated, that you just cannot be identified with it, or 
comment about its activities or its program or its work or anything, 
without possibly reflecting on yourself and incriminating yourself? 

Do you mean to leave that impression and give that statement out 
here to the public? Is that what you are doing? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17389 

Now you have two questions, and maybe three. What is your 
answer ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this, then : Is there anything, any- 
thing at all, about local 290 that is honest, that is decent, or at all 
respectable with regard to its officers, including you, that you can 
talk about without possible self-incrimination; anything at all? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I think that when some of you labor leaders and 
labor officials that come up here in public and in response to a com- 
mand from your Government to give the information that it may 
need legislation, take the position that you cannot talk whether 
you are honest about it or not without possible self-incrimination, 
that is the greatest insult to the decent working people in America 
who belong to unions that could possibly be thrown at them. 

I think if they have any self-respect they will certainly feel that 
people like you who take this position are about the sorriest crumbs 
with which humanity was ever infested. Do you want to make any 
comment on that ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. KIennedy. Mr. Chairman, I have a letter here that I would 
like to have the witness identify. 

The Chairman. I present to you a letter addressed to Mr. James 
K. HotTa, dated March 18, 1958, apparently a letter from you to 
Mr. Hoffa. 

I will ask you to examine it and state if you can identify it as a 
letter you wrote to Mr. Hoffa on that date. 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

The Chairman. Have you examined the letter? 

Mr. Frechette. I have. 

The Chairman. Do you recognize it ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you want to deny that you wrote this letter? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. This letter may be made exhibit No. 71. 

(Letter referred to was marked exhibit No. 71 for reference and 
may be found in the files of the Select Committee.) 

The Chairman. You may proceed to interrogate the witness. 

Mr. Ej:nnedy: This is a letter dated March 18, 1958, to James R. 
Hoffa, general president. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, 25 Louisiana 
Avenue NW., Washington, D.C., and is signed by Dave Frechette, 
local 290. 

Dear Jimmy : Enclosed please find story from the Miami Herald of this 
date covering job action discussed with you by phone this morning. 

Support from the Building Trades Crafts has been heartwarming on this 
proposition especially from the Laborers, with whom we are on very close 



17390 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

terms here and with whom we and the Operating Engineers are now engagpil 
in a joint organizational drive on the ('(mcrete and concrete products industry 
in south Florida. 

We are really going hot and heavy after Acme Concrete, with all three locals 
pulling out all the stops to get him in the fold. They are a pretty rough nut 
and are the second large.st outfit in the industry, next to Maule. But we are 
pretty confident we can get them, and, if they go, the entire (Concrete and 
Block AssfK'iation will go, as the rest won't have much choice when the two 
largest are union, what with the support we can now muster among the other 
trades. 

It's a no-holds-barred war; Acme is using all the tricks in the book to conibat. 
ns. 

Then lie goes on for several paragraphs to state the difficulties they 
are having. This is the part I am particularly interested in. 

As I've outlined above, we're in a flght to the finish on this one since it can 
make or break us in this part of the South and we intend to use every tactic- 
at our disposal. Bernie Rubin, the head of the three Laborers locals here, has 
a gimmick he has used successfully in the past when he gets into a knockdown 
drag-out battle with a contract where FHA or VA financing is involved. He- 
employs the segregationist feeling here concerning the Negro and makes it back- 
fire into their laps. 

On a Sunda.v, when the developer has his model homes on display to th^^ 
public and when he makes his sales, he floods the models with a few hundred 
colored laborers and their families, who parade through the models and many 
express an interest in purchasing a home in the project with a few actually 
making application. In the light of this segregation thing here, this ruins the 
sales for the day. Then he delivers a crowning blow by having (me family show 
up with a certified check for the full i>urchase price, with Rubin's attorney in 
tow, and the colored nlan asks to buy a house. Of course, the mail" signs the 
necessary legal papers so that the money is not actually his, hut belongs to th*- 
local. 

If the sales agent refuses to sell him a house or hedges around about it, a 
formal complaint is immediately registered with the FHA and VA who. as you 
know, whenever any Federal money oi- guarantees are involved, can brook no' 
discrimination. This usually ends it, as the builder gets shook up about having 
his mortgage financing fouled up. 

Rubin says this should be our ace in the hole on this Heftier situation, as 
he's selling his houses twice as fast as he can build them because he has a 
terrific financing deal out of the FHA under title 216 which provides up to a 
40-year mortgage and allows a family to get into the house with $400 down 
total. 

This title 216 is some kind of cooperative mortgaging aiTangement. If it'.s 
fouled up, or he thinks it's going to be fouled up, h&'s dead. Rubin's willing 
to supi)ly the necessary people for this deal, but he thinks the money should 
be put up by the Teamsters for tJiis go-round, since it is a joint venture. 

It will take .$15,000 to buy one of these homes. Actually, there never will be 
a purchase made and the money is never out of the control of the local. But. 
as you well know, my local doesn't have the money to even put up in the form 
of a certified check. If you can .see your way clear to having it put up. I think 
we can be assured of a winner down here. I wouldn't want to handle the money 
my.self, but would suggest that Ben Cohen, the attorney here, handle it as your 
personal representative. 

And then he goes on. 

The Ctiairm.\n. Have you any comment? 

Mr. F'kkcjie'ite. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer mjiy tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Did Mr. Iloffa make reply to your letter? 

Mr. FuKCiiETTE. I respect fully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to meriminate me. 

Senator Cfrtis. ITow would a letter written by Jimmy IToffa in- 
criminate you? 

Mr. Freohe'ite. I respect fulljjr decline to answer because I honestly 
believe mv answer mav tend to meriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17391 

Senator Cirtis. Do you know Jimmy Hoffa? 

Mr. Frkchette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Do you know any of the other International offi- 
cers in the Teamsters Union ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

]\Ir. FuECiiETrK. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Have you worked for any other union besides the- 
Teamstei-s? 

Mr. FRECiiE'rrE. I respectfully decline to ansAver because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Church. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Senator Church? 

Senator Church. Did the Teamsters put up this $15,000 ? 

Mr. Frecheite. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my ansAver may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Church. Do you go ahead with your plan and place this 
money in the hands of a colored citizen who posed as the purchaser 
of one of these houses ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfulh' decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

(At this point Senator Kennedy entered the hearing room.) 

Senator Church. Wouldn't you regard the proposal that is set 
forth in your letter as a trafficking in public prejudice? 

Mr. FRECjn:TTE. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator (^hurcii. Don't you think that this is a brazen case of 
exploiting the colored man ? 

^Ir. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

(At this point Senator Curtis left the hearing room.) 

Senator Church. Mr. Chairman, in the course of the past few 
months w^e have had much evidence of the fact that the Teamsters 
Union is willing to employ any means to accomplish its ends, and in 
its conquests we have seen extortion used, we have seen violence 
I'esorted to, we have seen embezzlement. But I believe that this is as 
outrageous an abuse as any that has come to the committee's atten- 
tion because here is a conspiracy to capitalize upon deepseated public 
feeling in the very tender and important area of race relations. 

More than that, here is a flagrant instance of intentional exploita- 
tion of colored people to create bad feeling in the community in order 
to break the resistance so that the Teamsters can accomplish another 
conquest. 

I think this is a disgraceful display of immorality of the worst sort, 
and is as shocking an instance of Teamster abuse as has come to 
the attention of this committee. 

I will ask the witness one other question. This letter has been read 
to 3'ou, this proposal has been set out. Do you deny that the letter- 
is yours? Do vou denv that the proposal was one that vou made tO' 
Mr. Hoffa? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully^ decline to answer because I honestly 
believe mv answer mav tend to. incriminate me. 



17392 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Senator Church. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. May I ask you this question. 

I share what you have said, Senator Church, so it prompts a ques- 
tion I am about to ask. 

Are there any depths so low to which you and other officers of the 
Teamsters Union will not stoop to carry out your nefarious acts ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I don't believe there are. I have not found them 
in the course of these investigations. I said the other day and I say 
it again, that there is every justification for every decent member of 
the Teamsters Union in this country to start a rebellion against the 
present rotten, contemptible leadership of the Teamsters Union in 
this country. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Frechette, what is the idea of rounding up 
these colored people then, that you would pay them some money to 
come through on a Sunday afternoon and walk tlirough the liousing 
development ? 

Mr. Frecheite. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then your reference after that is that the man buys 
the house but that is all a fake. Of course, the man signs the neces- 
sary legal papers so that the money is not actually his, but belongs 
to the local. 

Can you explain that to the committee? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any feeling toward the people of the 
colored race at all that you would follow this procedure, Mr. 
Frechette? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Senator Kennedy ? 

Senator Kennedy. Mr. Frechette, are there Negroes in the Team- 
sters locals in the Miami area ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. It states that the people who came to the hous- 
ing project were members of the Laborers Union and were Negroes. 
You refuse to give this committee any information as to whether 
there are Negroes in the Teamsters local in this area? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. Would you tell us whether this has ever been 
done before? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa send you the money? 

Mr. Frecheite. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
b>elieve my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. In other words, you do not defend this action? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17393 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy, What it amounts to is not only taking adA'^antage 
of the segregationist feeling, but it is a question of the exploitation 
of the Negro, is it not? It is a flagrant example of that, Mr. 
Frechette. 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. Mr. Frechette, Mr. Hoffa goes around the 
country talking a good deal about what he does for the working men 
and women of this country. Did he react to your suggestion and 
refuse it and express outrage that you would even consider it or did 
he send you the money? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. Isn't it a fact that he did send you the money ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Kennedy. Mr. Hoffa has been quoted before in regard to 
the violence in Tennessee as saying that "these hillbillies need kicking 
around," in regard to the goon squad, Mr. Smith and others who 
committed acts of violence nmnbering into several hvuidreds without 
having any penalties. 

Now it seems to me by the fact that he supported you in this effort, 
it indicates what his regard is as to the white and colored people of 
this particular area, that he would exploit racial feeling in order to 
permit you to put pressure on a company. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call Mr. Bellino and 
Mr. Sheridan in respect to the accounts. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess for 15 minutes. 

(A short recess was taken, with the following members of the select 
committee present: Senators McClellan, Kennedy and Church.) 

(Members of the select committee present at the expiration of the 
recess: Senators McClellan and Church.) 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

Mr. Kennedy. May I call Mr. Sheridan? 

The Chairman. Mr. Sheridan, have you been sworn? 

Mr. Sheridan. Not in this hearing. 

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. Sheridan. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WALTER J. SHERIDAN 

The Chairman. Are you a member of the staff of the committee? 
Mr. Sheridan. Yes, I am, Senator. 
The Chairman. How long have you so been? 
Mr. Sheridan. Two years. 
The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Sheridan, you or someone under your direction 
and control, associated with you, has made an investigation into some 



17394 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

of the correspondence between Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Frechette in con- 
nection with this matter that we Juive discussed this afternoon? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have we found that the letter we have been dis- 
'cussing this afternoon was missing from the union files? 

Mr, Sheridan. Yes, sir; we did. We found that the letter by Mr. 
Prechette was missing from the Teamsters International files. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did we find that subsequently there were some finan- 
cial transactions with Mr. Frechette and with Mr. Cohen, who is 
discussed in the letter? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes, we did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what we found 
in connection with that, or what documents and letters are available? 
This letter to Mr. Hoffa is dated March 18, 1958. 

Mr. Sheridan. Following that letter, on April 24, 1958, there was 
.a letter from Ben Cohen to Mr. Hoffa, in which Mr. Cohen says that : 

Pursuant to your letter regarding my fee of $15,000 in the above matter, I am 
enclosing a list of some things that were done in connection with the successful 
handling of this case. 

Mr, Kennedy, In the letter of March 18, 1958, from Mr, Frechette, 
Mr, Frechette says in the second to the last paragraph : 

If you can see your way clear to having it put up. 

and-$15,t)i)0 is being discussed 

I think we can be assured of a winner down here. I wouldn't want to handle 
the money myself, but would suggest that Ben Cohen, the attorney here, handle 
it as your personal representative. 

Is that right? 

Mr, Sheridan, Yes, sir, 

Mr, Kennedy. The next piece of correspondence we find is a letter 
from Ben Cohen ? 

Mr. Sheridan, Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. Ben Cohen in that letter refers to a letter he received 
from Jimmy Hoffa ? 

Mr. Sheridan. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy, And that letter is also missing from the Interna- 
tional Brotherhood of Teamsters" files? 

Mr, Sheridan, Yes. 

Tlie Chairman, Does it appear that the files of the International 
Teamsters have been stripped of this correspondence? 

Mr. Sheridan. Well, the letters should be there, Senator, but they 
aie not there. 

The Chairman. You were unable to find the letters there? 

Mr. Sheridan. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. He mentions the $15,000. Then how is it handled 
at that time? 

Mr. Sheridan. On the side of the letter there is a notation of $10,000, 
indicating that the sum was reduced from $15,000 to $10,000, and on 
the top of the letter is "OK, J. II. Holl'a." Following that, there is 
a transmittal of $10,000 to Mr. Colien. 

Mr. Kennedy. A transmittal of $10,000 to Mr, Cohen? 

Mr, Sheridan. To Mr. Cohen. 

Mr. Kennedy. On what date? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17395 

Mr. Sheridax. That is by letter dated May 16, 1958, from John F. 
"Knjxlisli, to Ben Colien. 

Mr. Kexnedy. What about the $5,000, the next $5,000? 

Mr. Sheridan. By check dated April 30, 1958, in the amount of 
$5,000, made out to local 290 of the Teamsters local union in Miami, 
Fla. This money is forwarded to Mr. Frechette in Miami in con- 
nection with a request from him for $5,000 for organizational expenses. 

Mr. Kennedy. So altogether there was $15,000 forwarded, $10,000 
to the attorney and $5,000 to the union ? 

Mr. Sheridan. That is correct. 

!Mr. Kennedy. The attorney in his letter lists what he has done 
for the $15,000 that he originally requested, did he not? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a copy of that ? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Kennedy. That consists of some seven or eight conferences 
that he held? 

Mr. Sheridan. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many conferences, actually ? 

Mr. Sheridan. There are actually 10 conferences. 

The Chairman. Do we have a copy of the letter ? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes; we do. 

The Chairman. This letter may be made Exhibit No. 72. 

( Letter ref ei-red to was marked ^'Exhibit No. 72" for reference and 
will be found in the appendix on p. 17686.) 

^Ir. Kennedy. Actually, it consists of a conference with a client 
and an attorney, a Teamster attorney, a meeting with the press, that 
is the second, another conference with the attorney, a conference with 
two clients, and a conference with the client and attorney, obtaining 
some six depositions. Is that right ? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then two appearances in court and for that the 
•charge was $15,000? 

Mr. Shicridan. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all there is, is there, in connection with the 
documents in connection with this opei'ation ? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. The letter was made exhibit No. 72. The photo- 
static copy of the check for $10,000 may be made exhibit No. 72-A. 

( Check referred to was marked '"Exhibit No. 72-A'' for refei-ence 
and will be found in the appendix on p. 17687. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you the document for $5,000 ? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes; we have that check in connection with the 
advance of $5,000 to local 290. 

The Chairman. What document have you showing that transaction ? 
Have you the check ? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes, dated April 30, 1958, to local 290, in the amount 
of $5,000. 

The Chairman. "V^Tio is that check from ? 

Mr. Sheridan. From the Teamstei-s International Union. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 72-B. 

( Check referred to was marked "Exhibit No. T2-B'" for reference, 
^and it will be found in the appendix on p. 17688.) 



17396 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OF DAVID FRECHETTE, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFOKD ALLDER— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. You still hold your union position, do you not? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. So Mr. Hoffa at least was not so outraged at your 
suggestion that he requested your resignation or fired you as a Teamster 
official ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. What we find here is that $15,000 came out of the 
international union less than a month after this proposal was made; 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Sheridan. WUhin a 2-month period. 

The Chairman. The letter is written March 18, and this check is 
April, the check for $5,000, is April 11, 

Mr. Sheridan. And the $10,000 check, I believe, is the 15th. 

The Chairman. Well, less than 2 months ; all right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And, of course, during that period of time, there 
was some financing of the union going on, regular financing, from the 
southern conference ? 

Mr. Sheridan. Yes ; that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. But Mr. Hoffa did not take any disciplinary action 
against you, Mr. Frechette ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In fact, he took steps to financially support the 
union and also to financially support this attorney, Mr. Cohen, who was 
the attorney for your union as well as other unions down there of the 
Teamsters ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long have you had Mr. Cohen as the attorney ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You speak of him to handle this as Mr. Hoffa's per- 
sonal representative ; is that right ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does Mr. Cohen handle many things such as this ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Will you make one decent statement about your operations ? 

Mr. Frechette. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Stand aside. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Karpf . 

The Chairman. Mr. Karpf. 

Be sworn. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17397 

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 ? 

JVIr. I'LARPF. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES KARPF 

The Chairman. State your name, please. 

Mr. Karpf. Charles Karpf . 

The Chairman. Where do you live, Mr. Karpf ? 

Mr. Karpf. 424 Surfside Boulevard, Miami Beach, Fla. 

The Chairman. AVhat is your business or occupation ? 

Mr. ICarpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Is that because your business is not legitimate ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel ; do you ? 

Mr. I^RPF. I do. 

The Chairman. Will you waive that card, memorandum, or what- 
ever it is you have in front of you ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Karpf, you were formerly associated with Local 
598 of the Upholsterers Union and Local 296 of the United Textile 
Workers ; is that right ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your criminal record reveals some eight arrests and 
three convictions ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1944, possession of policy slips, $25 fine ; 1951, forgery 
in the second degree, grand larceny in the second degree, and petty 
larceny. You plead to attempted grand larceny in the second degree 
and received 1 to 2 years in the State prison in New York ; is that right ? 

Mr. I^rpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1955, convicted of assault and battery, 30 days 
and a $250 fine ; is that right ? 

Mr. I^rpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Before you became active in this operation, in unions, 
in the Miami area, you were active in New York City; is that right? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to 1950, you derived your income largely from 
bookmaking, but when you were arrested from June of 1944 you gave 
your occupation as organizer for the Dress Drivers and Helpers Union, 
Local 102 of the ILGA\Tr ; isn't that right ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 



17398 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Kenxedy. Your brother, David Karpf, was the manager of 
Local 102, ILG"VVU, up until 1957, when he was convicted of labor 
extortion ? 

Mr. KIaepf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And his activities liave come before the connnittee;: 
in addition to that there is also the fact that lie was one of those whoi 
borrowed money from Irving Mishel and Charles Bernoff; is that 
right? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And another brother was Benny Kaye, a Miami 
gambler who is now deceased ; is that right ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfull}' decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 19-19 you obtained a charter for Local 65 of the 
Novelty Workers, which was affiliated with the International Jewelry 
Workers ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennfjdy. The charter was revoked in 1950, but you kept a 
checkbook, and in December 1950 bought six cameras in New York 
City with a local 65 check ; is that right ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestl}' be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you continued to use the checks of that local 
into 1951 ; did j^ou not ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You continued your union operation. You went 
down to Florida, and when the Automatic Music Guild was formed 
with Mr. Randazzo, they recognized Local 598 of the LTpholsterei"S 
Union, of which you were the chief official; is that right? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was never any intei-est in the employees. You 
were there as an oi-ganizer on behalf of the employers; is that correct? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you offered the employers, the operators, secu- 
ritv: is that right? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then wlien the association voted to recognize local 
598, you put an assessment of 50 cents ])er macliine ])or montli to be 
S]>lit between the association and tlie union, with about 4,000 machines 
in the county giving $1,000 to each per montli ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

]Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us anything about the operation 
there? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17399 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us anything about Mr. Xorman's 
place of business being stinkbombed ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. On Mr, Helow being beaten up? Can you tell us 
about that? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Is he the one that testified he was beaten up ? Is this 
the Karpf that this boy said beat him up ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, that is right. 

The Chairman. Are you ])roud of it? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. How much help did you take along with you? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. All right. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was the fourth man, Herman Wilensky, who assisted 
you in beating this Mr. Helow up, an associate of yours in Brooklyn, 
kno^vn as Herkie ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve mv answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And who has the reputation of that of a killer who 
has 11 arrests and one conviction, in 1952, for grand larceny? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go around and threaten operators that did 
not take their jukeboxes from the members of the association with 
whom you had this collusive deal ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you tell Miss Catherine Gibson that her boxes 
were not accepted by the association, that her place would be stink- 
bombed ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was that threat also made by "Walter George 
Zarzyski, Avho was the owner of the Florida Flamingo Music Co.? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve m3' answer mijiht tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He has a record of seven arrests and five convictions, 
having served more than 8 years of a l-to-20-year sentence for armed 
robbery. 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer miirht tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was one of the operators who formed the new 
association, and Randazzo was one of those behind you; is that right? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve mv answer miaht tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. "\Mien you went into local 296, according to the 
information we have, 296 of the Textile Workers Union, included 
amongst the jukebox repairmen, of which you had about 4, you 



17400 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

organized a major shrimp packing plant, 27 window-cleaning firms, 
and 2 optical-supply plants; is that right? 

Mr. I^j^RPF. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And most of the workers were Puerto Rican and 
Cuban extraction, could not speak English, and had to pay some $3 
to $4 to the union. All they received was the membership card; is 
that right ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And no one ever approached the employees. It 
was just once again this collusive arrangement that you made with 
the employers. 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you also became business manager of the 
Florida Window Cleaners & Maintenance Association, is that right, 
an association of companies doing window cleaning and janitorial 
services in local hotels ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there was some violence with some of the em- 
ployees who refused to join the union, and which, again, was 
operated by the association. Those employees were beaten up ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you ever whip anybody your size ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Call the witness from this morning, the one who 
got beat up. 

Mr. Helow. I am Mr. Helow. 

The Chairman. Wliat do you weigh ? 

Mr. Helow. About 155. 

The Chairman. How much do you weigh ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you know this fellow standing by you? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. The fact is you are ashamed of what you did, 
aren't you ? You can't look him in the face, can you, without show- 
ing your shame ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually, he had three other people with him. 

The Chairman. I know; he had three others helping him. 
_ Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have some letters that I would 
like to have made exhibits, if we may. 

These letters are in connection with Mr. Karpf's activities. They 
oppose his union, saying they want nothing to do with them. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17401 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

The Chairman. Mr. Kaplan, 3^ou may identify the letters and 
comment about them, on the basis of your examination and your 
investigation related thereto. 

Mr. Kaplan. These letters resulted from the attempts of the 
IBEW local that was being pushed out by Karpf 's local to deter- 
mine just who Karpf was and whether he complied with the Florida 
law requiring that he register as a labor representative. 

The Chairman. That is this man on the witness stand — Karpf ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir — Mr. Karpf. 

They first inquired of Mr. Sal Hoffman, who was president of the 
Upholsterers International Union, and as a result of that inquiry, 
Mr. Hoffman wrote to Mr. Meyer Greenfield, who was then president 
of local 598, which Mr. Karpf was purporting to represent in or- 
ganizing the coin machine workers, and Mr. Hoffman stated that — 

When we issued our charter to local 598, it was on the basis that the local 
and its representatives confined their organizing activities to the unorganized 
workers coming within the jurisdiction of the Upholsterers International Union. 

Then he goes on to describe what that jurisdiction is. 
Then he says — 

Now with regard to Charles Karpf, our records do not show a Charles Karpf 
as a member of our union. Neither do our records indicate that a Charles 
Karpf is an oflBcer of local 598. Therefore, you will please see to It that Mr. 
Charles Karpf does not present himself as a representative of the Upholsterers 
International Union, Local 598. 

The Chairman. What is the date of that letter ? 

Mr. Kaplan. This letter was dated March 21, 1955. 

And on that same day 

The Chairman. That letter may be made exhibit 73. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 73" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kaplan. On that same date, Mr. Hoffman wrote to the Miami 
Crime Commission, because they were concerned with what to them 
appeared to be a very obvious shakedown in this industry. Mr. 
Hoffman addressed a letter to Mr. Dan Sullivan, and it states — 

We do not know Mr. Charles Karpf. Our local 598 does not have the author- 
ity to organize nor to accept as members coin machine mechanics. 

They disclaimed them completely. 

The Chairman. That letter may be made exhibit No. 73A. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 73-A" for ref- 
erence and will be found in the appendix on p. 17689.) 

Mr. Kaplan. Immediately therafter Karpf represented himself as 
an organizer for the Miscellaneous Workers of America, Local 296, 
of the United Textile Workers of America, AFL, and gave out this 
card. He had this card printed and gave it out when he called on bars 
and various persons. 

The Chairman. I will present to the witness a card of the Miscel- 
laneous Workers of America, UTWA-AFL, Charles Karpf, organ- 
izer. I present this card to you and ask you if that is your card of 
identification that you used in connection with your union activities 
at one time. 

( The document was handed to the witness. ) 

36751— 69— pt 48 18 



17402 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES KARPF— Resumed 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Are you ashamed of it? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did you ever represent legitimately any union in 
your life ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Were you an imposter? Did you just represent 
yourself as being an officer or as authorized by a union to act as its 
organizer or representative when in truth and fact you were not so 
authorized ? 

Mr. IvARPF. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we also had the testimony of Ruth 
Brougher in connection with Mr. Karpf, as well as Mr. Indellicato. 

The Chairman. This card may be made exhibit No. 73-B. 

(Card referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 73-B" for reference 
and will be found in the appendix on p. 17690.) 

Mr. Kennedy. It was that, according to Ruth Brougher, the three 
of them received this payment and that Joe Indellicato received 
$2,500 of the split. 

Do you know Ruth Brougher? 

Mr. Karpf. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is her testimony in connection with your activities 
correct ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respeotfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the reason, of course, that you could not regis- 
ter in the State of Florida was because of the fact that you had had 
t\iis felony conviction ; is that right ? 

^ Mr. Iv^vRPF. I respeotfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that was handled by having Mr. Randazzo reg- 
ister rather than you ? 

Mr. Karpf. I respeotfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know Barney Baker? 

Mr. Karpf. I respeotfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. INIr. Chairman, this letter from the State of Florida 
shows that he did not receive a license. Mr. Kaplan secured it. 

The Chairman. Mr. Kaplan, I hand you a letter and ask you to 
identify it. 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. This is a letter dated May 11, 1955, and is 
in response to an inquiry to the Secretary of State of the State of 
Florida. It is addressed to the Electricians Union, No. 239, which 
isthelBEW. It states: 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17403 

Dear Miss Matthews : As requested iu j'our telephone call to the office this 
day, we have checked our records relative to the status of Charles Karpf and 
do not find where he has been issued a business agent's license for the Uphol- 
sterers International Union. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 73-C. 

(Letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 73-C" for reference 
and will be found in the appendix on p. 17691.) 

Mr. ICennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Tlie committee will now stand adjourned, subject 
to the call of the Chair. The next public hearings will likely- be 
around the 8th, 9th or 10th of April. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of adjournment: 
Senators McClellan and Church.) 

(Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m. the select committee adjourned, to re- 
convene at the caU of the Chair.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



TUESDAY, APBUi 7, 1959 

U.S. Senate, Select CoMMnrEE on Improper AcnvrriES 

IN THE Labor or Management Field, 

Washington^ D.G. 

The select committee met at 2 p.m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 
44, agreed to February 2, 1959, in the caucus room. Senate Office 
Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present : Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Senator 
Sam J. Ervin, Jr., Democrat, North Carolina. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel, Walter R. Ma;^, 
assistant counsel; John P. Constandy, assistant counsel; Arthur G. 
Kaplan, assistant counsel; Sherman S. Willse, investigator; Ruth 
Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session were Senators McClellan and Ervin.) 

The Chairman. The Chair will make a brief statement. 

The committee enters today into the final phases of its scheduled 
study of racket infiltration and control in the coin-operated machine 
business. 

The hearings held by the committee thus far on coin machines 
have demonstrated that underworld figures have in a number of in- 
stances successfully infiltrated both the management and the union 
end of this lucrative business; we have found racketeers in manage- 
ment associations, in jukebox companies, in record-distributing com- 
panies, and in operatmg unions in this field. The hearings on New 
York, Chicago, Miami, and other cities have presented a variety of 
combinations used to get and exercise control over the coin-machine 
industry. 

The Detroit phase, however, that we are now beginning, we expect 
will serve to highlight a combination of the factors previously un- 
covered during our hearings. The struggle for control of the Detroit 
coin-machine industry extends over a long period of time. The com- 
mittee intends to review the factors which have contributed to the 
existing racket control of certain segments of both management and 
labor in this industry in the Detroit area. 

Because the racketeers have been so successful in the Detroit area, 
the committee will trace the methods by which they achieved in that 
city their measure of control. In Detroit, as in other cities, the stage 
was originally set by a group of employers who wanted to bar the 

17405 



17406 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

competition of outsiders. This they found could most effectively be 
done by collusion with a union. The racketeers, faced with this 
challenge, the proof will show, successfully infiltrated and assumed 
control of major portions of both ends of the business. 

Mr. Hoffa, his assistant, Mr. Bufalino, and certain key figures in 
the Detroit underworld, it appears, play key roles in the situation 
in Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy, you may call the first witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. The first witness is Mr. Joseph Brilliant. 

The Chairman. Will you be sworn, please ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select conmiittee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH BRILLIANT 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Brilliant. My name is Joseph Brilliant. I operate the Bril- 
liant Music Co. of the City of Detroit. 

The Chairman. Wliatisthat? 

Mr. Brilliant. Brilliant Music Co. of the City of Detroit. 

The Chairman. Do you have counsel ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ? You do not desire counsel ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, prior to Mr. Brilliant's testimony, 
we have a number of possible exhibits here. One is a tracing of the 
Detroit coin-machine industry as to its union and to its association, 
which might be helpful to the committee in following the testimony, 
and also have here the names of people whose names will arise during 
the course of the hearings. 

The Chairman. The Chair will permit these to be printed in the 
record at this point, solely as a basis of information, and not as 
evidence. 
, (The information referred to follows:) 

Detkoit Coin Machine Indvstuy 
in twenty years : ten employer-sponsored unions 

From March 1939 to 1942 : Local Industrial Union 737, United Electrical Radio 
and Machine Workers of America, CIO (Roy Small). Union sponsored by the 
Michigan Music Operators Association, Inc., which name was amended to 
United Music Operators of Michigan (membership :\m\ purposes remain un- 
changed). Union represented at Michigan CIO Convention, 1942, by Roy Small. 
Charter revoked by International. 

From 1942 to 194.S : American Federation of Coin Machine Operators, Inde- 
pendent. (Terminated in 1043.) 

From March 1043 to the fall of 1943 : Local 361, CIO, United Retail, Wholesale 
and Department Store Employees Union (Neil Holland). Union charter was 
revoked by the International. 

From .Tune 1043 to December 1944: Federal Local No. 22321, United Coin 
Machine Workers, AFL (Terminated in 1044) (Neil Holland and Sam LaVigne). 
Was dissolved January 191.^>. Union commenced operations from office of 
Association. Union business agents on payroll of Association. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17407 

From January 1945 to the spring of 1947 : Federal Local No. 23814, Music 
Maintenance Workers, AFL (Eugene C. James). Sponsored by the Michigan 
Automatic Phonograph Owners Association, Inc. (MAPOA). Membership and 
purposes unchanged from that of predeces.sor. Union charter revoked through 
Detroit Federation of Labor ; Jimmy James puts Hoffa's wife and Brennan'a 
wife on union payroll. 

June 1947 to date : Local 985, International Brotherhood of Teamsters (Eugene 
C. James and William Bufaliuo). Charter application fraudulent. Charter 
obtained from International by James Hoffa. 

United Music Operators of Michiga.n (reactivated), 1953 to 1958 (UMO). 

June 1950 to the fall of 1950 : National Phonograph Machine Workers of 
America (independent). (Edward Duck.) Sponsored by Muisc Systems, Inc. 
A company union. 

April 19.'>3 to date: Local 1, United Electronic Workers of America (independ- 
ent). (Theodore Gaylor.) Sponsored by Jump Music Co., et al. A company 
union. 

September 1953 to date: Michigan United Coin Workers Union (independent). 
Sponsored by Bush Music Co. A company union. 

1953 to date : Automatic Coin Machine Workers Union. Sponsored by the 
Gaycoin Music Co. A company union. 

Names of Interest, Detroit 

Ayres, Warren : Sales manager, Vendo Cigarette Co., Detroit. 

Balenseifer, Martin: Franchisee! Wurlitzer distributor, Detroit (1943-46). 

Brennan, Owen : President of IBT Local 337. 

Bilvin Distributing Co. : Wurlitzer distributor, January 1946 to June 1947. 

Blumetti, James : Youngstown, Ohio, ex-convict. One of Nickelodeon Record 
Corporation of America trustees. Also former secretary of local 410, IBT. 

Bommarito, Joe, also known as SCARFACE : A leading Detroit mobster. 

Brilliant, Joseph : Former jukebox operator and distributor, and past president 
of the Michigan Automatic Phonograph Owners Association, Detroit. 

Bufalino, Russell : Attended Apalachin meeting. Cousin of William Bufalino. 

Bufalino, William : President of Local 985, Teamsters, Detroit, and former 
president of Bilvin Distributing Co. 

Bushkin, Jack "Babe" : Labor consultant and owner of Market Vending Co. 

Calland, Frank (deceased) : Jukebox union oflacial in New York City up to 
1953. Also official of Nickelodeon Record Corp. 

Cammarata, Frank : Deported Midwest mobster. 

Ciarmitaro, Sam, also known as Black Shirt Sam : Juke box operator. 

Clason, Roy : Former manager of MAPOA. 

Coleman, Morris : Business agent for Local 337, Teamsters, Detroit, and vend- 
ing machine operator. 

Coppola, Francisco : Large-scale narcotic dealer. Arrested in Italy. 

Corrado, Domenic : Owner of T.D. Vending Co., Detroit. 

Corrado, Pete : Known numbers racketeer. 

De Schryver, Victor : Former jukebox operator in Detroit. 

Dilberto, Carlo: Convicted gambler who loaned money for start of Bilvin 
Distributing Co. 

Ditta, Nick : Underworld figure who loaned money for start of Bilvin Dis- 
tributing Co. 

Dixon, Leo : Jukebox distributor and operator in Ohio area. 

Duck, Edward : Former head of an independent jukebox local in Detroit. 

Gallo, Arthur : Operator of G. & G. Vending Co. 

Goldman, Morris : Detroit jukebox operator and former president of the 
Michigan Automatic Phonograph Owners Association. 

Graham, Harry : Former Wurlitzer distributor in Detroit. 
Guensche, Hugo : Former employee of Joseph Brilliant, and a jukebox 
serviceman. 

Hammargren, Milton J. "Mike" : Former Wurlitzer vice president in charge of 
sales. 

Holland, Neil : Former union leader in Detroit. 

Hopkins, Carl : Vending machine operator in Detroit. 

James, Eugene "Jimmy" : Former president of local 985, Teamsters, Detroit, 
and oflScial of Laundry Workers International Union. 

Jay-Cee Music: Jukebox operation of Pete Tocco and RafEaele Quasarano. 

Johnson, Siegfried : Bar owner in Detroit. 



17408 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Langley, James: Secretary-treasurer of local 985, Teamsters, Detroit, and 
brother-in-law of Hoffa. 

La Vigne, Sam : Representative of Detroit Bartenders Union, local 562, AFL. 

Lieavoli, Peter : Convicted Detroit gangster. 

Maltese, Domenic, J. : Partner in Arizona Music Co. 

Market Vending Company : Cigarette vending company owned by Jack "Bake" 
Bushkin. 

Marquette Distributing Co. : Aieron jukebox distributor, Detroit. 

Marston Distributing Co. : AMI distributor in Detroit. 

Meli, Vincent A. : Jukebox operator in Detroit. 

Meltone Music Company : Jukebox company operated by Vincent Meli. 

Michigan Automatic Phonograph Owners Association (MAPOA) : Formed by 
operators of jukeboxes in Detroit in 1944. 

Minaudo, Nono : Deported hoodlum. Partner in Arizona Music Co. 

Morgan, Charles "Chuck" : A representative since 1952 of various jukebox and 
cigarette machine operator associations. 

Nemesh, Joseph : President of Music Systems Inc., Seeburg distributorship in 
northern Ohio and Detroit area. 

Nickelodeon Record Co. : Company formed to produce and sell phonograph 
records. Now defunct. 

Passanante, James : Former jukebox operator and partner of Angelo Meli. 

Presser, William : Former president of Jukebox Local 410, Teamsters, Cleve- 
land, and presently oflBcial of various units within Teamsters Union. 

Priziola, John, also known as "Poppa John" : Former director of Bilvin Dis- 
tributing Co. Has lengthy arrest record. 

Prujanski, Herman "Turk" : West coast representative of Nickelodeon 
Record Co. 

Salupo, Anthony "Babe" (deceased) : Officer of local 442-D, IBEW, CincinnatL 

Small, Roy : Former jukebox operator, labor leader, and association official in 
Detroit. 

Tocco, Sam J. : One of the officers of Bilvin Distributing Co. 

United Music Operators Association : Detroit association of jukebox operators. 

Watts, Cecil : Business agent for local 337, Teamsters, Detroit. 

Welsh, Lawrence "Johnny" : Financial and recording secretary of local 985, 
Teamsters, Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Brilliant, you are in the music and game 
machine business in Detroit, from approximately 1930 to early 1958 ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were in the capacity of a distributor and as 
an operator at various times during that period ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That period of some 28 years ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. During a portion of that time, you were president of 
the Operators Association in Detroit ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. As president of the Operators Association during the 
early 1940's, were you engaged in an effort to fight some of the gangster 
and racketeering element? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That tried to obtain control of both the union and 
the association ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, could you explain just briefly what the diffi- 
culty or problem is as far as the juke box business itself is concerned, 
the distribution of the juke boxes and the pressures that are put on a 
jukebox operator ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That covers quite a bit. I don't know which phase 
of it you want me to explain. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17409 

Mr. Kennedy. If you could explain the operations of the so-called 
"whip" companies, what the pressures are from the location owner and 
what the pressures are from the distributor, as a general proposition. 

Mr. Brilliant. Well 

Mr. Kennedy. Specifically as far as the early 1940's. 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know what you are getting at, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were having difficulty in the early 1940's, were 
you not ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And which ultimately led to your going down into 
Ohio to try to get some help and assistance ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just explain what the difficulties were that you were 
having at that time. 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, Wurlitzer at that time came out with a story 
that they were going to have exclusive operators, and the operators 
in the Detroit area, in order to protect themselves, went to Cleveland 
to find out the workings of an association and how it should function, 
and thereby protecting ourselves against that. 

Mr. Kennedy. What does it mean when they say they were going to 
have exclusive operators ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Meaning that they would sell to certain individuals 
and sign a contract with them, and thereby not selling to anybody else. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the danger as far as the rest of you were 
concerned in that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. We wouldn't be able to get any new machines, and 
thereby protecting ourselves and our business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was Wurlitzer at that time ahead of other com- 
panies ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason were they abead of these others? 

Mr. Brilliant. They were first with the machines, and all of the 
rest of them were lagging behind, 6 months to a year. 

Mr. Kennedy. How had they been able to do that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know. 

The Chairman. You mean they were able to deliver a machine 
promptly, if you purchased it ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

The Chairman. And the others would have to take an order and 
deliver it some six months later ? 

Mr. Brilliant. They weren't ready. 

The Chairman. It would take some time before they could deliver ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they said that they were going to just give the 
right to distribute these machines, just to certain companies; is that 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. To certain operators ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. In order to protect yourselves you decided you would 
go down and meet with some of these people in Ohio ? 

Mr. Brilliant. We heard of a successful organization and we 
wanted to follow the pattern. 



17410 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN TBDE3 LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, "successful" in what way ? 

Mr. Brilliant. In order to protect the operators, whereby one don't 
jump the other and so forth and so on. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you go down to Ohio to visit ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Bill Presser and Leo Dixon. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliowashe? 

Mr. Brilliant. He was president of the association in Cleveland. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was Mr. Presser ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He was with a union. He was running the union 
for the association at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was an Electrical Workers Union; is that 
right? 

Mr. Brilliant. I think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is No. 442-H, I believe, of the United Electrical 
Workers. 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know about that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of the International Brotherhood of Electrical 
Workers. 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand that this arrangement down in 
Ohio had been an arrangement made between the union, personified 
by Mr. Presser, and the Association, personified by Mr. Dixon ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did they explain to you how it operated when 
you were down there ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you went back to Detroit and did they 
make several visits to Detroit after that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. They did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Dixon and Mr. Presser ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did they explain to you at that time as to how 
it could operate, and what you would have to do ? 

Mr. Brilliant. We got the bylaws, and the rules and regulations 
and how to function in an association, and set it up accordingly. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the method of operation dealt with one com- 
pany jumping another company ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That was illegal, and one company shouldn't jump 
the other company as long as they were members of the same 
association. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the union going to do in connection with 
this, and were they going to be sort of the enforcement arm ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that the way they had operated in Ohio ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And had been so effective ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it generally known that in Ohio, with the arrange- 
ment with Mr. Presser, that that is the most effective area as far as 
preventing jumping of locations, and the union acting as this enforce- 
ment arm ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Even to this day ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17411 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it keeps competition between the various op- 
erators down to a minimum ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, when Mr. Presser was up in Oliio, did he say 
that this advice as to how to set up this association, a union arrange- 
ment, would cost some money ? 

Mr. Brilliant. It would cost us $5,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was $5,000 then raised for Mr. Presser at that 
time ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Who was to get that money ? 

Mr, Brilliant. As far as I knew, to the best of my knowledge, 
Bill Presser. 

The Chairman. Just a personal contribution to him ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Pardon me? ' 

The Chairman. That was a payment to him personally ? 

Mr. Briliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. For his counsel and advice ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Just as you would employ a lawyer or a doctor 
to advise you ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. So it is a consultation fee of how to set up one of 
these organizations? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

The Chairman. And what was his position at the time ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He was president of that union in Cleveland, what- 
ever the name was. 

The Chairman. He was president of a union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. A local union ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Ch^\irman. All right. 

Mr. I^nnedy. Now, who contributed to making up the $5,000 for 
Mr. Presser? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, the entire group. 

Mr. Kennedy. This group of operators ? 

Mr. Brilliant. In Detroit, yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You yourself contributed ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And to whom was the money given ? 

Mr. Brilliant. To the best of my recollection, to Victor De- 
Schryver. 

Mr. Kennedy. D-e S-c-h-r-y-v-e-r? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat was his position at that time ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He became president of the first association. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you understood that he in turn passed the 
money on to Mr. Presser ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You understand that Mr. Presser had to, in turn, 
pass any of this money on to any other individual ? 



17412 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kjjnnedy. There wasn't any discussion about that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Elennedy. Who was it that was to be made head of the union 
at that time ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Jimmy James. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did Jimmy James come from ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What year is this that we are talking about? 

Mr. Brilliant. 1945. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1945 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know who brought Mr. Jimmy James into 
the group ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir ; I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. He just was introduced as the one to head up the 
union ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. He was brought in from the outside ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. He was a Detroit man. 

The Chairman. He was a Detroit man ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Who selected him ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't remember, sir. I just don't remember. 

The Chairman. Did your group select him ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were the employees consulted at all about going 
into the union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. However, they were placed into the union at that 
time? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you paid the dues of your employees ? 

Mr, Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And as far as you know, the rest of the association 
members followed the same procedure ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that became local No. 23814 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I think so. 

Mr. Kjinnedy. That was a federal charter ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I guess so. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did this arrangement operate reasonably success- 
fully? ^ 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had no difficulties, at least initially ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then within a year or so did you begin to have 
some difficulties? 

Mr. Brilliant. No. We had no difficulties until approximately 
1946. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you pleased with the service that Mr. James 
was performing? 

Mr. Brilliant. Very much. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17413 

IVfr. Kennedy. Did you make some presents to him ? 
Mr. Brilliant. Yes, we did. 
Mr. Kennedy. What did you give him ? 
Mr. Brilliant. The association rendered him a Cadillac. 
Mr. I^JENNEDY. That was Christmas of 1945 ? 
Mi\ Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Wlio was James representing, the union or the 
association ? 
Mr. Brilliant. Both. 
The Chairman. No conflict of interest ? 
Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Served the welfare of both, for the union to have 
as their representative the representative of management ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes. We thought he was very good and did a fine 
job. 

The Chairman. It was working out well for management, wasn't 
it? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 
The Chairjnlan. All right. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Did he also get a piece of the business as well as a 
Cadillac car ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. When AMI became — when machines 
were becoming available, or we heard they were, I understand h© 
went to AMI and helped Mr. Marston get the distribution of AMI, 
and thereby getting 20 percent of the distribution. 

Mr. KJEXNEDY. So he got 20 percent of the Marston Distributing 
Co.? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right, sir. 
Mr. Kennedy. Which was the distributor for AMI ? 
Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

The Chairman. What did the people who do the work get out of 
it? 
Mr. Brilliant. They were getting a fair salary. 
The Chairman. They were gettmg that anyhow, weren't they? 
Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. So they got no additional benefit by reason of 
having their name put in the union ? 
Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

The Chairman. This was a deal worked out solely to benefit, pri- 
marily to benefit, management, the operators and this miion official; 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, at the same time it helped the fellows be- 
cause it kept their jobs and we kept our locations. 

The Chairman. So it only benefited them by reason of the fact 
that they kept their jobs? 
Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You mean as long as business was good for the op- 
erators, they would have someplace to work ? 
Mr. Brilliant. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you miderstand that he also got an interest in 
the Marquette Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir ; not the Marquette. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he get any interest in any other company other 
than Marston ? 



17414 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Brilliant. Aireon. 

Mr. Kennedy. A-i-r-e-o-n? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is ri^ht. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that the name of the company or is that the 
name of the jukebox ? 

Mr. Brilliant, That is the name of the jukebox ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The company that had the distributorship of the 
Aireon jukebox also gave him an interest ; is that right? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he able to keep the industry on a fairly stable 
plane while he was operating the union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, he was. 

Mr. Kennedy. So everybody was extremely grateful and pleased 
with Mr. Jimmy James ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, they were. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So this went along for 1945 and 1946. Were you 
operators financing the operation of the union during this period of 
time? 

Mr. Brilliant. I think so. 

Mr. Kjennedy. Whenever he would need money in order to run the 
union or to provide pickets or whatever it might be, the operators 
would provide that money ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know if he ever had to go to any outside 
source for money ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir ; not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Kennedy. Any time that he needed any extra money, he could 
always come to your group ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Was this money in addition to the dues you paid 
for your members ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. Dues was raised whenever there was any 
more money needed. The dues were raised. 

The Chairman. I mean, you paid so much in dues per month for 
each of your employees, did you ? 
> Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And these would be extra assessments or extra 
dues? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir ; that is right. 

The Chairman. He would decide he needed more money in addi- 
tion to what the regular dues were providing ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And he would assess the operators an additional 
amount ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, it never happened, but that is the way it 
worked. 

The Chairman. I don't see how it could work if it never happened. 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, there was no assessments at that time. 

The Chairman. At that particular time. Did he give you assess- 
ments later ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Then it did happen some time later ? 

Mr. Brilliant. All right. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17415 

The Chairman. Is that right ? 
Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were assessments for labels, were there ? You 
had to pay for labels ? 
Mr. Briixiant. Labels ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that would help jfinance the union, would it not? 
Mr. Brilijant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was going on during this period of time ? 
Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. The reason that I wanted to bring that out and 
develop it, Mr. Chairman, is this : 

Well, did you know if Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Brennan had anything to 
do with the operations of this local ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You never heard of that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Mr. Hoffa's testimony to the committee, Mr. Chair- 
man, was that his wife and Mr. Brennan's wife were placed on the 
payroll of this union in their maiden names at $100 a week in order 
to repay a debt of some $2,000, which Mr. Brennan and Mr. Hoffa 
had loaned to Mr. James so that Mr. James could set up and operate 
this union. 

They remained on the payroll until they received a total of about 
$6,000, even though they only had loaned some $2,000 or $3,000. But 
Mr. Hoffa explained that by just saying that it was a mixup. 

We are going to go into that matter more extensively later on 
during the hearings. The importance of this witness' testimony is 
that it was the operators who were financing this union ; that when- 
ever there was any need of any money, the operators were putting the 
money up. At least according to the testimony of these individuals 
who made the arrangements originally with Mr. Presser, there was 
no need for any extra money at that time, or need for Mr. James to 
turn to any outside source. 

You were going along quite nicely for 1945 and 1946. Was there 
an occurrence then in 1946 in connection with the Wurlitzer Co. that 
caused some consternation and trouble? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, there was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us what happened then ? 

Mr. Brilliant. At that time, a fellow by the name of Harry Gra- 
ham went down to the Wurlitzer Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that G-r-a-h-a-m ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes. At that time a fellow by the name of Martin 
Balenseif er had the Wurlitzer distribution. 

Mr. Kennedy. Balenseif er of St. Louis, Mo. ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Right. 

I don't know how Graham went about it, but Graham went ahead 
and got the distribution for Bill Buf alino and Tocco, and quite a few 
other fellows that were supposed to be in it. Who they are 

Mr. Kennedy. So Harry Graham was tlie one who arranged to 
have the distributorship taken away from Balenseifer and given to 
a company that was run by Tocco and Buf alino ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Sam Tocco and Bill Buf alino ? 



17416 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. He made his arrangements with Mike Hammergren, 
the Wurlitzer vice president ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know how he was able to make those 
arrangements ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir ; I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if any money had to be paid at that 
time? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir ; I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know who was behind the operations of 
Buf alino and Sam Tocco ? 

Mr. Brilliant. By hearsay ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was behind it ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Angelo Meli, Nick Corrado. 

Mr. Kennedy. These were some of the leading underworld figures 
in the city of Detroit ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. I^nnedy. When you say "hearsay," was this fairly well under- 
stood in the trade, that Mr. Meli and the Corrados were behind this 
company ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KIennedy. It was accepted that Angelo Meli was the chief 
figure behind it? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you know about Mr. Harry Graham, 
who made this arrangement ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Mr. Graham was general manager of Marquette 
Music Co. for a good many years and operated or sold Wurlitzer for — 
I don't know — 10 or 15 years prior to the war and then there was no 
more machines to sell, naturally. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. He was very friendly with Mr. Hammergren, was 
he not? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he was a major figure in this industry at that 
time? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have had some testimony about 
Angelo Meli's connection with this company, and we will have con- 
siderably more testimony before the end of the hearing. 

The name of that company was the Bilvin ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Bilvin Distributing Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. B-i-1-v-i-n Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have difficulty and trouble with this com- 
pany that you understood was backed by the underworld in the city 
of Detroit ? 

Mr. Brhxiant. Yes, we did. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVliat kind of trouble ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, they started putting out routes, not in their 
own name, but through diii'erent companies, like the T-D Music, Jay- 
Cee Music, Meltone Music. T-D Music Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then Jay-Cee Music Co. ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17417 

Mr. Brilllant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Sam's Music Co. ? 

Mr. Briluant. That is correct. 

IMr. Kennedy. And the Mel tone Music Co. ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. They would distribute their jukeboxes through these 
three or four different companies ? 

Mr. Brilliant. They sold them to them and they put them out. 

Mr. Kennedy. They gave an exclusive to these companies? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the problem and difficulty with that? 
Were tliese companies also operated by gangster figures in Detroit ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, they are all relatives. 

Mr. Ivennedy. All relatives of these gangsters or other gangsters ; is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. For instance, T-D Music Co., who ran and operated 
that company ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Sparky Corrado. 

Mr. Kjennedy. Who are the Corrados ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Sparky Corrado is a nephew of Pete Corrado. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he is a major underworld figure in the city of 
Detroit? 

Mr. Brilliant. Was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He died ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Last year? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You mentioned Jay-Cee Music Co. Who ran that 
company ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Pete Tocco. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who is Pete Tocco ? 

Mr. Brilliant, A relative of the other Tocco. 

Mr, Kennedy. Black Bill Tocco ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. Also a major underworld figure? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You mentioned Meltone Music. Who ran that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. It was run by Vince Meli, a nephew of Angelo Meli. 

Mr, Kennedy. How about Sam's Music Co. ? 

Mr. Brilliant. A former employee of Angelo Meli's in another 
company. I don't think he was related to him at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. But these were the companies that Bilvin used to 
distribute these jukeboxes throughout the city ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kjennedy. Were they taking locations away ? 

Mr. Briltjant. Very easily. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did it take a lot of sales when these companies would 
call up and try to get a machine placed ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. There was no effort on their part. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. All that was necessary was what ? 

36751 — 59 — pt. 48 14 



17418 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Brilliant. Just deliver a machine. 

Mr. Kennedy. They would kick the other machine out and put these 
machines in ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kjennedy. Why do you think they did that at these locations? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know wh}^. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is your best judgment ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, No. 1, they received a brandnew machine, 
and we all had old machines, because there was no new machines out 
for 4 or 5 years. 

No. 2, it seems that they could walk into a fellow and say, "We are 
bringing in a new machine," and that was it. There was no way in 
the world we could hold it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why do you think they were able to accomplish this 
with such ease, other than the fact that it was a different kind of 
machine? 

Mr. Brilliant. I just think that the saloonkeepers wanted to do 
them a favor to be on their side. 

The Chairman. Doing himself a favor rather than doing them a 
favor, wasn't he ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Both. Let's say it was both ways. 

Mr. Kennedy. These are well known people in the city of Detroit ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think that that played a major role ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many locations do you think they were able to 
take away ? 

Mr. Brilliant. About a thousand, as a rough guess. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is a thousand out of how many ? 

Mr. Brilliant. 4,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they were able to take about 25 percent of all the 
locations in the city of Detroit ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. If they could take them that easily, why didn't 
they take all of them ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know, sir. Maybe they ran out of money. 

The Chairman. They would take them as fast as they could get 
machines, I guess. 

Mr. Brilliant. They did. 

Mr. Kennedy. They were taking just the cream locations, were they 
not? 

Mr. Brilliant. They sure were. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just the best ones ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What year was this that this was going on ? 

Mr. Brilliant. 194G and 1947. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there some violence in the city of Detroit? 

Mr. Brilliant. Very little. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there a grand jury investigation of the situation 
at that time? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they investigate the fact that you might have 
paid $2,000 to Mr. Jimmy James ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17419 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the situation in connection with the 
$2,000? 

Mr. Brilliant. Mr. James came to us and said they were forming 
another union to try to combat us. We didn't know who they were. 
The board of directors of the association voted to give him $2,000. 

Mr, IvENNEDY. This was the opposition, this other group, the Bilvin 
group ? 

Mr. Brilliant. We felt so. 

Mr. Kennedy. They w ere going to form a union of their own ? 

Mr. Brilllvnt. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And James said that he needed $2,000 in order to 
combat that ? 

INIr. Brilliant. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you arrange to pay him the $2,000 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. We collected $2,000. They gave it to me. 
I got sick and was home for 4 days. Then they took me down to the 
grand jui-y and before I had the chance to give James the $2,000 that 
■was brought out. So I took the $2,000 and gave it back to the 
association. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you never gave him $2,000 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The money had been collected but you never paid it 
to him because the grand jury investigation intervened ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the grand jury investigation lead to the revoca- 
tion of the charter of James' local, No. 23814 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then there was no union in Detroit? He lost his 
charter and what happened ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He received a Teamster charter within a 30- or 60- 
day period. 

Mr. Kennedy. Immediately after his charter had been revoked for 
these activities with 23814 he received a new charter with the Team- 
sters ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. That was local 985 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is, of the Teamsters. 

The Chairman. The first charter had been with the Electrical 
Workers ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. This charter, 23814, was a federal charter ? 

Mr. Brilllvnt. It was an independent, whatever that is. 

Mr. Ejennedy. Independent under the AFL ? 

The Chairman. That is making it three different unions or charters 
that he is operating under. 

Mr. Brilliant. One at a time. 

The Chairman. At different times ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I see. 

Mr. Kennedy. During this period of time, when your union was 
out of existence, or 23814 was out of existence, were you paying dues? 



17420 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you pay the dues to ? 

Mr. Brilliant. The same office. 

Mr. Kennedy. Even though there was no union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. We didn't even know that the charter was revoked 
before there was another charter in existence. 

Mr. Kennedy. So as far as you were concerned, the union just 
continued to exist ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it changed from 23814 to 985 of the Teamsters? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you continued to pay your dues ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he keep the same office — Jimmy James ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he continue to run the union himself ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was another individual brought in ? 

Mr. Brilliant. A little while later. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I would say in the latter part of 1947. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Bill Buf alino. 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually, wasn't it in the summer of 1947 that 
Mr. Buf alino was brought in, immediately after the union got going ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know exactly the date, but it was some time 
in 1947. 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe that the records would show it was July or 
August, July of 1947. 

Mr. Brilliant. It could be. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is when Mr. Buf alino came in? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir ; it could be. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, this is the same Bufalino who was the one 
causing all of the difficulty with the Bilvin Co.; is that right? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the Bilvin Co. go out of existence ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Bilvin Distributing Co. went out of existence and 
Mr. Bufalino, who had helped the Bilvin Distributing Co., became 
a Teamster Union official ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know how that came about ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now here is somebody that you and Mr. James 
had been fighting, during this period of time, a company which was 
operated by the underworld. Mr. James has his charter lifted and he 
immediately gets a charter from the Teamsters Union, and then Mr. 
Bufalino becomes a Teamster Union official. Did this surprise you ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Very much so. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was your reaction ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I was very angry, but there was nothing I could 
do about it, and when I talked to Jimmy, he told me that he had a 
better proposition in Chicago. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17421 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Jimmy James ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlien did you talk to him about it ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I talked to him on the phone a couple of times. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you try to get an explanation as to how Buf alino 
got in the union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I sure did, but I had no results on it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Buf alino then proceed to run the union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat happened to Mr. James ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He went to Florida for a while, and then he was in 
Chicago. He came in periodically, though. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he was still nominally president of the union? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually he remained, and was he actively running 
the union at all after 1947 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the records show he remained on the 
payroll of local 985 in 1947, 1948, and 1949, and I believe into Novem- 
ber of 1950. 

And do you know why they were continuing to pay him if he was 
a union official in Chicago, and had been down in Florida? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir, I understand he was getting $100 a week, 
and I don't know how long he got it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if that was part of the deal, that he 
would get out of the union but continue to draw his salary ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know that. 

Mr. Kennedy. And turn it over to Mr. Buf alino ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know that. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Did you meet or discuss this at all with Mr. Hoffa? 

Mr. Brilliant. We had one meeting. Mr. Hoffa brought us into 
his office and there were seven or eight members, and Mr. Bufalino, 
and myself. He told Mr. Bufalino to run a clean union and not to 
favor anybody. We thought it was a very nice speech. 

The Chairman. "What is that ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Pardon me. 

The Chairman. You thought what ? 

Mr. Brilliant. It was a very nice speech. 

The Chairman. A nice speech ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chair]vian. Okay. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Hoffa tell you Mr. Bufalino would be run- 
ning the union from then on ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He just said that Bill was running the union, and 
he would give everybody an equal fair shake. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ask Mr. Hoffa why he selected Mr. Bufalino 
to run the union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir, I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell Mr. Bufalino that he didn't want him to 
favor his relatives ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He sure did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were very impressed with Mr. Hoffa at 
that time ? 



17422 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir, we were. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Buf alino favor his relatives ? 

Mr. Brilliant. He sure did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you disillusioned ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Not a bit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you disillusioned with what you had heard 
fromMr.Hoffa? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir, I was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us, or relate to the committee, what 
happened then, after the meeting you had with Mr. Hoffa, and Mr. 
Buf alino, and Mr. Buf alino was told not to favor any group, including 
his relatives, and you left the meeting ? Did you have difficulty with 
Mr. Buf alino shortly afterwards? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes. After that the Jay-Cee and the T-D Music 
and Meltone Music kept on jumping locations here and there, and 
nothing was done about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is the same group ? 

Mr. Brilliant. The sam.e group. 

The Chairman. That was the company that he had formerly 
headed ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Pardon me ? 

The Chairman. Is that the company that he had formerly headed 
himself ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. In other words, after he got in 

Mr. Brilliant. Oh, no, he was formerly head of the distributing 
company, and not the operating company. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which set these companies up ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You knew he had come in from this company to 
head the union and then he began to favor some other company rather 
than you folks ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And was Mr. Buf alino giving service to his relatives 
and not giving service to you ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When I talk about "service," I mean that he would 
prevent the jumping of locations by your group, but he would not 
stop the jumping of locations by this other group ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. That group was his relatives and friends; is that 
right? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And which were controlled or backed by this 
gangster element ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So how long did you go along like this ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, I got out of it at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was this ? 

Mr. Brh.liant. It was about the early part of 1948. 

Mr. Kennedy. You got out of the union ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right, and I stayed out of the union and the 
association for 2 years. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17423 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliat would be up to about 1950 ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go back into the association then ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir, I went back into the union and the asso- 
ciation, both. 

Mr. Kennedy. Vincent Meli and Corrado and the other group, 
were they in the association ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they stay in the association during this whole 
period of time ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you quit the union also ? 

Mr. Brtlllant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was this? 

Mr. Brtlllant. About the same time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then you rejoined the union, did you not ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. KiiNNEDY. Why did you rejoin ? 

Mr. Brilliant. They were harassing my locations, and bothering 
them, and walking in and offering them different considerations, and 
better machines, and so forth and so on, until it became unbearable. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was the union any different when it was being run 
by Mr. Buf alino than when it was being run by Mr. James, except 
that Mr. Bufalino was favoring certain people, as far as the union 
operating as an enforcement arm for certain groups ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Well, with Mr. James, there was no favoritism 
shown and no one operator was better than another. When Mr. 
Bufalino came came in, there was a different picture entirely. His 
friends and relatives, or whatever they were, were favored, and the 
rest of them just ignored. 

Mr. Kennedy. But the union still was not being run for the benefit 
of the employees. It was being run for the benefit of the operators 
or the employers ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kjinnedy. That was true not only under Mr. James but true 
under Mr. Bufalino ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And your complaint and objection to that was that 
it was not being run for the benefit of all but being iim for the benefit 
of just a few ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And these few happened to be relatives or close 
friends of Mr. Bufalino who were the underworld element in the city 
of Detroit? 

Mr. Brilllant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, this continued right up until what period of 
time ? Actually they forced you out of business ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you got out in 1958 because you felt you could 
no longer fight this ? 

Mr. Brilll\nt. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that right? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 



17424 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Gradually, each week or each month. 

Mr. Brilliant. Now, they didn't go out full blast at you, but they 
nibbled away at you, one stop at a time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And gradually taking away your locations? 

Mr. Brilliant. One good stop 1 week and 2 weeks later another 
one, and 3 weeks later another one, and they just kept on hammering 
until you couldn't take it any more. 

Mr. Kennedy. And finally forced you out of business ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

The Chairman. How did you go out of business ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I sold out whatever I had left. 

The Chairman. You sold out to whom, to their interests ? 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Not only this group was active but it was supple- 
mented by the fact that business agents of the Teamsters began to go 
into the business ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Four or five of them. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they began to have their own routes ? 

Mr. Brilliant. They began, and I don't know if it was a group 
but individually, I would say four or five Teamster agents went into 
the jukebox business, and they started taking locations one at a time, 
from everybody. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were they difficult to compete with ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I should say they were. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you explain what the problem was ? 

Mr. Brilliant. There was nothing explained, they would walk in 
and talk to the location and tell them they would help him out, and 
wouldn't have any trouble, and so forth, and they just put in a new 
machine, and you were called and told to take yours out. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was competition that was impossible to meet? 

Mr. Brilliant. It was impossible to compete with. 

The Chairman. You were a member of the union at that time? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Presumably you were supposed to have the union's 
protection. 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You were paying for something you were not 
getting ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is correct, sir. 

The Chairman. They were still taking your money and at the same 
time cutting your throat ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were the dues that you had to pay to the 
imion? 

Mr. Brilliant. $20 per man per month. 

Mr. Kennedy. For your employees to belong to this union, local 
985 ; and is that still true? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is still true. 
. Mr. Kennedy. They have to pay $20. Each employee has to pay 
$20 a month for dues ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does the union help them actually ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17425 

Mr. Brilliant. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Most of the operators are paying the employees far 
more than the union wage scale, are they not ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. AVhat becomes of this $20 a month ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I don't know, sir. 

The Chairman. You have an idea it doesn't go to serve the em- 
ployees, do you not ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I have an idea it goes to the union, and what they 
do with it I haven't the slightest idea. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. When you were operating with Mr. James, you 
would pay your employees' dues ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And initially with Mr, Bufalino, you followed the 
same procedure ; is that right ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then subsequently, it was decided that in order 
to give a cloak of legality to it, you would raise all of the employees' 
wages $20 a month, and then deduct the $20 and send the dues in ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

The Chairman. What business are you in now ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I sell tube testers, tube-testing equipment, testing 
equipment. 

The Chairman. Testing equipment ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You are out of the music business and the jukebox 
business altogether, are you ? 

Mr. Brilliant. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you feel like you were forced out by reason of 
improper practices in connection with labor-management relations ? 

Mr. Brilliant. I think so, that and the conditions the way they are 
in the city of Detroit. 

The Chairman. What do you mean by conditions in the city of 
Detroit? 

Mr. Brilliant. Conditions are very bad in the city of Detroit, and 
collections are down, and between that and being pushed out of the 
good stops, every once in a while, it was impossible to operate. 

The Ch AIRMAN. In other words, you were pushed out of the good 
stops by reason of the fact that a labor union and business association 
had conspired together to ^et them ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is right. 

The Chairman. And take them away from you and give them to 
someone else ? 

Mr. Brilliant. That is correct. 

The Chairman. All right ; thank you very much, sir, and we appre- 
ciate your testimony. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Neil Holland. 

The Chairman. Mr. Holland, will you be sworn ? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Holland. I do. 



17426 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OF NEIL HOLLAND 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Holland, be seated, and state your 
name, your place of residence, and your business or occupation. 

Mr. Holland. Neil Holland. I live in New York City, and I am 
employed as a studio engineer by the National Broadcasting Co. 

The Chairman. All right. Do you waive counsel, Mr. Holland? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy, Now, Mr. Holland, you were initially in the jukebox 
business, were you not ? 

Mr. Holland. I was not in the business ; no, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were a union official ? 

Mr. Holland. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Dealing with coin or jukebox employees? 

Mr. Holland. So far as the coin industry is concerned, exclusively 
in that particular field. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was in the city of Detroit; is that right? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you had been in the labor union movement, 
and you began actually in 1933 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Approximately? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And in 1940 you were appointed an organizer for 
the Detroit Joint Board of the United Retail, Wholesale & Depart- 
ment Store Employees, known as URDWDSEA ? 

Mr. Holland. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was known as the "Undersea" movement? 

Mr. Holland. That was the nickname. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1942 you became president of local 361 of this 
union? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, in 1942, you were approached by Mr. Roy 
Small ; is that right ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of the Michigan Phonograph Owners Association ? 

Mr. PIoLLAND. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he asked you at that time to accept his people 
in as members of your union ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Holland. The employees and the self-employed operators; yes, 
sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. His people had been in Local 737 of the Interna- 
tional Union of Electrical Radio & Machinery "Workers of America? 

Mr. Holland. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then James Newman had said that his inter- 
national did not want these people in the union, and didn't like their 
tactics and wanted them to get out ? 

Mr. Holland. That is my understanding. 

Mr. Kennedy. And so they were looking around to make a deal 
with some other union, that they could put their people in ? 

Mr. HoTJiAND. Well, primarily they were looking for a place in the 
CIO to have a union affiliation, because a great many of their loca- 
tions operated by the Music Operators were in industrial areas, which 
were predominantly CIO people. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17427 

Mr. Kennedy. So Mr. Small came to you, and said that he would 
like to put his people in your luiion ? 
Mr. Holland. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And now with these predominantly self-employed 
people ? 

Mr. Holland. No; I would say that the majority of them were 
people employed by the larger operators, although there were con- 
siderable number of men who operated anywhere from half a dozen 
to maybe tAventy machines, that could take care of them themselves, 
and so they didn't need an employee. But in order to service the 
machines in keeping with the general concept of operations at that 
time, they were members of the union and attended meetings of the 
union and also of the association in order to j^rotect their interests 
as operators. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you brought them in and they became members 
of local 361 ? 

Mr. Holland. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And later you transferred into the AFL and became 
the United Coin Machine Workers, Local 22321; is that right? 

Mr. Holland. That part of the local, and the Retail Clerks and 
other supply people remanied in local 361. We carried the No. 361 
with us to the RCIA of the AFL. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Small, for a period of time, operate the associa- 
tion and the miion out of his own office ? 

Mr. Holland. That is my understanding. The Electrical Work- 
ers in the Hoffman Building. It is my understanding that originally 
he organized the local and then, in order to keep the local together, he 
organized the association and both bodies operated out of the same 
office. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, this is Mr. Small, whose name will 
come into the hearings as we go along. He was head of the associa- 
tion up in Detroit up until 1958. The methods and tactics that were 
used during this period of time are of some interest. 

The union was completely dominated and controlled by Mr. Small 
and his group ; was it not ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir ; it was. 

The Chairman. Did these unions ever have an election of officials? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. I was an elected president. 

The Chairman. You were an elected president ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. What other officials were elected ? 

Mr. Holland. The treasurer and the secretary' and the vice presi- 
dent and, to the best of my recollection, we had several members of the 
executive board. I know that condition existed in local 361, and I 
remember specifically the resignation of one of the jukebox employees 
as secretary of his unit because his route had gi-own so big he couldn't 
take care of it. 

We had an election for a successor to him. So at least to that extent, 
in my recollection — you understand, of course. Senator, this is 15 years 
ago, and some of the details are a little bit dim. But I do know that 
we had elected officers and they were elected by the rank and file mem- 
bership. They weren't appointed. 



17428 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. As to the control that the association had over the 
union, the association, Mr. Small, and his group, would decide when 
pickets would go out ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Holland. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they would pay the pickets ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. Not always directly, but they did pay them. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. And the association paid the business agents, did 
they not? 

Mr. Holland. They paid three of them and later paid a part of my 
salary. 

Mr. Kennedy. And paid a part of your salary ? 

Mr. Holland. Later ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When the association got into any difficulty, they 
would call you for the pickets ; and you would send the pickets out, 
and then they would pay you ? 

Mr. Holland. Unfortunately not always ; no, sir. Quite often they 
would instruct the three so-called business representatives who were 
directly on their payroll, and they would conduct picket lines without 
my knowledge or information. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was no discussion ? There was no real benefit 
gained for the employees nor was there any interest in the employees, 
at least initially ? 

Mr. Holland. Well, I think at least in theory the concept of the 
responsibility of the union to protect the locations was that a union 
member was making the collections and doing the service at each of 
these locations, and the principal part of his income came from the 14 
percent of gross collections which was his commission. 

So if he were knocked out of a good location which might have run 
anywhere from $50 to $75 or $80 a week, 14 percent of that would make 
a substantial difference in his weekly income. So, so far as my mind 
was concerned, that was the justification for picketing if a location 
serviced by a union member had been jumped by someone else. 

Mr. Kennedy. But I expect that you agree that the method by 
which the pickets were sent out and the control that the association had 
over the pickets was improper ? 

Mr. Holland. They had practically full control of the situation un- 
til the fight started. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. For instance, looking at the minutes of the United 
Music Operators of Michigan, in 1943 it says : 

UMO has made the predominating decisions in regard to picket lines, where and 
when they are to be conducted, and the union had no say whatsoever. 

Mr. Holland. That was a complaint which I made to the associa- 
tion ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then later on, Small said, speaking of you — 

We couldn't have organized this association without the aid of active members 
and help received from contacts with various 010 locals. Complained many 
times to Neil Holland. 

No, this is talking about himself. He said : 

I couldn't have organized this association without the aid of active members 
and help received from contact with various CIO locals. Complained many times 
to Neil Holland, Sam LaVigne, that he wanted more work done. There was no 
shortage of money to pay pickets at the time Neil Holland and he talked about 
pickets, but that he wanted Mr. Holland to be as conservative as he possibly could 
when picket lines were used. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIE8 IN THE LABOR FIELD 17429 

later on, talking about the fact that pickets were placed and removed as 
he saw fit. 

So there was complete control at that period of time by the 
association ? 

Mr, Holland. I think there is one clarification that needs to be made 
there, Mr. Kemiedy. The conservatism that he wanted me to exercise 
was not to exercise my judgment but to follow his. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. What about the stamps that were issued at that time? 

Mr. Holland. Well, the original stamps that were issued were issued 
by the association. A flat fee per machine was assessed against the 
members of the association. The stamps that were issued said that the 
work performed on the machines was done in cooperation with organ- 
ized labor. It didn't make a flat statement that they were a union 
label. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. And the association paid for those stamps ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that money was used 

Mr. Holland. As a matter of fact, the association had complete 
control over those. I never had any of them in my possession. They 
were possessed, issued and collected for by the association. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you protest against this operation after a period 
of time ? 

Mr. Holland. Quite definitely ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. Then you got into a dispute with Mr. Small and 
othere ? 

Mr. Holland. I got into a dispute with Mr. Small, but I think the 
records of the association would show that most of the officers and 
most of the members of the association were inclined to my view, that 
the union matters should be controlled by the union, and that the union 
stamp, if it were going to be union label, should state so and should be 
under the jurisdiction of the union rather than the association. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it was a question about the control of this union 
label, was it not? 

Mr. Holland. Not only that, but control of who were to be the 
business agents, and when and where there were to be picket lines 
and for what purposes there were to be picket lines. 

Mr. Kennedy. There was some dispute amongst the association 
members of the union taking over the distribution of these labels, 
was there not ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir; there was. And unreasonable grounds, I 
would say some of it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Carl Angott, who later became a business partner 
in a motel and a juke box route with Vincent Meli, he suggested 
rather than to have the union control the distribution of the labels, 
that each operator pay for his own pickets when needed ? 

Mr. Holland. That would have been a little more direct than the 
original operation. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then board member Corbett said : 

Recall that at the time money was raised it was added for UMO organiza- 
tional expense and picket lines which were necessary to conduct the phonograph 
business. 

Tell me what would happen if a union member, who was also a 
member of the association, took another member of the association's 
location. 



17430 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES- IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Holland. Well, the member who jumped another member 
would be called to account for it, and we would attempt to negotiate 
with him so that he would get out of the location and let the original 
union member continue to service his location. 

If he didn't, that location would be picketed until he did remove 
his machine. But to the best of my recollection, none of his other 
locations would be disturbed. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you would picket even if it was a union memer ? 

Mr. Holland. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. You would picket his location ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. If a man pays $1 or $10 or $20 dues for 
protection in his woi-k, and if he is not protected in that work, then 
he is entitled to recourse to the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were having this major dispute with Mr. 
Small, particularly. Then were you arrested in an extortion charge 1 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was that ? 

Mr. Holland. That was in, I would say, the late summer of very 
early fall of 1943. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate briefly to the committee what 
happened in connection with that ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. Tliere had been tliis dispute between the 
association and myself as to who was going to control the assignment 
of pickets, who was going to control the hiring and the direction of 
union business agents, and also the issuance and/or nonissuance of 
union labels to operators. 

We had a closed shop contract between all of the members of the 
association and the union. A part of the contract was that the 
monthly dues of the employees would be deducted from their pay by 
the employers on what is known as a check-off and remitted to the 
union not later than the 10th day of the following month. 

For a period of a few months, some of the larger operators who 
had a fair number of employees were not deducting, if they had ever 
deducted, the dues from tlieir employees' salaries, and were not remit- 
ting to the union. One of these was a finn in Pontiac, Mich., which 
is about 26 miles from Detroit, and they owed, to the best of my 
recollection, $85 or $90 in back dues for their employees. 

Following a meeting of the association itself, which I attended and 
explained my position at, and following a discourse between Mr. Glen 
Uley, one of the two brothers who owned this firm in Pontiac, and 
myself on the floor in the meeting, I received a phone call from Roy 
Small, the conciliator of the association, advising me to go out to 
Pontiac, that the Uley brothers had now come aroimd to seeing my 
point of view and were willing to pay the dues. 

I went out and had another discussion with them, among which was 
that they were very much afraid that if we got control of the union 
label situation, the first thing we would do would be to increase the 
price from 25 to 50 cents, and eventually maybe they would be paying 
$1 apiece for them. 

I assured them that wasn't the condition and, if necessai-y, we 
would enter into an agreement Avith the various operators that wo 
would not raise the cost of the label, at least not without quite a bit 
of prior consultation. So following that conversation, Mr. Uley 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17431 

agreed to pay — I believe, now, the amount was $87 which he paid me 
and I gave him a receipt for it. 

As 1 turned to leave the building, two gentlemen entered the room, 
and one of them identified himself as a police lieutenant and the other 
identilied himself as the prosecuting attorney for the county. I was 
placed under arrest and told that I was being charged with extortion. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they took you 

Mr. Holland. They took me to the county jail, and I was held in 
one wing of the jail. There was a string of 14 cells. There were no 
other prisoners in that particular wing. I was held there incom- 
mmiicado for 5 days. Not even my attorney could get to me to dis- 
cuss the case with me before going to jail. 

JVIr. Kennedy. Did you see anybody while you were in jail ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir ; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you see ? 

Mr. Holland. Jimmy Hotfa of the Teamsters Union. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did you happen to see him ? 

Mr. Holland. He came in to the cell block and talked to me. I 
don't know how he got in there, but there he was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he give you an explanation of how he could 
come to see you when your own lawyer couldn't come to see you ? 

Mr. Holland. He didn't give me any direct information, but he 
did tell me that the prosecutor was a pretty hungry guy, and if 
1 could raise $5,000 I wouldn't have to go to court, that he would 
see to it. And if I didn't raise $5,000 for the prosecuting attorney, 
I was going to get 10 years in prison for extortion, and that he had 
the political power and prestige in that section of the State to see 
that I went to jail, no matter how good my attorney was or any 
struggle I might make against going to jail; but that was the situa- 
tion ; if I didn't come up with $5,000, I was going to go to jail. 

The Chairman. Who said that you wouldn't go to jail ? 

Mr. Holland. Mr. Hoffa said that the prosecuting attorney would 
see that I didn't go to jail. 

The Chairman. Hoffa was telling you that the prosecuting at- 
torney had that power ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That the prosecuting attorney would see that you 
went to jail? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir, and that Mr. Hoffa 

The Chairman. But if you got $5,000 and gave it to Hoffa, he 
would take care of it ? 

Mr. HoLLiVND. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That was the deal ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you say to him ? 

Mr. Holland. I told him I didn't have $5,000, and if I did have 
it I wouldn't pay it, because I didn't think they had a case against 
me ; what I had done was perfectly legitimate, and if I was convicted 
in the Oakland County Court, they had a Supreme Court in the 
State of Michigan and I was quite confident that if I got into the 
Supreme Court there would be no case at all. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened then ? 



17432 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Holland. I believe it was the fourth day, the day before I 
went to court, Mr. Hoffa came back and reiterated the same state- 
ments with the same results. He also told me that he didn't believe 
me when I said I didn't have $5,000. 

He said, "If you don't have $5,000, you don't know what you got 
your hands on, boy, and you ought to be in jail." 

Mr. Kennedy. Meaning what ? 

Mr. Holland. Well, that the opportunities which I think were 
later demonstrated by some of the more ambitious gentlemen who 
took over the union operation in this industry for making money 
were quite wide open, that if I was dumb enough that I wasn't mak- 
ing any money, I ought to be in jail. 

The Chairman. In other words, if you were not exploiting the 
opportunity to the fullest, you were dumb and, therefore, you ought 
to be in jail ; let somebody else have it that would. 

Mr. Holland. That is pretty straight ; yes, 

Mr. Kennedy. So he came back to see you, the only visitor you 
had in 5 days, he came back to see you to get you to give him $5,000 
in which he said he could fix this case for you ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you refused to pay him ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. I would have had to refuse in any event ; 
I didn't have the $5,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on the fifth day, did they take you before the 
Judge? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir ; except that at the last minute my attorney 
discovered that the courtroom in which the hearing was scheduled 
had been changed and I was being taken into another court and they 
were trying to get me through a hearing without his being present in 
court, and he discovered it in time to get over to the other court and 
prevent that and I was released on bail. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did anybody know you were in jail for the five 
days? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, my wife and my stepbrother — not my step- 
brother; my foster brother, came up to see me. They weren't al- 
lowed to see me, but they were allowed to send in a change of cloth- 
ing and cigarettes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever find out how Mr. Hoffa knew you 
were in jail? 

Mr. Holland. Well, it got into the Detroit papers after two of 
the other business representatives of the union were picked up in 
Detroit at the request of the Oakland County authorities. 

Mr. Kennedy. What day was that ? 

Mr. Hoi.land. I believe later in the same day I was arrested or 
the following, at the very latest. 

Mr. Kennedy. So Mr. Hoffa could have learned it from the news- 
pa])ers that you were there ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. Or he might have learned it at the AFL 
Temple, because those people were quite excited about it there and 
got in touch with Edward N. Barnard. 

Mr. Kennedy. What finally happened in the case? 

Mr. Holland. It was thrown out. There were several delays. 
After I had been released on bail, there M^ere several delays through 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17433 

calls from the Oakland County prosecutor to my attorney, postpon- 
ing the hearings, and after about 8 weeks of that, I went back to 
another meeting of the association or their executive board, I don't 
remember which, and told them that if the case wasn't taken to trial 
or dropped entirely, that I was going to start suing a few people for 
false arrest and defamation of character. 

JNIr. Kennedy. Subsequently they brought the case against you? 

Mr. Holland. Within 24: hours ; yes. 

The Chairman. Did they ever try to get money out of you after 
Holt'a's eti'orts failed ? 

Mr. Holland. No, sir ; they didn't. It was pretty well known after 
that that we didn't have any. 

The Chairman. They found out you didn't have any and left you 
alone ? 

INlr. Holland. That is right. 

The Chairman. You were arrested for extortion, but actually you 
think what happened was that they arrested you in order to extort 
$5,000 out of you ; is that it ? 

Mr. Holland. I don't think that was the original plan, sir. I know 
the arrangement was made, if you want my view on it. Senator, it is 
this — the conciliator or executive director of the association made the 
attempt to have the same deal rigged in Wayne County, which is 
Detroit, and the prosecutor there and his staff refused to go along. 

He then made the arrangement in Oakland County in an effort to 
first get me out of the picture and secondly enhance his own position 
in the association so there would be no further threat to his control 
of the association. 

The Chairman. They tried to frame you up in another county, first ? 

Mr. Holland. They tried to frame me up in my home county first. 

The Chairman. What is the name of that county ? 

Mr. Holland. Wayne County. That is where Detroit is. 

The Chairman. They undertook to frame you there before you were 
arrested in this other county ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir, and it was understood by the prosecuting 
attorney's office in Wayne County that it was to be strictly a frame. 
I was advised of that by one of the members of his staff'. I don't 
recall who it was now, but that Avas my advice, directly from his office. 

The Chairman. Why didn't they go through with it in Wayne 
County ? 

Mr. Holland. They didn't want any part of it. It was a pretty 
dirty deal and they wanted no part of it. 

Tlie Chairman. In other words, the prosecuting attorney in Wayne 
County refused ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently some of the State authorities were con- 
ducting an investigation in this county in which you were arrested, 
and the district attorney committed suicide ? 

Mr. PIoLLAND. Yes, sir. There had been charges of graft in many 
parts of the State and the select committee of the State senate was 
investigating from county to county as to the graft situation and so 
on and so forth. 

I would say it was about 3 months after this arrest was made I 
heard about 2 :30 in the afternoon that that State senate committee was 

36751—59 — pt. 48 15 



17434 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

going into Oakland County the following day to begin investigations 
there, and at about 7 :30 that night a special bulletin came over the 
radio that the prosecuting attorne.y had shot himself. A different 
reason was given, but he shot himself that night. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, because of the sigiiificance of Mr. 
Holland's testimony in connection with Mr. Holfa, we requested a 
lie detector test be given to him regarding Mr. Hoffa's attempts to 
shake him down for the $5,000. 

You have there, Mr. Chairman, a handwritten report on the lie 
detector test. There will be a more complete report furnished to 
the committee subsequently. 

The Chairman. Did you take a lie detector test ? 

Mr. Holland. I took a series of three tests yesterday afternoon; 
yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Wliere ? 

Mr. Holland. In New York City. 

The Chairman. By whom ? 

Mr. Holland. A Dr. Rouke ; Fabian L. Rouke. 

The Chairman. Do you know anything about his reputation in this 
profession ? 

Mr. Holland. Only vaguely. I remember hearing his name in 
connection with this type of examination ; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. How did you happen to go to him ? 

Mr. Holland. I was taken there by two investigators for this 
committee, sir. 

The Chairman. Members of the staff toolv you to this doctor ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. They wanted to establish a reasonable 
degree of my veracity. 

The Chairman. You readily agreed to cooperate ? 

Mr. Holland. Yes, sir. I agreed right from the first time one of 
your staff talked to me. I agreed to cooperate. 

The Chairman. Did you ever meet this doctor before? 

Mr. Holland. No, sir ; I hadn't. 

The Chairman. You had never seen him or heard of him or knew 
anything about him before ? 

Mr. Holland. I just faintly I'emember hearing his name in con- 
nection with lie detector tests, but I had never met the gentleman 
before. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, have you sworn testimony to support 
this report ? 

For the present, I will let this report of Dr. Rouke be made an 
exhibit not as proof, because it is not sworn to, but as a matter of 
reference. I assume the doctor would swear to what he has reported, 
but I will not make this evidence at the present. 

If Ave have an affidavit later substantiating it, or verifying it, it may 
be made a part of the evidence. It may be made exhibit No. 74. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 74" for reference 
and m:vy bo found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. Exhil)it No. 72 is for reference. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could I read the last part ? 

The Chairman. If you road it, it goes into the record. It may be 
read for the information of the committee. You need not put this into 
the record at the moment, Mr. Reporter. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17435 

Mr. Kennedy. He, incidentally, is a member of the stall' of Man- 
hattan College. His tests in this field are utilized by various govern- 
ment agencies in the New York area. 

The C^iiAimiAN. Are there any further questions ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. Haven't you found this to be a kind of 
rotten business, the way it began to be operating ? 

Mr. Holland. I would say after I began in the service, and some 
of the people began to take it over, it got pretty rugged ; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. There is nothing wrong with the jukebox business 
as such, is there ? I mean, it is perfectly legitimate i 

Mr. Holland. It is a very legithnate business. 

The Chairman. And it does provide for man}^ a form of entertain- 
ment that is wholesome and that is enjoyable ? 

Mr. Holland. I spend a couple of dollars a week in it myself ; yes, 
sir. 

The Chairman. What I mean is there nothing inherently wrong in 
the jukebox business as such. 

Mr, Holland. If I might make a couple of side remarks in this 
respect, Senator, I think you might be interested in them. 

I think the principal difficulty in this business began because of 
the shortage of equipment, repair parts and new equipment and rec- 
ords due to the war, I think, too, that a lot of the people — not a lot 
of the people but a number of the people — who become interested in 
this business were like a lot of other people who had outside-the-law 
activities during the prohibition era. 

At the end of the prohibition era, a lot of them flocked into the 
legitimate liquor business and its many avenues of revenue. Many of 
them operated in a purely legitimate manner. Others of them couldn't 
stand to stay away from their old habits and they began to break the 
law and to take undue advantage of other people in the same trade. 

There is where your difficulty began. That and the combination of 
the shortages of equipment, records, and repair parts gave them an 
excellent opportunity. 

The Chairman. We get some communications from people operat- 
ing jukeboxes and people who manufacture jukeboxes, and they are 
apprehensive, and maj^be with some justification, that a hearing of this 
nature may tend to injure their business and give it a bad reputation, 
whereas, the truth is, there is nothing inherently wrong in the business 
itself. 

Mr. Holland. No, sir. 

The Chairman. I wanted to emphasize that. The committee doesn't 
feel that way about it at all. But we do find it an avenue or a vehicle 
being used by certain elements, maybe criminal elements in some in- 
stances, and by conniving in others, where there is labor and manage- 
ment involved, where the thing is handled m such a way as to destroy 
legitimate business and actually substitute a form of corruption and 
exploitation for what otherwise might be ligitimate enterprise. 

]Mr. Holland. I don't regret having gone in the service, but I am 
of the opinion. Senator, that had I not gone in service, a lot of the 
difficulties that arose would not have arisen, because I had very strong 
support, among-st most of the people who were operators, and I would 
say a predominant majority of people who were members of the union 
would have supported my position. 



17436 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Had that condition been allowed to continue, I think eventually we 
would have straightened out the organizations, both of them, and 
avoided a lot of the difficulty whioli followed. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you veiy much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, this is a part of a pattern that will be 
developed during the period of the next few days in connection with 
Mr. Buf alino's operations and with Mr. Hoffa. It is for that reason 
that Mr. Holland's testimony is of considerable importance. 

The next witness, Mr. Victor DeSchryver, adds something more to 
Mr. Hoffa's activities in this field. I would like to call Mr. Victor 
DeSchryver. 

The Chairman. Mr. DeSchryver. 

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. DeSchyver. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF VICTOR DeSCHRYVER 

The Chairman. State yovir name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. DeSchryver. My name is Victor DeSchryver. I live in Grosse 
Pointe Park, Mich. I am in the book business, retail book selling. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. DeSciiry\'er. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You sell religious books, is that right, Mr. DeSchry- 
ver? 

Mr. DeSchryver. Yes, I do, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were in the jukebox business for quite an 
extended period of time ; is that right? 

Mr. DeSchry\'er. Yes, sir; that was the first job I had in high 
school. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the age of 18 ? 

Mr. DeSchryver. In 1936. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were a part-time employee of your uncle, Harry 
DeSchryver ; is that right ? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was the owner of the Marquette Music Co.; is 
that right? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you became a full-time employee and subse- 
quentlv in 1943 vou were taken into partnership witli vour uncle; is 
that right? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you purchased, in 1946, your uncle's interest ? 

Mr. De Sc i r ryver. Yes, I d i d . 

Mr. Kennedy. And you remu ined in the business until when ? 

]\Ir. De Schryver. I remained in the business until June of last 
year, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. During the year 1944-45, you wei-e president of an 
association known as the United Music Operators ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17437 

]\rr. De Schryvkh. In 1944; yes. This extended toward the end of 
1944. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were having difficuUies in the Detroit area, were 
you not, with various unions springing up ? 

Mr. I)e ScHKYMi:R. This had been our history in tlie city of Detroit 
for the past few years. 

Mr. Kennedy. And had caused a great deal of difficulty and prob- 
lems for the operators? 

Mr. De Schryo:r. That is riglit, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So was it decided by the association that you would 
go down to Ohio and consult with Mr. Dixon and Mr. Presser there? 

Mr. De Sciiry^ter. It was decided by a group of men who were the 
most active in the association, that we would do this. We had had an 
opportunity to view the operation of the association and union in 
Cleveland, and it seemed to offer the stability we were trjang to bring 
about in our own business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that because there had been such a close arrange- 
ment between the union and the association, the union under Mr. Pres- 
ser and the association under Mr. Dixon ? 

Mr. De Sciiryver. Yes, that was our view. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it is well known, is it not, that this arrangement 
that existed between the association and the union was about the best 
as far as the operators were concerned of any place in the country? 

Mr. De Sciiryver. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And as a matter of fact that reputation has stayed 
with it even up to the present time, has it not ? 

Mr. De Sciiryver. I believe so, and I don't know its current history. 

Mr. Kennedy. Up to the time you got out of the jukebox business? 

Mr. De Sciiryver. Yes, sir, I believe so. 

^Ir. Kennedy. And you consulted with Mr. Presser and Mr. Dixon 
there, did you ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes sir ; we did. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. And they explained to you how this arrangement 
should be set up and the arrangement between the union and the as- 
sociation ? 

Mr. De Sciiryver. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the bylaws you should use and the rules and 
regulations that should exist ? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And then subsequently thej^ made some trips up to 
Detroit, did they not? 

Mr. De Sciiryver. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Presser at that time was the union official of 
442-HoftheIBEW? 

Mr. De Sciir^-^-er. He was the head of the Cleveland union, and I 
don't know what the number was or the connection. I believe it was 
the Electrical Workers. 

Mr. Kennedy. You formed the association, or it was set up and Mr. 
Jimmy James was brought in. Do you know how ]Mr. James was 
brought in to head the union ? 

Mr. De Schryaer. Xo, sir, I don't know how he came in. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did JMr. Presser state to j'ou and to the other associ- 



17438 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EN THE LABOR FIELD 

ation members that he would require some mouey for pei-formiug this 
service ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How mucli mouey did he want ? 

Mr. De Schryver. He stated his fee would be $5,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you agreed to pay him the $5,000 ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir; we did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did you raise that ? 

Mr. De Schryver. That was collected from nine operators. 

Mr. Kennedy. Seven of them paid $650, and two of tliem paid $250 ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Tliat is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And $5,000 was then turned over to you ? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is right. I vras custodian of the money. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you in turn give it to Mr. Presser ? 

Mr. De Schryver. The money was originally given to me in individ- 
ual cliecks, and I caslied them and turned over $5,000 in cash to ]Mr. 
Pi'esser. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you turn over a check to Mr. Presser? 

Mr. De Schry\t,r. Because he wouldn't accept a check. He wanted 
cash. 

Mr. Kennedy. Xow, where did you turn the $5,000 over to him ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Tliis was a mezzanine of the Statler Hotel. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Presser has testified, not before this committee, 
but before another group, that he did not receive any money, and he 
did not receive any money for this service that he performed up 
in Detroit. 

You say you did give him the $5,000 ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliere is no question about that, and you are telling 
the truth ? 

Mr. De Schryver. There is no question about tliat. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it was $5,000 in cash; is that correct? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is right. 

Mr. Kknnkdy. Did Mr. Presser indicate that he would have to 
take care of some other individuals in the Detroit area ? 

Mr. De Schryver. He indicated that the $5,000 was to cover his 
expenses, and it was our belief that these expensCvS involved giving 
money to union officials there in Detroit. 

Mv. Kennedy. AVere there any union officials' names mentioned 
at that time? 

Mr. De Schp.yver. My best recollection of this is that there was 
a reference made to the union officials on Trumbull Avemie. 

Mr. Kennedy. On Ti-umbull Avenue ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir. 

ISIr. Kennedy. Now, that, of coui-se, is the Teamster headquarters, 
is it not? 

Mr. De Scuryvek. 1 believe it is. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any discussion about mentioning Mr. 
Ho(Ta. and Mr. l^>rennan's name? 

Mv. De SciiHYVEi!. There may have been, sir. 

INIr. Kennedy. You camiot recollect ? 

Mr. De ScintYVER. I have no recollection riaht now. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17439 

Mr. Kennedy. But you do remember tliere was discussion about 
the union officials at Triunbull Avenue that had to be taken care of ? 

Mr. De ScIIRY^■ ek. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, ]Mr. James' operation was financed by the 
association ; is that right ? 

Mr. De Schkyver. It was from dues. 

Mr. Kennedy. That you would pay for these stamps ? 

JVIr. De Sciiryv'er. That were coilected. This was not ostensibly 
the way it was done. Each employee or each self-employed man was 
assessed the dues. But I think you could figure it out either way, 
the amount of the dues would equal a ''per label" assessment, but 
teclmically it was collected in the form of dues per man. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this was in order to finance his operation ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. De ScHRv^rER. Tliat is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, did he tell you, or inform you, or did Mr. 
James subsequently come to 3'ou and tell you that he had to have some 
more money to take care of certain individuals ? 

Mr. De Schryv^er. I don't have any recollection of this. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to see if I can refresh your recollection. 

You testified before a grand jury in Detroit, the Murphy grand 
jury, did you not? 

Mr. De Schryv'er. Yes, sir, I did. 

?.Ir. Kennedy. And that testimony indicated that you were asked 
a question that I asked you, if Mr. James came to you with the problem 
that he had to take care of or he needed some more money to take 
care of his obligations, and the question was asked of you at that 
time, "To whom?" and your answer at that time was "To Mr, Bren- 
nan and Mr. Hoffa." 

Was that answer correct at tliat time? 

Mr. De Schry^er. Yes, sir, that was. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the question : 

What did he say those obligations were? 

Answer. Well, that was In order to keep them from, or rather to keep 
somebody from getting to them, referring to the Italian element in town, that 
he would have to keep them satisfied with money. 

Is that testimony correct? 

Mr. De Schry\'er. That testimony is correct, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy (reading) : 

Question. Was any amount nametl? 
Answer. No, sir. 
Question. Any specific amount? 
Answer. I couldn't say as to a specific amount. 
Question. Wasn't some amount per week named? 

Answer. It was to be worked out on a weekly basis, paid on the payroll 
of the union. 

Question. How much was to be paid through the union payroll? 

Answer. As I can recall, ,$100 or $150. 

Question. Was that $100 apiece? 

Answer. Yes. 

Queston. Were the wives of Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Brennan mentionetl? 

Answer. Yes, sir; I believe they were. 

Question. In what connection? 

Answer. That they would be put on the payroll. 

The Court. What payroll? 

Answei". On the union payroll. 



17440 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Is that testimony correct that you gave at that time ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir, that testimony is correct, and it is 12 
years closer to the event, and I have no reason 

Mr. Kennedy. Is it your general recollection without getting into 
the specifics at this time ? 

Mr. De Schry^t.r. My general recollection is that Mrs. Iloffa and 
Mrs. Brennan were on the payroll, and the immediate events leading 
to it I just can't recall. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. Chairman, that fits in, of course, with 
the testimony of Mr. Brilliant, tliat they were having this difficulty 
back in 1945 and 1946, and that the difficulty was caused by Mr. 
Bufalino and Mr. Tocco being set up in business by Mr. Angelo 
Meli, one of the chief gangsters in Detroit, and that they operated 
under the name of the Bilvin Distributing Co., and the Bilvin Distrib- 
uting Co. gave Wurlitzers to some three or four companies which in 
turn were run by gangsters or relatives of gangsters. They began 
to get a monopoly control over the operation in the city of Detroit, 
and at that time they were looking for a union to be formed. 

Evidently at this time Mr. James came to Mr. De Schryver and 
said in order to prevent this Italian element from coming in, or 
to deal with this group, what would be necessary for the union to 
do would be to place Mr. Hoffa's and Mr. Brennan's wives on their 
payroll at $100 a week, as a payoff to them. 

This was done, and this in fact we know was done. They re- 
ceived some $6,000, and subsequently the union was formed. Mr. 
James went out of business as an independent; the union was formed; 
and ]\Ir. Bufalino was taken in immediately and made head of the 
union by Mr. Hoffa. 

So for that reason, and with the testimony of Mr. Holland that 
Mr. Iloffa came to him about getting $5,000 to fix the case, and 
then the testimony of Mr. De Schryver and Mr. Brilliant in con- 
nection with Mr. Hoffa's activities, it shows a pattern of operation 
leading to Mr. Bufalino's taking over local 985. 

Of course, we will go into some detail as to the operations of 
local 985. 

Tlie CiTAiRMAN. Did you agree to the placing of these women 
on the payroll? 

Mr. De Schrym<::r. Yes, sir, I would say so, although wo had no 
coTitrol over whether they did or didn't go on the payroll. 

The Chairman. Well, there was no secret about it at the time, 
that file matter was to be handled in that way ? 

Mr. De Schryver. I think it was common knowledge. 

The Chairman. All right. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. Then, Mr. Chairman, the question further was 
asked : 

In connection with raisinc: tho dues in order to make tliese payoffs to Hoffa 
and P.rennan, was there a raise in dues that was effected to cover that sit- 
uation from how mucli to how much? 

Answer. Actually, the increase as well as I can remember was from approxi- 
mately no cents to 70 cents. 

Question. And tho stated purpose as told you by James was to create a fund 
for payment to Hoffa and Brennan ; is that correct? 

Answer. I believe that is correct. 

Question. Well, is there any doubt about it in your mind? 

Answer. No, sir ; there is not. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 17441 

The CiiAiRiktAN. Is lliat the testimony that you gave before? 

Mr. Dk Schryvek. Yes, sir, that is. 

The Chairman. Xo%y, did you then, after Mi\ Jimmy James re- 
mained in control of the union, and then I\lr. Hoffa established Mr. 
Bufalino in local 085, did you continue to be a member of local 985? 

Mr. De Sciirym::r. No, for a period of time after the termination 
of the grand jury hearings, Ave dropped out of the association and 
out of the union. 

The Chairman. For what reason ? 

Mr. De Schry^er. Well, actually we Avere surprised to see a grand 
jury hearing and surprised to see so many people running in so 
many directions. We just felt it Avould be better to be out of it 
completely than to remain in it. 

The CiiAiRMAX. You mean running m different directions to avoid 
subpenas to appear before the grand jury ? 

Mr. De Sciirynt.r. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. People were scattering abroad to get away from 
it, were they ? 

Mr. De Schryat:r. Yes, sir, they were. 

JNIr. Kennedy. Subsequently, you went back into the union? 

Mr. De Schry\'er. Yes, sir, a few months later we returned to 
the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be local 985 ; is that right ? 

Mr. De ScHRYMiR. I believe so, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy". Did you find that Mr. Bufalino and the officials 
of local 985 were favoring certain operators: was that a complaint 
that you had? 

Mr. De Schryver. I don't think that was an immediate develoj)- 
ment. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently, was it? 

JNIr. De Schrywer. I think it was a subsequent development, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that one of the difficulties that you had in op- 
erating in Detroit? 

]\Ir. De Schryver. Yes, it was, sir. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Did you ultimately get out of local 985 ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir, we did, in 1953. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did your employees form their own independent 
union at that time? 

Mr. De Schry^vtr. Yes, sir, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did that last ? 

Mr. De Schry^^r. That lasted until we liquidated the business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Up until then you had been paying their dues; 
had you not ? 

]\lr. De Schryat.r. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you felt that you didn't want to have any more 
part of this, and so you put it up to the employees as to whether they 
wanted to join the union and pay their own dues ? 

Mr. De ScHRY^'ER. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they had a meeting and voted to form an in- 
dependent union ; is that right ? 

Mr. De Schry\ er. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they established their own union and they said 
thev did not want to belono^ to 985 ? 



17442 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, De kSciiRYVER. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And tliey called it the Michigan Coin Workers 
Union ? 

Mr. De Sciiryver. I believe that is the name of it, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which was an independent union ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did that last ? 

Mr. De Schryver. From 1953 until we sold our business in 1058. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you got out of the business at that time? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you go out of the business ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Just a desire to get out of the business, and I liad 
wanted to get out of it for a long time, and I had been developing the 
present business that I am in over a period of the last 4 or 5 years, 
and also for our own economic difficulties. 

Mr. Kennedy. You felt that you yourself didn't want to have any- 
thing more to do with this kind of an operation? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, ^Ir. Chairman, I liave INIr. Pressor's testimony 
here, when he was asked to appear before the Hoifman connnittee on 
June 8, 1953, and he was asked a question on page 78 by Mr. McKenna : 

I have one iiuestion : Did you, Mr. Pressei', receive any money from November 
or December of 1944 from jukebox operators who came from the Detroit area? 
Answer. I did not. 

The CiiAHniAN. That covers tlie same area this witness has been 
testifying about. 
Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

The Chairman. Did you know the $5,000 was paid ? 
Mr. De Schryver. Yes, I paid it to him. 
The Chairman. So his statement there couldn't be true. 
Mr. De Schryah^r. No, it could not, sir. 
Mr. Kennedy (reading) : 

Mr. Pkesseu. I received nothing from no one in Detroit or anywhere else. 

Mr. McKenna. You didn't receive any compensation at all in connection with 
the establishment of a union in Detroit? 

Mr. Presser. I won't say that. I received my expenses from the union after 
it was established, and I think it was somethinjj; around $200 or $300. 

Mr. McKenna. You never i-eceived any compensation from anybody other than 
the union? 

Answer. No. 

The CnAiR:\iAN. Did he know you were from the Detroit area ? 

Mr. De Schryver. Yes, sir, he did. 

The ('iFAiRisrAN. And you paid it to Mr. Presser himself ? 

Mr. De Schryver. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So we have all of this involved Avith Mr. IToffa and 
Mr. Presser and then IMr. James, Avho was kept on the payroll of the 
union for some 3 or 3^^ years, and yet was not working during that 
period of time. 

TiieC^iiAHnrAN. Is tliere anylhing further? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The CiiAHt^tAN. Thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Scholle. 

The Chairman. Mr. Scholle, will you come around, please? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17443 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give befoi;e this 
Senate select committee sliall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
l)ul the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. ScuoLi.E. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF AUGUSTE SCHOLLE 

The CiiAiKMAX. State 3'our name, 3'our place of residence, and your 
business or occu})ation. 

Ml'. SciioLLi:. My name is Auguste Scholle. I live at 2710 Vincetta, 
Pvoyal Oak, .Alich. I am the Michigan AFL-CIO State president. 

Tlie C'liAiRMAN. Thank 3- ou, sir. 

Pi'oceed, Mr. Ivenned3\ 

Mr. Kennedy. You are president of the state council, ISIichigan 
Federation of Labor ; is that right ? 

Mr. SciioLLE. And CIO. 

Mr. Kexxedy. And how long liave 3^ou been with the union move- 
ment, Mr. Scholle ( 

Mr. ScnoLLE. Since 11)3:3. 

Mr. Kennedy. And how l(jni>' have vou held this position as head of 
(lieAFI^CIO? 

Mr. ScnoLLE. Well, only for 1 year, since the merger in February 
of 1058. 

Mr. Kennedy. And ])rior to that, what position did 3"ou hold? 

Mr. kSciioi.EE. Prior to that I v.as named b}- John Lewis in 1937 as 
a i-egional director of the CIO in northwestern Ohio. I was later 
transferred to Chicago, and then in V.KV.) I was brought into Michigan 
as a regional director. 

In 1940 I was elected president of the state CIO, and held both 
j()1)S as regional director and president of the State CIO until the 
mergei- in 1958, when I Avas elected to the combined organization's 
])resiclency. 

]\Ir. Kennedy. In your operations in Detroit, did \'ou have an3' 
contact or comiection with any of the so-called jukebox locals in that 
area ? 

Mv. Sciroi.LE. Yes, I did. As a matter of fact, in 1940, not long- 
after I had come in and assumed the responsibilities as regional 
director of the organization for Michigan, after getting acquainted 
with th.e various local unions over which I had to administer, I learned 
tliat there vras one that had been, prior to the time I came in there, 
chartered by the United Radio, Electrical and Machine Workers of 
America, which 1 learned was representing tlie em|)loyees of certain 
oi-ganizations that were in the music-box machine opci'ation and Avhat 
they called at that time the jukebox operators. 

Do you want me to go on ( 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; v.ould you, i)lease '? 

Mr. Scholle. "Well, not long — I don't know exactly liow long it 
was after I had lirst learned of the identity of the members of this 
organization, I learned that the}' h.ad put into elfect a system of put- 
ting what they called at the time union labels on each machine that 
was put in each location, and that their dues, consec{uently. had been 
far in excess of the actual number of members that they had. 

In other words, the3' were not collecting a dollar a month dues from 
men or vromen as union members, but, as I under.stood it, and as it 



17444 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

was described to me by botli officers of the organization at that time 
and others, they were charging $1 for a stamp and for the use of the 
union label stamp on the machine. 

This was followed np very shortly after that by some of these union 
members picketing places that did not have the union label on the 
machine. Of course, I learned tlien that it had to be a certain type 
of machine as well as a jukebox. When I got this information and 
had established its veracity, I called the officers of this organization 
together and told them that, amongst other things, I was responsible 
for the good name of the organization that I represented there, the 
CIO, and that we could not tolerate this situation. 

I consequently got hold of the national officers of the United Elec- 
trical, Radio and Machine Workers, and advised them of the situation, 
and told them that they should immediately revoke that charter; that 
we couldn't tolerate this kind of situation in the trade union movement. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was Local 973 of the XTE, was it not? 

Mr. SciiOLLE. I think that is the correct number. 

Mr. Kennedy. No. 737. 

Mr. SciioLLE. I wouldn't remember exactly the number, but in any 
event, shortly thereafter the charter was revoked, and, of course, as 
far as we were concerned at that period of time, it cleansed the situa- 
tion. Later on, if you want me to continue 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ; would you, please ? 

Mr. SciiOLLE. I don't know how long it was after that, but I learned 
again that not identically the same group of people, but for the most 
part many of them that were associated with it, had blossomed out 
with another charter unbeknownst to me and the CIO union. This 
time it was the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Employees 
Union. 

Mr. Kennedy. About 1946 or 1947 % 

Mr. ScHOLLE. That is right. Well, as soon as I learned that they 
had obtained this charter without my knowledge, naturally I pursued 
the same course and we again had this charter revoked for the same 
identical reasons. 

I think that there was some slight difference, as I recall it. I think 
that one of the active members of the organization at that time — I am 
not sure whether he was an officer, but I think that he was also putting 
out machines, and the same practice was engaged in where they were 
collecting dues not off of members, but off of a union label. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was a union that existed for the help and 
assistance of the employers, rather than the employees? 

Mr. SciiOLLE. Well, very definitely. At least that was my reaction 
to it. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was why you took the action against both of 
these unions at that time? 

Mr. S(;ii0ELE. Well, not only that. But very frankly, it was pur- 
suing a course Avhich, to me, was totally irreconcilable with good 
union principles. I didn't want any part of anything like tliat going 
on in the organization o\'er which I had administrative authority. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you were approached later in 1940 

Mr. ScFioLLE. I don't recall exactl v what year it was. 

Mr. Kennedy. About 1946 or 1947? 

Mr. ScHOLEE. Well, I thought it was the latter part of 1945, but 
my memory may not be exactly correct in relation to the date. But I 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17445 

had three dirt'erent visits from two men who came in and asked that 
we issue a cliarter in this area. 

On tlie first visit, they simply came in and inquired as to how much 
it wouhl cost. I very carefully explained that the fee was very 
nominal, nothing more tlian $25 for the cost of the books and the 
charter and the other paraphernalia that went along with it. 

But when I learned that tliey were not employees, that they were 
there representing people who wei'e in the business of distributing 
jukeboxes. I told them that we never gave a charter or sold a charter 
to anyone in the business; that they had to have bona fide and legiti- 
mate employees who were organized, or wdio would be willing to be 
organized, request this kind of charter. 

Sir. Kennedy. A\niat kind of people were they ? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Well, they were two men. We have tried to remember 
their names. Unfortmiately, no one in the office — I never kept a 
record of it. It seems to me that their names were quite distinctly 
Italian as I recall it, and as the others corroborate. 

One was a relatively heavy-set fellow, about — I presume at that 
time perhaps 40 to 45 years old, blue shirt, gray trousers, dark hair. 
The other fellow wdio accompanied him was relatively medium size, 
about 160 pounds. I would judge that he was about 35. Frankly, 
they were the kind of people that I didn't think we wanted to have 
obtain a CIO charter. 

Mr. KENNEDY. Were they so-called gangster types, would you say ? 

Mr. ScnoLLE. Well, I would say that they certainly could have been 
put in that role in Hollywood. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they came this first time and you explained to 
them that a union has to be formed by employees. Then they came 
back to see you again ? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Yes. On the second visit they came back — they said, 
they never showed me, but they said they had 65 people signed up, 
ancl they were described as "They are all good boys, they are our own 
boys." 

I presumed that they were salesmen, repairmen, collectors, et cetera. 
I again advised them very carefully and very patiently that we didn't 
give charters out to employers; that if they wanted a charter that 
the employees would have to be called to a meeting by a bona fide 
representative of our organization; that we would then sit down with 
them across the table and bargain with them for the employees. 

They tried to explain to me that this wouldn't be necessary, that 
they could get along very well. I was then asked how much a charter 
would cost, with the intimation that there had to be a price for 
everything. A fellow reached in his blue silk shirt pocket, rolled out 
a roll of bills wrapped up with a rubber band, and said, "Here is the 
downpay ment. What else does it take ? " He said, "We will take care 
of you." I said. "That is what I am afraid of." 

j\Ir. Kennedy. Was there any figure mentioned as to how much 
they would pay you? 

Mr. Scholle. Well, the intimation was that the downpayment 
would amomit to $10,000. It wasn't exactly stated as such, but they 
said that there would be 10 grand in it for me. 

I told them that — again I tried to carefully explain to them 
that we just didn't have CIO charters for ^snlA This r>j"ett.v much 



17446 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

ended that visit. T (lou't think that 1 liad satisfactorily explained to 
them because one fellow seemed very seriously puzzled. He said, 
"Well, you are the boss, aren't you?'' and I said, "Yes, I presume you 
would assume that. I am the highest authority of the organization in 
this area,*' and he said, "Well, then, Avhy csin't I buy a charter?" 

I tried to tell him again that the charters were not for sale. But 
I think I failed to convince him because they came back the third 
time. On their third visit the discussion wasn't quite so pleasant. As 
a matter of fact, well, there is no use of repeating it here, but I invited 
them to get out and stay out and not bother me any more. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were very harsh words, were there not ? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Well, they insisted that everybody had a price on 
something. They even intimated that they couldn't understand. I 
think the one fellow was quite sincere in not being able to understand 
or at least he appeared that way to me. He couldn't quite understand 
that anybody wouldn't have some price at which they would be willing 
to deal. 

I tried to convey to them very carefully that this was an impos- 
sibility under the structure of our organization, that it couldn't occur. 
But I guess I wasn't a very good convincer, as far as they were 
concerned. 

Mr. Kennedy. There wasn't any ({uestion that these people were 
desperately in want of a charter at that time? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Well, I would say that they wanted a charter badly 
enough to have paid a very substantial sum of money. I don't know. 
It just seemed to me that they wanted a charter in the worst possible 
kind of way. 

I have never seen anybody quite so adamant and so arduous in their 
efforts to obtain something as those fellows were, particularly a CIO 
charter. You know, a lot of people didn't think they were worth 
much at one time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently in Detroit, a charter was issued by 
the Teamsters, and specifically through the efforts of INIr. HolTa, for 
local 985, giving the Teamsters jurisdiction over this. Did you know 
anything about that? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Well, I learned about it and read about it in the 
paper. I think this was only about not more than a month after the 
last visit they paid me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That local 985 charter was issued? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Yes. 

The Chairman. Did the same ]')eoi)]e get the charter from Hotfa 
or from the Teamsters? 

Mr. SciioLLE. Well, Senator 

The Chairman. That is, as far as you know? 

Mr. SciiOLLE. I couldn't attest to "that because I don't know. All 
I know is that there was a charter issued. I didn't inquire as to their 
identity. 

The Chairman. But the charter was issued for the same purpose 
as one was sought from you? 

Mr. S(^iioLi,K. I would naturally assume so. 

The Chairman. In other words, it did fill that purpose and fill 
that mission in that area and over that particular jukebox enterprise? 

Mr. Scholle. Yes. Yes, very definitely. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17447 

The Chaiioiax. So what they didn't get frojii you, obviously was 
supplied, a moutli or so later, by the Teamsters? 

Mr. ScHOi.LE. That is right. 

Tlie CiiAiiiMAN. And whether the same particular individuals 
secured tlie charter that contacted you, you don't knovr. 

Mr. SciioLLE. Well, of course not. 

The Chairman. But the facts did happen. I mean, the reality of 
the thing materialized shortly afterwards. 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Very definitely. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Subsequently, in later years, specifically in 1050, 
you were approached again about issuing a charter; is that right? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Yes. I was requested again to issue or have a charter 
issued to cover this jurisdiction through a fellow that I had not 
known, who first wa'ote me a letter from Toledo, Ohio, a fellow by 
the name of Duck, I believe; Eddie Duck. 

As a matter of fact, he wrote me several letters and on one occasion 
came to the Detroit office to see me. As far as I was able to discern, 
it seemed to me that he was sincere enough in his desire to establish a 
wholesome organization, although I have no way of knowing this. 

I explained to him in both letters and verbally over long-distance 
phone on several occasions that we did not have any desire to issue 
charter to people in this field because of the very bad experiences that 
we had previously had in 19-10 and 1941 and 1942. 

In my discussion of this matter Vt'ith Allen Havwood, now deceased, 
who was then the national director of the ClO, the organizational 
director, he advised me and wrote me a letter which I later sent a 
copy of to Mr. Duck, explaining that we had similar experiences in 
Cincinnati, Ohio, and that we under no circumstances would issue 
another charter in this area. 

It seems to me that Mr. Duck had suggested at that time that we 
have some type of regionwide charter. I recall that what they wanted 
essentially was a charter that would be broader than one community 
and transcend State lines, as a matter of fact. 

It seemed to me that they wanted a charter that would cover a 
geographic area extending from Cincinnati to Detroit, embracing 
Toledo and Columbus and several other conmiunities in betvreen. But 
nevertheless, we definitely and positively rejected this application, 
and from that time on we have heard no more of it except wliat Ave 
have heard about the thing in the newspapers. 

Mr. Kennedy. You liad some correspondence with Richard Gosser 
in connection with IVIr. Duck ? 

Mr. SciioLLE. Yes. Richard Gosser sent me a letter which simpl>' 
substantiated our own attitudes, that there was an element of racke- 
teering — well, perhaps that isn't the right word for it. I don't want 
to try to indict anybody as far as union members were concerned, 
but that there was a type of activity that obviously was associated 
with the jukebox industry which certainly was not conducive to build- 
ing the reputation of organized labor and holding it in good graces 
with the public. As a consequence, we didn't want to get into the 
field. 

Senator Ervin. In other words, you considered the method of oper- 
ation which they intended to follow could not be reconciled with 
sound principles of unionism, did you ? 



17448 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, SciioiXE. That is right. 

The Chairman. I present to you what appears to be a photostatic 
copy of a letter dated January 19, 1950, from Mr. Grosser to you. Will 
you examine it and state if you identify it, please, sir ? 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. SciioLLE. Yes; that is the letter. 

The Chairman. You received that letter from Mr. Gosser? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Yes, I did. 

The Chairman. It may be made exhibit 75. 

(Document referred to was marked exhibit 75 for reference and 
will be found in the appendix on p. 17692.) 

The Chairman. I would like to read an excerpt from it, at least. 

Who was Mr. Gosser ? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. Richard Gosser is the TJAW vice president whose 
home is in Toledo, Ohio, Avho obviously knew Mr. Duck personally. 
I have known Mr. Gosser since 1933. 

The Chairman. He says in this letter : 

There is no question in my mind that Mr. Eddie Duck is a very honest and 
sincere fellow. He has put in a lot of hard work with the CIO, but in my 
opinion this has nothing to do with the CIO entering into the field you .speak 
of in your letter. Most of these men are paid very high and controlled by their 
boss, who has to be some type of racketeer to stay in business. 

Apparently he recognized them for what they were and agreed 
with you that a charter should not be issued to them ; is that correct ? 

Mr, ScHOLLE, Not only correct, but that corroborates my own 
opinion of it. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. I say it is not only correct, but it corroborates my own 
reaction to it. 

The Chairman. So you submitted it to your higher official, advising 
him of what you were doing and why you were doing it, and he fully 
agreed with you? 

Mr. SciiOLLE. That is right. 

The Chairman. And this is what he wrote you in connection 
therewith? 

Mr. ScHOLLE. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. If you operated in Detroit and found this out in a 
relatively short period of time, what explanation do you have for 
your fellow union official, Mr. Hoffa, granting the charter? Answer 
that one, 

^ Mr, ScHOLLE, Well, I know Jimmy, I have known him for a long 
time. 

There are some people in the trade union movement as leaders who 
are not dedicated to idealism. The overwhelming majority of them, 
I believe, are. Some, I believe, are unfortunately the victims of their 
own fears, for their own economic security, and become fast-buck boys. 

Unfortunately, I would assume that temptation was too great for 
some leaders, and perhaps this Avas true in his case. I don't know. 
My own reaction has been that if he issued the charter down there 
shortly after I was offered some money for it, and he didn't get the 
money, and he probably has acquired some money, I would assume — 
T don't know, 

I suppose that he didn't care. I don't presume that he is as con- 
cerned, well, with trying to keep the organized labor movement's 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17449 

name clean and wholesome and appealing to the i)eople, I can't give 
you any other reason. Of course, I can't judge other people because 
I am not God, either. 

jVIr, Kennedy. What about Mr. Hoffa placing his wife on the pay- 
roll of Jimmy James' union in her maiden name? 

Mr. SciiOLLE. Well, I presume that if you are one who is seeking 
to get all you can for yoiu'self out of any situation in which you are 
involved, that this would be another course that would feasibly enrich 
your own pockets, and, consequently, could be easily pursued. I pre- 
sume that once you start in that sort of direction — I don't know why 
there should be any particular limitation to it. If you are going to 
look for ways and means of enhancing your financial situation, I pre- 
sume that that is about as legitimate as anything could be, getting your 
wife put on a payroll somewhere. I even understand that it is done in 
other places. 

I am sorry. We can strike that from the record. No aspersions. 

The Chairman. That is all right. Let it stay in the record. That 
is perfectly all right. You expressed what I was thinking. 

Are there any further questions ? 

I just wanted to make this observation : 

I don't know you, I have never seen you before and, therefore, in 
view of your demeanor and manner of testifying, you make a very 
good impression as an honest, sincere, and devoted man, dedicated 
to the best ideals and principles of unionism. If I am not mistaken 
in that judgment of you, I think I can say without any reservations 
that if all union leaders were of the character and quality that you 
have displayed here in your testimony this afternoon, there would 
be very little need, if any, for the work of this committee. 

It is tragic, in my judgment, that there are some, as you have pointed 
out, who pursue a course that reflects upon unionism, which tends to 
degrade and create disrespect for what ought to be and what is 
intended by many to be, and should be, an organization with the 
highest ideals, dedicated to the betterment and to the benefit of 
humanity as a whole. 

It is tragic. It is terribly regrettable that some people exploit their 
fellow man in this fashion solely for self-enrichment. 

I commend you highly, sir. I think you are a great credit to the 
labor movement, based upon your testimony here today. 

Mr. ScHOLLE. I certainly appreciate those very kind remarks. 
Senator. 

The Chairman. Senator Ervin. 

Senator Ervin. I would like to concur in what the chairman has 
said. Unfortunately, a lot of people have power but do not have 
enough wisdom to go along with it and enough self-restraint. Power 
is the most dangerous thing that anybody ever undertakes to handle, 
and it takes a mighty good man to handle it wisely and properly. I 
want to commend you for what you have told us and for what you 
liave done. 

^Ir. SciiOLLE. Thanks very much. 

I just want to make this one observation: I think that the over- 
whelming majority of trade union leaders are idealists, as am I. I 
admit it. There are some, however, who I, unfortunately, find in 
many instances I have to apologize for or hope that something can 

36751 — 59— pt. 48 16 



17450 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

be (lone by you people to lielp to eradicate, as far as we are concerned, 
because the dedicated trade union leaders don't like racketeers in our 
midst any more than anybody else anywhere in the country. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

The conmiittee will stand in recess until tomorrow morning at 
10 : 30. We will convene in room 3302, New Senate Office Building. 

(Memembers of the select committee present at the taking of the 
recess were Senators McClellan and Ervin.) 

(Whereupon, at 4:10 p.m., the select committee recessed, to re- 
convene at 10 :30 a.m., Wednesday, April 8, 1959, in room 3302, New 
Senate Office Building.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR 3IANAGEMENT FIELD 



WEDNESDAY, APRIL 8, 1959 

U.S. Senate, 
Select Committee on iMrROPER Activities 

In the Labor or Managejuent Field, 

Washington, D.C . 

The select committee met at 10:30 a.m., pursuant to Senate Keso- 
lution 44, agreed to February 2, 1959, in room 3302, Senate Office 
Building, Senator .Tolin L. McClellan (chairman of the select commit- 
tee) presiding. 

Present : Senator Jolin L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas ; Senator 
Karl K. Mundt, Ivepublican, South Dakota ; Senator Barry Goldwater, 
Republican, Arizona; Senator Carl T. Curtis, Republican, Nebraska. 

Also present : Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel ; Walter R. ^lay, 
assistant counsel; John P. Constancly, assistant counsel; Artliur G. 
Kaplan, assistant counsel; Sherman S. Willse, investigator; Ruth 
Young Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present at tlie convening of the 
session were Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

Tlie Chairman. Call tlie next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. INlr. Cliairman, at the hearing yesterday afternoon 
we went into the operation of Jimmy James, and we also went into 
the establislnnent of the Bilvin Distributing Co. We will be going 
more extensively into tliat company as the hearings go on, but I 
would like this morning to put a little bit of its background into the 
record, and for tliat })urpose I would like to first call a member of 
the staif, Mr. Artliur Kaplan, to put in tlie incorporation papers of 
the Bilvin Distributing Co. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kaplan, will you come around? 
. Mr. Kennedy. Pardon me, Mr. Chairman. ^Ir. Walter ]\fay will 
put til em in. 

The Chatr:man. ISIr. ISfay, have you been previously sworn ? 

Mr. May. No, Senator. 

The Chairman. 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. May. I do. 

17451 



17452 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

TESTIMONY OF WALTER R. MAY— Resumed 

The Chairman. Will you state your name and your present 
emplo^anent, please ? 

Mr. ]May. Walter R. May, assistant counsel to this committee. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have the articles of incorporation of 
the Bilvin Distributing; Co., which ]\Ir. Bufalino was a member of 
prior to becoming head of local 985 of the Teamsters? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. I have a photostatic copy of those articles. 

Mr, Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, these are the papers. 

The Chairman. You identify these photostatic copies? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. They may be made exhibit No. Y6. 

(Documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 76" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, Mr. jNIay, whom do they show as being the 
incorporators of the Bilvin Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. May. These articles which are dated February 8, 1946, show 
that the first board of directors consists of William E. Bufalino, 
Samuel J. Tocco, and John Priziola. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have also had the history of the backing of Mr. 
Angelo Meli in this company. 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. We will go more extensively at a later time into the 
activities of Mr. Meli in connection with the Bilvin Distributing Co., 
as well as certain otlier people. 

But, Mr. Chairman, it shows in those articles of incorporation that 
Mr. John Priziola was one of the incorporators of the Bilvin Dis- 
tributing Co. He is of some interest to the committee and I would 
like to have permission to call him as a witness. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Priziola. 

The Chairman. 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. Priziola. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN M. PRIZIOLA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFORD ALLDER 

The Chairman. Will you be seated, please. 

State your name, your place of residence, and your business or 
occupation, please. 

Mr. Priziola. My name is John Priziola. 

The CiTAiR^iAN. Let us have a little bit of order. We can hardly 
hear. 

Now let us start again. Will you state your name, your place of 
residence, and your business or occupation, please. 

Mr. Priziola. My name is John Priziola. I live at 1349 Devonshire, 
Grosse Pointe Park 30, Michigan. 

The Chairman. Sir, do you have any business or occupation? 

Mr. Prizioa. I decline to answer on the ground my answer might 
tend to incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17453 

The Chairman. All right. You have counsel, have you ? 

Mr. Pkiziola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Counsel, identify yourself for the record. 

Mr. Alldek. H. Clifford Allder, Washington, D.C. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Priziola, could you tell us why you became an 
incorporator of the Bilvin Distributing Co ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the ground that I might in- 
criminate myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us what your main source of income 
was at that time? 

Mr. Priziola. I respectfully decline to answer because my answer 
might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us wdiat your source of income is at 
the present time ? 

Mr. Priziola. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground that I 
might tend to incriminate myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to the information we have, you are one 
of the main traffickers in narcotics in the United States; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. I*kiztola. I respectfully decline to answer on the ground my 
answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Priziola is extremely important in view of the 
testimony that we had yesterday- of the activities of the Bilvin Dis- 
tributing Co., and Mr. Bufalino, and then Mr. Bufalino taking over 
local 085 of the Teamsters and still controlling that local, and the fact 
that there was an effort by certain groups in Detroit to obtain control 
of the coin-machine industry, particularly the jukeboxes. Mr. 
Priziola's background and activities play an extremely important role. 

I would therefore like to call a representative of the Bureau of 
Narcotics to give some background on Mr. Priziola. 

Senator Curtis. May I ask Priziola one question first, Mr. Chair- 
man ? 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Priziola, you have declined to tell us what your 
business is. I shall not go into that part of it or push that part of it 
further at this time. But J do want to ask, has any labor organization 
been connected with or utilized in any way in any phase to make your 
business operations operate? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the gi'ound that my answer 
might tend to incriminate me, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Do you laiow any union officials? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the ground that my answer 
might tend to incriminate me, sir. 

Senator Curtis. That is all, Mr. Chairman, 

Tlie Chairman. Call the next witness. You may remain seated 
where you are, and you will be further interrogated. Call the next 
witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Siragusa. 

The Chairman. Will you come forward, please? 

Would you mind accommodating us by moving over into the other 
chairs temporarily ? 

Mr. Allder. Certainlv, !Mr. Chairman. 



17454 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Be seated, Mr. Siragusa. You have not been sworn, have you? 

Mr. Siragusa. No, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. Will you be sworn? 

You do solemnly swear that the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Siragusa. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES SIRAGUSA 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Siragusa. My name is Charles Siragusa, S-i-r-a-g-u-s-a, and 
I am a field supervisor for enforcement, of the U.S. Bureau of Nar- 
cotics, in Washington, D.C., and I live at 2905 Farm Road, Alex- 
andria, Va. 

The Chairman. Hoav long have you been in your present position ? 

Mr. Siragusa. I have been in my present position since last August 
of 1958, and I have l^een with the Federal Bureau of Narcotics since 
1939, and prior to that 4 years with the Immigration and Naturaliza- 
tion Service. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were field supervisor for enforcement since 
August 1, 1958; is that right? 

Mr. Siragusa. Yes, sir. 

jMr. Kennedy. And prior to that you were district supervisor of 
the American Embassy, Rome, Italy, since September of 1951 ? 

Mr. Siragusa. District supervisor with the Bureau of Narcotics, 
stationed at the American Embassy. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you have operated and made arrests and 
seizures of narcotics in Italy, France, Switzerland, Germany, Greece, 
Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, and several other countries; is that right? 

Mv. Siragusa. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you worked in a total of 25 different countries? 

Mr. Siragusa. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1948 you worked in Puerto Rico setting up (lieir 
narcotics squad? 

Mr. Siragusa. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. On January 23 ,1951, you got the Treasury l)e])art- 
menfs gold medal; is that right? 

Mr. SiRAoisA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And in the summer of 1956, the Italian GoNeriuneiil 
made you a knight? 

Mr. Siragusa. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. For yoiu- services along (lie:e lines? 

Mr. SiiaGUSA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are an Ttalo-American ? 

Mr. Siragusa. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And v<>ur partMits or sfraiidparenls came from 
Sicily? 

Mr. Siragusa. My parents ciime from Sicily. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17455 

?.Ir. Kexnkdy. Your parents came from Sicily? 

Mr. SiRAOusA. I Avus born in Xew York City. 

Mr. Kexxedy. Now, Mr. Siragusa, in the course of your studies aiul 
investigations both here and abroad, do you liaA-e anv information on 
Mr. John Priziola ? 

^fr. SiRAGi'SA. Yes; Ave Inwe considerable information in our tiles 
pertainint": to John Priziohi. His most commonly knoAvn alias in the 
underAA'orlcl is Papa John. He Avas born in 1893 in Partinico, Sicily, 
and Ave consider him to be the head of the Paitinico branch of the 
Mafia. 

The CiiAiR.ACAx. What branch of tlie Mafia ? 

Mr. Siragusa. Partinico. 

The CiiAiRMAx. "Would you further identify that, please ? 

Mr. Siragusa. Partinico is a village of perhaps a population of 
about 35,000 people, approximately 40 miles from Palermo. 

The Chairmax. From Avhere ? 

Mr. Siragusa. Palermo, Sicily. 

Mr. Kexxedy. Isn't it correct that Kaifaele Quasarano avIio is iioav 
o])erating in Deti'oit also comes from the same toAA-n in Italy ^ 

Mr. SiRAGi'SA. He is more connnonly knoAvn as Jimmy. He Avas 
born in Pittsburgh, Pa., but his parents came from Partinico. He is 
also a member of the Partinico faction of the Mafia. 

Mr. Kexxedy. And he Avill feature quite prominently in your testi- 
mony this morning ? 

Mr. Siragusa. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kex'X'edy. Would you give us some more of the background of 
Priziola ? 

Mr. Siragusa. Priziola — Ave consider him to be probably the most 
important trafficker out of Detroit, among the leading traffickers in 
the United States. His gang has been sup])lying outlets in Xcav York 
City for many years, one of tlie larger criminal Ncav York City outlets 
for heroin, received from the Priziola gang. 

There is a certain John Ormento, P>ig John Ormento. He Avas 
arrested just last AAeek, incidental^. He has been a fugitiA'e for ap- 
proximately 1 year. He is a codefendant in the same narcotic con- 
spiracy case recently prosecuted successfully in NeAv York City, in 
Avhich Vito Genovese Avas couA'icted. 

The Chairmax'. Did 3^011 Avork on that case ? 

JNIr. Siragtsa. Yes, sir; I Avorked on that case, and just about every 
major national and international narcotic trafficker case conducted 
by my bureau. 

The Chairman. GenoA'ese Avas a Avitness before this connnittee. 

Mr. Siragusa. No, sir ; I Avas not a 

The Chairman, I said Genovese Avas. Maybe I should qualify that. 
He AA'as called as a Avitness. He failed to testify A-ery fi'eely. All 
right. 

Mr. Kex'XEOy. Priziola came to tliis country at an early age and 
Avas naturalized in Detroit in 103(); is that right '. 

Mr. Siragusa. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kexxedy. He has been arrested a ninnber of times, but his last 
conviction Avas 1919 ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Siragusa. Yes, sir. He has a total of 20 arrests and three con- 
A'ictions, dating back from 1917. The last one. I believe, Avas in 1951. 



17456 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Some of these convictions were two convictions for carrying concealed 
weapons. He had three other arrests for carrying concealed weapons, 
one arrest for murder, five for armed robbery, two for prohibition, and 
three for larceny. One of the larceny charges was theft of whiskey. 

]Mr. Kennedy. "What do you think is shown by the fact that he hasn't 
been convicted since 1919 ? 

Mr. SiiiAGusA. It shows he is a pretty shrewd individual. 

Mr. Kennedy, Because he has been involved in all of these matters? 
From the records that you have, and the work that you have done, you 
have established him as a major figure in narcotics in the country? 

Mr. SiRAGtJSA. Not only a major figure in the narcotics traffic, but 
his prominence in the underworld first began during prohibition days, 
possibly even before ]:)rohibition days. He was in the bootlegging 
racket, numbers, gambling. 

Mr, Kennedy. Involved with him in the narcotics is who else from 
the Detroit area ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Raffaele Quasarano, Jimmy Quasarano. 

Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Siragusa is going on to testify 
in connection with Mr. Priziola and how he is involved in some of these 
narcotics rings, as well as Mr. Quasarano, as well as certain other in- 
dividuals who have featured so far in our hearings or will come up 
later on in the hearings. 

He has prepared, with the staff, a list of the individuals whose names 
will arise in the course of the hearing. 

The Chair]\ian, Do you have a copy of the list before you that you 
helped prepare? 

Mr. Siragusa, Yes, sir ; I have it now. 

The Chairman, Do you identify it as such ? 

Mr, Siragusa, Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. This list may be made exhibit No. 77, just for refer- 
ence. It is not regarded as testimony, but just as helpful information 
as we try to follow the testimony, 

(List referred to was marked exhibit No. 77 for reference and may 
be found in the files of the Select Committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. In the past there have been two narcotics groups that 
have been operating in Detroit ; is that right ? 

Mr. SiiMGusA. Yes ; that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. One was headed by a man by the name of Giuseppe 
Catalanotte? 

Mr, Siragusa, Yes, He is known as "The Old Man,'' or "Cockeye." 
He has a defect with one of his eyes, 

Mr, Kennedy, His right-hand man was who ? 

Mr, Siragusa. Paolo Cimino. 

Mr. Kennedy. And tlien in 1953, Catalanotte was convicted on a 
Fedei-al narcotics cliarge and deported to Italy? 

Mr. SiRAGiTSA. Yes, sir; convicted in Detroit, in Federal Court. 

Mr. Kennedy, What happened ? 

Mr. Siragusa, He was convicted. He received a seven-year sen- 
tence, I believe, and in lieu of completion of certain of the sentence 
he was paroled and de]>orted. He was deported to Italy. Tlien about 
a yeai- ago he left Italy and went to Canada, He was ex])elled from 
(^anada. He went to Havana, ('uba, where he is presently living noAV. 

Ml-. Kennedy. Who is he doAvn in Cu])a with at the present time? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17457 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. With a fellow named Onofrio Minaudo. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who is he ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Onofi-io Minaudo, alias "Ono", is another racketeer 
from Detroit. He fled the United States. He left Detroit about 2 
years a^o to avoid prosecution on an income tax evasion case. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to ask JVIr. Kaplan a question, Mr. 
Chairman. 

The Chairman. Have you been sworn ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kaplan, yesterday Mr. Brilliant testified that 
when the Bilvin Distributing Co. was set up there were a number of 
companies that were established which were the operating companies, 
which Avere responsible for getting the Wurlitzer machine on loca- 
tion ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he testified that a number of these companies 
were controlled or operated by known hoodlums or relatives of known 
hoodlums in the Detroit area ? 

INIr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. One of the companies which performed this service 
for the Bilvin Distributing Co. was the Arizona Music Co.; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do we know about the Arizona Music Co. as 
it refers to the testmiony of Mr. Siragusa ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Well, on the 20tli day of November 1946, the Arizona 
Music Co. filed a certificate of copartnership in the county of Wayne, 
the State of Michigan, and listed their business address as 345 
JMacomb, Detroit, and the full names of the persons composing said 
partnersliip are "Ono" Minaudo and Domenic Maltese. 

jMr. Kennedy. This Minaudo is the same Minaudo that has just 
been testified to that is now down in Havana, Cuba, with Catalanotte, 
who fled the United States to beat an income tax evasion case; is that 
right? 

Mr. SiiLVGUSA. Yes, sir ; the same individual. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Minaudo was also convicted in absentia in 
Italy on various charges, in.cluding murder? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1952 he was convicted with Sam Perrone and 
others in conspiring to prevent employees of the Detroit, Mich., Stove 
Co. from joining the UAW-CIO ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on July 30, 1953, he was ordered deported on 
the grounds he entered this country illegally. He is now down in 
Havana, Cuba ; is that right ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. He was deported from Italy and went 
from Ital}' to Havana. 

Mr. Kennedy. The Arizona Music Co., was one of the companies 
operated by this man, which was handling the distribution of the 
Wurlitzer machine for the Bilvin Distributing Co.; is that correct? 



17458 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir ; it is. 

Mr. Kennedy, And we ha"\'e had some testimony on three or four 
other companies, and we will put some further records about them 
in at a later time. 

Mr. Kaplan. We also have information, Mv. Kennedy, that the 
Arizona Music Co. was purchased, or at least there was a paper 
purchase of it, by the Meltone Music Co., which was Vincent Meli's 
company in 1948, and at the time the financial paper to the manufac- 
turers of the jukeboxes were guaranteed by Angelo IMeli and Angelo 
Polizzi. 

ISIr. Kennedy. Angelo Polizzi is also a well-known figure, is he 
not? 

Mr. SiR-\GUSA. Yes, sir ; in Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. His right-hand man you mentioned earlier was 
Paolo Cimino? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir ; Paolo Cimino. 

!Mr. Kennedy. What happened to him ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. About a year ago we heard that he had been 
murdered. He has disappeared from tlie face of the earth. He has 
a denaturalization-deportation proceeding pending against him with 
the Department of Justice. The denaturalization proceeding is based 
on the discovery by my office in Rome of an extensive criminal record 
in Italy, which fact he withheld at the time of obtaining naturaliza- 
tion papers. 

Mr. Kennedy. The other and much larger Detroit narcotics mob 
A\a,s one headed by Quasarano and Priziola ; is that riglit ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir ; that is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kaj^jlan, do we also find that Mr. Quasarano is 
in one of these companies which handled the machines for the Bilvin 
Distributing Co. ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. Mr. Quasarano was associated with Pete 
Tocco and Frank Matranga in the Jay-Cee Music Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Jay-Cee ? 

Mr. Kaplan. J-a-y C-e-e Music Co. In 1946 he was one of the 
coplaintiffs along with Carl Diliberto and Vincent Meli, attempting 
to restrain the AFL Music Maintenance Workers Union, Jinnny 
James' miion, from picketing the locations in which they had put 
their new Wurlitzer nuichines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Quasarano is also a close associate of Mr. 
Finazzo, is that right, from Detroit ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir; they ovv'ned at one time, I don't know if they 
still own it, the Motor City Gym in Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have had the testimony already before the com- 
mittee, Mr. Chaii'mau, of the relationship which existed between Mr. 
Quasarano and Mr. Finazzo on one hand, and Mv. ITotl'a and iVFr. 
Brennan on tlie other. AVe also have the testimony that Mr. 
Quasarano, this major narcotics figure, took a trip to New York 
with Mr. Owen Bert Brennan, staying in the Hotel Lexington with 
him at the time that Mr. Brennan was obtaining lights for Mr. Fmbrel 
Davidson, the figliter Mr. Tlod'a and Mr. Brennan had dui-ing the 
])eriod 1952 and 195:5. Telephone calls Avere made from Mr. l^ren- 
nan's and Mr. Quasarano's room to Hymie "The INIink'' Walhnan, 
wlu) has bocii indicated in Xew ^'ork for fixing prizefights along 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17459 

with Fninkie Carlo, as well as to Al "Weil of the International Box- 
ing Club, who was barred as a manager in the State of California, 
and also to certain narcot ics figures. 

AVe had testimony in connection with that last year from a repre- 
sentative of the Bureau of Narcotics. 

Those are the two big groups that Avere operating in Detroit. 

There was also an operation in St. Louis which has a close con- 
nection with these people ? 

Mr. SiRAGusA. That is correct. 

Mr. Kexnp:dy. Who is head of that ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Anthony Lopiparo, Anthony Giordano, and Ralph 
Caleca. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was these three individuals who formed the An- 
thony Novelty Co. ; is that right ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is one of the big jukebox operations in the city 
of St. Louis ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And these individuals, Mr. Chairman, will also fig- 
ure more prominentl}^ in our hearings. 

Since the time of the forming of the Anthony Novelty Co., Mr. 
John J. Vitale has become associated with that company; is that 
right? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And INIr. Vitale is also a major underworld figure 
in the city of St. Louis ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, he is. He was convicted on a Federal narcotics 
violation and served 7 years in the Federal i)enitentiary. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you give us a little background on Giordano? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. He has 17 arrests and 2 convictions, both convictions 
for concealed weapons. He has been questioned on murder charges. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about Lopiparo? 

Mr. Seragusa. Ix)piparo has been arrested 10 times, 2 convictions, 
1 for internal revenue laws and tax evasion. In fact, at the present 
time I belieA'e he is serving a sentence now. He has also been arrested 
for violation of the Federal narcotics laws and on murder charges. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was the go-between between the St. Louis group 
and the Detroit group? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Anthony Giordano. I think Anthony Giordano. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was operating in Italy ? IVIr. Salvatore Vitale? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Salvatore Vitale was operating in Italy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he operating for the St. Louis group and the 
Detroit group of Priziola and Quasarano? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. He was servicing both groups with huge quantities 
of heroin. 

Zvlr. Kennedy. Who was Salvatore Vitale^ 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Salvatore Vitale was convicted in 1037 on a narcotics 
charge. He served 2 years of his sentence. He was then deported to 
Italy. He remained in Italy until December of 1951, when he pro- 
cured an Italian passport and went to Venezuela. From Venezuela 
he attempted to flv over the United States ostensibly in transit to 
Italv. 



17460 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Our information was that lie fully intended to debark the airplane 
somewhere in the United States. So the customs officials and immi- 
gration authorities arrested him in February of 1952. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he have a relationship with a man by the name 
of Frank Coppola ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. He and Frank Coppola. 

Mr. Kennedy. He is known as Three Fino;ers ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Three Fingers. He has two fingers missing from 
one of his hands. He and Frank Coppola knew one another from 
Detroit in the old days. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Coppola had been deported to Italy from the 
United States ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir ; he was deported. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there was a dispute then between Coppola and 
Vitale? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. There was a dispute in this sense : That Vitale, hav- 
ing preceded Coppola to Italy on a deportation case, had just about 
taken over the major portion of the narcotic racket in Italy, supplying 
the St. Louis and Detroit mobs. However Coppola is a little older. 
His stature in the Mafia is much higher, and he just decided he would 
take over, so he proceeded to steal customers from Vitale. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Lucky Luciano then try to step in to settle the 
dispute ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes. Lucky Luciano thought that despite Coppola's 
age and prominence in the Mafia, he should not have taken over as 
much narcotic traffic and territory as he did, and he made known his 
dissatisfaction to Coppola, and Coppola just told him to mind his own 
business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was the one of this group that was supplying 
Priziola and Quasarano ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Both. 

Mr. Kennedy. Both of them? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Salvatore Vitale used to supply them. One of his 
favorite tricks — he had many methods of smuggling heroin in to the 
United States concealed in trunks, carried by Italian immigrants, 
given to Italian seamen. But the cutest one was the one where he 
had it shipped to Detroit concealed in legitimate shipments of sardines, 
Italian sardines. 

Mr. Kennedy. What company were they handled through in 
Detroit? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. It was handled through the Peter Gaudino Import- 
ing Co. in Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Peter Gaudino was the owner of the firm. Was he 
a close associate of Priziola and Quasarano? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes ; they have known each other for 3'ears. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is right near a so-called fish store that is owned 
by a nephew of Angelo Meli ; is that correct ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes ; Peter Tocco. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Angelo Meli play any role in this operation? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Well, he did in this sense: Shortly after the war, 
when the narcotics traffic was being reorganized and put on a better 
business status, so to speak, the New York mobs were looking for 
direct outlets. John Ormento came to Detroit. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17461 

Mr. Kennedy. John Orinento has just been picked up ; is that riglit ? 
Mr. SiRAGUSA. Just this last week; yes. Big John Ormento has 
several convictions for narcotics. I know him personally John 
Ormento went to Detroit, and Angelo ]\leli gave a banfjuet in the 
Bowery Night Club in Hamtramck, Midi. Ormento was the guest 
of honor. At that time, Angelo Meli, who knew Ormento, intro- 
duced Ormento to Priziola and Quasarano. The puii:)ose of the in- 
troduction was to set up tliis narcotics business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that, what had been the theory of the 
Bureau of Narcotics as to how the narcotics had been handled by 
this group in New York ? 

Mr. SiRAoi^SA. Well, prior to that time, actually up until about 
1949-50, we had assumed that just about all of the heroin smuggled 
into the east coast of the Unitecl States was done at the express ortlers 
of the New York mobs. It wasn't until, as I say, about 1949-50 
that we realized some of the larger New York mobs were being 
supplied by Detroit and St. Louis gangs. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this was coming down from Windsor into 
Detroit ; is that right ? 

^Ir. SiRAOusA. Not necessarily. It would go, as I say, when it 
was shipped in these sardine shipments, to land right smack in De- 
troit, and from Detroit it was carried to New York. Sometimes 
persons from New York would come out to pick it up. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it would appear from your testimony that xVngelo 
Meli, who, again, Mr. Chairman, was another backer of the Bilvin 
Distibuting Co., played a major role in establishing the liaison be- 
tween the Detroit group that were importing narcotics and the New 
York group of John Ormento ; is that right ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. In addition to this specific introduction, we have 
had considerable information in our files that in the past Angelo 
Meli has financed these narcotics operations. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have any specific instances where narcotics 
have been sent to Mr. l*riziola and Mr. Quasarano? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. We have this seizure we made in 1952. 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you give us or relate to the committee what 
occurred and what role Mr. Priziola and Mr. Quasarano played in 
this seizure of, I believe, some $80,000 worth of heroin ; is that right ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Are you speaking about the witness here? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Of the witness here? Yes, sir. 

There were two seizures actually made in Italy. I will try to 
give the account chronologicallj'. 

That was in April 1951, working with the Italian police. We 
arrested a Frank Callace, "Chick 99" as he is better known. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVliat is that ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. "Chick 99." Chick is the American sound for 
"Cheech" and "Cheech" is Sicilian for Frank. In addition, the ap- 
pellation of the "99" denotes that he came from 99th Street. I used 
to follow him around quite a bit in New York in the old days, 99th 
Street and Second Avenue. He has been con\'icted for narcotics 
charges, but he fled the United States to beat a violation of parole 
on a narcotics offense. 

Mr. Kennedy So he was arrested in Italy ; is that right ? 



17462 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. He was arrested, yes, sir, in 1951, I believe. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate how that ties in to Mr. Priziola ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. He was arrested, and so were many others. Among 
the suspect sources of supply was a man named Salvatore Vitale. 
Salvatore Vitale was picked up for questioning by the Italian police, 
but released for insufiicient evidence. 

At that time of his arrest and questioning, they found a letter on 
Salvatore Vitale from Priziola. 

Mr. Kennedy. This witness here ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. In fact, the letter was on his stationery, 
on printed stationery from Priziola. I even think it is his current 
address, 1349 Devonshire. 

The Chairman. I hand you here what purports to be a photostatic 
copy of the letter to which you have referred. Will you examine 
it and state if you identify it? 

(The document w^as handed to the witness.) 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir; this is the letter. This is a photocopy of 
the letter. In fact, the name of the Italian police official who seized 
this letter appears both printed and in longhand at the top of the 
letter. 

The Chairman. The letter may be made exhibit 78. 

(Letter referred to was marked "Exhibit 78" for reference and 
may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. I would like to present the letter now to Mr. 
Priziola. 

Will you examine the letter, Mr. Priziola, and state if you iden- 
tify it, the letter that has been made exhibit 77? 

(The document was handed to the witness. ) 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

The Chairman. Look at the signature on it. Do you identify 
that letter as a letter written by you and as having your signature? 

Mr. Priziola. I respectfully decline to answer because I might 
tend to incriminate myself. 

The Chairman. I haven't read the letter. I don't know whether 
it would incriminate you or not. You say if you answered truthfully 
to that letter, that a truthful answer under oath might tend to in- 
criminate you? 

Mr. Priziola. Yes, I do. 

The Chairman. All right. Let's see the letter. 

Mr. Kennedy. This letter relates to — Mr. Siragusa, this relates 
to efforts by Mr. Vitale to return to the United States, does it not ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. From the conventional language used. But we in- 
terpret it as meaning that Vitale is impatient, he wants to return to 
the United States, and that the tenor of Priziola's letter is, "Don't 
be impatient, be calm, let's wait until the expiration date." x\s far 
as the expiration date referred to, we would not know, unless we 
had the individuals. 

Salvatore Vitale himself was questioned at the time the letter was 
received, and all he would say is that it did relate to his elForts to 
return to the United States. When questioned by tlie Italian police 
as to whether these efforts were to be legal or illicit, lie Avouldn't 
state. But the obvious inference is that the reentry was going to be 
illojral. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 174(^3 

Mr. Kennedy. Could you tell us about that, Mr. Priziola? You 
wrote the letter? 

Mr. I'lnzioLA. I decline to answer on the ground it miglit tend to 
incriminate myself. 

Senator Curtis. ]Mr. (liairman^ — — 

The Chairman. Senator Curtis? 

Senator Curtis. I would like to ask this witness this question: 
How big, dollarwise, is the narcotics business? Do you have a rough 
estimate of what transpires a year ? 

Mr. SiRAGusA. In terms of money ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. SiRA(iuSA. Well, I think tliat one of the best estimates I can 
give is tlie one often quoted by my boss. Commissioner Anslinger. 
He saj's that in New York City alone, 1 believe, tJiere is a total take 
of about $200 million a year annually. This take is not only nar- 
cotics trafficking, but other rackets. 

Senator Curtis. Do you have a rough estimate of what it amounts 
to in the whole country or worldwide? 

Mr. SiiLVGusA. Well, in the whole country I guess it is — I don't 
know. Maybe $50 million or $100 million. You have to take into ac- 
count many considerations, the value of the merchandise at the whole- 
sale level and down to retail level ; the amount of money it costs so- 
ciet}' to enforce the laws against these racketeers; the moneys spent 
in, their upkeep in penitentiaries. 

I don't imagine that anyone has ever made a thorough study of it 
because it would be quite difficult. 

Senator Curtis. It Avould depend on definition ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. How many addicts are added to the list of people 
who are addicted to drugs per year ? That is, in the United States ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. As of about 6 years ago, we started an accurate 
compilation of statistics regarding addicts, and for the year 1958 it 
is 45,000-some-odd number in the United States. 

Senator Cuetis. That is not new ones ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Of those, some are new. Some are recidivous. 

Senator Curtis. But do you have even a guess as to how many new 
ones? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Well, I would have to hazard a guess, because I 
have been out of the country, like I say, and I am not too familiar 
offhand with statistics in America. But I would say of the 45,000, 
maybe we might have some 2,000 new ones a year. 

Senator Cuetis. And how many of those are young people? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. There is a portion, I think it is 2 percent or maybe 
1 percent of persons under 18, and maybe 10 percent of persons from 
18, let's say, to 21. The biggest bulk are between the ages of 25 
and 35. 

Senator Curtis. So a substantial portion of them are below 35 ? 

ISIr. SiP-AGUSA. Y"es, sir. 

Senator Curtis. ^AHiat type of businesses are quite often used as a 
front for carrying on this illicit narcotics trade ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Well, our files show that persons who ai*e now in 
the narcotics racket and persons who have been in it in the sense that 
their activity was much greater at one time, perhaps, than it is today. 



17464 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

b-ut it just about represents every legitimate business in the United 
States today. 

Senator Cuetis. Such as what? 

Mr, SiRAGusA. Well, I mean labor racketeering. Some of the per- 
sons who have been called by your committee have been prune sus- 
pects with us for years. In the entertainment racket, jukeboxes, the 
all-night clubs, horse races, tracks, labor and management consultant 
services. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, some of the people that you have 
followed for years with reason to believe and know of their relation- 
ship, at least with the narcotics traffic, have gone in and exploited the 
union movement? 
Mr. SiRAGusA. Absolutely. Absolutely. 

Senator Curtis. That would give them a position and a respect- 
ability and an alleged source of income to conceal their other income, 
would it ? 

Mr. SiRAGusA. Besides putting an effective stranglehold on the 
particular business involved. 

Senator Curtis. This committee also has an interest in it in this 
regard, that some of these businesses, such as jukeboxes and so on, in 
some instances, their racketeering practices are enforced by exploit- 
ing the imion idea or union organization, aren't they ? 
Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 
Senator, Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, other than finding the letter from Mr. 
Priziola to Mr. Vitale, in connection with Mr. Vitale's operations 
wlien he was arrested in Italy at this time, do you have other evi- 
dence sliowing Mr. Priziola and Mr. Quasarano's participation in 
this particular effort to send narcotics to this country ? 
Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 

In the first seizure I mentioned, it was in April of 1951, and I 
would like to precede that. 

In May of 1951, rather, Qiiasarano came over to Italy and he spoke 
to Salvatore Vitale, and Vitale told him that things were too hot to 
arrange future narcotics shipments at tliat time. So Quasarano re- 
turned to America. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was that? 
Mr. SiRAGUSA. That was in May of 1951. 

Mr. Kennedy. And prior to that, in February of 1951, Cimino and 
Giordano of St. Louis, had made a trip to see Mr. Vitale? 
Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And not finding liim at that time, they liad re- 
turned to the United States? 
Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then Quasarano came over and he made the con- 
tact but was not able to make any arrangements at tliat time? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. He made no arrangements with Salvatore Vitale, 
but we believe he did make arrangements for a future delivery with 
Frank Coppola. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate what happened and wliat 
occurred? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17465 

In February of 1952, Anthony Giordano came over to Italy and 
he was over there in Home, and I followed him around with the 
Italian police and tlien he left. Things were too hot for him. 

Along about March 18, I believe it was, March 18 that same year, 
in 1952, we got information that a certain movement of narcotics 
would take place from Rome down to southern Italy. We traced 
this trunk to the town of Alcamo, which is close to Portonico, always 
inside Sicily. This trunk was seized when it was picked up by 
Serafino Mancuso and another man. This trunk contained a bunch 
of old clothing, but in the sides and bottom of this trunk we found 
6 kilograms of pure heroin. In fact, the builder of the trunk him- 
self was arrested and he confessed wiiat was obvious, namely, that 
this trunk had been built around the G kilograms of heroin and not 
that the heroin liad been put in a previously fabricated trunk. 

Mr. Kennedy. To whom was this trunk to be sent ? 

Mr. SiRAGUsA. This trmik, according to our information, was des- 
tined for Priziola and Quasarano, and it was to be carried to the 
United States. Their intention at the time was to use an immigrant, 
either a suspecting or unsuspecting Italian immigrant. 

Mr, IvENNEDY. This was the so-called "green trunk"; is that right? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then following the seizure of the trunk which was 
destined for Mr. Priziola and Quasarano and contained the heroin, 
first what would be the value of the heroin? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. At that time a kilogram of heroin, delivery c.o.d. 
in Italy, w^ould be about $3,000, and delivery in the United States 
would be maybe $5,000. Then wholesale for about $7,000, and today 
the prices have gone up. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then what happens to it after that? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Well, the smuggler, not necessarily the person who 
carries the thing, but we call the smuggler the man responsible for 
having the stuff come into the country, he then wholesales it. Today 
the^oing rate is $12,000. 

jVii'. Kennedy. Now, following the seizure of that heroin, were 
there further arrests and further investigations made? 

Mr. SiRAGtJSA. Yes, there were. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, would you relate wliat happened? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. We seized a trunk and many houses were searched. 
In fact, I should interject at this time that there had been searches 
made before this particular seizure, in Angio, which is about 15 
miles from Rome. As a result of these combmed searches, we found 
many address books, names and addresses, and most of these papers 
that we seized came from Franlv Coppola, and he had the Who's 
^Ylio of American gangsterism among all of his notes. He can't read 
or write. 

Among some of his papers we found a piece of stationei-y, the same 
stationery that Priziola Avrote the letter to Salvatore Vitale, and on 
that was listed the names of a lot of gangsters in America, Detroit, 
and St. Louis, and New York City. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was on Priziola's stationery ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes, sir. And in addition to names of persons, 
there were names of companies, and I remember the name of Anthony 
Novelty Co. 

36751— 59— pt. 48 17 



17466 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the Anthony Novelty which is the jukebox 
company in St. Louis, which in turn is run by these four individuals 
now, who are some of the leading narcotics people in St. Louis? 

Mr. SiRAGusA. Yes, that is Giordano, Lopiparo, and Caleca. 

Mr. Kennedy. And John Vitale? 

Mr. SiRAGusA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And also you made a search for Coppola; is that 
right? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. We didn't actually. Wlien this trunk was seized 
from Mancuso and his brother, Frank Coppola heard of our ap- 
proach and he just beat it, and it wasn't until about a year and a 
half later that he was arrested by the Italian police, I happened 
to find out where he was hiding out, and I gave the information to 
the Italian police and they arrested him. 

During the time of the issuance of the fugitive warrant in con- 
nection with the narcotics case, and the time he was arrested a year 
and a half later, he had committed two kidnapings and two murders. 

Mr. Kennedy. Two kidnapings in Sicily ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. And two murders. And one of the fellows he kid- 
naped was one of the wealthiest landowners in Sicily, in Palermo, 
and they took this old man and kidnaped him. He happened to be 
walking with his little 10-year old nephew at the time, and so these 
bungling kidnapers kidnaped the boy, too, and they kept him hostage 
in some neighboring shack just outside of Palermo. A couple of his 
henchmen were watching this shack, and even the mafia of Sicily, 
in Palermo, took a particular dislike to the fact that this little boy 
was kidnaped, and the word got out that they just had to forget to 
wait for the ransom money and the old man and his nephew were 
released. 

As a result of this bungling, one of the two kidnapers was knocked 
off by, or Coppola had him murdered. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were indictments and arrests and they were 
followed by indictments ; is that right ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. On the narcotics case, yes, there was an indictment. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were there any Americans indicted in connection 
with that ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes. Let me see. We had the Mancuso brothers, 
but they lost their American citizenship so they are not Americans. 
But we had Raffaele Quasarano, John Priziola, and he was indicted, 
and so was Peter Guadino indicted, and Paul Cimino. Of the four 
I have just mentioned, only Paul Cimino made the mistake of coming 
back to Italy, and he got arrested for that. He was released after 
4 or 5 months, but within '^ months I think of the return of this in- 
dictment in Federal court, the Italian authorities dismissed the 
charges against Priziola and Quasarano and Guadino thinking that 
they wonld never retui-n to Italy. 

Mr. Kennedy. But they were only dismissed on account of the 
fact that tliey couldn't get them back to Italy ; is that correct ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that there was sufficient evidence or there was 
felt to be suflicient evidence by the Italian authorities to indict 
Priziola and Quasarano in connection with this importation of 
narcotics ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17467 

Mr. SiRAGusA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, were there any further ramifications to this 
case ? 

Mr. SiKAGusA. In what particular do you mean? Tied in with 
this narrative of kidnaping and dope peddling worldwide, just about, 
there is another interesting disappearance-murder. 

Salvatore Vitale, when he was in Partinico, sent a load of heroin, 
1 believe it was about 12 or 14 kilograms of heroin, to Priziola and 
Quasarano in Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. When was this ? 

Mr. SiRAGusA. This was about 1951. The manner of this ship- 
ment, we don't know just how it was shipped, but when it arrived 
Priziola and Quasarano discovered to their dismay that this heroin 
was adulterated. 

Incidentally, in addition to this information that I received about 
this particular disappearance-murder, it was corroborated to me as 
recently as January of 1957 by Vitale's son-in-law, who told me the 
stoiy. 

To get back to the stoiy, this heroin Avas highly adulterated and 
Priziola and Quasarano obviously complained they were being 
cheated. 

Vitale said he wasn't the cheat, that Priziola and Quasarano were 
the dishonest crooks. 

So they had this out by correspondence and by emissaries going 
on for some time. One of the first efforts at conciliation took place, 
according to this son-in-law of Vitale, in 1951. They held one of 
their typical Mafia meetings in Detroit at which the accused, 
Quasarano and Priziola, were allegedly present. Vitale was not 
present; he was in Italy. 

But I believe that a proxy vote was given to one of his hoodlum 
associates in Detroit. As a result of this meeting, Priziola and 
Quasarano were told that they had to pay up. The price was 
$80,000. That was the price for the kilograms of heroin. 

Priziola sort of resigned himself to paying this money. Quasa- 
rano, instead, he was more adamant, and he said he wasn't about to 
pay any money on this. 

It wasn't until 1955 that the first payment of $20,000 was made. 
This was made in San Diego, Calif., to Vitale, Salvatore Vitale, by 
Priziola. 

The Chairman. You are talking about this man sitting here as a 
witness; Priziola? 

Mr. SiRAGuSA. Yes, sir. This man. 

The Chairman. He paid the $20,000 ? 

Mr. SiRAGusA. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. How about tliat ? Is that right ? 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN M. PRIZIOLA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFORD ALLDER— Resumed 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the gi'ound I might incrimi- 
nate myself. 

The Chairman. Has the witness testified to anything about you 
that isn't true? 



17468 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the ground I might incrimi- 
nate myself. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Will you proceed ? 

TESTIMONY OF CHARLES SIRAGUSA— Resumed 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. Vitale had been in Italy up until 1952, December of 
1952, and when he came back to America he was arrested in San 
Pedro, Calif., and taken immediately to Fort Leavenworth to serve 
the balance of his original 13-year sentence, since his presence in 
Italy was a violation of parole. 

He managed to appeal the case on the grounds that the original 
guilty plea was made because of ignorance of the English language, 
despite the fact he had resided in America for quite some time. So 
this case was pending and I guess it might not be pending now since 
it has been dismissed based on the fact that Vitale isn't around to 
support his own appeal. 

Anyway, in 1955, approximately, he was released from Fort 
Leavenworth on the basis of this appeal and he went to San Diego 
where he owns three or four bars run by his brothers-in-law. Gasper 
and Joseph Matrango. Joseph Matrango is married to Mr. Priziola's 
daughter. 

Right after his reestablishment in San Diego, Vitale received visits 
from a bmich of hoodlums, not only Quasarano and Priziola and 
Frank Lo Medico, and he is a gangster from Detroit who divides his 
time between Italy and Detroit. John Ormento came out and paid 
his respects to Vitale, and so did Frank Livorci, another narcotics 
trafficker from New York City. 

After these initial meetings, as I said, Mr. Priziola paid $20,000. 

Joseph Matrango then tried to prevail upon his father-in-law to pny 
up the remainmg $60,000 on this narcotics debt. In fact, Frank 
LoMedico tried to throw some water on the boiling fire that was raging 
between Priziola and Quasarano on the one hand, and Salvatore Vitale. 

Vitale was determined to get back his money. He told his son-in- 
law that if he didn't get back his money, as a last resort he would have 
Priziola and Quasarano killed. 

So the son-in-law said that Vitale claimed that ho was going in April 
of 1956 to Detroit to have a final bout with Priziola and Quasarano. 
That was about the $60,000. 

He also told his wife and his son-in-law DiGregorio to meet him in 
Italy. He was going to Detroit and collect his money, and go into 
Canada and make arrangements to get himself clandestinely taken to 
France, and from France he was going to collect another outstanding 
debt, narcotic debt, and then from France go to Italy. 

He made a telephone call from Detroit to his wife in San Diego, 
saying he would meet them in about a month or so, and that is the last 
he was ever heard of. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the son-in-law tell you what he felt had 
happened ? 

Mr. SiRAGUSA. The son-in-law told me that this thing was beginning 
to get quite annoying to big sliots in the mafia, with threats of murder 
back and forth, and he thmks, the son-in-law, that Quasarano and 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17469 

Priziola liad this guy murdered be<iause if they did not perliaps at a 
subsequent mafia hearing the decision might be made to knock off 
Priziola and Quasarano tliemselves. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was liis understanding, then, that Priziola and 
Quasarano had Vitale nuirdered ? 

Air. SiRAGFSA. Yes, and in fact he told me that he went to Joseph 
Matrango, who is Priziola's son-in-law, and he said, "I think that the 
least these characters can do after murdering the old man is to give the 
$60,000 to his widow." Matrango told his son-in-law to mind his own 
business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what happened to Mr. Vitale, Mr. 
Priziola ? 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN M. PRIZIOLA, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFORD ALLDER— Resumed 

Mr. Priziola. I am sorry. Your Honor, I have to take the Fiftli. 

The Chairman. I can't understand you. 

Mr. Priziola. I might incriminate myself. 

The Chairman. Will you say it again ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the gi'ound that I might in- 
criminate myself. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe that is the whole situation, Mr. Chairman. 
I think the importance of course is that these two major narcotics 
figures, identified as such, were the ones behind Mr. Bufalino's being 
established in the jukebox business in Detroit. There was then the 
dispute between these gangstei's and Jimmy James, and Jimmy James 
ultimately turned the union over to Bufalino when Bufalino received 
from Jimmy Hoft'a the Teamsters Taiion charter. 

It shows once again the close relationship of not only gangsters 
but the lowest type of gangsters, those dealing in iiarcotics, being in- 
terested in certain elements in the Teamsters Union, namely in this 
case, Mr. Bufalino. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Senator Curtis, do you have any questions '( 

Senator Curtis. I have no questions. 

The Chairman. Do you have any connnent you want to make, Mr. 
Priziola ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer. 

The Chairman. You don't have to decline now. I asked you if you 
wanted to make any comment. You can say "yes" or "no" without 
incriminating yourself, can't you ? 

Mr. Allder. He said "no," sir. 

The Chairman. You don't want to make any comment ? 

Mr. Priziola. No, sir. 

The Chairman. This is pretty ugly testimony against you here this 
morning. Are you going to let the record stand like that? 

Mv. Priziol^^. I decline. 

The Chair^ian. You decline to change the record and you will let 
it stand ; is that right ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the ground it might incrimi- 
nate me. 



17470 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. We are going to let the record stand whether you 
answer or not. 

Proceed, Mr. Kemiedy ; call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just on Mr. Priziola, I had one other question. 

Mr. Priziola, you also were in the Jay-Cee Music Co., were you not? 

Mr. Priziola. I respectfully decline to answer because I might 
incriminate myself. 

Mr. Kennedy, In December 31, 1949, you bought your son-in-law's 
interest, Frank Matrango ; is that right ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the other partners in that enterprise were Peter 
Tocco, the son-in-law, Michael Polizzi, and Kaffaele Quasarano. 

Mr. Priziol.v. I respectfully decline to answer because I might 
incriminate myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the profits of the company were divided be- 
tween you, Priziola receiving 50 percent, Quasarano 25 percent, Tocco 
1214 percent, and Polizzi 121/^ percent; is that right? 

Mr. Priziola, I decline to answer. 

Mr, Kennedy, You disposed of your interest in 1952 ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the gi'ound I might incrimi- 
nate myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. Now, also, you had an interest, did you not, in the 
Jon-Car Homes, also known as the Modern Craft Home Building Co., 
in Detroit, Mich. ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the ground I might incrimi- 
nate myself, 

Mr. Kennedy. It was used by you in 1952 to construct houses in 
East Detroit ; is that right ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you filed a return under the name "Modern 
Craft Home Building Co." ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer that. 

Mr. Kennedy. With you and Mr. Carty Demonico as partners ; is 
that right? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the ground I might incrimi- 
nate myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. This partnership was formed in March of 1953. 
Herbert Grosberg, certified public accountant, associated with the 
Teamsters Union, and George Fitzgerald, who is the attorney for Mr. 
Hoffa and the Teamsters, were the accountant and the attorney re- 
spectively for this company ; is that right ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer because I might incriminate 
myself. 

Mr, Kennedy, Also you had an interest in a company called the 
Modern Craft Homes, Inc., a corporation that was first organized in 
1952; is that right? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer on the ground my answer might 
tend to incriminate myself. 

Mr, Kennedy, With yourself as president and your wife as vice 
president and treasurer ; is that right ? 

Mr. Priziola. I decline to answer, 

Mr. Kennedy. And also the Modern Craft Home Building Co,, 
which was a partnership. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17471 

Mr. PmzioLA, I decline to answer. 

INIr. Kennedy. Until 1953. And George Fitzgerald was the attor- 
ney for both of those companies, was he not ? 

Mr. Priziola, I decline to answer. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, ]\Ir. Chairman. 

The Chairman. You may stand aside. 

(Members of the select committee present at this point in the pro- 
ceedings were Senators INIcClellan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. I hope we can get through two witnesses this morn- 
ing, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Morris Goldman. 

The Chairman. Mr. Goldman. 

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. Goldman. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MORRIS GOLDMAN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Goldman. IVIorris Goldman. I am self-employed. I operate 
a jukebox route. I live at 24031 Seneca, Oak Park, Mich. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. Goldman. I do. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Goldman, you have not been well, and if you 
feel ill during the course of the interrogation, will you let us know ? 

Mr. Goldman. I am OK, thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been a jukebox operator in Detroit since 
about 1940 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were president of the operators association 
from 1947 to 1953 ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. During the period 1943-44, there had been a lot of 
location jumping and the industry was having a difficult time in the 
city of Detroit ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there was a meeting of the operators associa- 
tion called in late 1944 or 1945 ; is that right? 

Mr. Goldman. 1944-45. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was to see if you could affiliate with some union 
which would give stability to the industry ? 

ISIr. GoLD3iAN. We wanted some way of getting some stability in 
our industry. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you had this meeting at the Detroiter Hotel ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And among those that attended was Mr. Victor 
DeSchryver, Joe Brilliant, Sam "Black Shirt" Ciamerataro, who 
were fellow association members ; is that right ? 



17472 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES m THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And also present was Mr. William Presser ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was he doing there ? 

Mr. Goldman. He was invited from Cleveland to help us get started 
in the union so that we could have union affiliation in the city. 

Mr. Kennedy. He wns brought up from Cleveland for that purpose ? 

Mv. GoLDisrAN. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was going to tell you or show you how a union 
could operate in order to act sort of as the enforcement arm for the 
association ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Presser bring in an individual to handle 
this for you in Detroit ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did he bring ? 

Mr. Goldman. He brought in Bill Buf alino. 

Mr. Kennedy. Initially who did he bring in ? 

Mr. Goldman. He brought in Jimmy James. Bufalino came in 
later. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Presser at the first meeting brought in Jimmy 
James ; is that right ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was made head of the union ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Pi-esser charge for the service of telling 
you how to set this union up and bringing Mr. James in ? 

Mr. Goldman. Well, the board members raised $5,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you contribute to that ? 

Mr. Goldman. Yes, I contributed a check of $600. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was for the payment to Mr. Presser ? 

Mr. Goldman. Where the money went, we don't know. It was part 
of the money that went. 

Mr. Kennedy. My question was : Was that for the payment to Mr. 
Presser ? 

INIr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. He had requested some $5,000 ; is that right ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. The monej^ was ultimately turned over to Mr. 
De Schry ver ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. DeSchi-yver testified yesterday that he, in turn, 
turned the money over to Mr. Presser. 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the purpose of the money ? Wh}' was the 
payment made? 

Mr. GoLDisfAN. The payment Avas mnde to help us get a union into 
Detroit, to start up a charter and become affiliated with the union. 
We had no union at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why was it necessary to make the payment to Mr. 
Presser? Wasn't it possible to do it yourselves? 

Mr. Goldman. We didn't knoAv liow. We didn't know of any 
method to get it started. We felt that was a copy of one that was at 
Cleveland at the time. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IX THE LABOR FIELD 17473 

Mr. Kexxedy. Did you know at the time that Mr. Presser was an 
official of tlie IBEW? 

JVlr. GoLDMAX. At that time I did not know. 
Mr. Kenxedy. But the result was that a Music Maintenance 
Workers Local 23814 was formed witli Jimmy James as the business 
a <Tent ; is that right ? 

Mr. GoLDMAX. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kexxedy. The association signed a master contract with the 
union calling for dues of 50 cents per month per machine? 

Mr. GoLDMAx^. Correct. 

Mr. Kexxedy. xVnd it did not matter how many men were on the 
payroll ? 

Mr Goldman. It made no difference. 

Mr. Kennedy. The men were not consulted about it? 

Mr. Goldman. They were not. 

Senator Curtis. May I ask this question right there : This wasn't 
a union in the ordinary sense where employees organized to bargain 
collectively with employers, was it? 

Mr. Goldman. We bargained as a blanket contract for our em- 
ployees, as well as for ourselves, being w^orkmen on the jukeboxes. 

Senator Curtis. But employers themselves joined the union, didn't 
they ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. And part of their payment was based on the 
number of machines they operated? 

Mr. Goldman. At that time, yes. 

Senator Curtis. In other words, the union idea was used as a con- 
trol measure in your machine operations ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. This union-association tie-up worked well until 
another group came into the field in the city of Detroit ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kenx-edy. What was this group? 

Mr. Goldman. That was the Bilvin Distributing Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you understand was back of the Bilvin 
Distributing Co.? 

Mr. Goldman. We understood it was the Meli group. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you talk about the Meli group, you are 
speaking about Angelo Meli ? 

Mr. Goldmax'. Angelo Meli; that is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who else did you understand was associated with 
Angelo Meli ? 

Mr. Goldman. Bill Bufalino. 

Mr. I^nnedy. And he is married to the niece of Angelo Meli ? 

Mr. Goldmax'. That I don't knoAv. 

Mr. Kexxedy. And they established some four or five operating 
companies ; is that right ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they in turn would make machines available 
to the operating companies on an exclusive basis ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is correct. 

Mv. Kennedy. And the operating companies then would be able 
to get their machines placed on locations ; is that right ? 



17474 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

]Mr. GoLDMAX. Cori-ect. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know or understand that these companies 
were in turn run by certain underworld figures or relatives of under- 
world figures in the city of Detroit ? 

Mr. Goldman. I did not know it at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you hear any talk about that ? Or discussions ? 

Mr. Goldman. There was common talk that it was run by the Meli 
group. 

Mr. Kennedy. That these operating companies were in turn run 
by the Meli group? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you lose locations to this group? 

Mr. Goldman. I was fortunate. I did not lose any. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did your organization lose? 

]\Ir. Goldman. The organization lost. 

Mr. Kennedy. Approximately how many? 

Mr. Goldman. 1,200 locations. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why wasn't Jimmy James able to provide the 
service for you in order to keep this company from jumping the 
locations ? 

Mr. Goldman. Pickets that were sent out, some reported and some 
didn't even report for picket duties. We had no support and there was 
no tie-up any way that we could 

Mr. Kennedy. They were just too strong? 

Mr. Goldman. They were too strong for us. 

Mr. Kennedy. They reported back that the pickets were frightened 
to go out ? 

Mr. Goldman. They were frightened and they didn't show up. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Jimmy James subsequently appear before the 
Murphy grand jury and ultimately have his charter lifted? 

Mr. Goldman. That was common knowledge, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did you continue to pay dues to Jimmy James 
despite this? 

^ Mr. Goldman. To my knowledge, I believe we did pay dues con- 
tinuously. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he immediately obtain a new charter ? 

Mr. GoLDaiAN. There was some time that lapsed, but I don't know 
when the new charter was issued. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was local 985 of the Teamsters ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know how he was able to get into the 
Teamsters ? 

Mr. Goldman. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. ISIr, Rufalino became associated with the union? 

Mr. Goldman. Mr. Bufalino came in as an assistant to Jimmy 
James. 

Senator Curtis. Mr. Chairman, there is something I am not clear 
on right there. 

What were these pickets for? 

Mr. Goldman. Well, we were affiliated with the union. Jimmy 
James was our union conciliator. At that time, the Bilvin Distribut- 
ing was not unionized. 

Senator Curtis. The what? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17475 

Mr. Goldman. Bilvin Distributing was not unionized. They were 
jumping our locations. Being a nonunion operator, it was up to 
Jimmy elames to see that we would try to get back our locations. 

Senator Curtis. The principle of the thing was because of the con- 
troversy over locations ? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. It was not a matter of employee-employer rela- 
tions ? 

]\Ir. Goldman. No, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Wages, working conditions, anything like that? 

IMr. Goldman. There was nothing there. 

Senator Curtis. It was an issue that management and the people 
who control this industry were interested in because of the desire for 
locations ? 

Mr. Goldman. The locations, to lay out equipment. 

Senator Curtis. Thank you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually, the newspaper reports at that time showed 
that on May 30, 1947, in an announcement by you on behalf of the 
Michigan Automatic Phonograph Association, that you stated to the 
newspapers at that time that you would recognize Local 985 of the 
International Brotherhood of Teamsters. 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think tlie records will show that that was even 
prior to the time that local 985 had extended its jurisdiction to the 
coin-machine business, but we will go into that this afternoon. 

Did you have a meeting with Mr. James, who discussed the fact 
that Mr. Buf alino would be brought into the union ? 

Mr. Goldman. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what occurred 
at the meeting ? 

Mr. Goldman. It seemed that Mr. James could not control our 
industry. He had no power to do anything, and after meeting with 
Bill Bufalino he came up and said that he could find harmony in 
the industry if we would recognize Mr. Bufalino as his assistant; 
that the 1,200 locations that we lost we were to forget about, and 
from then on he would have Mr. Bufalino as his assistant to take 
care of the boys that were operating those 1,200 pieces of equipment. 

Mr. Jimmy James was, of course, to help keep us in harmony as far 
as our group was concerned. 

Mr. Kennedy. This would be a complete surrender on your behalf? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you agree to that ? 

Mr. Goldman. At first I did not agree, but later on I agreed to it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you agree ? You were going to have to take 
in these operating companies who were operated by these underworld 
figures, or relatives of these underworld figures. You were going 
to have to bring in Mr. Bufalino as a union official, and you were going 
to have to give up your 1,200 locations, your group. 

Why did you all agree to it ? 

Mr. Goldman. Well, we were told by the Liquor Control Commis- 
sion that if we didn't clean up our industry that all jukeboxes were 
going to be thrown out of bars in the entire state. 



17476 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kenneidy. Is cleaiiino; up your industry bringjin^ into the asso- 
ciation this underworld group ? 

Mr. GoLDivrAN. Well, it meant to stop the jumping, to alleviate 
chaos tliat had come into the city. 

Mr. Kennedy. It involved complete capitulation on your behalf, 
did it not? 

Mr. Goldman. It did ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you understand that Mr. Bufalino was 
going to represent as a member of the union, as an official of tlie union? 

Mr. Goldman. He was going to represent the Italian group tliat was 
interested in jukeboxes at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And when you speak of the Italian group, you are 
speaking about the Italian group which are the underworld figures? 

Mr. Goldman. That was the four or five companies that were affili- 
ated with the Bilvin Distributing. 

Mr. Kennedy. And those, Mr. Chairman, are some of the ones that 
we have been discussing today, like the Arizona Company, the Jay-Cee 
Music, which had Quasarano in it. Actually, it might be well if we 
summarized that at this time. Can I have Mr. Kaplan put tliat in? 

The Chairman. Mr. Kaplan has already been sworn. 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

INIr. Kaplan. There were a series of companies that were allied with 
Bilvin Distributing Co. as their own affiliates, and then there were 
several separate companies that came into the business at the same 
time ; all of them had persons in them with criminal records. 

One was the Jay-Cee Music Co., which at that time had Pete Tocco, 
RafFaele Quasarano and Carl Diliberto. 

There was the T-D Music Co., which had Dominic '"Sparky" 
Corrado. 

There was the Meltone Music Co. which had, at its inception, Sam 
Call, and which has continued to be the company owned and operated 
by Vincent Meli right up until today, in spite of all of their 
maneuvering. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the one that absorbed the Arizona Music 
Co., which was operated by Polizzi and — who was the other one? 

Mr. Kaplan. Dominick ' Maltese. Then there was the G. & G. 
Vending Co., which started a little bit later with the same group, with 
the Gallos, Arthur Gallo, Romero Gallo, and Vincent Meli. That led 
off into tlie cigarette vending field, as they started on that. 

Then thei-e was the M-C Music Co.,' wliich was a ]:)urchaser for 
Meltone. That had Frank Meli in it, and Angelo :Meli's brother, 
and Sam Calli and James Calli, each of which had criminal records. 

There was the Arizona Music Co. with INIinaudo and Maltese, we 
just mentioned. 

There was also Sam's Music, which was Sam Cianierataro, also 
known as "Black Shirt Sam." Prior to that he also appeared as a 
business agent for the union about which Mr. Holland spoke 
yesterday. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17477 

TESTIMONY OF MORRIS GOLDMAN— Resumed 

Mr. Kkxxeuy. So these were tlie four or five companies that you 
had to accept in I 

Mr. (toldmax. That is riglit. 

Mr. Kexnedy. Tliese were tlie four or five comijanies handling it 
for the liilvin Distributing- Co. '. 

Mr. GoLDMAX. That is ri<^ht. 

Mr. Kennedy. You not only had to take them into your association, 
but you had to take Mr. Buf alino in as an official of the union ? 

Mr. Goldman. As an official of Mr. James. 

Mr. Kexnedy. When that agreement was made, and you agi-eed 
to do so, Bufalino sold his interest in the Bilvin Distributing Co. to 
Joe Young and began to Avork for the union ; did he not? 

Mr. Gold:max. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. But Jimmy James remained as the titular head of 
the union ? 

Mr. Goldman^. He was the head of the miion at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you undei-stand that within a short time Bufa- 
lino began running the union ? 

Mr. Goldman-. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And James gi-adually disappeared; is that right? 

Mr. Goldman. He had other interests. He wasn't available when 
we needed him. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Bufalino began running the union? 

Mr. Goldman-. Bufalino was running it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a meeting with Mr. Hoffa at this time? 

]\Ir. Goldman. That was the time that Mr. Bill Bufalino was intro- 
duced to the general membership meeting. 

Mr. Kennedy. "What did ISIr. Hoffa relate to you at that time ? 

Mr. Goldman. That he was to represent our local 985 and all busi- 
ness was to be transacted through Bill Bufalino. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was the meeting at the Teamsters Build- 
ing; is that right? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy-. And he told you at that time that Bufalino would 
not be out to help liis relatives or friends; is that right ? 

]Mr. Gold:man. That is correct. 

]Mr. Kennedy. That he would work for the entire industry? 

Mr. Goldman. The entire industry. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was around September 1947 that that meeting 
took place ? 

]\Ir. Goldman. About that time; yes. 

The Chairman. How long w^as it before Bufalino started working 
for his relatives ? 

Mr. Goldman. We never knew that he stopped working for them. 

The Chairman. Never stopped. All right. 

;Mr. Kennedy-. Soon thereafter, he told the association that he was 
going to have to raise the dues of the members? 

Mr. Goldman. We started originally at $10 a month, and he said 
that he couldn't operate at that figure, that he had to have more 
money. It was voted to him to give him a raise of $5 per month, 
making it $15 a month. 



17478 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And subsequently you had to raise it again to $20 ? 

Mr. Goldman. Shortly after that it was raised to $20. He stated 
that they needed additional money, he was being assessed for build- 
ing funds of $5,000, and at one of his meetings they voted to assess 
themselves an additional $5 per month. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was a building fund to help build the Team- 
ster Building? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you helped by raising the dues of your operators 
to the union to help build the Teamster Union Building; is that 
right i 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

The Chairman. Which one, the one here in Washington? 

Mr. Goldman. No; this is the one in Detroit. 

The Chairman. They have another one in Detroit? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did he say originally for the first $5 raise that 
the dues had to be raised ? 

Mr. Goldman. Well, he thought that he needed a larger staff of 
men to work for him, and he couldn't do service for us on the same 
basis that Mr. Jimmy James was working. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which means protecting your locations; is that 
right? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was understood when Mr. Bufalino came in that 
he was going to perform the same services that Jimmy James had 
performed ? 

Mr. Goldman. Identical services. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he was going to perform them, he was told at 
the meeting of Mr. Hoffa, for the entire industry, and you found, 
shortly afterward, that it was just for one segment of the industry? 

Mr. Goldman. Well, it was common knowledge that he was working 
for the family. 

Mr. Kennedy. However, you were reasonably pleased right at the 
beginning. Did you write a letter to Mr. Bullock, managing director 
of the Southern California Automatic Music Operators Association, 
in August of 1947? 

Mr. GoLDiMAN. There was an inquiry of Mr. Bullock. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was an inquiry from him and you answered that? 

Mr. Goldman. We answered the letter. 

The Chairman. I hand you what purport to be photostatic copies 
of the letter. Please examine them and state if you identify them, 
the letter from Mr. Bullock to the Michigan Automatic Phonograph 
Owners Association. You were president of that, were you? 

Mr. Goldman. Yes ; at that time. 

The Chairman. And a reply, apparently from you to Mr. Bullock. 
Examine these photostatic copies and state if you identify them. 

(The documents were handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Goldman. This letter was addressed to Mr. Joseph Brilliant. 
Of course, an election had taken place after that, so I was the president 
at the time and I did answer this letter. This is my answer. 

The Chairman. The letters you identify may be made exhibits 
79-A and 79-B in the order of their dates. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17479 

(Letters referred to were marked "Exhibits 79-A and 70-B" for 
reference and will be found in the appendix on pp. 17693, 17694.) 

JSIr. Kennedy. May I just refer to the answer, Mr. Chairman? 

The inquiry to you was to find out how they could set up in Cali- 
fornia a similar kind of arrangement between the union and the 
association so that they would prevent location jumj)ing; is that right? 

ISIr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you answered on August 6, 1947: 

We are pleased to enclose a copy of this association's agreement with the 
Teamsters Union of the American Federation of Labor. I believe the agreement 
in itself is self-explanatory. Historically, the AFL offers the best aflSliation, as 
we have had considerable experience in Detroit with both the CIO and the AFL. 

At the present time the union is operating about 98 percent efficiency in holding 
locations for members. Should you desire further information, we would be 
happy to supply same upon your request, 

and then he goes on. But the whole idea was that the union's only 
purpose was to hold locations for you? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. At this juncture, when you wrote this letter, you 
had affiliated with local 985 and Mr. Bufalino was associated with 
the union ? 

Mr. Goldman. I believe he was at that time. 

Mr, Kennedy. In fact, at the time you made the announcement on 
May 30, 1947, it had been indicated to you that Mr. Bufalino was 
going to be associated with the union ? 

Mr. Goldman. What date was that ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That would be at the time yon made the announce- 
ment on May 30, 1947. You stated to the papers that the association 
would recognize local 985 of the Teamsters. 

At the time you originally agreed to recognize local 985 of the 
Teamsters, had Mr. Bufalino been with them ? 

Mr. Goldman. No. 

Mr.IvENNEDY. He had not? 

Mr. Goldman. He had not. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know the date that he came with the union ? 

Mr. Goldman. I don't know the exact date. 

Mr. Kennedy. I believe, however, it was at the time that you wrote 
this letter? 

Mr. Goldman. It was about that time ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Local 985 maintained a location list on all the mem- 
bers and used it as a whip to keep the members in line? 

Mr. Goldman. That location list was not given out by us. They 
maintained their own list. 

Mr. Kennedy. They requested the location list from you? 

Mr. Goldman. They requested the list. 

Mr. Kennedy. You refused to furnish it ? 

Mr. Goldman. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you refuse to furnish it ? 

Mr. Goldman. I didn't feel it was any of their business where our 
equipment was located at, and as long as we had members in our group 
that did not want their list given over to them, I maintained that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you think they wanted your location list ? 

Mr. Goldman. They felt that by having the location list, they 
could use it as a whip to keep us in line if we at any time fell behind 
in dues or out of their favor. 



17480 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

]\Ir. Kennedy. And did you fear that if you made the list avail- 
able, he would make that list, in turn, available to the Meli f^roup ? 

Mr. Goldman, I didn't know what he would use the list for, but it 
was against the wishes of our membership to give the list up. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Have they been able to take locations and nibble 
away at locations that you have had ? 

Mr. Goldman. They have at times; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What? 

Mr, Goldman. They have at times; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are still in the business? 

Mr. Goldman. Yes, I am, 

Mr. Kennedy. You are still with the union? 

Mr. Goldman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you pay dues? 

Mr. Goldman. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What can the union do for you? 

Mr. Goldman. We don't ask them to do anything for us. 

Mr. I^nnedy. You, as an employer, what can the union do for 
you? 

Mr. Goldman. Take my dues and keep me informed as to when 
their meeting dates are. That is all they can do for us, 

Mr, Ivennedy. But they don't raise your income during a period of 
a year? 

Mr, Goldman, They can't raise it, 

Mr, Kennedy, They can't help you? 

Mr, Goldman. They can't help me any way. 

The Chairman. Why do you pay dues to them? 

Mr. Goldman. It is the line of least resistance, Senator. 

The Chairman. A little louder. 

Mr. Goldman. It is the line of least resistance. 

The Chairman. The line of least resistance? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

The Chairman. Are you afraid of them? 

Mr. Goldman. Yes, I am. 

The Chairman, And you know you better pay dues or else you 
probably won't continue long in business ? 

Mr, Goldman, That is right. 

The Chairman. It is that kind of economic power and threat they 
have over you that compels you to pay money for nothing? 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

The Chairman. Except to get relief from fear and intimidation 2 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. What could they do? 

Mr. Goldman. AYliat could they do? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 

Mr. Goldman. Well, they have the power of pickets if we do not 
pay dues. The locations, when you go into a location, the man says, 
"Well, I am sorry ; you are not a union member. I want a union mem- 
ber in my place. Please remove your box." 

Senator Curtis. What happens if they put pickets , around you? 
Would it cut off your business then ? 

Mr. Goldman. Well, they cut off the supply to the location. 

Senator Curtis. Supply to the location? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17481 

Mr. Goldman. That is ri<^lit. 

Senator Curtis. So it is a sort of picket that results in a boycott? 

]VIr. Goldman. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. Is there any cliance of any violence in some in- 
stances? 

Mr. Goldman. There hasn't been any. 

Senator Curtis. I mean if someone refused to join? 

Mr. Goldman. I don't know of any violence. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually, you pay for your brother, too, don't you ? 

Mr. Goldman. My brother-in-law; yes, sir, I do. 

Mr. Kennedy. Your brother-in-law? 

Mr. Goldman. He works for me; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is $20 per month per man ? 

Mr. Goldman. $20 per month per man. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is almost a form of extortion, is it not? 

Mr. Goldman. I call it a head tax. 

Mr. Kennedy. A head tax, in order to operate in Detroit. 

Mr. Goldman. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is paid to I^cal 985, Mr. Buf alino's union ? 

]Mr. Goldman. That is riglit. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. The committee will stand in recess until 2 :30. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of recess: Sena- 
tors McClellan and Curtis.) 

(Wliereupon, at 12:20 p.m. the select committee recessed, to re- 
convene at 2 :30 p.m. the same day. ) 

afternoon session 

(The select committee reconvened at 3 :20 p.m.. Senator John L. 
McClellan (chairman of the select committee) presiding.) 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of reconvening: 
Senators McClellan and Mundt.) 

The Chaiiuvian. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have just a short witness, or an 
individual to turn over some records. I would like to call Mr. Jason, 
from the Woodner Hotel. 

The Chairman. Come forward, please. Be sworn. 

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. Jason. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF EDWARD JASON 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Jason. My name is Edward Jason. I live at 3636 16th Street, 
N^V., and I am the general manager of the Woodner. 

The Chairman, Mr. Jason, was a subpena served on you, a com- 
mittee siibpena, to produce certain records of the hotel ? 

36751—59- 



17482 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. I hand you here the original subpena and ask you 
if a copy of that was delivered to you. 

(The document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. It shows to have been served on the 3d day of this 
month. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That subpena may be made exhibit 80. 

(Subpena referred to w-as marked exhibit 80 for reference and may 
be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. Mr. Jason, this subpena calls for certain records. 
Are you prepared to comply with the subpena ? 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You have the original records ? 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The original ? 

Mr. Jason. No, sir. Photostats of the original. 

The Chairman. This calls for the original. Are the records in 
your custody at the hotel ? 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The originals are in your custody ? 

Mr. Jason. Yes. 

The Chairman. Then you may deliver, then, if you have photo- 
static copies, the photostatic copies now, but I shall want the originals 
delivered so that comparisons can be made. 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You will deliver the originals? Can you deliver 
them this afternoon ? 

Mr. Jason. I don't know sir. It would require, perhaps, some 
digging in our files. 

The Chairman. You have already done the digging to get tlie 
photostatic copies. I assume very little digging wall be needed now. 

Mr. Jason. I do not know, sir, whether they have been returned to 
the files in order or not. 

The Chairman. Contact the counsel of the committee immediately, 
as soon as you ascertain, and let us know. In this particular instance, 
it is necessary that we have the originals at least for a period to give 
us an opportunity to make certain checks with regard to them. 

All right, sir, with that understanding, you may be excused. Let 
us know immediately this afternoon, as quickly as you can ascertain 
this. 

Mr. Jason. I Avill do it. 

The Chairman. I undei-stand that the photostatic copies if ac- 
cepted in lieu of originals w^ould comply fully with the subpena? 

Mr. Jason. Yes, sir ; to the best of my knowledge. 

The Chairman. The same order will prevail as to the originals. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Jimmy James. 

The Chairman. Mr. James, come forward. Be sworn. 

You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the wdiole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. James. I do. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17483 

TESTIMONY OF EUGENE C. JAMES 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation ? 

Mr. James. Eugene C. James, 325 Leask Lane, Wlieaton, 111. 

The Chairman. I am sorry. •! didn't hear you. Did you state 
your name, your place of residence, and your business or occupation? 

JMr. James. I stated my name and my residence. 

The Chairman. You wouldn't give your occupation ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
ground the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You can say whether you do or do not. You don't 
give your occupation. You respectfully decline to give your occupa- 
tion on the ground that it might tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. James. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you honestly believe if you told the truth and 
gave your occupation that a truthful answer to the question of what 
IS your occupation might tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. James. I believe it would, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, would you ask Mr. James if he has 
an attorney present ? 

The Chairman. Do you have counsel ? 

Mr. James. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel ? 

Mr. James. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell me what has happened to your coun- 
sel ? I talked to him this morning. 

Mr. James. Yes, sir. JNIy counsel came down here with me to talk 
to the chairman and you, trying to get me excused from appearing in 
front of the committee due to the fact that I am in allegation for 
income tax in Chicago which has not been completely settled. I am 
under extradition to New Jersey on embezzlement. 

I thought possibly that he might be able to explain it in its entirety 
to this body and possibly get me excused until such time as these 
hearings were completed. That is what I brought him here for. He 
had other business to attend to today, where I am not interested, and 
that is where he is at this time. 

I know where he is at and I will be able to see him before the day 
is over. But I didn't bring him down here to come in here with me. 
I brought him down here for that one thing with reference to my 
letter to you. 

The Chairman. For purpose of this interrogation, then, you waive 
counsel ? 

Mr. James. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. The reason I asked the question was that I spoke to 
him this morning and told him that I was going to bring up a point 
with you and with him in connection with the income tax case. That 
is why I was wondering why he didn't appear this afternoon. 

Mr. James. I understood that any questions pertaining to the in- 
come tax or anything that might go to a reflection on my case I 
wouldn't be asked. 



17484 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. That was on the question of tlie fee. As I under- 
stand from a review of the case, lie is aro^ning on your behalf tlnit you 
embezzled these funds between 1951 and 1954 when you were a union 
official, funds which amount to $738,000, and the taxes on that would 
be $562,982; that you shouldn't have to pay the taxes l^ecause of the 
fact that you embezzled the money. 

Mr. James. Is that in the form of a question, Mr. Kennedy ? 

Mr. Kennedy. As I understand, that is your defense in the case. I 
am not asking you whether it is correct or not. I am just asking you : 
Isn't that your defense in the case ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am not getting into the merits of your case at all, 
Mr. James. 

Mr. James. You are getting awfully close to it, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is the conversation that I had Avith Mr. Gorman. 

Mr. James. I wasn't present at that meeting. 

The Chairman. You are present now. Let's proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. I asked him if union funds were being used so that 
he, as 3^our attorney, could argue that you embezzled this money and, 
therefore, should not pay taxes on it. 

Would you tell us that? That has nothing to do AA'ith your tax 
case. If you can answer questions, can you tell us if union funds are 
being used to pay your attorney's fees ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is why I think it very important that Mr. 
Gorman be here and very peculiar that he didn't come. I notified him 
that this matter would come up. He told me on the telephone he 
received some $15,000 to defend you so that he could argue this 
point, and that the $15,000 came out of union funds. 

We have the rather unusual situation that you, a union official, are 
accused of embezzling or taking some $750,000, of which you should 
pay some $550,000 in taxes; that your attorney is arguing that you 
shouldn't have to pay taxes on the money because you embezzled it. 

The attorney, when he is arguing this case, is being paid some $15,000 
out of union funds. How could that possibly be a union purpose 
served in having $15,000 of union funds used for this purpose? Can 
you tell the committee that ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds that the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Cttatrman. Mrs, Clerk, issue a subpena for his attorney im- 
mediately, please. 

Mr. James. You don't have to issue a subpena. I can go get him 
for you. I know where he is at, if you want him. 

The Chairman. You may call him and get him here pretty soon. 
Wliere can we call him ? 

Mr. James. He is with some attorney conversing about a case that is 
pending in Chicago. I am not familiar with the case. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where is he ? 

Mr, James. Somewhere in some law office down in 

Mr. Kennedy. Where? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17485 

Mr. James. I don't know tlie exact spot. But I know where to find 
him around the time 1 get out of here around ■irJlO or 5 o'clock. I am 
going to meet him. 

Mr. Kennedy. You said we didn't have to issue a subpena for him. 

Mr. James. You don't, without you want him right this minute. 
I can't go and put my finger on liini, but I will see him later in the 
day. I will tell him that you want him here. 

Mr. Kennedy. I told him I was going to go into this matter. 

The CiLMRMAN. Issue the subi)e]ui. and undertake to reach him by 
telei)hone. Where is he stopping i 

Air. el AMES. He is stopping at the Statler Hotel. 

The Chairman. Send a message to the Statler Hotel immediately 
that a subpena is out for him and we want him here. Have that mes- 
sage put in his box. 

]Mr. Ja:mes. Mr. Chairman, he is not trying to duck this committee. 
He merely had a busine^ss appointment. He will be here as quickly as 
I can go over and find him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where are you going to find him ? 

The Chairman. I am not questioning that he is going to be here, 
but I Avould simply think that he would want a subpena issued for 
him. 

Mr. James. Well, I don't know about that, sir. 

The Chairman. I can't know either. But being a lawyer, I think 
under the circumstances he would want a subpena issued. The sub- 
pena simply means that it is an official notice to him that the commit- 
tee wants to hear liim and he is ordered and directed to appear. If we 
can reach him and he will volunteer to come, very well. 

Mr. James. He will be here, sir. 

The Chairman. Very well. Proceed. 

Senator Mundt. Are you presently a union official with some union, 
Mr. James? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Mundt. To your knowledge, is some union paying the fee 
of your attorney ? 

Mr. James. I can't hear you, sir. 

Senator Mundt. To your knowledge, is some union paying the fee 
for your attorney ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
ground the answer might tend to incriminate me, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Are you personally paying your attorney fees? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Mundt. It aaouUI be a safe deduction that the attorney is 
being paid from somewhere ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
ground the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The CiiAiR3iAN. Well, this is one of the most outrageous thin^ 
imaginable. A fellow is charged — and I don't know whether you did 
or didn't, but at least you are charged — with stealing, and it is steal- 
ing, embezzlement and stealing is one and the same thing — one is you 
are in legal possession of it and you take it and convert it to your own 
use, and the other is you are not in possession of it and you take pos- 
session of it and use it. 



17486 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Tliere is notliiiio; different in the morals of it at all. If anything, 
embezzlement is worse, because you have been trusted. You have here 
a situation, if this is true, that you took this money where you were 
acting in a fiduciary capacity, the money of union members, people 
who Avork, who pay dues in their organization, hoping to derive some 
benefit from it. 

Then you abscond with it. Then when the Government undertakes 
to collect taxes that would be due on the money as income, you make 
the defense, and your attorney told me this, that he was defending on 
the ground that it wasn't legitimate income and therefore was not 
taxable. 

On that basis, certainly, if his position in that case is true, then you 
took the money unlawfully, and now you are having the union, the 
same men that the money was stolen from, pay the lawyer to make such 
a plea. 

It just simply violates every fiber, every fabric, of integrity, honesty 
and decency that ought to be in human beings. 

Mr. Jaisies. I don't think you are familiar with the case. 

The CiiAiRarAN. I may not be. I said "if those are the facts." You 
are given an opportunity to deny it. If those are not the facts, you 
have the opportunity now to say that those facts are not true and state 
what the facts are. 

Do you want to take advantage of the opportunity ? 

Mr. James. Mr. Chairman 

The Chairman. Yes? 

Mr. James. I wrote you a letter explaining the entirety of these 
cases involved. 

The Chairman. Yes, sir. I have your letter. 

Mr. James. And your honorable committee 

The Chairman. Just a moment. Wlien I speak, you be quiet. 

I have your letter. I replied to it. You are here in due process 
of the powers and authority of the committee. 

Now, you may proceed. 

Mr. James. When I wrote that letter, I wrote that letter in good 
faith. I thought that the committee could give me time until I com- 
pleted this case, because the stuff that you are talking about here 
today is directly incriminating toward me, and you can't expect me 
to answer. 

The Chairman. It no doubt is. I am giving you the opportunity 
to refute it. Is it true or not true ? 

Mr. James. Maybe my case is built on those grounds, Senator. 

The Chairman. Is it true or not true ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to ansAver the question on the 
grounds the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. All right. You have been given the opportunity. 
Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are now an international vice president of the 
Laundry Workers Union ; is that right? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
ground that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. There are two laundry workers unions at the present 
time. There was an ouster of the Laundry Workers Union of which 
you were a vice president after it was revealed by the Ives-Douglas 



EMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17487 

subcommittee that this money was taken from tlie union by you and 
your colleague, taken from the welfare fund, and that union was 
ousted. 

Then another union, a Laundry Workers Union, was formed, which 
is now a part of the AFL-CIO. You are part of the ousted, the 
corrupt, part of the Laundry Workers Union ; isn't that right ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. But you are a vice president of the corrupt, ousted 
unioUj and you are also secretary-treasurer of the union's local 46 
in Chicago ; is that correct ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kj^nnedy. It is local 46 whose funds were used, the $15,000, 
to pay your attorney's fees in this case. They were taken from 
local 46; isn't that right ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
ground the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Again, when I talked to your attorney, he explained 
that this was not the same union from wliich you embezzled the funds, 
that this was another union and, therefore, that this union, local 46, 
was the one that was paying your legal fees ; is that right ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Mundt. For my information, counsel, will you explain if 
they are interlocked ? 

Mr. Ivennedy. They are entirely separate. The AFL-CIO ousted 
the Laundry Workers Union after this had been revealed. Pie and 
several of his colleagues formed a new Laundry Workers Union, this 
same man, which is now outside of the AFL-CIO, but which is very 
active around the country. 

The Chairman. Is that the one that is paying the attorney ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

The Chairman. The one they have formed ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. It is a so-called independent union comprised of 
the same people ? 

Mr. Ivennedy. That is right. 

The Chahiman. He has lost control of the AFL-CIO union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Is the other one still functioning ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes, it is. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

It might be also of some interest to you, Senator, that the head of 
this union is a man by the name of Sam Biers. He was originally 
president of the international union, the Laundry Workers Union. 
He is in this other group with ISIr. James. He has a rather interest- 
ing background, including the fact that one time in 1933, under the 
name of John Gilson, as a business representative of the Bill Posters 
and Billers Union, Local No. 1, in Chicago, 111., he was arrested in 
connection with a murder and was sentenced to 1 to 5 years. 

So you have that background of the officials who are running this 
union. 



17488 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. James, in going into your background a little bit, in 1940, 
according to the Detroit directory, it shows that you and your wife, 
Jean, operated a billiard parlor on East Warren Street, is that right, 
at 15302 East Warren? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in 1941, the Detroit directory lists Eugene 
James as a business agent of the Laundry Workers Internationa] 
Union Local 129 ; is that right? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. So was that your firet entry into the labor union 
movement, with local 129 ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you were brought into the union by Mr. 
William Presser, is that right? That is, into this independent union 
for the coin machines, in 1944—45 ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was local 23814 ; is that right ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on tlie 
grounds that the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And about that time, after you were brought into 
the union, you received cei-tain funds from tlie operators, and you 
were also given an interest in the Marston Distributing Co. You 
received 20 percent, did you not, in tlie Marston Distributing Co., 
which had the AMI distributorship in Detroit ? Is that right ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds (hat the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And also the Marquette Distributing Co., which 
was run by Mr. De Schryver, you received 31 percent of that com- 
pany. 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on tlie 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then Mr. Nardi's wife— Mr. Nardi being a union 
official down in Cleveland with Mr. Presser, at that time with the 
IBEW, and later with the Teamsters, and he presently holds that 
position with tlie Teamsters — his wife received 6 percent and Mr. 
Presser's wife received 6 percent; is that right? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they received those interests because of the 
fact that they set this up for you to run the union together with 
the association ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
gi-ounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have had testimony that subsecpiently you were 
liaving diflirulty from (he l^ui'alino gr(mp and the so-called Italian 
gangsters in Detroit, and that you made arrangements in order to 
combat that so that the rival union would not be set up to put Mr. 
IIolFa's and Mr. Ikennan's wives on your payrolls in their maiden 
names; is that riffht? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17489 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliey each were put on the payroll for $100 a week 
and did no work ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was so that the Teamsters wouldn't set up a 
rival union and help this so-called Italian gangster group ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And subsequently your charter was withdrawn after 
the Murphy grand jury made an investigation, and Mr. Hoffa then 
gave a charter to you with the understanding that you would bring 
in INIr. AVilliam Buf alino ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Bufalino was brought in and made, subse- 
quently, the business manager, and you left, for all practical pur- 
poses, the end of 1947, is that right, although you remained on the 
payroll of this union until November of 1950 ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
gromids Ihat the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Would you tell the committee why they kept you 
on the payroll for such a long period of time? Is that a method 
of paying you off ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that the answer might tend to incriminate ine. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, in connection with the awarding 
of that charter, could we have these letters introduced ? 

Mr. Kaplan secured them. 

The Chairman. Mr. Kaplan, joii have been previously sworn? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. Identify them briefly. 

Mr. Kaplan. These are letters relating to the issiumce of the 
charter to local 985, in the very beginning of June 1947. They were 
obtained by subpena from the Teamsters International headquarters. 

Mr. Kennedy. The documents, Mr. Chairman, to which Mr. Kap- 
lan has referred, show, for instance, on the June letter which is 
undated, shows : 

Please send to James Langley, secretary-treasurer of Local 985, International 
Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers, at Trum- 
bull Avenue, Detroit, Mich., the following supplies : 

And then it lists them. 

Have we identified who he was ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Mr. James Langley is Mr. Hoffa's brother-in-law. 

The Chairman. That is the first document. That may be made 
exhibit No. 81. 
Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 81" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 



17490 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. It shows the close relationship Mr, Hoffa had, with 
this letter. 

Then w^e have a letter dated June 3, 1947, written to Mr. James 
Hoffa, from Mr. John English, which acknowledges receipt of $5 
for "revised charter, seal and stamp, for local 985," stating that the 
charter was "picked up by you this date and the seal and stamp will 
be forwarded," again showing Mr. Hoif a's involvement. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit 81-A. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 81-A" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. Then, Mr. Chairman, on June 3, 1947, the same date, 
a notice was sent to Mr. John English from a man by the name of 
Norman C. Murrin, in which he states : 

Attached find check in the amount of $5 to cover the cost of charter name 
change for local 985 — 

and — 

Also insert Eugene James as charter member in place of Alvin Ogelvie. 

The Chairman. That may be exhibit 81-B. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 81-B" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Kennedy. So that brings Mr. James into the picture. 

Here is the application for certificate of affiliation with the Team- 
sters, which lists Eugene James as No. 1 on the list of applicants and 
it states : 

Charter received by J. Hoffa, 6-3-47, 
and then it says : 

Picked up. 

The Chairman. That may be made Exhibit 81-C. 
(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit 81-C" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

TESTIMONY OF EUGENE C. JAMES— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us anything about that, Mr. James ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the court proceedings when you Avere having this 
dispute in 194G, you stated to the Murphy grand jury that the people 
behind Bufalino Avere Scarface Joe Bommarito, Angelo Meli, and 
Pete Licavoli. Can you tell us what information you had on that? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you stated, on page 963 of the Murphy grand- 
jury transcript, that there were some unionmen working for Bilvin's 
predecessor, and when Bilvin took over these men were fired, and that 
you tried to — 

talk to anybody in authority. I made phone calls and they would refer me to 
Joe Doakes, and I could never jjet hold of the right man, and I put a picket line 
on the place May 23 to June 7, lOlf], and I got hold of the right man — 

and you say the right man was Angelo Meli. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17491 

Were Bommarito, Licavoli, and Meli, behind the operation of 
Bilvin. as you testified? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds the ans^A'er might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us in view of that why you then brought 
Bufalino into the union with you when vou received the charter from 
Mr. Hoffa in local 985 ? 

Mr. f J AMES. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds the answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that a condition to obtaining the charter, Mr. 
James ? 

Mr. Jainies. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Did Kofi'a know of your reputation and Bufalino's 
reputation at the time he granted the charter ? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to the testimony we have had, you were 
financed by the operators, and in addition they were so pleased with 
you in one year they gave you a Cadillac; is that right? 

Mr. James. I respectfully decline to answer the question on the 
grounds the answer may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have already gone into, at a 
previous hearing, about Mr. James' operation down in Miami, Fla., 
with Mr. Newbold, so I will not go into that. Those are the questions 
I want to ask him today. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

Mr. Chairman, we made a telephone call to the Statler Hotel. Mr. 
Gorman was in his hotel room. 

Are you surprised to hear that, Mr. James? 

Mr. James. No, sir ; I am not surprised. 

Mr. Kennedy. I thought you said you knew he was busy with some 
attorney. 

Mr. James. I knew he had some business to transact this afternoon; 
yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. We asked him to come over and he is coming over. 

The Chairman. You may stand aside for the present. You may be 
recalled. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Come forward, Mr. Hopkins. 

You do solemnly swear that tlie 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. Hopkins. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF CARL F. HOPKINS 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please, sir. 

Mr. Hopkins. Carl F. Hopkins, 14635 Monica Street, Detroit, 
Mich., owner of Hopkins Vending. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel ; do you ? 



17492 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are the sole owner of the Hopkins Vending, 
located at 14635 Monica ? 

Mr. Hopkins. It is another address now. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is the address ? 

Mr. Hopkins. 11169 Grand Eiver, Detroit 4, Mich. 

Mr. Kennedy. You started this business in about May 1951 ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And your business consists of placing on location 
coin-operated vending machines ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Forty percent of your machines vend candy, 
some 40 percent vend cigarettes, and about 20 percent remaining vend 
soft drinks ; is that right ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Soft drinks and coffee. 

Mr. Kennedy. What? 

Mr. Hopkins. And coffee. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have approximately 600 machines ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. On about 1Y5 or 200 locations ? 

Mr, Hopkins, Thereabout. 

Mr, Kennedy, Throughout the Greater Detroit area ; is that right ? 

Mr, Hopkins, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You own, service, and maintain these vending 
machines ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you been a member of local 985 ? That is. of 
the Teamsters, 

Mr, Hopkins, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you join ? 

Mr. Hopkins, In 19 — latein 1951, 

Mr, Kennedy, Were you self-employed at that time ? 

Mr, Hopkins. Yes, sir, 

Mr, Kennedy, Why did you join ? 

Mr, Hopkins, Well, it was the best thing to do to stay in business, 

Mr. Kennedy, What do you mean by that ? 

Mr, Hopkins, Well, they come out and asked me to join, and you 
had to join the union or they made it a little bit rough on you to 
operate your macliines. Certain places wanted machines with union 
labels and the union made sure that they wanted me in, 

Mr, Kennedy. But tlie union could do nothing for you. You were 
self-employed. 

Mr. Hopkins. T was solf-oniployod. Tliey couldn't do anything 
to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did tlioy indicate that they would picket you unless 
you joined? 

Mr, Hopkins, Well, one of my locations was. 

Mr, Kennedy, One of your locations was picketed ? 

Mr, Hopkins, Yes, 

The CiiAiRTMAN, Wiat effect did that have on your business? 

Mr, Hopkins, Well, I would have lost the machine in this particular 
location unless I had a union label. The only way to secure a imion 
label was to join the union. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17493 

The CiiAiRsiAN. You didivt own the phice of business, but you only- 
had a machine there, and if the phice of business was picketed 
where you had your machine by reason of your having your machine 
there, the owner of the business w^ould lose business ? In other words, 
he couldn't afford to keep your machine and out it w^ould have to go ; 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. He told me he would have to have a machine 
with a union label. If I couldn't furnish it, he would get somebody 
else. 

The Chairman. Otherwise, he would be picketed ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. So in that way, they compelled you to join a union 
if you were going to operate ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Does that mean, Mr. Hopkins, that if there w^ere 
a Federal law against blackmail picketing, you would have been pro- 
tected against this club that was used to compel you to take on union 
membership? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. The easiest way out is actually to join the 
union. 

Senator Mundt. Yes, but if there were a laW' prohibiting blackmail 
picketing, they would not have been able to use that club against the 
people in whose locations you had the machines ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Eight. 

Senator Mundt. You could have gone ahead and used union ma- 
chines or nonunion machines or anything you desired to use ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it a fact 

Mr. Hopkins. This, gentleman, is always at the time I was operat- 
ing the business myself, with no employees. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Hopkins. This was done at the time I was operating the busi- 
ness myself with no employees. 

The Chairman. You did all of the work yourself ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. And had no employees at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they in fact stop the truck going in and out? 

Mr. Hopkins. I didn't see any of that myself; I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you went down and joined the union? 

Mr. Hopkins. I went down and got the labels and put them on 
the machines. 

Mr. Kennedy. Because you understood this might happen; is 
that it? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mv. Ivennedy. How much did you pay at that time ? 

Mr. Hopkins. The initiation fee into the union, if I remember 
correctly, was $50. 

]\Ir. IvENNEDY. Did you pay all of that? 

]\Ir. Hopkins. I think they waived some of it in order to get me 
in, and I think I paid 50 percent of that. 

Mr. Kennedy. $25 ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you pay dues on that ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir ; on myself as owner. 



17494 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. How much did you pay ? 

Mr. Hopkins. $5 a month. 

Mr. ICennedy. Then you hired some people subsequently. This 
all occurred 5, 6, or 7 years ago ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. Then you hired people subsequently; is that right? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they belong 

Mr. Hopkins. As the business grew, I hired more employees. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they join the union ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Kennedy. How did that come about and when did it come 
about ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Well, late in 1956 I hired a man. According to 
my understanding with the union, we had 30 days before he had to 
join. For some reason or other, it was a little after 30 days. He 
was intimidated into a way of joining the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did that come about ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Well, he was — his truck was stopped on the high- 
way by — I don't know w^Iio stopped the truck because I wasn't rid- 
ing ; I wasn't in the truck. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was related to you as what happened? He 
came back to the office afterward, did he not ? 

Mr. Hopkins. He called me up and said there were four fellows 
who stopped him. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was driving along. What happened ? 

Mr. Hopkins. His car was pushed to the curb or a little beyond 
the curb, and he was asked to stop. They asked him at that time 
to get out of that car and get into another car and sign some 
papers, and he became a union member at that moment. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of a car forced him off the road? 

Mr. Hopkins. I don't know, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliat did he relate to you, Mr. Hopkins? 

Mr. Hopkins. Well, he said — I don't know what make of car it was 
or anything like that. He said he was pushed over by a car. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then he got in the car. Wlio was in the other car? 

Mr. Hopkins. Officials from the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they made him sign the paper ? 

Mr. Hopkins. I don't know what officials it was. He was shook 
up, and he didn't want to say. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was anybody identified as being in the car? 

Mr. Hopkins. He said there was three or four fellows in the car. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there anybody that was subsequently identified? 

Mr. Hopkins. No. I don't know who was in the car. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know whether Johnny Welsh was in (lie 
car ? 

]Mr. Hopkins. I don't know whether he was in the car or not. I 
actually don't because I didn't see it. He related to me that there 
was people in the car and he named some of them off. But he was 
in a nervous condition and I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you John Welsh was in tlie car? 

Mr. Hopkins. He said he thought it was Welsh. That was the 
fii'st time he had ever met Welsh, to my knowledge. 



niPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17495 

Mr. Kennedy. And there were tliree colored fellows plus Johnny 
Welsh? 

JMr. Hopkins. He told nie that, but I wouldn't know for sure. 

Mr. Kennedy. So anyAvay, he signed the papers. What kind of 
papers did they have him sign ? 

Mr. Hopkins. I don't know. I never saw them. I saw one; it 
was an application to join the union. The union showed me that 
when I went down to their office. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. What was the other paper ? 

Mr. Hopkins. I don't know. 

IVIr. Kennedy. He signed the papers while he was in the car? 

Mr. Hopkins. He never told me what the papers were. He signed 
two or three papers. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was he scared ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, he was. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that why he joined up ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Senator INIundt. How much dues or initiation fee did he pay? 

Mr. Hopkins. He pays $5, too. 

Senator Mundt. $25 ? 
" Mr. Hopkins. Initiation fee? $50. 

Senator Mundt. Was there any other reason why the union used 
methods like this to bring in two lone people in Detroit to a union? 
It doesn't seem to me that union money is hard enough to get. 

Mr. Hopkins. Well, the union made a statement to me that they 
were going to have everybody in Detroit that run any type of coin- 
operated equipment under union control. 

Senator Mundt. All they got out of it, according to you, is $25 
from you and $50 from your associate. That is $75, plus $5 a month. 
That is pretty small money. 

Mr. Hopkins. Per man. 

Senator Mundt. So far as this committee testimony reflects, that 
would be two men, $5 a month, $120 a year. That isn't very much to 
justify attacking a man in broad daylight, forcing him off to the side 
of the road and throwing up a picket line. Is there any other racket 
comiected with it? Is there any other income? "VVliat motivates it? 

Money is not that hard for unions to get since we have heard about 
it. 

Mr. Hopkins. That is all they got from me. 

Senator Mundt. Did you get your stamps free for the coin ma- 
chine ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, they issued me stamps for the machine. 

Senator Mundt. You don't have to pay for them ? 

Mr. Hopkins. No. As long as we keep the dues paid up to date, 
we get the stamps. 

Senator Mundt. $5 per month ? 

Mr. Hopkins. $5 per month per man including myself. 

Senator Mundt. Two men ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Four now. Three employees and myself. I got more 
employees as the business gi*ew. 

Senator Mundt. They all had to join ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, $50 plus $5 a month, plus — well, that is it. 

Senator Mundt. Are you a small operator there ? 



17496 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Hopkins. I am not a very big operator, no. I am a small 
operator. 

Senator Mundt. In other words, they just didn't want to let you 
run around being an exception, I suppose. 

Mr. Hopkins. Detroit is full of a lot of operators and small opera- 
tors ; it is highly competitive in the vending industiy in Detroit. 

Senator Mundt. What is your candid opinion ? Was there enough 
money in this for the union to justify all those highhanded tactics? 

Mr. Hopkins. I am in favor of a good union. 

Senator Mundt. Well, so am I in favor of a good union. But I am 
trying to figure out where the payoff is and what the percentage is in 
picking up little fellows like you at $25 and $5 a month. That is 
pretty slow income. 

Mr. Hopkins. If they get enough of them, they are all right. 

Senator Mundt. Are they trying to control the whole industry, do 
you think? 

Mr. Hopkins. In my opinion, yes. 

Senator Mundt. They already had the big operators and they were 
trying to get you little ones ? 

Mr. Hopkins. They have all kinds of operators in Detroit, fellows 
that operate their machines like I used to, alone. 

Senator Mundt. They have some big operators, too ? 

JNIr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Senator Mundt. They were all unionized ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did they do? They had your employee join 
in the manner you described. Did you hear from the union then ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. They called me and told me I had a man work- 
ing for me who was not a union member, but he now is. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did they want you to do ? 

Mr. Hopkins. To come down and sign a contract for wages and 
hours. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go down and sign a contract ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes, I did. I didn't argue much with them; I just 
signed it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Just signed it when they told you to ? 

Mr. Hopkins. And since then w^e have been negotiating when the 
contract expires. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was it that greeted you when you got down to 
the union headquarters? 

Mr. Hopkins. Gosh, I don't remember. I think I signed a contract 
with William Buf al ino. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who called you and made the statement to you ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Mr. Welsh. 

Senator Mundt. When you signed the contract, what changes in 
working conditions, in hours, or in pay schedules took place as far 
as your employees were concerned ? 

Mr. Hopkins. There wasn't much changes. I think the wage might 
have Avent up a little bit, $5, $6, $7, maybe $10, or something, which 
was agreeable with me. I had no objection to the contract at that time, 
to that contract. 

Senator Mundt. Wages went up $5, $6, $7, $10 — what, a week or a 
month ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17497 

Mr. Hopkins, No, a week. I think it went up $5 a week from what 
I was paying them before. 

Senator Mundt. A man got $5 a week more when he joined the 
union? 

Mr. Hopkins. Wiien we joined with that one man. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were ah"eady in the union ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any other conversation with Jolmny 
Welsh, specifically in connection with some gum machines that he 
had? 

Mr. Hopkins. He came out to my house one day and wanted to sell 
me some gum machines that he was operating, penny gum machines. 
It didn't amount to much. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much do those kind of machines cost? 

Mr. Hopkins. About $17 or $18 apiece. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much did he want to sell them to you for ? 

Mr. Hopkins. About $25. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you buy them from him ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You paid $25 ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Something like that, between $20 and $25. I don't 
want to state the exact figure. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he tell you that he would be able to help you 
out if you got in trouble if you purchased the machines from him? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes ; he told me he would leave me alone. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many machines did you purchase? 

Mr. Hopkins. Just five. 

Mr. Ivennedy. What happened then ? Did you lose the locations ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy, W]\j ? 

Mr. HopiaNS. They fell through. Some of them the business 
wasn't any good. I couldn't understand why tlie machines were in 
such a tj'pe location as they were. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Did you understand Welsh was able to place these 
machines in the locations he had them in because of the pressure he 
was able to bring? 

Mr. Hopkins. I don't know. That might have been my personal 
opinion at the time. Anyhow, I lost all the locations and the ma- 
chines sat on my shelves for 3 years. 

Mr. Kennedy. Immediately on finding out that you had purchased 
the machines, did the people say they wanted to get rid of the 
machines ? 

iVIr. Hopkins. Yes; I lost them. Every location comes up with 
a different answer. They can paint the walls and take them down, 
and you can't get them back up. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ultimately sell the machines ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. For how much? 

Mr. Hopkins. About $10 apiece. 

Mr. Kennedy. A^Hiy did you purchase the machines from him ? 

Mr. Hopkins. He said he was in trouble, that he wanted to get rid 
of the machines. 



36751— 5i9—pt. 48 19 



17498 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Did you want to stay on his good side? 

Mr. Hopkins. I, at that time, was a little bit leery of things, and 
I didn't know how it was going to work out. In all good faith, he 
was going to sell me the machines and I was going to buy them. That 
is the way it went. 

Mr. Kennedy. In all good faith, he was going to sell them to you 
above the market price ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Well, the additional amount was for the business 
that went with the machines. That is the way machines are sold in 
this business. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which turned out to be zero, because none of the 
locations would keep them ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Over a period of 3 months I lost the locations. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does local 985 control the industry pretty much 
in Detroit now? 

Mr. Hopkins. To my knowledge they do. I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, you are in the industry, in the business. 

Mr. Hopkins. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do they control it ? 

Mr. Hopkins. Pretty much, as far as I know. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any further questions? 

If not, thank you. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Ayres. 

The Chairman. 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. Ayres. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF WARREN AYRES 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mr. Ayres. My name is Warren Ayres. I live at 19574 jSIaydol, in 
Southfield. I am the manager of the Vendo Cigarette Co. 

The Chairman. You waive counsel, do you ? 

Mr. Ayres. I do. 

Tlie Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Ayres, you have been in (he cigarette vending 
field in Detroit for about 25 years? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are sales manager of this cigarette company? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Ml'. Kennedy. In 1945 you received some letters from Jimmy 
James, from his local 23814, requesting you to join the union; is that 
riglit? 

Mr. Ayres. We did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You ignored them until you were told by the loca- 
tion ownei-s that the macliines would have to be union or be removed ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. We postponed joining ^Ir. James' union when 
he first started. Then later on there was a little pressure put on. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17499 

A few of the operators in town did join, so we decided to go along 
and we joined, also. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there any thought or consideration at that 
time of the employees, or was it all an arrangement between ceitain 
of the operators and the union ? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, at that time, at the inception of Mr. James' local, 
it was more or less dealing directly with the owners, although the 
dues were based upon the amount of employees you had. But the 
employees had nothing to say as far as — well, there was nothing 
mentioned about the wages and hours and things like that. That 
is, at the inception of the union. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. It was just an arrangement between this so-called 
union and the operators ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. About September of 1951, the Market Vending Co. 
came into existence ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was a business interest of Jack "Babe" 
Bushkin? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it operated cigarette vending machines; is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have had some testimony about him, Mr. Chair- 
man. He is a labor relations consultant in the city of Detroit and 
a close associate of Mr. Hoffa's. 

Mr. Bufalino, about tliis period of time, called a meeting in his 
Teamster headquarters, local 985 offices, did he not ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Of all the representatives of cigarette vending com- 
panies who had locations in the supermarkets around Detroit? 

]Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what he said at 
that time ? Mr. Buslikin was present ? 

Mr. Ayres. Mr. Bushkin was present. Mr. Bufalino informed, 
I think there was five operators there who had machines in super- 
markets in the city, he informed us that Mr. Bushkin had decided to 
go into the cigarette vending machine business and that he was going 
to take all the markets in the city. 

He would advise us to relinquish the markets without fighting 
because he would take them regardless of what we ever tried to do. 
So we discussed the situation pro and con and we decided that th© 
only thing we could do, knowing that he was a labor consultant, 
knowing that he had the inside track, you might say, on the markets, 
we handed to Mr. Bushkin all the supermarkets at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that situation exists at the present time? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He has control over all the supermarkets, does he 
not? 

Mr. Ayres. He does. 

Mr. Kennedy. Locations in all supermarkets in the Detroit area? 

Mr. Ayres. He does, with the exception of the Kroger chain. 

The Chair]vian. In all except the Kroger chain ? 



17500 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Ayees. With the exception of the Kroger chain. Another 
company operates the Kroger chain. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Wliat was Mr. Bufalino, a Teamster Union official, 
telling you employers, operators, the fact that Mr, Bushkin was going 
to take over all of these supermarkets? "VVliat Avas he interestmg 
himself in it for ? 

Mr. Atres. Well, I never did know the exact story on it. I don't 
know whether there was a deal made or what, but he said he had 
talked to Mr. Bushkin and tried to talk him out of going into the 
cigarette machine business. He tried to prove to him that operating 
machines in the supermarkets would not be a paying proposition. 
But he had decided definitely to go into it so there was nothing more 
he could do about it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why would Mr. Bushkin be so successful in taking 
over the supermarkets ? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, the supermarkets turned out to be a pretty pay- 
ing proposition, if you have enough of them. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliy would Mr. Bushkin be so successful in taking 
them? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, Mr. Bushkin, being a labor consultant, could go 
to any supermarket chain in the city and, we might say, promise them 
having no trouble in their chain, no trouble with their clerks, and 
he could write his own ticket as far as the vending machine was 
concerned. 

Mr. Kennedy. In order to do that successfully, he had to have 
some connections also with the union, did he not ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir ; very definitely. 

Mr. Kennedy. What unions did he have connections with? 

Mr. Ayres. The Retail Clerks. 

Mr. Kennedy. His brother or he 

Mr. Ayres. His brother, as I understand, is an agent for the Retail 
Clerks. 

Mr. Kennedy. Which at that time was in the Teamster Union 
headquarters building ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you understand he and his partner were close 
associates of Mr. Hoflfa's during this period of time? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you felt he would be successful in taking over 
these supermarket locations if lie so wished? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, we couldn't do much about it. He was going to 
take them over, so successful or not, we had to give them up. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you all gave them up to him ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, Ave did. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is of some intei*est that the INIarket Vending Co., 
on December 4, 1951, had some 90 locations, and as of March of 1959 
this company has approximately 800 locations in the Detroit area. 
So he has grown considerably, lias ho not, tliat company? 

Mr. Ayres. He is the fastest growing operator in the State of 
Micliigan. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you think or believe that it is because of his union 
connections that he has been so successful ? 

Mr. Aa-res. I definitely do, although as I understand, there are 
several friends — naturally, being in the labor movement as long as he 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17501 

has, he has several influential friends to help him get locations, but I 
definitely feel his labor relations has helped him considerably. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you found certain Teamster Union officials 
who have also gone into this business? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, yes. We have had two others in our city. 

Mr. Kennedy. Vfiio are they ''( 

Mr. Ayres. We had one by the name of SchuUer, Mr. Schuller. 

Mr. Kennedy. SchuUer? 

Mr. Ayres. Schuller, business agent for the Teamsters ; and Morrie 
Coleman, also a business agent. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have they been successful in obtaining locations? 

Mr. xVyres. They have been very successful. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that also because of their union connection ? 

Mr. Ayres. In my opinion, it is ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is a tremendous advantage, is it not, to have this 
comiection in obtaining locations ? 

Mr. Ayres. It is in our city ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Because of the fact that you can promise labor peace? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, they promise labor peace. There has been talk of 
what you might call sweetheart contracts, one thing and another. 
I have never had any definite proof, but in my opinion it is a great 
feather in their cap to operate that way. 

Mr. Kennedy. Anyway, they have been unusually successful in 
these oi:>erations ? 

Mr. Ayres. They have ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have some dispute with Mr. Buf alino and the 
local on the question of payment of dues back in 1952 ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, we did. Our contract expired around June in 1952, 
and Mr. Buf alino wanted to renew it. We were quite reluctant to do 
so. We didii't figure, first, that our men should pay $5 a week for the 
privilege of servicing cigarette machines which had been going on for 
about 3 years, and, furthermore, w^e knew that we were in violation of 
a law by keeping our books the way w^e had been. 

Mr. Kennedy. In what w'ay were you in violation of the law ? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, the way the books were set up at that time, we 
were paying our servicemen's dues. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. You Weren't deducting them ? 

Mr. Ayres. No. 

jVIr. Kennedy. You were paying them directly ? 

]Mr. Ayres. Paying them directly. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was a violat ion of the Taft-Hartley Act ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you bring that to Mr. Buf alino's attention ? 

Mr. Ayres. AVe did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was it suggested that you raise the wages and then 
deduct them, go through that formality ? 

Mr. Ayres. That is right. Mr. Bufalino said raise the boys $5 a 
week and take it off their pay. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you find out about that? 

Mr. Ayres. Our attorney advised them at that time that we could 
not give that much of a raise. The stabilization law was in effect and 
we couldn't give our men $5 a week raise. The most we could give them 
was around $1.50, 1 believe, at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what happened ? 



17502 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Ayres. So we negotiated for a few montlis and then just broke 
off negotiations; we dropped it completely. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you won that dispute ? 

Mr. Ayres. No, we didn't win it. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. What happened ? 

Mr. Ayres. We stayed away from it. There were several operatoi'S 
in town that were in the same situation that we were. Y/e tried to stay 
out of the union, not because we didn't want some union, but we didn't 
like Mr. Buf alino's setup. 

So in February 195^, our place was dynamited. They threw six 
sticks of dynamite, some unknown person threv/ six sticks of dynamite 
in the rear of our garage, causing a damage of approximately $5,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were any of the other group, anv of the other mem- 
bers of the group that were also staying away from Mr. Bufalino, 
were their places dynamited ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. One other place was dynamited 3 months before 
ours. 

Mr. Kennedy. Michigan Vending? 

Mr. Ayres. Michigan Vending ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did that bring about a change of heart ? 

Mr. Ayres. It softened up quite a few of the boys ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you decide to get back into the union ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you signed up under his terms ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you feel this was a warning to you ? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, we though it had been ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was more than a warning to you ? 

Mr. AyrSs. Well, yes. You can put it several different ways. We 
figured the best thing to do was we had held out a long while; we 
tried to do the thing legallike, and that didn't succeed. We decided 
the only thing we could do at that time was to get back in. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the police come out and attempt to solve the 
dynamiting ? 

Mr. Ayres. The night the dynamiting occurred we had practically 
every top brass of the Detroit Police Department at our pla<^e. We 
had the arson squad, we had the cleanup, we had the inspector crew 
and special investigation. They were all very much interested in 
when it happened and how it happened and why it happened. 

The Detroit papers had a subheadline a couple of days on it and 
then the interest dropped and we heard nothing more about it. It 
was never solved, nothing said about it, with the exception that about 
a week or 10 days later a couple of detectives stopped by and asked 
if we heard anything about it. That Avas the end of the episode. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have any explanation as to why there was 
not a more vigorous explanation ? 

Mr. Ayres. No. We never knew exactly wliy they didn't try to 
find the i^erson that did it. But in the previous bombing of Michigan 
Vending it was the same thing. Frankly, in my opinion they didn't 
make too mucli of an effort to try to find it. 'it is a pretty tough 
situation to find just who would do a thing like that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know a police officer by the name of James 
Blessinirton ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17503 

Mr. Ayres. I have never met the gentleman. I liave lieard of him. 

Mr. Kennedy. What squad was he on ? 

Mr. Ayres. Special investigation. 

Mr. Kennedy. What were they charged with? What was their 
responsibility ? 

Mr. Ayres. They were charged with investigating things such as 
ours. They investigated the unions. They investigated any bombings 
or dynamitings or any suspicious activities of any group. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know his daughter w^orked for local 985 ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. The daughter of Detective Blessington worked for 
local 985 with whom you were having the dispute at that time. 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. 

Mr. I\JENNEDY. And Investigator Krug, was he the head of the 
squad ? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And his wife worked at Northville Downs Race- 
track ; is that right ? 

Mr. Ayres. I never knew his wife. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know his wife worked out there ? 

Mr. Ayties. No, I never did. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is where the Teamsters made a very large loan. 

Senator Mundt. Do you have any conflict-of-interest ordinance in 
the city of Detroit pertaining to this type of situation ? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, not that I know of. 

Senator Mundt. All you know is that they dynamited your place 
and never found out who did it and apparently never tried very hard ? 

Mr. Ayres. That is my opinion ; yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. That is your opinion. 

Maybe you didn't know about this conflict of interest until you came 
here today. Apparently you didn't know about this man's wife. 

Mr. Ayres. I never knew that ; no, sir. The only one I knew that 
had any connection at all with the Teamsters, and I never knew him 
personally, was Mr. Blessington, and I knew that his daughter worked 
for Mr. Bufalino. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did the fact that you didn't feel that you were re- 
ceiving sufficient police attention play a role in your ultimately sign- 
ing up again with local 985 ? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, not necessarily. We figured although in a way — 
I wouldn't want to condemn the Detroit Police Department; we have 
a very fine police department in our city. But it might have in some 
way influenced us, yes, when you have a situation like we had, and you 
feel as though you weren't getting the exact cooperation from the 
police department, although they tried, probably tried. But those 
things are pretty hard to solve. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am not condemning the Detroit Police Depart- 
ment either. There are certain elements in the Detroit Police Depart- 
ment who have been extremely helpful to this commitee, so we are 
extremely grateful for the help and assistance that we receive fi"om 
certain groups in the Detroit Police Department. 

Senator Mundt. Let me put the question this way: Had the in- 
vestigation of the police department found the people who had dyna- 
mited your plant and punished them, you might not have been under 



17504 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

the same compulsion to rejoin the union as you were when nobody 
found the culprit; is that right? 

Mr. Ayres. That is veiy true, very true. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Ayres, then in 1954 you joined up with a man 
by the name of Charles "Chuck" Morgan; is that right? 

Mr. Aykes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was to try to bring labor peace for you ? 

Mr. Ayres. Well, that was the general idea. After we had gotten 
back into the union, which was after our trouble, then we were still 
having a little difficulty with certain operators in the city, so Mr. 
Morgan formed what they called the United Vendors of Michigan. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he was closely associated, supposedly, with 
Mr. Bufalino? 

Mr. Ayres. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was that successful? 

Mr. Ayre. Well, it was successful for a little while. He started the 
thing off pretty good, and it did, in my opinion, make a lot of peace 
around town for a while. There were some of the operators that were 
a little, you might say, wanting to go out and increase their business, 
and when they were signed up in the association, that put it at a very 
minimum. 

As far as your locations were concerned, the molesting of locations, 
let's put it, were cut to a minimum, for awhile. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. That did not last long? 

Mr. Ayres. Not too long; no. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you find or have you found that Mr. Bufalino 
and the union favor certain operators in the city of Detroit? 

Mr. Ayers. I have heard it said that there is favoritism shown. 

Mr. Kennedy. I mean, do you know from your pei-sonal 
experience ? 

Mr. Ayres. I know of no personal experience; no. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. All right. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, the attorney is here now. 

The Chairman. Senator Mundt has to leave and the quorum may 
be broken in a few minutes. 

Mr. Gorman, will you come forward, please? Be sworn. 

You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give before this 
Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, and noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Gorman. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF RICHARD E. GORMAN 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
profession. 

Mr. Gorman. Richard E. Gorman. My office is at 1 North LaSalle 
Street, Chicago, 111. I am an attorney, licensed to practice in the 
State of Illinois. 

The Chairman. You represent Mr. Eugene James? 

Mr. Gorman. Pardon, Senator? 

The Chairman. Eugene James? 

Mr. Gorman. Yes, I do. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17505 

The CiiAiRMAx. He appeared here this afternoon and waived 
counsel. I understood that you were ;[joing to represent him in his 
appearance here. However, he waived counseL 

Mr. GoRMAx. May I make a short statement in that connection, 
Senator? 

The Chairmax. Yes. Let the Chair finish and then you may make 
a short statement. 

That is not important either way, but in the course of the interro- 
gation of him, the statements were made to the effect, in fact, by chief 
counsel, that it is his information from you that a union was actually 
paying your attorney fees in connection with your defense of him in 
the case in which he is charged with embezzlement of union funds, 
or in which the Internal Revenue Seindce is seeking to recover taxes 
on the alleged embezzled funds. 

That is the question that I wanted to get straightened out. It is a 
matter of concern to the committee that a union would be paying for 
attorney fees for the defense of someone who may have embezzled 
union funds. 

You may make a brief statement. I just wanted to get the picture 
before you. 

^Ir. Gormax. May I state for the record that, of course, I am ap- 
pearing here voluntarily, that I have represented Mr. James, I have 
represented Local 46 of the Laundry Workers Union over the past 
2 years, and I have represented the Laundry Workers International 
over the past 2 years. 

I have received compensation from both the Laundry Workers 
International and also from local -iG in connection with the services 
that I have rendered. 

Senator jVIuxdt. Is the Lamidry Workers International Union the 
one of which Mr. James is vice president? Are there two unions? 

Mr. Gormax. He formerly was connected with the Laundry 
Workers International as secretary-treasurer of the Laundry Workers 
International. I believe that is correct. He now is secretary- 
treasurer of local 46. That is the Chicago local. 

Senator Muxdt. Of the Laundry International ? 

Mr. Gormax. Of the Laundry Workers International ; j'es. That is 
correct. Senator. 

The Chairmax. Is that the one that he is alleged to have taken the 
money from ? 

Mr. Gormax. I might say this in that connection. Senator. You 
have mentioned that the Internal Revenue Department has alleged 
that the funds were embezzled from the Laundry Workers Interna- 
tional. I think they would take issue with that statement. 

The CiiAiRMAX. I didn't say they were embezzled. They allege it 
is income on which they pay taxes, and the defense is being made that 
it is not taxable because it was money that is embezzled. 

]\Ir. Gormax. Tliat is correct. May I also say 

The Chair:nl\x. Now. then, in that connection, the question is: Is 
the union paying the attorney fees for making that defense? 

Mr. Gormax. The union is pajnng the attorney fees. I don't know 
that I can saj- 

The Chairmax. Well, you are making that, defense and the union 
is paying the attorney fees for it. 



17506 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Gorman. The union is paying the attorney fees ; yes. 

Senator Mundt. Is the union paying the attorney fees — I am not 
talking about your appearance for Mr. James; I understand that the 
union is paying that — but is the union also paying your fees as an 
attorney in representing Mr. James in the trouble he is having with 
the Internal Revenue Service ? 

Mr. Gorman. Yes ; my understanding is that is by executive order, 
approved by the membership. 

Senator Mundt. Is this the same union from which he is presumed 
to have embezzled the funds ? 

Mr. Gorman. May I say in that connection that that case is presently 
pending in the district court in Chicago, and I question the propriety 
of the committee interrogating me or asking me about that case while 
it is presently pending. 

Senator Mundt. We are not going into tlie merits of the case, but 
we are trying to establish for the record something which has aroused 
a lot of curiosity on our part: whether or not union members who 
allegedly have lost part of their dues through embezzlement are now 
paying an attorney to protect the man who allegedly embezzled their 
money ? That is the part that disturbs us. 

Mr. Gorman. Well, you see, Senator, that is one of the issues in the 
case, as to whether or not the money was embezzled and, if it was em- 
bezzled, from whom it was embezzled. 

Senator Mundt. I didn't think that w^as an issue. I thought that 
your claim was that it had been embezzled ; that you asserted that. 

Mr. Gorman. Well, of course, the Government contends that is not 
so. 

Senator Mundt. I understand the Government claims he owes them 
tax money for taxable income. 

Mr. Gorman. If I might explain, the money that is concerned in the 
tax case is money which was paid in the form of premiums to an agent 
of the Security Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New Jersey, and that is 
the source of the funds that the Internal Revenue Department contends 
tax should be paid on by Mr. James. 

Senator Mundt. Your contention is that it is nontaxable because 
this money was embezzled by Mr. James ? 

Mr. Gorman. That has been the contention ; yes. 

Senator Mundt. So the people who presumably lost the money 
through embezzlement are paying for the defense of the embezzler if, 
in fact, he is an embezzler ? 

Mr. Gorman. Well, as far as anyone losing any money, that money 
has been entirely returned to the Laundry Workers International, to 
the Welfare Department of the Laundry Workers International. 

Senator Mundt. But had it not been returned, they would have been 
the loser. 

Mr. Gorman. That is the question up for issue. It might have 
been the Security Mutual Life Insurance Co. that was the loser. 

Tlie Chairman. But for Mi-. James to prevail, for him to win his 
lawsuit, your contention will have to be sustained, and that is that 
the money was embezzled. 

Mr. GoRixfAN. That is correct. Senator. And he is also under indict- 
ment in the State of New Jersey. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17507 

The Chairman. I understand. And your fees are being paid out 
of a union treasury for presenting that defense for one who is alleged 
to have embezzled money, or one who you maintain has embezzled it. 
Mr. Gorman. Well, I doubt that the local is paying our fee for pre- 
senting that defense, but they are paying us for representing him. 

The Chairman. Whether it is local or international, it wouldn't 
make any difference. It is coming out of union funds. 
Mr. Gorman. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And whether it is local money or international 
money, that money comes out of workers' dues that they pay into the 
organization. 

Mr. Gorjian. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. And Mr, James lives in Illinois ; right ? 
Mr. Gorman. He does ; yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Have the authorities in Illinois indicted him for 
embezzlement ? 
Mr. Gorman. No ; thej^ have not. 

Senator Mundt. If the charge is sustained, they would have to do 
that, wouldn't they? 

]Mr. Gorman. I doubt that they could at this juncture. 
Senator Mundt. The statute of limitations has run? 
Mr. Gorman. That is right. 

Senator ]\Iundt. Well, of course, for a layman who is not a lawyer, 
I get a little confused about the legal entanglements. I don't want to 
ask any questions that are not proper. 

It seems to me, looking at it from the outside, that there must be 
something improper in the business, with some $150,000 having dis- 
appeared. Uncle Sam should get his share if it is legitimate income, 
and if it is not legitimate that restitution in itself is no defense. 
Mr. Gorman. You are getting into a question of law. 
The Chairman. Well, we have the facts, so everyone can seek legal 
advice as to how they should be applied or what law can be applied 
to it. 
Mr. Kennedy. Can I ask a question? 
Mr. Gorman. Surely. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much money have you received in connection 
with this? 
The Chairman. "Wliat is the fee; is that what you mean? 
Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

What is the fee to be or what fee have you received in connection 
with your defense of Mr. James either in the embezzlement charges, 

which I believe exist in some court 

Mr. Gorman. I do not represent him in the embezzlement case in 
New Jersey. 
Mr. Kennedy. Who represents him in that? 
Mr. Gorman. I doubt that he has any counsel in that. 
Mr. IvENNEDY. He does not have any counsel? 
Mr. Gorman. He is right now resisting extradition to New Jersey. 
Mr. Kennedy. Who is handling that for him? 
Mr. Gorman. Mr. Jason Bellows and Mr. Michael Brodkin, in 
Chicago. 
Mr. I^nnedy. Are they connected with your law firm at all ? 
Mr. Gorman. No. I practice as an individual. 



17508 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Are union funds also being used so that these 
attorneys can argue against extradition? 

Mr. GoR3iAN. I believe they have been paid in that manner. I am 
speaking of something that I don't have first-hand knowledge of. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is your fee? 

Mr. Gorman. I have received to date $15,000 in connection with the 
defense of Mr. James. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that has been union money that you have 
received ? 

Mr. Gorman. That has been paid through local 46 of the Chicago 
union. 

Mr. Kennedy. And what is the arrangement for any further fee? 

Mr. Gorman. There is none. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know what the fee of the other attorneys 
is who are fighting extradition to New Jersey ? 

Mr. Gorman. I don't know exactly. I wouldn't want to be quoted. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do you understand it to be? 

Mr. Gorman. I would understand it to be in the neighborhood of 
around $2,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. You stated Mr. James has made restitution to the 
union ? 

Mr. Gorman. He was sued civilly by the social security department 
of the imion, and that suit has been settled. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, how much money has he restored? First, 
how much did they sue him for? 

Mr. Gorman. I didn't handle that matter, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, how much 

Mr. Gorman. The exact amount of the suit that was charged in the 
complaint I don't know. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much did he restore to the union? 

Mr. Gorman. The entire amount was restored to the union. They 
sued the Security Mutual Life Insurance Co., Mr. James, Mr. Saper- 
stein, and also a Chicago banlv, through which these funds were 
transferred. 

Mr. Kennedy. So how much money was returned to the union? 

(At this point Senator Goldwater entered the hearing room.) 

Mr. Gorman. It was something in connection with the suit — I am 
only making an estimate — something in the nature of $250,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was returned to tlie union ( 

Mr. GoRivtAN. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. So on the question as to whether union funds are 
involved in this, certainly from the fact that some money has been 
returned to the union, it indicates or shoAvs that union funds were 
involved ? 

Mr. Gorman. No. The moneys that were returned (o tlie union 
were moneys tliat the welfare department would have received in 
premiums, restoration of premiums on tlie experience tliat the Security 
Mutual Life Insurance Co. had. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then let me ask you this, and maybe we can simplify 
it: In your argument, you are saying that he embezzled this money. 
Where are you saying tliat he embezzled it from ? 

Mr. Gorman. That hasn't })een armied. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17509 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, aren't you claiming that he embezzled it from 
some group i 

Mr. Gor:man. That is correct. 

Mr. Kenni':dy. Who are you saying or claiming he embezzled it 
from ? 

Mr. GoiniAN. It would appear that the money was embezzled from 
the Security Mutual Life Insurance Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this arrangement is made on a contract or 
arrangement between the employer and the insurance company? 

Mr. Gorman. Are you speaking of the social security 

Mr. Kennedy. Initially, when the arrangements were made for the 
embezzlement, it was an arrangement that was made how? Would 
you explain it to me? 

Mr. Gorman. Well, there was no arrangement made for any em- 
bezzlement. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did he embezzle it? 

Mr. Gorman. Again, Mr. Kennedy, we are getting into the case 
that is being argued presently in the city of Chicago, in the district 
court there. I again appeal to the Chair. I think we are invading 

The Chairman. We will not go into the case. I did want to clear 
this up about the attorney fee. 

I have made some observations about it. I think it is scandalous 
in the extreme that union men who may have had their funds taken 
and diverted to personal use, had them embezzled, then would be re- 
quired, through their union, to put up the money to defend the on© 
who had actually taken their funds. 

I think it is something that should receive the legislative attention 
of the Congress. I am putting it strictly on that basis. I think it 
ought to be prohibited. When people work and pay dues into a 
union, with the idea that their working conditions, their wages and 
things particularly related to their employment might benefit, I think 
it is just outrageous when they are robbed, or their money is taken 
away from them, union dues, are used for the purpose of defending 
those who took the money away from them. 

(At this point Senator Mundt withdrew from the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. Is there any thing further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairiman. Thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Johnson. 

The Chairman. 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. Johnson. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF SIGFRID JOHNSON 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Johnson. Sigfrid Johnson, Sarasota Avenue, Detroit, Mich, 
I sell builders supplies. 

Mr. Kennedy. In May 1957 you bought a saloon at 4854 Michigan ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes, I did. 



17510 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And in the saloon at the time was a jukebox belong- 
ing to the West Music Co. ; is that right ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time you wanted to install a pool table for 
your customers, and you asked a friend, Ralj^h Sheldon, a vending 
machine salesman, to install one, and also a jukebox; is that right? 

Mr. Johnson. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. You called the West Music Co. and asked them to 
remove their jul^ebox? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And Mr. Sheldon brought in his jukebox shortly 
thereafter ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were now two jukeboxes on location, so you 
turned the West Music Co. box to the wall ; is that right ? 

Mr. Johnson. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. A few hours later did you receive a telephone call ? 

Mr. Johnson. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. From whom did you receive the telephone call? 

Mr. Johnson. The caller identified himself as John Welsh from 
the Teamsters Union, and he asked me if I was having trouble with 
the jukebox, and I told him that I wasn't. 

The Chairman. Can you speak a little louder, please? 

Mr. Johnson. The man identified himself as John Welsh of the 
Teamsters. He asked me if I was having any trouble with the jukebox, 
and I told him that I wasn't. 

The Chairman. Can you speak a little louder, please ? 

Mr. Johnson. The man identified himself as Jolm Welsh of the 
Teamsters. He asked me if I was having any trouble with the jukebox, 
and I said, "No." He asked me why I had two of them in there. I 
said that one was going out. He asked me which one, and I told him. 
He said he would send someone around to see me. 

Mr, Kennedy. Did somebody come around thereafter ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who came ? 

Mr. Johnson. Chuck Morgan. 

Mr. Kennedy. Will you relate what happened ? 

Mr. Johnson. Chuck Morgan came in and 

Mr. Kennedy. Who was Chuck Morgan at that time ? 

Mr. Johnson. Well, he represented some jukebox organization that 
the man belonged to whose machine I was sending out. 

He informed me that tlie fellow that I was trying to put in tliere 
was not a union member, and I was asking for trouble, and so forth 
and so on, tliat he was going to put a picket line up and stop my 
supplies if I didn't go along with the original West Music Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you question him as to how the association, the 
reprei>entative of the association, could put up a picket line? 

Mr. Johnson. No, I didn't. But 1 had had the call from Welsh 
and from tlie Teamsters, so I just assumed tliat they Avere all in the 
same boat. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did ho toll you that the picket lino would cut oif 
deliveries and you would be j)ut out of business ? 

Mr. Johnson. Well, he didn't say put out of business, but that would 
be the inference. 



EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17511 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you tell him ? 

Mr, Johnson, "VYe liassled for ma3'be a week or 2 weeks with two 
jukeboxes in the place. In the end I gave in to him and had Mr. 
iSheldon remove his box, and Mr. West — his box remained. On the 
final tour of my bar, Morgan insisted that I have the cigarette machine 
that was in there at the time removed and have a bona fide union 
man in there that was paying dues, I guess, to their organization, 
because the cigarette machine itself didn't come under their jurisdic- 
tion either, 

Mr, Kennedy, So did you remove the cigarette machine ? 

Mr, Johnson, I did, 

]\Ir, Kennedy, And you put in another cigarette machine ? 

Mr, Johnson. Yes, 

Mr. Kennedy, What machine did you put in to replace your ciga- 
rette machine ? 

Mr. Johnson. Well, the name of the company that brought their 
machine in was the G. & G. Vending Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did they happen to come in ? Did you request 
them ? 

Mr, Johnson, No; I didn't request them. They came in with 
Morgan about a day or so after he had made the deal to put that 
machine in. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they just drive up with a new machine ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. They appeared to know all about the problem and 
difficulty ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they installed their machine ? 

Mr. Johnson. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know anything about the G. & G. Vending 
Co. 

Mr. Johnson. No. Not at that time, nor now, either. 

Mr. Kennedy. G. & G, Vending Co, is owned by Mr, Arthur Gallo 
and his brother Komero Gallo. Do you know anything about them ? 

Mr. Johnson. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. xVrthur Gallo has had six arrests and three convic- 
tions, including a 10-year sentence in 1935 for possession and sale of 
narcotics. Interestingly enough, from January to December 1952 the 
same Arthur Gallo who replaced this machine, and who has this bad 
criminal record, was secretary-treasurer of local 985 of the Teamsters. 

Did you know that ? 

Mr. Johnson. No, I didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. In addition, the G. & G. Vending Co. was operated 
from the premises of Vincent Meli's company, that is, the Meltone 
Music Co. The records show that Vincent Meli initially was a third 
partner in G. & G, That was in 1948. But the records show even up 
until 1955 that Vincent Meli was receiving money from this company. 

The first individual, Mr, Sheldon, he was a friend of yours whose 
machine you wanted to put in there ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, he had no employees; is that correct? 

Mr. Johnson. Well, he had one fellow that did service for him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Even at that time ? 

Mr. Johnson. Yes. 



17512 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you know if he had been in the union at one 
time ? 

Mr. Johnson. Well, he told me that he had belonged to the union, 
but he had gotten out of it because he didn't like the way it was run. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were forced to change your machines under 
threats of cutting off of your pickups and deliveries unless you put 
these two other machines in there ? 

Mr. Johnson. Correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is an example, Mr. Chairman, of the union and 
the association working together to gain business for a hoodlum-run 
company, the G. & G. Co. 

That is all. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions? If not, thank you very 
much. 

The committee will stand in recess until 10 :30 tomorrow morning, 
and at that time we will convene in the caucus room in the Old Senate 
Office Building. 

(Members of the select committee present at the taking of the recess 
were Senators McClellan and Goldwater. ) 

(Whereupon, at 4 :45 p.m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene 
at 10:30 a.m., Thursday, April 9, 1959, in the caucus room of the 
Senate Office Building.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



THURSDAY, APRIL 9, 1959 

U.S. Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN the Labor or JVLvnagement Field, 

Washington^ D.C. 

The select committee met at 10 : 43 a.m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 44, agi-eecl to February 2, 1959, in the caucus room of the Senate 
Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the select 
connnittee) presiding. 

Present: Senator John L. JMcClellan, Democrat, of Arkansas. 

Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief counsel; Walter R. May, 
assistant counsel; John P. Constandy, assistant counsel; xVrthur G. 
Kaplan, assistant counsel; Sherman S. Willse, investigator; Ruth 
Young Watt, chief clerk. 

Tlie Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the select committee present at the convening of the 
session: Senator McClellan.) 

The Chairman. Yesterday we recessed until 10 : 30 this morning. 
At that time we thought we would have a quorum and could proceed 
with the hearings as scheduled. However, some things have inter- 
vened since and we now find that none of the other members of the 
committee can be present this morning. Most of them, if not all — so 
far as I know all of them — are engaged in other legislative duties 
that make it impossible for them to attend this morning's session. 
Therefore the committee cannot proceed to hear witnesses in public 
hearings without a quorum, and under the rules of the committee, 
two members nuist be present to constitute a quorum for that 
purpose. 

Therefore, the committee will have to recess again until 10 : 30 in the 
morning, at which time I am reasonably assured a quorum will be 
present and the hearings will proceed. 

The hearings tomorrow, I may advise, will be in room 1202, New 
Senate Office Building. 

(Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m. the select committee recessed to recon- 
vene at 10:30 a.m., Friday, April 10, 1959, in room 1202, Senate Office 
Building.) 

17513 



3675,1— 59— pt.4J 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 1959 

U.S. Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper Activities 

IN the Labor or Management Field, 

Washington, D.G. 

The Select Committee met at 11 a.m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 44, agreed to February 2, 1959, in room 1202, Senate Office Build- 
ing, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the Select Committee) 
presiding. 

Present: Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; 
Senator Karl E. Mundt, Kepublican, South Dakota ; Senator Homer 
E. Capehart, Republican, Indiana; Senator Carl T. Curtis, Republi- 
can, Nebraska. 

Also present: Robert F. Kennedy, chief comisel; Walter R. 
May, assistant counsel ; John P. Constandy, assistant counsel ; Arthur 
G. Kaplan, assistant counsel ; Sherman S. Willse, investigator ; Pierre 
E. G. Salinger, investigator; Walter C. DeVaughn, investigator; B. 
Franklin Herr, Jr., investigator; Kobert E. Manuel, assistant comi- 
sel ; Ruth Y. Watt, chief clerk. 

The Chairman. The committee will be in order. 

(Members of the Select Committee present at the convening of the 
session were Senators McClellan and Mundt.) 

Mr. Kennedy, call the first witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mi*s. Anderson. 

The Chairman. Come forward, please. Be sworn. 

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? 

Mrs. Andj:rson. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MRS. ANNIE MAY ANDERSON 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mrs. Anderson. My name is Annie May Anderson. I live at 2566 
Pennsylvania. I washes cars. That is my occupation. 

The Chairman. In what city do you live ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Detroit, Mich. 

The Chairman. In Detroit, Mich. And you wash automobiles? 
You work at a garage or someplace where they wash cars? 

Mrs. Anderson. I do. 

The Chairman. And you work as a car washer? 

17515 



17516 IMPROPER ACTrV'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mrs. Anderson, That is right. 

The Chairman. What is the name of the place ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Tony's Five-Minute Auto Wash. 

The Chairman. Where is it located? Do you know the street 
address ? 

Mrs. Anderson. It is on Seven Mile, but I don't know the address. 

The Chairma x. Do you know what street it is on ? 

Mrs. Anderson. It is on Seven Mile. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is 13724 East Seven Mile Eoad, Detroit. 

The Chairman. Do you have an attorney to represent you or do 
you desire the advice of counsel ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I don't undei-stand. 

The Chairman. I mean, do you want a lawyer ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, I don't. 

The Chairman. You don't need a lawyer ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Kennedy, you may proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mrs. Andereon, how long have you been working in 
car washes? 

Mrs. Anderson. Ever since the latter part of 1954 and the early part 
of 1955. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where were you working originally, Mrs. Anderson ? 

Mrs. Anderson. At Tony's Five-Minute Auto Wash. 

Mr. Kennp:dy. Have you always worked at Tony's Five-Minute? 
Originally, when you first went to work for an auto wash, where were 
you working? 

Mrs. Anderson. At Steam Auto Wash at Miller Road and Van Dyke. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much were you receiving? First, would you 
tell the committee what hours you were working at the Steam Heat 
Auto Wash? 

Mrs. Anderson. I was working 10 hours a day for 7 days a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. What time in the morning did you go to work ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I went to work at 8 in the morning and got off at 
6 in the afternoon. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you worked 7 days a week ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I worked 7 days a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is 70 hours a week ? 

Mre. Anderson. Seventy hours a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much were you getting paid for that ? 

Mrs. Anderson. $35 dollars a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. While you were working there, did the union come in 
and attempt to organize you ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, the union came in. Newman and Shaw came 
in. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you understood they were two business agents 
of the union? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is Albert Newman and Jewell, or Bill, Shaw: 
is that right? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did tliey promise you at that time? 

Mrs. Andehson. They asked the emph)yees at Steam Auto Wash if 
we would join the union, that they would sliorlen our hours and get 
us more pay. There was another woman working there with me. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17517 

So lie told US women if we would join the union that they would get us 
shorter hours and iret us nioro pay. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is back where you worked originally in 1954, 
when business agents of the union came in. They promised that they 
would arrange for a steward there that vou could take your complaints 
to? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And for the women you would only have to work 
40 hours a week ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that there would be 10 cents a day deducted 
from your salary to pay the union dues for the services ? 

]Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you sign an application card and a dues au- 
thorization card at that time ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No. We had to put our names on a piece of paper 
the first day they came out there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you put your name on a piece of paper ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did you hear next ? 

Mrs. Anderson. One day I was off of work, and when I got back to 
work they told me that Newman and Shaw had been back out there 
and that they had talked with the boss. So then the boss had some 
white cards for us to sign, so we had to sign those. 

Mr, Kennedy. Did you sign the cards ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened then? Did you become a member 
of the union ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Well, he didn't explain it to us until next Sunday, 
which was payday. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened on payday ? 

Mrs. Anderson. He told us we had signed our names to a paper that 
we wanted to be in a union, and after we wanted to be in the union, 
he was going to have to cut our pays $10, which the union didn't re- 
quire him to pay us but $25 a week. 

Mr. I\JENNEDY. All the union contract required was that you get paid 
$25 a week? 

Mrs. Anderson. $25 a week. 

INIr. Kennedy. So nonunion you were getting paid $35 a week ? 

Mrs. Anderson. $35 dollars a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you joined up with the union and your pay was 
cut to $25 a week ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that is for a 70-hour week ; is that right? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you call the union and protest ? 

Mrs. Anderson. The union told us that we had pointed out a man 
for steward, so we went to this man and asked him would he call the 
union, so he did. He called the union building downtown, and asked 
to speak to Newman. But Newman wasn't in at the time. So when 
Newman came in, he got the message and he called back. He told the 
man that we had appointed for steward — the man explained to him 
that our wages had been cut, and he explained to this man, and told 



17518 IMPROPER ACTTV'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

him that there wasn't nothing he could do, because our union hadn't 
been or<>:anizcd. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliere wasn't anything that they could do for you ? 

Mrs. Anderson. There wasn't anything. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he say they hadn't organized you ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, he said the union hadn't been organized. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you quit your job then ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I quit. 

Mr. Kennedy. These were representatives of local 985 ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever find whether you were in the union or 
not? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, I didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. You just quit your job at that time ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I just quit. 

Mr. Kennedy. Where did you go to work then ? 

Mrs. Anderson. At Spic and Span. 

Mr. Kennedy. How long did you work there? Is that also known 
as Dukes' Five-Minute Auto Wash ? 

Mrs. Anderson. It was Spic and Span then, but Dukes was the 
manager. 

Mr. Kennedy. All right. Then you went to work there; is that 
right? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they ask you whether you belonged to the union ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Bill Stradder. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Bill Stradder is one of the partners ; is that right? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. He asked if you were a member of the union and you 
told him you were ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I told him I signed the card. 

Mr. Kennedy. What happened then ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Then he asked me did I miderstand I would have 
to pay 10 cents a day union dues. I told him yes, and I had to sign 
another card then. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you then go to work for them ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, I did. 

Mr. ICennedy. To pay the 10 cents a day for the 7 days or 6 days ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Six days. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you got 1 day free ; is that right ? 

Mi-s. Anderson. Yes, Sunday was free. 

Mr. Kennedy. You didn't have to pay the 10 cents on Sunday ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, I didn't have to. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much were you going to make there ? 

Mrs. Anderson. $30 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is, again, for 70 hours ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right, 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever receive a union card ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No; I didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is local 985 that you were in ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is the local of Mr. Bufalino ? Did you ever 
have any contact with him ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17519 

Mrs. Andersox. Not Mr. Buf alino ; I did not. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was with local 985 ? 

Mi-s. Anderson. Yes; that is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you ever notified of a union meeting? 

Mrs. Anderson. No ; I wasn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you ever notified of a union election? 

Mrs. Anderson. No ; I wasn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did any of the union officials ever visit the car 
wash ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes ; they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they ever consult with you or talk to you ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No ; they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who visited the car wash ? 

Mrs. Anderson. It was Newman and Shaw. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they never spoke to the employees? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Newman and Shaw ; is that right ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Subsequently, Mrs. Anderson, Mr. Stradder, the 
partner of Dukes, he left and went to open his own place; is that 
right? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was in Momit Clemens, Mich. ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you go to work there ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes ; I went with him when he left Dukes, bought 
his business, went with him to Mount Clemens. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you a member of the union then ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Well, I was still paying the 10 cents a day. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much were you making there ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I was making $35 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you went to Momit Clemens ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you were paying the 10 cents. Was the miion 
doing you any good there ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No ; it wasn't. 

IMr. Kennedy. Did you have any conversations then with the 
owner ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Well, one day when Shaw and Newman came out 
to Momit Clemens, I asked Shaw if he had a moment I would like to 
speak to him. So he told me whenever he come back out he would 
talk with me. 

So when he came back out, I caught up with him, and I said, 
"Shaw, you come out here and go straight to the office; you never 
talk to us, you never tell us anything. We don't have nobody to 
complain to, nobody to protect us. We don't have a steward. What 
I want to know is what we are paying dues for." 

And he said, "To protect your job." I said, "Protect what job? 
If something was to go wrong, our boss was to do us wrong, we 
wouldn't have nobody to go to." 

He said "In case your boss do you wrong, you have to go fuid you 
another job." 



17520 IMPROPER ACTrV'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

So after he left, I went to my boss and explained to my boss what 
he had told nie, and that I wasn't going to pay any more union dues, 
because the 60 cents meant as much to me as it did to them, and they 
wasn't doing anything for us, wasn't giving us any protection. It 
was Bill Stradder that I went to. I told him Bill told me I could 
not pay union dues and work with the other employees if they were 
paying dues. 

i said, "Well, if I got to keep paying dues, I will go to other 
locals and keep to begging and trying to plead with them and find 
out what is wrong with this local, if something is wrong, they 
wouldn't give us any help." 

He said, "Annie, don't do that, because you will get yourself in 
trouble, you will get us in trouble and a lot more people in trouble." 

So I told him, "Bill, you know I have a daughter to take care of 
and that 60 cents would mean a lot more to me m my pocket than to 
Newman and Shaw in their pocket." 

And he said, "If you feel that way, you don't have to pay any more 
union dues, but just don't tell the other employees about it." 

I promised him I wouldn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said you wouldn't have to pay the union dues ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You told him at that time that you would go to 
another union ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Another local to try to get some help, to ask them 
what was wrong with our local, and why wouldn't they give give us 
protection, why wouldn't they give us protection. I told Bill that 
I would go to another local. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, you were supporting your daughter, 
who was about 15 years old ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were getting paid how much ? 

Mi's. Anderson. At Bill's ? 

Mr. Kennedy. No, at the place where you had this conversation, 
Mount Clemens. 

Mrs. Anderson. $35 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy, And your daughter was 15 years old? 

Mrs. Anderson. Fifteen years old then. 

Mr. Kennedy, And did this 00 cents a week make a big difference? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, it did. I me.an because if it carried me 4 
weeks I was paying $2.80 a month, and if it carried 5 weeks, which 
was 5 Sundays in a month, I had to pay $3.50. I could take that $3.50 
and keep putting it together and in 2 or 3 months I would have enough 
to get my dtiughter a skirt, a sweater, even have enough to get her 
a pair of shoes with. That is what I explained to Bill. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why were you working in a car wash in the first 
place, Mrs. Anderson ?' 

Mrs. Andkkson. Because the first of 1954, the doctor told me that 
I couldn't work inside. I had to have a job on the outside. That 
is the only job that I could find was a car wash on the outside. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you lind it difficult to get by on that amount of 
money ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Pardon ? I didn't understand you. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you find it difficult to support yourself and your 
daughter ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17521 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, it is ; very diflicult. 

Mr. Kennedy. And when you are working 70 liours a week and 
you get paid $35 and the union deducts the 60 cents a w^eek, 10 cents a 

day? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. Then I have to pay my Social Security. I 
had to pay more than 60 cents a week out of it. I had to pay Social 
Security and something else. I mean, I don't understand it, but it 
was two or three more things we had to pay out. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has the union ever done you any good, Mrs. 
Anderson ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, they haven't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have they ever taken up any of your complaints? 

Mrs. Anderson. Xo, they haven't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you seen a copy of your contract ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, I haven't. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you haven't been informed by any meetings 
of the union ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, I haven't. 

The Chairman. How many are employed there where you work? 

Mrs. Anderson. Now? 

The Chairman. As car washers ; yes. 

Mrs. Anderson, At Dukes' now ? 

The Chairman. Wherever you are working. 

Mr. Kennedy. From Mount Clemens you went back to Dukes'; 
is that right ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much do you make now at Dukes' ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Twenty-five dollars. 

Mr. Kennedy. Twenty-five dollars a week at Dukes' ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. For 70 hours ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

The Chairman. Is that salary? They pay you $25 a week, and 
do not pay you by the hour or car, or anything ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No. They guarantee us $25 a week. 

The Chairman. Do you frequently exceed the guarantee ? That is, 
do you get more? Do you make more than the $25? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, I don't, unless I Simoniz cars. He pays me 
a dollar and a half extra. That is the only extra money I make. 

The Chairman. In other words, the carwashing where you are 
guaranteed $25 a week, you are not able to make more than the $25 
a week doing that work ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, sir, I am not. 

The Chairman. So if you don't have any Simonizing, you make 
no extra money? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

The Chairman. And do you have much of that ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Simonizing? No, not too much, not after the 
holiday. 

The Chairman. Is that after-hours work ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, it is. 

The Chairman. Do you mean after you put in your 10 hours car 
washing, then if there is some Simonizing to do, you may get to do 
that in extra hours work ? 



17522 IMPROPER AcrnaTiES in the labor field 

Mrs. Anderson". Yes, sir, I do. 

The Chairman. So if you make any extra money, you have to 
work longer than 10 hours ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

The Chairman. For the 10 hours, $25 is all you ever get any time ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that is 7 days a week ? 

Mrs. Anderson. You have to put in 7 days at 70 hours to get 
the $25. 

The Chairman. You have to put in 70 hours ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

The Chairman. If you miss 2 or 3 hours, there is a deduction? 

Mrs. Anderson. If you miss the day it is a deduction. 

The Chairman. If you miss a day there is a deduction ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

The Chairman. In other words, you wouldn't get $25 for a 6-day 
week? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, sir. 

The Chairman. How long have you been working at this place 
where you are now working ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Well, I just came back right after Christmas. 

The Chairman. After Christmas ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

The Chairman. You have been there some 3 months, then ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, going on 3 months. 

The Chairman. How long did you work there before ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I worked there during 1955 and I think up until 
1956. Then I went with Bill. 

The Chairman. So during the time that you belonged to the union 
wherever you worked you got no benefit from it whatsoever ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, sir ; I did not. 

The Chairman. In one instance you got your wages cut $10 a week ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That was immediately after you joined ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

The Chairman. And can you say that you know that the union takes 
no interest in the welfare of its members who are in the car-wash 
business where you work and where you have worked ? 

Mrs. Anderson. For myself I can say that. 

The Chairman. Have you observed anyone else benefiting who 
works with you in the car-wash business ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, sir. 

The Chairman. At any time, since you have been a member of the 
union in any of these places where you have worked, has the union or 
any representative of it, any of its officers or agents or representatives 
of it, made any effort, so far as you know, to get you better wages, 
better working conditions or to look after and help you with your 
grievances or complaints ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. They have done nothing except to get your money ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is all. 

The Chairman. Have you tried to get them to do something about 
your working conditions, about your hours or anything? 



IMPROPER ACTWITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17523 

Mrs. Anderson. I spoke to them one time. That was wlien I spoke 
to Shaw. 

The Chairman. "Were you promised at the time you first joined the 
union that they would c:Gt you better wages and better working 
conditions ? 

Mrs. Anderson. They did. 

The Chairman. And it was on the strength of that promise that you 
joined? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

The Chairman. And since then you have had to stay a member in 
order to work ; is that correct ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

The Chairman. In other woids, if you didn't pay that 10 cents a 
day, you would lose your job ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

The Chairman. In other words, you are paying the 10 cents a day 
for the privilege of keeping your job, rather than for any benefits that 
could i)ossibly accrue to you by reason of increased wages or shorter 
working houi-s or better working conditions ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is correct. 

The Chairman. Is that correct ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is correct. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You went back to Dukes' around Christmas of 1958 ; 
is that right? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. At that time, did you have any conversation about 
paying the union ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. I went to Dukes' and I explained to Dukes' 
that the GO cents meant more to me than it did to him. and that I didn't 
want to pay union dues. So Tony asked me why I didn't want to pay 
union dues. I told him I just didn't want to pay. So Dukes' told me 
then that I didn't have to pay the union unless I wanted to. So I 
didn't have to pay. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you went to work there and did not have to pay 
union dues ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I went to work there and didn't pay union dues. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if union dues were paid in your name? 

Mrs. Anderson. I found it out Tuesday afternoon, in Detroit, in the 
Phelps Building, that the union dues was being paid in my name, but 
I didn't knoAY anything about it before then. 

Mr. Kennedy. Dukes' was actually paying 10 cents a day for you 
to work there? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You never were aware of that fact ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No ; I wasn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tell me this : What if you show up for work on a 
Monday and it starts to rain and you stay there until 10, 11, or 12 
o'clock. Do you get paid for the whole day ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No ; you do not get paid at all. On a rainy day, 
when they don't make any money, they send you back home and you 
do not get paid for it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You do not get your $3 ? 



17524 lAIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mi's. Anderson. No; you do not get your $3. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you are working on the line, there is a split, 
is there not, when you wash the car ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is split amongst the individuals who are working 
on the car? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is there anything else in washing the car ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes ; it is. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have to split the money with any others? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes ; we have to split the money. Wlioever is on 
the line, 35 cents is split. He gets 85 cents for washing the cars. He 
takes 40 and gives us 35. We split the 35 with how many people there 
is on the line. Then we got a blower on the line which carries two 
men, we have two brushes on there we have to pay, which is four extra 
on the line besides the people who are on the line. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let's assume there are 10 people on the line. The 10 
individuals would split the 35 cents ; is that right? 

Mrs. Anderson. Tliat is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then added to that they put on two brushers and 
two blowers? 

Mrs. Anderson. No ; it is one blower but it is counted for two men. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then there is a brush ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. The brush 

Mr. Kennedy. It is an automatic brusher? 

Mrs. Anderson. An automatic brusher and automatic blower. 

Mr. Kennedy. And each one of those count two ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. So instead of splitting it among 10 men you split it 
among 14? 

Mrs. Anderson. Fourteen. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the employer takes it for the brusher and the 
blower, for 4 out of the 14? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. The man who owns the car wash, he gets four of 
them? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. The guarantee is what ; $3 a day ? 

Mrs. Anderson. $3 a day for 5 days and $5 a day for 2 days. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat if you make only $2.50, "for instance, on Mon- 
day ? Will he pay you $3 for that Monday ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes; he will pav you $3. All the guaranteed will 
get their $3. ' ^ 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on Tuesday you are able to make $3.50. What 
hnppens then ? 

Mrs. Anderson. The guaranteed still don't do nothing, but get their 
$3 because he takes that 50 cents and puts it back for wliat happened 
Monday, on what lie charged us Monday to bring the guarantee up 
to $3. 

Mr. Kennedy. So if you make more the following day, you get 
yonr gnnranteo of $3 on Monday, but the next day if you make a little 
extra, that is (kMhicted and charged to Monday ; is that'right ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17525 

Mr. Kennedy. You are tnnng to save some money for your (laugh- 
ter to go to college ; is that right i' 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, Mr. Kennedy. I have a real wonderful daugh- 
ter, and that is what I am working for. That is why I keep working on 
the wash rack; not because I want to, but because I can't work on 
another job. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is because of your health ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, on account of my health. So I have to keep 
working on the wash rack. I am working so that I hope — not at this 
rate, but 1 mean I hope if tilings change or something I will be able 
to save up money so my daughter can go to college. 

Mr. Kennedy. AVhat about your husband ? Does he work ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. He works at a wash rack, too. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is his Avash rack union or nonunion? 

Mrs. Anderson. It is nonunion. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much does he make on his wash rack ? 

Mrs. Anderson. They guarantee $4 a day for which they take one 
dime out for social security, they get $3.90. Whatever the line makes, 
they got a split, too, but they have a 55-cent line. Whatever the line 
makes, they split that. 

Mr. Kennedy. They don't add the blowers and the brushes ^ 

Mrs. Anderson. No, they don't have that. They just split it be- 
tween the men on the line. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they have a greater split. They get 55 cents 
rather than 35 cents ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, they get 55 cents. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there is a guarantee of $4 a day rather than $3 
a day? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this is a nonmiion car wash ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Nonunion. 

Mr. Kennedy. So the nonunion car wash does much better than the 
union car wash? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Have you ever tried to get a job in a nonunion car 
wash ? 

Mrs. Anderson. You say have I ever tried to get a job in a non- 
union car wash? Well, you see, they don't hire women at all the 
car washers. Just some car washers hire women. Everywhere I go, 
I see that sign stuck up on the door, most everywhere, local 985. 

Senator Muxdt. Do thev pav men more than women on the car 
wash? 

Mrs. Anderson. No. The women can make the same as men make. 

Senator Mundt. It is just that some car washers don't hire women ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. They just hire men. 

Senator Mundt. So your testimony is that in a nonunion carwash 
you get paid more money than in a union car wash ? 

Mrs. Anderson. My husband gets paid more money than I do and 
he is in a nonunion carwash. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know whether they have a State minimum 
wage law in Michigan '. 

Ml'. Anderson. No, sir ; I do not know. 

Senator Mundt. How many people work in your shop? 



17526 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mrs. Anderson. In the carwash? Well, you see, I don't never 
know how many people is going to work, because he don't have the 
same amount on every day. Maybe some days he will have 10, 15, 
12, 18, 20, 25. 

Senator Mundt. If he has that many, it seems they would be 
covered by the Federal minimum wage law. 

Mr. Kennedy. I think the interstate question arises, Senator. 

Senator Munji-. I think that it would be interstate if they were 
washing cars with a foreign license. That would be interstate. The 
general philosophy of the Supreme Court has been that an elevator 
operator going up and down in an office building is interstate because 
undoubtedly the offices upstairs receive letters from out of State. 

The Chairman. Well, cars would go between States more than an 
elevator, I imagine. 

Senator Mundt. Yes. Have you ever tried to protest the situation 
to anybody else except your union boss ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Do you mean about the union ? 

Senator Mundt. About the deplorable wages that you get, the 
mistreatment that the employees are getting? The fact that you are 
paid so little and the percentage cost for union membership is so 
great and the services are completely inadequate, if any? 

Have you talked about the union conditions or the working con- 
ditions or protested about them to anybody else ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, nobody but the employees. We talk between 
each other. 

Senator Mundt. Have you talked to the employer ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, that is all. I never went to my boss, if that 
is what you mean. 

Senator Mundt. The man who hired you, did you go to him ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, I never went to him and said anything. 

Senator Mundt. You are supposed to contact him, I suppose, 
through union channels; is that right? 

Mrs. Anderson. I didn't understand you. 

Senator Mundt. You are supposed to make your contacts with 
your employer, I presume, through your union representative? 

Mrs. Anderson. I don't know. I mean, tlie boss was taking the 
dues out when I was paying them and turning them over to a union. 
I mean the boss didn't say anything to me about the union and the 
union man didn't say anything. So I never said anything to them 
about the union. 

Senator Mundt. How do you make this 10-cent-a-day payment? 
Do you make it at the end of the week and give somebody 70 cents, or 
what? 

Mr. Anderson. Do you mean when I was paying? 

Senator Mindt. Yes. 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes. My boss would take them out at the end 
of the week, on a Sunday. We get paid on a Sunday. 

Senator Mundt. Your employer would take it out? 

Mrs. Anderson. Yes, on a Sunday. 

Senator Mitndt. This is a check-off system. Is this supposedly 
one of tlie great benefits of the union shop in Michigan, that the em- 
ployei- \v()uld lake the check-off and go out and make sweetheart 
contra<'ts for tlie employees? You would get nothing that way? 



IMPROPER ACTR'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17527 

Mrs. Anderson. I don't understrtiid. 

Senator Mundt. All you know is that you gave your 70 cents 

Mrs. Anderson. Sixty cents. 

Senator Mundt. Sixty cents ? 

Mr. Anderson. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. You didn't give it to anybody. The employer 
took it out of your check ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I didn't give it to anybody. My boss would de- 
duct it from my pay when he would give it to me on a Sunday 
afternoon. 

Senator Mundt. This is the check-off in operation ? 

Mrs. Anderson. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. You didn't see the union boss ? 

Mrs. Anderson. No, sir ; I did not. 

Senator Mundt. All you know is that you got that much less in 
your check ? 

Mi*s. Anderson. All I know I was 60 cents less. 

Senator Mundt. It would be given to some miion boss and nobody 
knows whether this is a sweetheart contract, or wdiether this is the 
standard operating procedure in Detroit in the carwash business. 
You don't know about that ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Xo, I didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have here a record showing that 
a payment was made by the employer to the union on behalf of Mrs. 
Anderson. The record would appear to indicate that a payment was 
made by the employer to the miion on behalf of Mrs. Anderson, de- 
spite the testimony of Mrs. Anderson that she was never aware that 
such payment was made, that no deduction was made from her salary. 

The Chairman. This is a recent docimient. It is dated the 14th of 
March 1959. 

You say you don't know. You are paying no union dues now ? 

Mrs. Anderson. Xo, sir ; I am not. 

The Chairman. But j'ou do not know whether your employer is 
paying them for you or not ? 

Mrs. Anderson. I do not know that. 

The Chairman. Apparently the committee has information indi- 
cating that the employer is paying your dues for you. Do we have a 
member of the staff that can verify this ? 

Mr. Kennedy. We have somebody who can verify it. 

The Chairman. "We will put it in the record. 

You may recite generally what it is, but I want it sworn to by who- 
ever procured it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, a member of the staff under our 
direction procured it. We have a later witness who can perhaps better 
identify it. 

The Chairman. All right. 

For your information, we will determine about this in the course of 
further testimony, but it appears that the committee has information 
that your employer is now paying your dues for you where you 
presently work. 

Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 



17528 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Gus Richardson. 

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. Richardson. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF GUS RICHARDSON 

The Chairman. What is your name ? 

Mr. Richardson. Gus Richardson. 

The Chairman. Where do you live ? 

Mr. Richardson. Detroit, Mich. 

The Chairman. Where? 

Mr. Richardson. Detroit, Mich. 

The Chairman. Detroit, Mich. Give your street address. 

Mr. Richardson. 143 Vernor Highway, Century Hotel. 

Mr. Kennedy. 143 Vernor Highway ; is that right ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. What kind of work do you do ? 

Mr. Richardson. I work in an auto wash. 

The Chairman. You don't care for a lawyer to represent you here, 
do you ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, I don't. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Ivennedy. You are presently employed as a driver on a wash 
rack at Tony's Five-Minute Auto Wash, is that right, Detroit, Mich.? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you have worked there off and on for the past 
7 years ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is this a union car wash ? 

Mr. Richardson. It is supposed to be a union car wash ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much money are you receiving ? 

Mr. Richardson. I am making $25 a week right now. 

Mr. Kennedy. $25 a week ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many days a week do you work? 

Mr. Richardson. Seven days a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many hours do you work ? 

Mr. Richardson. Seventy lioure. 

Mr. Kennedy. Seventy hours a week ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you first went to work, vou were guaranteed u 
weekly wage of $30 a week ; is that right ? 

Mr. RicjiARDsoN. That is when I first went to work. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is for seven days, a 10-liour day ? 

Mr. Richardson. Riglit. 

Mr. Kennedy. So your salary scale lias gone down, as well as Afrs. 
Anderson ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was back in 1053, is tliat riglit, wlien vou fir-st 
went to work ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17529 

Mr. KiciiAUDSoN. Yes, sir. 

]Mr. Kennedy. Then around Easter of 1953 you were told by your 
employer that he would liave to cut your salary to $25 a week? 

Mr. liiciiARDSON. That is ri«^ht. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then in the winter of 1954 did two representatives 
of local 985 come by your car wash ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. ^Ylio were they ? 

Mr. Richardson. They was iN'ewman and Shaw. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Did they promise more money to you at that time? 

Mr. Richardson. Well, they say if we would join the union, that 
they would see that we get better working conditions and get us more 
money. But at that time we wasn't in no union. There was no 
union there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they return the next day or return with a 
picket line? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, they did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And did the employees at the car wash continue 
to work ? 

Mr. Richardson. They contmued on to work that day because it 
was on a Saturday. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you join the union at that time? 

Mr. Richardson. Well, we wouldn't join that union because they 
wouldn't give us no consideration right then because they wanted to 
take us and give us — well, I wouldn't know how to plirase that in a 
way. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, anyway, you didn't want to join the union? 

Mr. Richardson. We did not want no part of that union. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they established the picket line. Did you have 
any convereation with Mr. Shaw ? 

Mr. Richardson. Well, when they came out there that morning, 
they brought about three carloads with them, and they established 
a picket line, which Mr. Bufalino also was out there on that morning, 
and Mr. Shaw, he had a sign on him walking up and down the side- 
walk. We had a little convei-sation about him flagging the cars 
past the driveway. 

The Chairman. Speak a little louder, please. 

Mr. Kennedy. He was what you thought flagging the cars away 
from coming into the car wash ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes. He was flagging cars away from the 
driveway. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you had some con vei-sat ions with him? 

Mr. Richardson. 1 told him, "You are not supposed to flag the 
cars away from the driveway. You are supposed to walk up and 
down the driveway." 

He said, "I am not flagging the cars past the driveway." I said, 
"I am looking right at you, and I can see." About that time a police 
walked by, and he asked what the trouble was, and I told him. He 
told Mr. Shaw, '"You walk on the sidewalk and leave the cai-s alone." 

Mr. Shaw said he was not bothering the people, he wasn't doing 
that at all. I told him he was telling a stor\' because I was looking 
right at him. He told me I was one of those things. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did Shaw say? 

36751— 59— pt. 48 21 



17530 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. EiCiiARDSON. Shaw told me I was telling 

Mr. Kennedy. He swore at you ? 
Mr. Richardson. He swore at me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was the end of the conversation ? 
Mr. Richardson. Right then and there. 

Mr. Kennedy. So then you were off for a few days and you came 
back to work the following week ; is that right ? 
Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And by that time 

Mr. Richardson. When I came back to work, it was on a "Wednes- 
day morning, there was a union sign on the front door and the back 
door. I asked the fellows what happened, and they said, "Well, we 
belongs to the union." 

Mr. Kennedy. So what did you do ? 

Mr. Richardson. So I continued on to work there that week, and 
the following Monday I signed up for the union, too. 

Mr. Kennedy. You signed up for the union. Then you got 10 
cents a day deducted from your salary ; is that right? 
Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you would get a regular salary of $30 a week ; 
is that right ? 
Mr. Richardson. That is right. 
Mr. Kennedy. Then you left in the summer of 1955 ? 
Mr. Richardson. Yes. I got a construction job and worked all 
that summer. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you returned in the winter of 1955; is that 
right? 
Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And again with your 10 cents, you were marking 
$30 a week and the 10 cents was being deducted ? 
Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then the representatives of the committee were out 
in Detroit in 1957, and you had some conversations with them at that 
time; is that correct? You went down to the Federal Building? 
Mr. Richardson. Yes. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you went down to the Federal Building in 1957 
and complained about the treatment that vou were receiving; is that 
right? ' • ^ 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the fact that you had to pay this 10 cents a 
day and that you were not receiving any benefits from the union ? 
Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. To whom did you make your complaints ? 
Mr. RicifAUDSON. Well, when I went down to the Federal Building, 
I seen some man down there. He belongs to this connnittee, but 
I don't rememl)er his name. 

The Chairman. He belongs to this committee? 
Mr. Kennedy. A staff memlier. 
Senator Mitndt. Yes, I know. 

You went down to the Federal Building and met there some member 
of our committee? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTI\'ITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17531 

Senator Mundt. I thoiii^lit you meant some representative of the 
Federal Government in the Labor Department, maybe to enforce the 
minimum wage law. 

Mr. RiciiAiiDSON. No, sir. 

I was very tired of how they was doing us out at the place that day, 
and I asked around and got information and was told to go down to 
the Federal Building. So I goes down to the Federal Building and I 
talked to a fellow down there and he told me, "You go back and go to 
work, like nothing never happened." He said, "We will have some- 
body out there to see you in a few days." 

So I went back to work and I didn't say anything at all. Sure 
enough, the next couple of days or so someone was out there to see us. 

Senator Mundt. To see you ? 

Mr. Richardson. To see everybody who was working out there. 

Senator Mundt. To see what ? 

Mr. Richardson. To see the workers on the job out there. 

Senator Mundt. You have three children ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. How can you support a family of three children in 
Detroit at $100 a month, even if they did not deduct your union dues? 
Do you have much difficulty there ? 

Mv. Richardson. Well, that don't help very much, sir, because my 
wife she does a little extra work, too, on the side. 

Senator Mundt. As far as you know, the union to which you belong 
has never protested these sweatshop wages that you are paid in the 
carwash business in Detroit ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. I never protested to them or nothing like 
that. 

Senator Mundt. You never protested to a union leader ? 

Mr. Richardson. Not about the deduction from my money or 
nothing like that. 

Senator Mundt. No, but did you ever protest about the fact that 
you are working at only $100 a month for 7 days a week? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir ; I never have. 

Senator Mundt. Wliere does all this 40-hour-a-week business that 
we hear so much about come in ? 

Mr. Richardson. Well, that wasn't in the contract when I got hired. 
That was something extra that they was going to pay me for the work 
I did, extra work in the wash rack. 

Senator Mundt. Do you get paid extra for overtime ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir ; that wasn't for overtime work. 

Senator Mundt. What does 7 days mean? Does that mean that 
you work more than 40 hours a week or that you divide up the 40 
hours into certain shifts on seven days? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir ; we had to work the 70 hours a week. 

Senator Mundt. Seventy houi^s a week? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Seventy, 10 hours a day, for seven days? 

Mr. Richardson. From Monday to Sunday, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Ten hours a day? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Seven davs a week? 



17532 IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Total pay $100 a month less your union dues? 

Mr. EicHARDsoN. Less your union dues. 

Senator Mundt. This is Detroit, Mich. ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is Detroit, Mich. 

Senator Mundt. Where we have all of these great international 
labor leaders trying to come out and tell us farm folks in South Da- 
kota we are not paying the people enough. I think that they have a 
little homework to do. Maybe Walter Reuther has a little work to 
do around his own hometown and leave everybody alone down in 
Arkansas and South Dakota. 

It is the same way with Mr. Hoffa. He lives in Detroit. They come 
down here to Washington and say that we ought to take care of some- 
body someplace else. 

You are positive of what you are telling us, that you work 10 hours 
a day, 70 hours a week and you get $100 a month? That is all? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Less your union dues? 

Mr. Richardson. Less the union dues. 

Senator Mundt. This is in the great city of Detroit, the union 
capital of the world? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir ; that is right. 

Senator Mundt. The showplace. Did you ever talk to the Gov- 
ernor about that? Did you ever write the Governor a letter and say, 
"Mr. Williams, how about this?" Does he know about this? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. All you did was go down to the Federal building 
and talk to one of our investigators. How did you know that our in- 
vestigators were in the Federal building? Did you read it in the 
paper ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. I got that information next door to our 
wash rack. 

The Chairman. You got it how? 

Mr. Kennedy. Next door. 

Senator Mundt. Somebody on a neighboring wash rack? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. I certainly hope that if we can't pass legislation out 
of these hearings, which I hope we can do, we can do something to 
improve the labor conditions in the city of Detroit. 

It seems to me that the top chiefs there have been busy in the otlier 
fellow's gardens. Tliey have some weeds at home to take care of. It 
is ])retty bad. You look like a good, honest fellow. 

Mr. Rtciiahdkon. I am telling the truth, sir. 

Senator Miindt. Tliis is the kind of sweatshop business you used to 
read about in the old days. Maybe they ought to cliarge a little more 
for wasliing the car. What do they charge for washing the car? 

Mr. Richardson. It depends. If it is on a Friday, Saturday or 
Sunday, it is $1. On weekdavs it is 85 cents. 

Seiiatoi- :Mi;ndt. It is a d()lhn- and a half in South Dakota. We 
have a little higher standard of living, maybe. Maybe if tliey wanted 
to charge that in Detroit for washing the car tliey could pay you a 
little more. Eighty-five cents isn't too much to spl'it up. Do you get 
a commission out of the 85 cents ? 



IMPROPER ACTrV'ITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17533 

]Mr, RicHARDSox. He guarantees us a flat $25 a week. 

Senator Muxdt. I think we will try to get a good group of South 
Dakota farmers up there to improve the standards of living in Detroit, 
Let them pay a little more for washing their car and then they can pay 
you a little more to come up to the nonunion living standards that we 
have in South Dakota. It would be good for the workers in Detroit. 

The Chairman. The Chair may say that the staff advises me they 
have checked the records of some of these operators and what these 
witnesses are testifying to about their wages is absolutely correct, ac- 
cording to the records of the business. 

Senator Mundt. I am sure it is. But it is a shocking thing to have 
in the labor capital of the world — this hurts our foreign relations. 
This is really something for the Russians to be reading about overseas. 
It is giving aid and comfort to the Communists to think that we have 
salt-mine conditions like this in Detroit. I am shocked. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there a question raised around the carwash after 
an investigator came down ? Did Mr. Newman come to the carwash ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, he did. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he try to find out ? 

Mr. Richardson. Well, Mr. Newman was kind of worried. He 
wanted to know — he wanted to try to find out what happened, who 
went downtown and reported this. Then he brought out some cards. 
He wanted everybody to sign cards. 

Mr. Kennedy. To sign cards to belong to the union ? 

Mr. Richardson. To belong to the union, because he had been re- 
ceiving money which he wasn't supposed to be receiving at that time. 
So everyone else around there, we all joined the union after he come 
around and brought the cards. 

Mr. Kennedy. Had they been deducting the 10 cents ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, they had. 

Mr. Kennedy. It wasn't until after the investigator came out 

Mr. Richardson. The investigator came around. 

Mr. Kennedy. That you signed the cards ? 

Mr. Richardson. That is when we signed cards. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did vour working conditions get any better after 
that ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, they didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. And had the union dues gone up ? 

Mr. Richardson. They didn't go up right there then, but they went 
up later. 

Mr. Kennedy. What are your union dues now ? 

Mr. Richardson. 15 cents now. 

Mr. Kennedy. Because of all the services Mr. Bufalino's union was 
performing for you, they increased the union dues 50 percent? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Were you ever asked to come to a union meeting? 

Mr. Richardson. No, I have never been asked to come to a union 
meeting. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know where the union headquarters are? 

Mr. Richardson. I knew where it was at one time, but they moved it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has Mr. Bufalino or Mr. Hoffa ever come down to 
find out how you were doing ? 



17534 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Richardson. No one has even been around to see us. 

Mr. Kennedy. Has anyone ever talked to you to find out whether 
you are pleased or have any grievances ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, nobody come around to see us, but we see the 
union man maybe once a month. 

Mr. Kennedy. What does he do ? 

Mr. Richardson. He comes in, parks his car in front. 

Mr. Kennedy. What kind of a car ? 

Air. Richardson. He has an Oldsmobile. 

Mr. Kennedy. What does he do ? 

Mr. Richardson. He gets out of his car, he goes into the office, he 
stays 2 or 3 minutes, and gets right back in his car and drives off. He 
don't come back to see the workers. 

The Chairman. He comes to pick up the money, I guess. 

Mr. Richardson. I don't know what he picks up, sir, but he doesn't 
come back to see us. 

The Chairman. He doesn't come to give the workers any attention ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you have a union steward ? 

Mr. Richardson. We had a steward there once, but we don't have 
none now. 

Mr. Kennedy. Are generally the conditions in the car wash similar 
to what you have described, what you and Mrs. Anderson have 
described ? 

Mr. RjCHARDSON. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, to refresh your recollection, Ave did 
have some members of the car-wasli industry who appeared before 
the committee about a year ago, from different companies, and the 
situation was as described here this morning, and obviously has not 
been improved since our hearings. 

Senator Mundt. Wasn't it a car-wash employer from Detroit who 
came in and testified about the fact that the union had picketed his 
place and made him unionize the shop and put signs up ? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is correct. Then Mr. Bufalino was starting 
to sue him and he had a difficult time paying his legal bills and all 
of that. He is still going through the same harassment. We are going 
to have some car-wash owners appear before the committee to state 
what happened to them. 

Dukes' is the place where they count the washers and the blowers? 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. The blowers and the brushes. 

INIr. Richardson. Right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever speak to your boss about wliy they 
count the brushes and the blowers as two men apiece ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, I didn't. But when I came back there to work 
for that place again, I heard that they counted blowers and brushes. 
In talk between the workers there I found out they was using the 
blowers as two men, the brushes as two men, and I said, "Wliat for?" 
They said, "Well, they are doing work, too, so they are supposed to 
get paid." 

Senator Mundt. Are they machines? 

Mr. Richardson. They are machines. 



IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17535 

The Chairman. Well, that is mechanical. That is what I am trying 
to detennine, if it is a mechanical man and not a human being. Is 
that right? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. They are paying a mechanical man for work; is 
that correct ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. He gets paid a little better than you do because 
he doesn't have to pay any dues. 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually, he is getting paid twice as much as you. 
A mechanical man is worth two of you. The mechanical man gets 
the pay of two people and he doesn't have to deduct liis dues. 

Mr. Richardson. That is right, sir ; and no social security. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

If not, thank you very much. 

Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Dukes. 

The Ca:ViRMAN. You do solemnly swear the evidence you shall give 
before this Senate select committee shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and notliing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Dukes. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF C. D. DUKES 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Dukes. My name is C. D. Dukes. I live at 19212 Pelkey, 
Detroit 5, Mich. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel, Mr. Dukes? 

Mr. Dukes. I do. 

The Chair3ian. I don't believe you stated your business. 

Mr. Dukes. A partner in Tonv's Automatic Car Wash, located at 
13277 Seven Mile Road, Detroit, Mich. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were operating a carwash in 1956? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the name of that ? 

Mr. Dukes. Two names, Spic and Span Auto Wash, in the spring 
of 1956, and then the name was changed in the spring of 1957 to 
Dukes' Five-Minute Auto Wash. 

Mr. Kennedy. In the spring of 1956, Mr. Dukes, you were up to 
that time nonunion ; is that right ? 

Mr. Dukes. I just bought this rack in 1956. I had another rack 
that was union. 

Mr. Kennedy. We are talking about this rack. 

Mr. Dukes. It wasn't union when I bought it, no. There was a 
contract there. 

Mr. Kennedy. What was the name of the rack you owned before ? 

Mr. Dukes. Paramount Auto Wash. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was union ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes. 

Mr. Ejennedy. Local 985 ? 

Mr. Dukes. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much were you paying your employees there? 

Mr. Dukes. I believe it was $30 a week. 



17536 IMPROPER ACTrVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. That is for the 7-clay week? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you boup:ht this nonunion carwash. How 
much were you payino- your employees at the nonunion carwash^ 

Mr. Dukes. Well, I believe it was $30 a week there, too. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was there an attempt to organize you at that time, 
in the spring of 1956 ? 

Mr. Dukes. I was approached on it, and I told them this is a new 
rack, I don't know what is going to happen here. 

Mr. Kennedy. By whom were you approached ? 

Mr. Dukes. I was called. 

Mr. Kennedy. By whom? 

Mr. Dukes. Mr. Bufalino. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say to you at that time ? 

Mr. DuBa:s. He told me he would see me later. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do you mean see you later ? 

Mr. Dukes. That is what he said, "I will see you later." 

Mr. Kennedy. He called you up ? 

Mr. Dukes. I told him to call me back. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he want when he called you on the tele- 
phone ? 

Mr. Dukes. He wanted to know about the union, how we could work 
there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you mean whether he could sign up your em- 
ployees ; is that right ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you told him to "call me back" ? 

Mr. DuiiES. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he call you back ? 

Mr. Dukes. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did he call you back ? 

Mr. Dukes. T don't know exactly when, but it was maybe later in 
the summer. And they did sign the men up. 

Mr. Kennedy. When he called you back, what did you say, "I will 
sign up now" ? 

Mr. Dukes. I told him to come out when he wants to. My relations 
have been all right with the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am sure of that. Why did you tell him to come on 
out, what reason ? 

Mr. Dukes. What reason ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Dukes. Well, I have had some good men — in the other rack, 
Paramount, I have been caught short of help on various occasions, and 
I have been able to call and they would send me men. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have been able to call whom ? 

Mr. Dukes. The union. 

Mr. Kennedy. They have a hiring hall, do they ? 

Mr. Dukes. I don't know how they get the men. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you need men, you call the union ? 

Mr. Dukp:s. I have obtained men from the union ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who do you speak to there ? 

Mr. Dukes. Shaw or Newman, as a rule. 

Mr. Kennedy. They send people out to you ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITTES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17537 

Mr. Dukes. They brought people to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you decided it would be helpful to you if you 
joined the union? 

Mr. Dukes. Well, I think so, yes. You see, Detroit is a union town, 
and I have to deal with those people. 

Mr. Kennedy. You Avhat ? 

Mr. Dukes. I deal with union people. They work in factories there, 
3'ou know, and they like the union. 

Senator Mundt. You say Detroit is a union town ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. In a union town and we know what the wage 
scale is of the carwash business. In South Dakota, a nonunion 
town, we pay $1.50 for a carwash, and they get a fine salary and live 
in fine homes. I don't want them to depress the working conditions 
in South Dakota by imposing Detroit standards on them in the car- 
wash business. 

Mr. Dukes. It would be a bad standard to impose on anybody. 
The town is not in good shape. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you signed the contract; is that right? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss the wages, hours, or conditions of 
employees with Mr. Buf alino ? 

Mr. Dukes. No. On the wages on the contract, I think, was $30 
a week guarantee. The hours are almost set in the wash rack in- 
dustry in Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did the contract provide? How much were 
you to pay your employees ? 

Mr. Dukes. Well, I haven't got that contract with me, and I don't 
know exactly now. That has been quite a while ago. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, have you had any discussions with any repre- 
sentatives of the union about how much was the pay for the employee ? 

Mr. Dukes. Do you mean then ? 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Then or since then. 

Mr. Dukes. Tlie contract I am pretty sure called for a $30 a week 
guarantee. 

Mr. Ivennedy. Initially had Mr. Buf alino suggested that you pay 
them$21aweek? 

Mr. Dukes. No. That was later on. That is another one. 

Mr. Kennedy. How did that come up ? 

Mr. Dukes. That is for the summer. In the summer you don't do 
any business in the wash-rack business. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did he say then ? 

Mr. Dukes. You have a clause that is called a hardship clause. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes ? 

Mr. Dukes. I don't believe there is a wash rack in Detroit that can 
break even in the summertime. 

Mr. Kennedy. So what do you do ? 

Mr. Dukes. Well, you can get your guarantee lowered. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlio do you call up and get the guarantee low- 
ered by ? 

Mr. Dukes. Any one of the persons there that you can talk to. 

You can request for the hardship clause. I don't say you will al- 
ways get it, but you can request it. 



17538 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. I^NNEDY. That would allow you to pay lower than $30 a 
week? 

Mr. Dukes. If it is agreed, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you call Mr. Buf alino ? 

Mr. Dukes. We talked. I could see in this rack after I bought it 
that there was going to be no money made in this place in the 
summertime. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. Did you call Mr. Buf alino ? 

Mr. Dukes. I have forgotten. I have had about three different 
contracts with those people and they all run together after a while. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Did you talk to Mr. Bufalino about the contract 
at all? 

Mr. Dukes. I talked to someone there. Whether I talked to Mr. 
Bufalino or Shaw or Newman, I have forgotten. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say you cannot remember if you talked to Mr. 
Bufalino about lowering 

Mr. Dukes. I talked to someone there. I have forgotten who I 
talked to. 

Mr. Kennedy. You got permission to lower the rate from what, 
$30 to $21 a week? 

Mr. Dukes. I believe so. 

Mr. Kennedy. So then with the agreement of the union you were 
paying your employees $21 a week for the 70-hour week; is that 
right? 

Mr. Dukes. Well, there is some washracks that might run YO hours 
a week. We don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. What do you pay ? 

Mr. Dukes. We work 68 hours a week. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. I am sorry to have confused it. 

So you were paying $21 a week for a 68-hour week; is that right? 

Mr. Dukes. That was the guarantee, I am pretty sure, yes sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was the arrangement that you had with the 
union ? 

Mr. Dukes. I think so. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you joined the union or signed up with the 
union, did you discuss it with your employees ? 

Mr. Dukes. I think the union discussed it with the employees. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you call the employees in to find out if they 
■wanted to join the union ? 

Mr. Dukes. Usually they go out and talk to them. 

Mr, Kennedy. Just answer the question. 

Did you call the employees to find out if they wanted to join the 
union? 

Mr. Dukes. I didn't. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if anyone did ? 

Mr. Dukes. They were signed up by the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. How do you know that? 

Mr. DuivES. Well, they signed them. I know this fellow gave them 
buttons and cards and what have you back then. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you see the cards? 

Mr. Dukes. Not then, I don't believe I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever see the cards ? 

Mr. Dukes. I have seen them, yes. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17539 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you seen the cards by your employees request- 
ing; that you sign the contract ? 

Mr. Dukes. Say that again. 

Mr. EJENNEDY. Did you ever see the cards by your employees re- 
questing that you sign a contract with the union ? 

Mr. Dukes. I have seen the cards on some contracts. I have had 
three or four different contracts with these people. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you signed the contract originally with the 
union 

Mr. Dukes. Originally, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you see the cards at that time ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You saw the cards at that time ? 

Mr. Dukes. That goes back to 1 954 ; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. I am talking about 1956 when you bought this new 
auto rack and it was nonunion. Did you see the cards at that time? 

Mr. Dukes. I don't remember that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. It is a fact that you never saw the cards, isn't it ? 

Mr. Dukes. I don't remember that time. I have seen their cards, 
yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ever show the contract to the employees? 

Mr. Dukes. All the employees saw it. 

Mr. Kennedy. They saw the contract. Wliat about when an em- 
ployee would leave after a period of a week ? Did the new employee 
see the contract ? 

Mr. Dukes. Not necessarily, no. 

Mr. Kennedy. What would happen when somebody new came to 
work there. Did he sign any card ? 

Mr. Dukes. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you just deduct 

Mr. Dukes. At one time I did, yes. I signed every man as soon as 
he came in. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did that stop ? 

Mr. Dukes. That stopped since I have been back in the wash rack 
business this winter. I haven't had the time. I just haven't messed 
with it. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you get out of the car wash business ? 

Mr. Dukes. 1957, the fall, September 14. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wlien did you come back in ? 

Mr. Dukes. August 11, 1958. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you deduct 10 cents, or what is it? Fifteen cents, 
from their salaries? 

Mr. Dukes. It is 15 cents now. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss that with the employees ? 

Mr. Dukes. Some of them, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you deduct it from all of them ? 

Mr. Dukes. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't ? You pay it yourself ? 

Mr. Dukes, Some of them, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. I would like to have you identify this. 

The Chairman. I hand you here what purports to be an original 
report. It has the heading, "This report to be attached to dues de- 
duction report," and it appears to be dated March 14, 1959. I ask 



17540 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

you to examine it and state if you identify it and, if you do, to state 
what it is. 

(A document was handed to the witness.) 

Mr. Dukes. Well, my partner did this, I see. 

The Chairman. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Dukes. My partner did this. This is not my writing. 

The Chairman. Do you recognize the writing ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Whose writing is it ? 

Mr. Dukes. Tony Scaramuzzino. 

The Chairman. Does he work for you ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. He is my partner. 

The Chairman. Your partner ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. So it is in your partner's handwriting ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir, and my partner tells me that this hasn't been 
paid. It is overdue. 

The Chairman. He reported it, but it hasn't been paid ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, it hasn't been reported. This is supposed to be 
mailed in. Now my partner tells me this morning that this hasn't 
been mailed. 

The Chairman. Is that the form of report you make ? 

Mr. Dukes. We make a report similar to this ; yes. 

The Chairman. That was prepared by your partner ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Why was it not mailed ? 

Mr. Dukes. I don't know. 

The Chairman. That may be made exhibit No. 82. 

(Document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 82" for reference 
and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

The Chairman. Exhibit 81 will be for reference. There may be 
further testimony about it. 

Does that report show how much was due the union at that time? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. How much? 

Mr. Dukes. Forty-two dollars. 

The Chairman. On how many employees? 

Mr. Kennedy. Twenty-one. 

The Chairman. Twenty-one employees over what period of time? 
One week? 

Mr. Dukes. One month. 

The Chairman. That is about two dollars an employee? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do all of these employees know that this money is 
being paid? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you mean you have men working for you who 
are in the union and don't know it ? 

Mr. Dukes. Tliey are not in the union maybe. I have men that 
work 1 day and I never see them again. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why do you pay the dime for them ? 



IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17541 

Mr. Dukes. I pay it. 

Mr, Kennedy. AVhy? 

Mr. Dukes. I have a contract with the union. 

The Chairman, You have to pay it ? 

Mr. Dukes. And I pay it. 

Mr. Kennedy. They are either in the union or not in the union. If 
tliey are in the union, then they pay the 15 cents themselves. 

Mr. Dukes. That is right, and they know it. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why do you pay the 15 cents for somebody who is 
not in the union ? 

Mr. Dukes. Well, it is my fault, it is no one else's. If I wanted to 
take 15 minutes and sign these people up, they would pay their union 
dues and realize it and know it. When you are trying to wash cars, 
in a rotten business like we got in Detroit, you don't stop 15 minutes 
and sign people up. You wash cars. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you are just taking this money out of the treasury 
of the company and paying for these employees; is that right? 

Mr. Dukes. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know that that is illegal under the law ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. This money has to be deducted from the employees' 
salaries, or otherwise it is an unlawful payment. 

Mr. Dukes. I didn't know it. 

Mr. Kennedy. What does the union do for the employees? 

Mr. Dukes. You will have to ask the employees. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know that the union does anything for the 
employees ? 

Mr. Dukes. Not necessarily. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know of anything that the union does for 
the employees ? 

Mr. Dukes. I know they place these people. I think they keep 
them working off the streets. 

Mr. Kennedy. Yo\i mean they have a hiring hall ? 

Mr. Dukes. I think so, yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Other than that, a hiring hall, which is a separate 
operation, other than trying to get them jobs, or they can go to some- 
place and get a job, and of course hiring halls themselves have been 
sharply criticized, other than that, does the union do anything for the 
employees that you know of ? 

Mr. Dukes. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Kennedy, Then why is this $42 paid each month ? 

Mr. Dukes. AVe have a contract. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why did you sign the contract ? 

Mr. Dukes. As I said before, I think it is good business. 

Mr. Kennedy. For what reason ? 

Mr. Dukes. I think the people that I do business with that get their 
care washed, all of them, not all of them, but 90 percent of them, 
belong to a union in Detroit. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you think it is good for you as an operator ^ 

Mr, Dukes, Absolutely. 

Mr. Kennedy. And it is good for the union because they get the $42 ? 

Mr. Dukes. I don't think that hurts them any. 



17542 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. So the only group that doesn't benefit from it are 
the employees, who, after all, are why unions exist. Is that correct? 

Mr. Dukes. It looks that way, doesn't it ? 

Senator Mundt. If this is just an arrangement because it is good 
business for you as an employer, and I can understand that might be 
true, why do you pay 15 cents an employee off for some of your 
employees ? 

Mr. Dukes. Why do I? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Dukes. Because they are in the union, I signed them up, and 
they work for me steady. I only have four men that work steady. 
Can I talk to you a minute ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Mr. Dukes. You made a comment on $25 a week. Can you imagine 
a man that can get all the labor he wants for $25 a week and can only 
afford to hire four of them ? 

Senator Mundt. I am entirely perplexed about this situation. 

Mr. Dukes. You should own a wash rack. Then you would be real 
perplexed. 

Senator Mundt. I notice in reading over the background about you, 
that at one time you charged $1. 

Mr. Dukes. A dollar and a half we got once in Detroit. It was 
good. We are now at 85 cents. 

Senator Mundt. Wliy is that ? 

Mr. Dukes. There is no money. There is no business. You can 
charge 85 cents and you still wouldn't wash any cars. 

Senator Mundt. Tell me this, Mr. Dukes: Are your employees 
covered by the minimum wage law ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. It is piecework. 

Senator Mundt. Piecework? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Piecework is not covered by the minimum wage 
law? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. If there is anything that can be done to help 
the wash rack business, I would like to see it done, anything at all. 
I know the union understands this. It is rough. 

Senator Mundt. Are you sure this qualifies as piecework where 
you guarantee them $25 a week minimum and when they earn a little 
extra from their piecework, you keep it, according to the previous 
witness, because there are some days when you have to pay them 
when they are getting less commissions on amounts to tlie minimum ? 

Mr. Dukes. Here is how this works : Very seldom will a man make 
over $25 a week at ^5 cents a car. First of all, we will see that he 
doesn't. I will tell you why, very easily. Let's say — make it simple, 
let's say we work 10 men. If I held to 10 men, they will make more. 
But on the day I can wash cars, I throw in 25 men. I have to or I 
wouldn't wash cars if I don't. That is why, when you have split 25 
cents 25 ways it doesn't come to much. 

Senator Mundt. That is not really a guarantee, though, according 
to the lady who testified. She said when it rains she comes down to 
work and nobody gets any cars washed and you send them home. 

Mr. Dukes. And she knows as long as she has worked for me off 
and on, if she works a half day she gets paid for it. She knows that. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17543 

Senator Mundt. Is she guaranteed a definite $25 a week minimum, 
rain or shine ? 

Mr. Dukes. Pardon ? 

Senator IMundt. Is slie guaranteed a definite $25 a week minimum, 
rain or shine ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. If she puts her time in there and doesn't wash 
a car, if she stays there, she gets paid. If she stays there and doesn't 
wash one car, she gets paid for it. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask you specifically the way she told us. 
She comes in the morning at 9 o'clock, and sticks around to noon, it 
rains all morning. You send her home, don't you ? 
Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Do you pay her for that day ? 
Mr. Dukes. I pay her for half a day. 

Senator Mundt. Suppose it rains all week, if you get a rainy week ? 
Mr. Dukes. That happens in this business. We had 5 weeks of ice 
and snow this winter. 

Senator Mundt. Does she get the $25 a week minimum ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. It is according to the time put in. 

Senator Mundt. It isn't a guarantee, then. 

Mr. Dukes. It is for the time, yes, for the 7 days, yes. If she sits 

there all day 

Senator Mundt. Does she get $25 if she sits 7 days ? 
Mr. Dukes. If she sits there and doesn't wash a car all day, yes, 
she gets it. But if she goes home, she doesn't get it. 

Senator Mundt. Who determines whether slie goes home ? 
Mr. Dukes. I have had some of the help come and ask me, are 
we going to stay or do we go home ? Sometimes they want to go home. 
Senator Mundt. What if they said, "Boss, I would like to sit 
around here all day. It is raining all day." 

Mr. Dukes. I have had some leave at 9 o'clock and I still give them 
a half-day. I have never mistreated labor. It is hard to pay them 
wliat you would like to see them get, but I have never mistreated 
labor. 

Senator Mundt. Would you take a little time out and list for the 
benefit of the committee the benefit to the employees in the wash 
rack business that accrue to them because they belong to this union? 
Mr. Dukes. I didn't hear you. 

Senator Mundt. Would you just take time out, and take all the 
time you need, and list for the benefit of this committee tlie benefits 
that flow to the employees in the wash rack business because tliey 
belong to this union. 

Just one, two. three, four. List them down the line. 
Mr. Dukes. Other than placement in jobs and seeing that they 
can work, I couldn't list any for you. 

Senator Mundt. In otlier words, the onl}^ one that you know of 
is that they have a hiring hall and provide them with an opportunity 
to go to work. That is the benefit which con\es to the employee and 
it also goes to the employer, because you have some central place 
that 3'ou can call and get help. 

Mv. Dukes. You see, the union is pretty close to the wash rack 
business. They understand it. Most people that I have talked to 
don't understand it. It is something you got to understand. They 



17544 IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

understand this, they know what position the wash rack owners are 
in. 

Senator Mundt. I don't doubt that. But you have listed one 
benefit. Go ahead and list the rest of them. 

Mr. Dukes. Well, they couldn't demand any more from me. They 
couldn't give them another benefit. I would close the doors. 

Senator Mundt, You list the benefits they don't have. List the 
ones they do have. Just the hiring hall, that would be your honest 
testimony, that as far as you know, the one benefit that goes to a 
union member in the wash rack business is he has a chance to be as- 
signed to a job through the hiring hall of the union. 

Mr. Dukes. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. As far as you know, that is it ? 

Mr. Dukes. As far as I know. 

Senator Mundt. What percentage of your help do you get from the 
hiring hall ? 

Mr. Dukes. What percentage? I couldn't give it to you in per- 
centage, but when I am short a man and need one, I can call and 
get one. 

Senator Mundt. What he gets is just a temporary job, he doesn't 
get a permanent job ? 

Mr. Dukes. No. I don't want a permanent man. 

Senator Mundt. So they have to put an asterisk around that bene- 
fit. He has the benefit of being assigned to a job because he is a 
union member, and the union hall assigns him to a job, asterisk — 
footnote : Temporarily, part time. 

Mr. Dukes. Every laborer I have had in the wash rack is tem- 
porary. 

Senator Mundt. You say you have four, who have stuck by you 
through thick and thin. 

Mr. Dukes. I have four men that are on solid with me. You 
heard the testimony of how many wash racks they work at. They 
come and go. Maybe they will work for me 3 months, maybe 2 
weeks, maybe 1 week, maybe 1 day. They come and go. There is 
nothing I can do about it. 

Senator Mundt. How do you explain the fact that one of these 
nonunion wash racks is able to pay their employees more than you? 
Do they make it up by washing cars ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. Some suburban towns around Detroit have 
$1.75 for washing the care. If you are in a good neighborhood and 
people are making good money, they will spend it. 

Senator Mundt. Most of your customers, you say, are union mem- 
bers? 

Mr. Dukes. We are in the location of Chrysler Corp., and if you 
know, Chrysler hasn't had things too good. They were laid oft' quite a 
bit. Most of tlie ]:)eople who do come to our rack work for Chrysler. 
Now I undei-stand they are going to move Plymouth out of Detroit, 
so i t w i 1 1 get worse. 

Senator Mtjndt. T understand that most of your customers who 
bring cars to yonr sliop are union men ; is that right ? 

Mr. Dukes. That is riglit. 

Senator Mitnivp. Is that the reason you thought it good business 
to belong to a union ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17545 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Do miion men in Detroit object to paying union 
wages to the people with whom they do business ? 

Mr. DuKES. I don't hear you too well. 

Senator Mundt. Do union men in Detroit generally object to pay- 
ing union wages to people with whom they do business ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Why do they w^ant to hammer down this price, 
then, at $25 a week, 85 cents a car, which is tough on you and tough 
on tlie men ? 

Mr. Di'KEs. It is tough on everybody. 

Senator Mundt. Why do these union members, whom I understand 
want to raise wages insist, Avhen they take their cars to be w^ashed, 
(hey want it done at a sweatshop ? 

Mr. Dukes. It is a funny thing about a human, but everyone I 
know will save a dime when they can. 

Senator Mundt. At least, that is your thought? 

Mr. Dukes. That is right, sir. 

]\Ir. Kenni^jy. They don't come in and ask you if you are union or 
nonunion. 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. If I wash a car cheap enough, they don't give 
a dam. 

Mr. Kennedy. They don't ask whether you are union or not? 

Mr. Dukes. No ; but I have the sign out front and it looks good. 

Senator Mundt. If you put a sign up saying, "We are not a union 
shop, we can wash your cars for 75 cents," you would be busier than 
you are now ? 

Mr. Dukes. You might be. 

Mr. Kennedy. Let me ask you about the fact that you get your 
employees from the union. Do you say you get all your employees 
from the union? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir, 

Mr. Kennedy. What percentage do you get from the union? Isn't 
it a fact that you have an arrangement with the welfare department? 

Mr. Dukes. They send us men. 

Mr. Kennedy. You talk to them daily and they send you anybody 
you need? 

Mr. Dukes. They send them when they can. 

Mr. Kennedy. They send anybody you need ? 

Mr. Dukes. Not all the time; no, sir. We also have men sent to 
us from Michigan unemployment. But there is a lot of mornings 
when they send no men. 

Mr. Kennedy. Certainly that is not your sole source on this, the 
union ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir ; that is not the sole source. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the union was formed, supposedly, for the 
benefit of the employee, and here the employees are receiving no 
benefit. Tlie employer is receiving some benefit, and the union is 
receiving the money. 

Mr. Dukes. I am certain that the union's hands are tied that thej' 
couldn't get any more for these men. 

Mr. Kennedy. You say the union officials understand you and 
your work so closely. It is a collusive arrangement if a ever saw one. 

367151— 59 — pt. 48 22 



17546 IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you have people working in this day and 
age for 70 hours a week, working 70 hours a week and making $25 
a week, it is the most disgraceful situation I ever heard of. 

Mr. Dukes. You are right. You are right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the fact that the miion is extracting 10 cents 
per employee, and you pay it or the employee pays it, it is per- 
petuating this system and 

Mr. Dukes. If you knew my investment and what I make, it is 
even worse than that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then why pay the 10 cents to the union which is 
not getting any benefits for the employees? 

Mr. Dukes. Well, I think they will benefit the employees some 
day. This is the thing that is going to have to be straightened out 
somehow. We have 300 wash racks in Detroit. I would say 190 
of them are in bad shape. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then why pay the money to the union that is not 
causing any benefits for the employee? 

Mr. Dukes. I am certain the union is going to get this thing on 
a higher plane some day. It has got to be. 

Senator Mundt. Do you have a State minimum wage law in 
Michigan ? 

Mr. Dukes. Pardon ? 

Senator Mundt. Do you have a State minimum wage law in 
Michigan ? 

Mr. Dukes. I think so. 

Senator Mundt. Does it also have a waiver on piecework ? 

Mr. Dukes. It doesn't apply to wash racks. 

Senator Mundt. What kind of law is that? Do you have a State 
minimum wage law that says wash racks are exempted? 

Mr. Dukes. I don't know. I am no authority on those laws. 

Senator Mundt. We all kind of look to Detroit and Michigan. 
This is labor headquarters, where all the international big shots come 
from with the big salaries, Cadillac cars, political efforts arxd propa- 
ganda and all of that. 

That is fine, but I want to explore what happens when they are 
in control or in charge. I would assume that the State of Michigan 
would have a reasonably good minimum wage law, and that they 
would present sort of a pilot demonstration to get others to adopt. 

I know some of their representatives were here a week or so ago 
trying to recommend Federal legislation for the States. I recog- 
nize minimum wages are important, but I can't understand a law 
that woukl be passed in Michigan that would not include wash racks, 
as intrastate business. Are you exempt because you are engaged in 
piecework ? That could be. 

Mr. Dukes. I know nothing about that. I think if you will talk 
to Mr. Williams, he will be more interesting than me about the law 
on that. Every wash rack in town, I am certain, pays about like we 
do. 

Senator Munixp. If the Governor of Michigan knows about these 
sweatshop conditions in Detroit, if he knows about them, I think 
he should be interested. 

Mr. Dukes. I am interested. 



EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17547 

Senator Mundt. It is something that is right at liome. He doesn't 
have to come to Washington to solve this one. This is something 
that you never solve by bringing down 5,000 men and having a great 
big whoop-dee-doo. This is something that ought to be done with 
hard work in the union field, no politics, no prominence, no head- 
lines. Just the old hard job of trying to get better working condi- 
tions for the men and women who labor. This at least should be 
part of the functions of a labor union. 

You said it happened, where people come and work under those 
conditions. You say it is deplorable. I can't see how they live and 
support a family under it. It is going on under the noses of the very 
most important labor people in this comitry. 

I asked if you had a State law to do something about it, and you 
said yes, but it doesn't include the wash racks. 

Mr. Dukes. It suits me, I would like to do anything to help them. 

Senator Mundt. You are not very happy, are you, with people 
working for you who are virtually starving to death ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir ; I am not. 

Senator Mundt. I wouldn't think so. It seems if you could work 
out an arrangement to charge the men $1 or $1.25, or high South 
Dakota standards of $1.50, you could raise them in their wages. 
You wouldn't have all of this temporary help. 

Mr. Dukes. That is right. I work maybe 200 people a year. 
That is the kind of turnover it is. It is horrible to have a turnover 
like that. It is awfully bad. I would like to open up and know I 
have so many man and will do so much business. 

The Chairman. Do you think you would get permanent employees 
if you paid decent wages? 

Mr. Dukes. I think maybe someday it will come to that, where 
a man can depend on something. 

Senator IMundt. "VATiy doesn't the union work for them? Why 
don't they try to get the wages up, get the prices up, so that the 
thing is in balance, and give these poor people in Michigan the right 
to enjoy standards of living like they do in other parts of the country? 

Mr. Dukes. Well, we tried our own. We cut prices to 85 cents to 
see if that would help it. It hasn't. I am at my rope's end. I don't 
know what else to do with it. 

Senator Mundt. What were you paying your employees when you 
were getting $1.50 per car Avash ? 

Mr. Dukes. I have seen my men make as high as $18 a day. 

Senator Mundt. You have seen them ? 

Mr. Dukes. I have seen that ; yes. Back in 1955 business was good. 

Senator Mundt. The same people who are now making $25 for 
70 hours a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. It has been testified that they were making the same 
in 1955. 

ISIr. Dukes. We got $1.50 for a wash then. I even had a system 
where I paid all my regular lielp a penny a car bonus. If we washed 
800 cars, he made what was his regular salary plus a penny a car extra. 
But we washed cars. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why have things gone to pot then ? 

Mr. Dukes. You are asking me that ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I am askinij vou that. You are the witness. 



17548 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Dukes. You just lost yourself a witness. I wish I was wrong. 
You are asking me and they brought 5,000 people down here. 

Mr. Kennedy. Well, they didn't seem to get anything done as far 
as helping the j^eople in Detroit are concerned. 

Mr. Dukes. I wish I knew what was wi-ong. I don't know. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

Mr. Kennedy. When the car washers receive tips, do you set that 
aside for them ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir ; we kept it. 

Mr. Kennedy. You keep the car washers' tips ? 

Mr. Dukes. Yes, sir. Do you want to know why ? 

Senator Mundt. It is the same Avay in the hat-check business. If 
you give a tip to a hat-check girl, the boss keeps it. I am a little 
curious when a man is working at as low wages as these people are that 
you keep the tips. I would like to know why. 

Mr. Dukes, We pay for their coveralls. We lose money on that, 
too, but it helps. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you mean what they have to Avear to work? 

Mr. Dukes. What they wear while they work, to protect their 
clothes; yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You feel, therefore, you are entitled to the tips? 

Mr. Dukes. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wlien you are paying these people $25 a week? 

Mr. Dukes. That is right. You may not know it, but $25 a week is 
a lot of money for an operator to guarantee these people. That sounds 
funny to you, but it is not funny. 

Mr. Kennedy. Not funny. I think it is tragic. Have you dis- 
cussed this with Mr. Buf alino ? 

Mr, Dukes. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you discussed the fact of these situations at all 
with Mr. Buf alino? 

Mr. Dukes. He know^s it, I imagine. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you discussed it with him ? 

Mr. Dukes. The conditions in Detroit ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The conditions in the car wash. 

Mr. Dukes. Not with Bufalino himself, no. I never saw the man 
in my life, 

Mr, Kennedy. Have you talked to him on the telephone ? 

Mr. Dukes. Not lately. 

Mr. Kenni'^dy. Have you talked to him occasionally on the tele- 
phone ? 

Mr. Dukes. No, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you talked to him on the telephone at all? 

Mr, Dukes. Yes, sir; once or twice in my life a long time ago. 

Mr, Kennedy, What about tlie other union officials ? 

Mr, DuKKs. I talk to Newman, Shaw and Mr. Welsli often, 

Mr, Kennedy, Have they told you that you sliould raise the wages 
of tbe employees? 

M r, I )rKKS, They know I can't raise the wages, 

Mr, Kennedy, Then why do they take the money ? 

Mr. Dukes. The dues ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Dukes. They have a charter, I understand. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrriES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17549 

Mr. Kennedy. Why do tliey take the money if they can't do any 
good for the employees? Why do they take the $42 a month? 

Mr. Dukes. Why does any union take dues? 

Mr. Kennedy. Because they are going to help the employees, sup- 
posedly, and if they can't help the employees and somebody is making 
$3 a day, they don't take 15 cents from their wages. They don't do 
that. 

That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

The committee will stand in recess until 2 o'clock this afternoon. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of recess : Senators 
McClellan and Mundt.) 

( Wliereupon, at 12 :40 p.m., the select committee recessed, to recon- 
vene at 2 p.m. the same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION 

(The select committee reconvened at 2 p.m.. Senator John L. Mc- 
Clellan (chairman) presiding.) 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of convening: 
Senators McClellan and Capehart.) 

The Chairman. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kj:nnedy. Mr. Scaramuzzino. 

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. Scaramuzzino. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF TONY SCARAMUZZINO 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Scar.\muzzino. Tony Scaramuzzino, 12825 Jane Street, De- 
troit 5, Michigan. 

The Chairman. What is your business or occupation, please? 

Mr. Scaramuzzino. I am a partnership in Tony's Automatic Car 
Wash. ^ 

Mr. Kennedy. You spell your name S-c-a-r-a-m-u-z-z-i-n-o; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Scaramuzzino. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are a partner of Mr. Dukes? 

Mr. ScAR.\MuzziN0. Of Mr. Dukes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Evidently, from the testimony this morning, you 
were the one that prepared this list ? 

Mr. Scaramuzzino. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. You are familiar with it, are you not? 

The Chairman. This list refers to exhibit 81. I am identifying 
it for the record. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did any of these individuals that you had listed 
here — were they aware of the fact that they were in the union? 

Mr. Scaramuzzino. Two or three of them might have been; yes. 



17550 ESIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Two or three out of the 21 ? 

Mr. ScAitAMuzziNO. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. For all the others, you just paid the money? 

Mr, ScARAMUzziNO. I paid for it myself, 

Mr. Kennedy. On the side, on deductions, you have 20 days for 
one man, 20 days, $3 ; 10 days, $1.50. Did you know that to be a fact, 
that that is how long they worked ? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNo. Not exactly. I just used that figure. That 
is about the average days they come in for the month. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it was just a rough summary by you; is that 
right? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. There were no exact records kept ? 

Mr. SCARAMUZZINO. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. You just felt you had to make a payment of so 
much each month to the union ? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. I knew I had to make a payment. I had the 
dues there and had the slips and I was supposed to get them filled 
out and it was through my own fault that I did not do it. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you just had the amounts 

Mr. ScARAMUzziNO. That has not been paid yet or accepted by the 
local union. 

Mr. Kennedy. This is just the procedure that you followed in the 
past? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. Yes. Tlie last time I done that, they sent it 
back to me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have done it when they did not send it back to 
you, have you not ? 

Mr. ScARAMUzziNO. When they did not sent it back to me, it was 
all right. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you followed the same procedure ? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. Yes. If I could get away with it, it was in 
there. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat was necessary was that you pay the same 
amount each month ? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you tried to put the names in to come out 
correctly ; is that right? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually, what it amounted to, really, was just a 
shakedown of you, was it not? 

Mr. ScARAMUzziNo. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. What else is it? Is it a collusive arrangement be- 
tween you and the union ? 

Mr. Scar.\muzztno. No, it is not. 

Mr. Kennedy. What is it? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. Union dues that should be paid by the em- 
ployee's. 

Mr. Kennedy. But the employees don't even know they are in the 
union. 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. The union told me how to go about it, how to 
make these guys fill out the slips and everything. The fact it wasn't 
done was ray fault, not the union's fault. 



IMPROPER ACTrV'ITIES IK THE LABOR FIELD 17551 

Mr. Kennedy. "Wliy do you recognize the union ? 

Mr. ScARAMUzziNO. "Wliy do I recognize the union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. If the employees don't want the union or 
recognize the union, why do you want the union ? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. Because as far as I am concerned, it is a good 
thing. 

Mr. Kennedy. For the employer ? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO. For the employer and the employees. 

Mr. Kennedy. How is it good for the employees ? 

]\Ir. ScAitAMUzziNO. They benefit by being able to get jobs through 
the union hiring hall. 

Mr. Kennedy. But you go to the welfare department. 

!Mr. ScARAMUzziNo. Yes, but we have more than one medimn to get 
help from. 

Mr. Kennedy, But they can go to the welfare department and get 
the job. Do you contribute to the welfare department? 

Mr. SCARAMUZZINO. No. 

Mr. Ivennedy. You should be contributing money to the welfare 
department, then, 

Mr. ScARAMUZziNO. We contribute to the welfare department in 
this sense : that we take those people on relief and put them to work. 
Consequently, the welfare don't have to pay these people relief. 
The more people we hire from the welfare, the less the welfare has 
to pay these people, 

Mr. Kennedy, Other than running a hiring hall, which is ques- 
tionable, the employees do not benefit from this procedure? 

Mr. ScARAMuzziNO, I dou't know. I am not familiar with the 
union benefits. 

Mr. Kennedy. You said it was for the benefits of the employees. 
Do you know of any other benefit to the employees? 

Mr. Scara:muzzino. No, because I am not acquainted with that 
part of the union business. 

Mr, Kennedy, Then you do not know of any benefit to employees? 

Mr, ScARdVMUZZINO, No. 

Mr. Kennedy, That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions ? 

If not, call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr, Eugene Lazewski. 

The Chairman. Be sworn. 

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. Lazewski. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF EUGENE LAZEWSKI 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, 

Mr. Lazew^ski. Eugene J. Lazewski, 8038 Orien, Detroit, Mich. 

The Chairman. What is your business or occupation? 

Mr. Lazewski. I am in the auto wash business, and an auto wash 
proprietor. 

The Chairjian. Do you waive counsel ? 



17552 IMPROPER AcnvrriES in the labor field 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, I do. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. You spell your name L-a-z-e-w-s-k-i ; is that right? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr, Kennedy. You are the owner of the Hack-Wax Auto Wash ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr, Kennedy. 14440 East Seven Mile Road ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1952 you owned the Clean Car Wash in Ham- 
tramck ? 

Mr. Lazewski. In Hamtramck, Mich. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you opened your present business in 1954 ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Up to 1956 your place was nonunion ; is that correct? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. About July 1956, Messrs. Welsh and Newman, repre- 
senting local 985, came by to see you ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. They told you they had a majority of your employees 
signed up ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And asked for a union contract ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you ask about seeing the cards ? 

Mr. Lazewski. I didn't think at the time Mr. Welsh and Mr. New- 
man were in my place of business they had a majority representation 
of our employees and, therefore, we doubted them at this time. We 
didn't want to discuss it any further and I told them we didn't recog- 
nize them as bargaining agents or as the union and we asked them to 
leave our premises. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat happened next? 

Mr. Lazewski. After that, we had received several phone calls ask- 
ing us to meet with the miions for bargaining, which we did not 
comply with. After that, we received several registered letters request- 
ing us for meetings with the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you sought legal counsel; is that right? 

Mr. Lazewski. Aftei- we were receiving several letters, I felt that 
at this time we needed legal counsel, wliich we got, and we petitioned 
for an appearance before the State mediation board. We felt that if 
our employees wanted a union at this time and if local 985 had the 
majority of our men signed up, we would agree with a contract with 
them. 

We appeared for several sessions with the State mediation board at 
this time, seeking or wanting to see proof from the union showing us 
that they did have a majority of our help signed up, which they 
couldn't prove at any of these meetings. So we were getting post- 
ponements week after week. 

Finally, Mr. liufalino stated that if we couldn't get anything 
accomplished at these mediation boards, that our place would be 
eventually blackmail picketed. 

The Chairman. Would be what? 

Mr. Lazewski. T^lackmail picketed. 

Mr. Kennedy. He didn't say blackmail picketed, did he? 



EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17553 

Mr. Lazewski. Xo, not lluit. 

Mr. Kexxedy. Just say what he said. 

Mr. Lazewski. He said our phice would be subject to picketing. 

The Chairman. How did you interpret it to be bhickmail picket- 
ing^ Because he didn't have a majority of your employees and, 
therefore, he was picketing you to compel you to place them in the 
union whether they wanted to be or not? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairman. Or compel you to recognize the union without 
them having the majority of your employees? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. I felt that at that time. 

The Chairman. Is that the sense of the term in which you use 
the words "blackmail picketing" ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairivian. All right ; proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. In August 1956, the picketing started ; is that right? 

Mr, Lazewski. Yes, it did. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did any of your employees picket ? 

Mr. Lazewski. No. All of our employees were working. None 
of them were out on a picket line. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you try to get a temporary injunction? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, we did. At this time, we felt that we needed 
a temporary injunction restraining the pickets, and to further nego- 
tiations with the union. So we w^ent to circuit court and made an 
appeal there, and we got another postponement. 

In the meantime, the pickets were in front of our place of busi- 
ness. Gradually we were losing revenue by not being able to do 
the work. Eventually, we tried to go to the Supreme Court, which 
we did, and couldn't get a decision there. 

Mr. I<JENNEDY. Why not? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, it was during the summer months and most 
of the judges were on vacation. I think our legal counsel managed 
to talk to one of the judges. He refused to order an injunction 
on the grounds that the petition had not been acted on by the lower 
courts. 

The Chairman. Let me ask you this: Prior to the time that the 
union contacted you and undertook to enter into negotiations, had 
any of your employees ever discussed with you the prospects or 
their desire for a union? 

Mr. Lazewski. No, they didn't. 

The Chairman. I am talking about prior to the time the union 
contacted you, or its representatives contacted you in any way about 
becoming a union plant, had any of your employees discussed it 
w^ith you and said, "We want a union. We want to belong to a 
union. We want somebody to represent us in bargaining matters." 

Mr. Lazewski. No, sir, Senator ; they never did. 

The Chairman. All right. Up to the time of the picketing, when 
your place was picketed by the union, had any of your employees, 
up to that time, requested that you recognize a union as their bar- 
gaining agent, or told you that they wanted a union? 

Mr. Lazewski. No, sir ; they didn't. 

The Chairman. What I am trying to determine is whether this 
was all a voluntaiy action on the part of union officials or their 



17554 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

representatives, and not something that emanated from the think- 
ing and Avill of the men themselves. In other words, who initiated 
it? Did tliey have the men signed up? Did they have their con- 
sent, your employees, in order to contact you about recognizing them 
as the bargainmg agent ? 

Mr. Lazewski. No, I don't think they had the majority of the 
employees signed up or any of them. I think it was a voluntary 
part 

The Chairman. You used the term "blackmail" or "shakedown" 
picketing, whatever you want to term it. "V\Tiat I am trying to de- 
termine is whether they had any basis for that, any authority as 
representatives of your men, your employees, to take that means, 
that economic force against you, in order to compel you to put your 
men in the union. In other words, if they did it without any au- 
thority of the men in your employ. 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, I think they did. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. You tried to get some alleviation of the problem 
in the courts and were unable to do so, and your business was suffer- 
ing. Was the union also contacting your customers and telling them 
not to use your car wash ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, our operation was a little different from the 
average auto wash in the city due to the fact that we had an 
added line outside of car washing. We were in the auto recondi- 
tioning, and we felt that all during the time of picketing, while 
the income would be dropping from customers not patronizing our 
place of business, we would still be able to maintain our payrolls 
and our upkeep by doing the auto reconditioning. 

We were getting this work on new and used cars from auto 
dealers around the city. This was sort of a challenge for the organ- 
izing local at this time, because we were probably the first one 
of its kind that they had encountered this experience with. 

Therefore, after a period of days, they found where we were get- 
ting this work. They would call the dealers and tell them that 
Hack-Wax was having trouble with the Teamsters, and they would 
appreciate it if the dealers would give them the cooperation by not 
sending the work to us. 

Gradually, after this was done, even that revenue was dropping off. 
We wasn't able to get as many cars in as we were usually getting 
over a period of a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you finally decided that you better sign up; 
is that right? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. Finally, after seeing that we were unable 
to receive court action, and gradually the pickets were there, we 
decided that we would sign a contract. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who did you sign the contract with ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, I signed it with local 985. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you discuss it with any official of 985? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. I discussed it with Mr. Bufalino. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what arrange- 
ments you made with him ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, there were different types of contracts. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did he give you a choice of contracts? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17555 

Mr. Lazewski, Yas, he did. There were different contracts. I had 
tlii"ee to look at at a time. We finally agreed on one. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did this improve the wages, hours or conditions of 
your employees, the contract? 

Mr. Lazewski. No, I don't think it did. 

Mr. Kennedy. As a matter of fact, they were doing less well under 
the contract than they had been doing previously ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did Mr. Bufalino say to you that he had to make 
it appear that they were getting an increase in wages ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, he did. He said that we would have to give 
tlie men more money because, after all, "We have picketed your place 
for a number of weeks. After signing a contract, we would have to 
make it look like we did get an increase of money for your men." 

Mr. Kennedy. So how was that arranged ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, the only way it was is that there was just 
an increase in productivity ; that is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Instead of, for instance, where you had the classi- 
fication called the buffer ; is that right ? 

Mr, Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had been paying them how much ? 

Mr. Lazewski. AVell, before the union came in, I was paying a 
buffer, for example, which was one of the classifications in our depart- 
ment, $45 a week guaranteed. 

The Chairman. $45 ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. For how many cars ? 

Mr. Lazewski. That was for 65 cars a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much were you paying after the union came in ? 

Mr. Lazewski. After the union came in, we raised his guarantee 
$5, so we were paying him $50 a week then, but it meant also that 
he would have to do 10 additional cars. So we raised the production 
10 cars a week. 

Mr. Ivennedy. So he would get $50 for 75 cars cars; is that right? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Under your old system, if he did 75 cars how much 
would he have gotten paid ? 

Mr. Lazewski. He would have gotten paid $51. 

The Chairman. He lost a dollar. 

Mr. Kennedy. So this, as a matter of fact, went down a dollar. 

Mr. Lazewski. It went down a dollar, actually. 

Mr. Kennedy. But it appeared to the employees, did it not, that 
they were getting an increase in wages? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about No. 2 buffer? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well prior to unionism, his rate of pay was a guar- 
antee of $35 a week. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. That was 65 cars ? 

Mr. Lazewski. That was on 65 cars? 

Mr. ICennedy. How much was it afterwards ? 

Mr. Lazewski. That remained the same. 

Mr. Ivennedy. But did he have to do 75 cars then ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 



17556 IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr, Kennedy. So that was down ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he was getting $35 by you for doing 65 cars, and 
after the union came in he had to do 75 cars to get $35 ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. What about the chrome man. He was getting how 
much ? 

Mr. Lazewsbli. Well, he was getting $27 a week guaranteed. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. How much under the union ? 

Mr. Lazewski. His pay remained the same. 

Mr. Kennedy. So he was getting $27 for 65 cars before, and now 
he is getting $27 and he has to do 75 cars ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Wliat about the wheels and trmik ? 

Mr, Lazewski. The wheel and trmik, they were getting $21 a week 
guaranteed, and when the union came in that went up $4. He is 
now getting $25. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. But for 75 cars ? 

Mr. Lazewski. And that was for 75 ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. What if he did 75 cars under the former system, if 
he did 10 cars ? How much would be get for that ? 

Mr. Lazewski. He would have gotten an additional $3. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that would have only brought him up to $24. So 
actually, for the wheels and trunk man, the union brought an increase 
of$l? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairman. How much of that did the union get back in dues ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Ten cents a day for every man working there. 

The Chairman. So they got 60 or 70 cents a week of it back for that 
one man? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairman, So he got an increase, then, of 30 or 40 cents a 
week, in that particular category or classification, wheels and — what 
did you call it? 

Mr. Kennedy. The wheels and trunk men. 

The Chairman. Actually, if they got a dollar increase in wages, 
that is what it amounted to — is that correct ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairman. The union got back 60 or 70 cents, whichever it was, 
60 cents of that in dues ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairman. So the union got them 40 cents a week benefit in 
that category ; is that right ? 

Mr, Lazewski. Yes, it is. 

Tlie Chairman. Whereas, some of the others lost a dollar a week; 
is that correct? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, it was. 

The Chairman. Some of the others ffot their work increased, by the 
nmnbc]- of cars. In fact, they all got that, didn't they ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, they did. 

The Chairman. They had to work harder ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Actually, the dues now are what ? 

Mr. Lazewski, They have just been raised a nickel a day. They 
are 15 cents a day now. 



IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17557 

Mr. Kennedy. So actually the men are now losing. This group is 
losing money, also, the wheels and trunk men. 

The Chairman. They make 10 cents a week extra, don't they ? 

Mr. Kennedy. I am sorry. You are right. Ten cents a week. 

The Chairman. They are making 10 cents a week extra now. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then the windows and interior men were making $25 
before for 65 cars ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lazewski. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy, Then it was $27 for 75 cars ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that actually amounted to being down also ; is 
that right? 

Mr. l^AZEWSKi. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the detailer No. 1, in the waxing department, 
was making $25 before ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much was he making under the union con- 
tract ? 

Mr. Lazewski. He was making $25 also. 

Mr. Kennedy. But for 75 cars ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So that was down ? 

Mr. Lazewski. That was down. 

Mr. Kennedy. And detailer No. 2, the same situation ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. $25 and that was down. Waxer No. 1, $27 ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that was down because it was down for 75 cars ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Waxer No. 2 had the same situation ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

]Mr, Kennedy. And the inspector, $35, remained the same, is that 
right? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. So out of the various classifications — there are 10 
classifications — one remained the same, one was an increase of a dime, 
and the others were all down ? 

Mr, Lazewski, Yes, 

Mr. Kennedy. So the vast majority of the employees lost out on that, 
is that right ? 

Mr, Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairman. No one benefited from this except the union and 
the employer; isn't that correct? You benefited by getting rid of the 
strike, the picketing ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

The Chairman, In other words, you got to continue in business 
without business being taken away from you by entering into this 
agreement with the union. That is correct ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. But the men really got nothing out of it and some 
of tliem got less ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And they all got more work, isn't that correct ? 



17558 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. They all got more work and less pay. That is, the 
men who did the work, who had to be placed in the union. Did they 
go in there with their consent ? 

Mr. Lazewski. I don't know if they did go in there with their 
consent or not. It just eventually happened we signed a contract. 

The Chairman. They didn't consent to you, did they ? 

Mr. Lazewski. They didn't consent to me ; no. 

The Chairman. You just put them in ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Right. 

Senator Capehart. How many employees did you have? 

Mr. Lazewski. At that time I think we had about 30. 

Senator Capehart. Thirty employees ? 

Mr, Lazewski. Yes. 

Senator Capehart. What were the union dues per month? 

Mr. Kennedy. It was 10 cents per day. 

Mr. Lazewski. If all of them worked the proper amount of time, 
I don't remember exactly, it was probably $75 per month. 

Senator Capehart. $75 a month ? Per employee ? 

Mr. Lazewski. No ; for all of them. 

Senator Capehart. The whole fight, then, and the whole argument, 
was over $75 a month ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Probably ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Also, you had in the car wash division the front 
line foremen making $40 a week ? 

Mr, Lazewski. Yes. I had two line foremen. They worked up 
in the front. They were making $40 a week at the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. How much are they making mider the union scale ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, if we had to abide by the union contract, it 
meant that we would have to pay them $120 a month minimum, which 
meant that it would be less than what they were making. 

Mr, Kennedy. That amounts to about $30 a week. 

Mr. Lazewski. About $30 a week. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they lost $10 a week. 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, we still continued 

Mr. ICennedy. I know you did, but under the union scale, if you 
wanted to conform to the union scale, you could have paid them $10 a 
week less? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And in addition to that, they had to work 24 davs 
out of 30, did they not ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Right; they had to work 24 days out of 30 everv 
month. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliat is 6 days a week ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Tliat is in order to collect even $120 ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. If thev didn't work that amount of time, then they 
wenMi't even entitled to the $120 for the month ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is under the contract? 

Mr. Lazewski. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. The front line foreman was $30. You had been pay- 
ing him $30? 



EMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17559 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. That remained the same ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes ; that remained the same. 

Mr. Kennedy. Except, once again, the provision in the contract 
that he had to work 6 days a week for 4 weeks in order to colle^^t that 
amount ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. And whicli was very, very difficult. Then the back 
eiul foreman, $35. What happened to that ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Well, his pay remained the same, but actually we 
could liave paid him less. 

Mr. Kennedy. ^Vnd the car washers received a guarantee of $3 a 
day? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. Again, that amounted to less l^ecause they had to 
work the 24 days ; is that right ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Otherwise, they wouldn't collect that. 

Did some of your men tell you that they didn't want to belong to 
the union? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. I heard the conversations several times on 
the premises of the building that they didn't want to belong to the 
union, but I guess they had no choice. They automatically became 
members. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you deduct the 15 cents from their wages? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. A new employee that comes to work for you, is he 
ever notified he is in the union ? 

Mr. Lazewski. No; I never notify them. A new man, whenever 
he starts working, we automatically start deducting the union dues, 
whether he works for us 1 day, 2, or 30 out of the month. 

Mr. Kennedy. Do you know if anybody ever comes around and 
talks to the employees ? 

Mr. Lazewski. Do you mean from the union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Lazewski. We have periodical visits, probably one a month, 
from the agents of the local. 

Mr. Kennedy. So they are familiar with the fact of what is going 
on in the shop? 

Mr. Lazewski. Yes ; they are. 

The Chairman. Do they come around just to collect their dues? 

Mr. Lazewski. No. We mail the dues in automatically monthly or 
quarteirl)\ But they never ask us for them right then and there 
directly. 

Mr. Kennedy. You just try to send in a certain amount each 
month ; is that right, and they make the names up ? 

Mr. Lazewski. No. We have an accurate record of the amount 
of dues deducted from the help. 

Mr. Kennedy. You don't folllow the same procedure as the pi*evious 
witness? 

Mr, Lazewski. No. I don't. 

Mr. Kennedy. You ti*y to keep accurate records? 

Mr. Lazewski. We have accurate records; yes. 



17560 IMPROPER ACTIVrriES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Is that difficult for you? 

Mr, Lazewski. It is time consuming because I have to do all this 
work myself. We haven't any additional bookkeeper or anyone hired 
to do that. 

Mr. Kennedy. Does the union perfomi any help for the employees; 
do any good for the employees? 

Mr. I^AZEWSKi. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Kennedy. There is no fringe benefit, no welfare, or anything 
like that? 

Mr. Lazewski. No. 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

Tlie Chairisian. Do you get any of your help fi^om the union ? Do 
3''Ou call them to send your employees down there ? 

Mr. Lazewski I don't tliink I ever called the union hall for help, 
Senator. 

The Chairman. Do you get some yours from the welfare 
department ? 

Mr, Lazewski. Yes, we do. We have several sources to get our 
help when we need it. One of them is the welfare department. The 
other is the Michigan unemployment agencies. In case of an 
emergency, that is who we call. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Duff. 

The Chairman. Come forward, Mr. Duff. 

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 noth- 
ing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. Duff. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF GERALD DUEF 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr, Duff. Gerald Duff, 6663 Kenmore, Dearboni, Mich, I am 
now employed in an engineering firm. 

The Chairman. All right. Do you waive counsel? 

Mr. Duff, I do, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

All right, Mr, Kennedy, you may proceed, 

Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Duft', you leased a hand-equipped auto- wash 
building back in July of 1956; is that correct 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. At 6588 North Telegraph, Deai'born, Mich. ? 

Mr, Duff, That is right, 

Mr. Kennedy. It was known at that time as the Bubble Bath Auto 
Wash ? 

Mr, DiTFF, That is correct, 

Mr. Kr.NNEDY, You installed some mechanical equipment in there? 

Mr. Duff, I installed automatic equipment. 

Mr, Kennedy, Costing you about $15,000? 

Mr. Duff. Tliat is right, sir. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17561 

Mr. Kennedy. You employed how many men during that period 
of time? 

Mr. Dui'^F. My operation wasn't too large. I employed, starting 
Monday, five men. Tuesday would be six. For example, Friday 
approximately 8, and over the weekend it would be 12, 13 to 14 men 
in my operation. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you gave a minimum guarantee of $4 a day? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And when the men stayed on for a period of time, 
you raised it? 

Mr. Duff. I raised their guarantee. 

Mr. Kennedy. Up to $5 and $6 a day? 

Mr. Duff. One got $7. 

Mr. Kennedy. You had regular help, did you not ? 

Mr. Duff. I had the same help for over 2 years. I didn't have a 
changeover of help. 

Mr. Kennedy. Why didn't you pay them the $3 dollars as has been 
discussed here? 

Mr. Duff. Why didn't I? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. 

Mr. Duff. Well, I wanted dependable help for one thing, and I 
just didn't have the heart to pay a wage they couldn't eat on. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then you in addition to giving them the guaranteed 
wage you would split 50-50 with the men after 100 cars; is that right? 

Mr. Duff. After the guarantee, every dollar that came in was split 
down the middle. They took half and I took the other half. 

Mr. Kennedy. The men worked 6 days a week? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And with everybody getting 1 day off every week? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. As you say, your men stayed with you continuously ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. I didn't have a changeover in help. 

Mr, Kennedy. And if the man showed up in the morning, he 
received his guaranteed wage for the whole day ? 

Mr. Duff. If it rained, he could go home. If he showed up that 
day, he received his guarantee for the whole day. 

Mr. Kennedy. Even if it rained? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Then on Christmas Day you gave them the keys to 
the premises and allowed them to run the car wash themselves? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. Everything that came in was theirs. 

Mr. Kennedy. About 6 months after you began in January of 1957, 
a union representative came to see you? 

Mr. Duff. Not directly. They came to see my men. No union 
representative ever talked to me directly. 

Mr. Kennedy. What did they say? 

Mr. Duff. The men came and told me they were opposed to joining 
the union. 

Mr. Kennedy. "What did they tell you? 

Mr. Duff. That they didn't want it. 

Mr. Kennedy. And that the union representative from local 985 
tried to get them to join the union ? 

Mr. Duff. I don't recall the local. I believe that is the only one. 

36751— 59— pt. 48 23 



17562 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. Then did you receive a notification from the State 
mediation board to appear? 

Mr. Duff. To appear, that is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. To show cause why you should not accept your 
employees' wishes to join the union? 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennf.dy. And your employees had already indicated that 
they did not \fant to join the union? 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you appear before the board ? 

Mr. Duff. Yes; I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. And there were ux or seven other operators present? 

Mr. Duff That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Was Mr. Buf alino there ? 

Mr. Duff. Yes. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Would you relate to the committee what happened 
before the Board ? 

Mr. Duff. Mr. Bufalino had these applications, I don't recall the 
amount 

Mr. Kennedy. Application cards ? 

Mr. Duff. Application cards supposedly signed by my help. That 
was supposed to be more than half of my employees. Well, upon 
examining the cards, not one individual had ever worked for me, 
the name had never been familiar, and the date on the application 
was dated before the building had ever been built. 

Mr. Kennedy. This was a new building that you were working in? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. These were the cards that Mr. Bufalino provided ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

(At this point Senator Capehart withdrew from the hearing room.) 

The Chairman. We will have to suspend for a few minutes. 

(A brief recess was taken. After the recess, the following members 
of the select committee were present : Senators McClellan and Curtis.) 

The Chairman. The committee will come to order. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. You were talking about the fact that at the meeting 
of the State mediation board, Mr. Bufalino came forward with the 
cards ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he said he had your employees signed up ? 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. You looked at the dates of the cards and — first you 
saw that none of these people had worked for you ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. And they were signed prior to the tune of the build- 
ing being erected ? 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have a dispute back and forth with Mr. 
Bufalino? 

Mr. Duff. Yes ; I brought that point up to the board, and it is on 
the record. I believe that is one of the reasons that they decided in 
my favor, that the union was not the proper bargaining representative 
for my men. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17563 

Mr. KENNEDY. What was Mr. Bufalino's attitude toward you at 
that time ? 

Mr. Duff. He was a little bit peeved at me. 

The Chairman. As I understand, he was representing that he had 
a majority of your employees signed up for you ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. And when you examined the cards, when he pre- 
sented them and they were examined, it was found that none of the 
men had ever been employed by you ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. And that the cards were signed prior to the time 
the buildmg was constructed ? 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. 

The Chairman. And he was undertaking by that fraud to compel 
you to place your men in a union ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. That is Buf alino that is the head of this 985 local ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, Mr. Bufalino. I so stated at that hear- 
ing, that I would have no part of any shakedown which they were 
attempting to put on me with the type of thieves that I considered 
they were 

The Chairman. The type of thieves ; is that what you said ? 

Mr. Duff. I used little stronger words than those, sir. 

The Chairman. You emphasized the thief part ? 

Mr. Duff. I did, sir. I felt that these were leeches living off the 
misery and whatnot of these people who were helpless. As far as I 
was concerned, they were just leeches, that is what they were. I so 
stated, that if they wanted the union and they would sign my men up 
and collect the dues themselves, I would live up to a union contract. 
Otherwise, I wanted no part of him or his union. 

The Chairman. How long ago was that ? 

Mr. Duff. I don't know the correct date. 

The Chairman. What year ? 

Mr. Duff. That was in 1957. 

The Chairman. 1957? 

Mr. Duff. Yes. 

The Chairman. Some 2 years ago. All right. 

Senator Curtis. These were the employees in your carwash 
establislunent ? 

Mr. Duff. Yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. What union was it asking you to put them in the 
union '? 

Mr. Duff. I don't know the numbers. Mr. Bufalino's auto wash 
union. 

Mr. Kennedy. 985. 

Senator Curtis. What union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The Teamsters. 

Mr. Duff.* The Teamsters ; yes. 

Senator Curtis. Why do people who wash cars belong in the 
Teamsters Union ? 

Mr. Duff. Wliy do they ? 

Senator Curtis. Yes. 



17564 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Duff. Well, it is a method the Teamsters have devised to 
shake down money from businessmen. That is all it is. We know 
that, and you know it. 

Senator Curtis. The pressure was put on you as the employer ? 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. I feel further that unless legislation is 
made, you people here, instead of just listening, if legislation is not 
made to protect the small businessmen in even simple matters, that 
this thing will continue. It is a speed limit that has to be put on 
there somewhere. 

Senator Curtis. I think what you say is very true. Congress is 
derelict in its duty if we do not curb some of these excess powers of 
blackmail picketing, secondary boycotting. This problem cannot be 
solved merely by internal cleanup within the unions. 

Mr. Duff. No, sir, it can't be. There must be a speed limit set 
somewhere. 

One of the things that would help the small businessmen get this 
shakedown off their back, would be the picketing. They go down and 
get pickets off the streets, and so forth, and pay them $5, and put 
them picketing your place of business. 

Senator Curtis. And they do not represent anybody working there 
who has a grievance. 

Mr. Duff. That is a standard weapon. I think legislation should 
be made from the smallest to the biggest, that only people who can 
picket or who would be allowed to be in front of the place of business 
are interested working people from that place of busmess itself. 

Senator Curtis. I agree with you that if it is lawful for these 
Teamster outfits to picket somebody out of business, then we should 
make it lawful for competitors to do the same thing. 

Mr. Duff. That is correct. That is the biggest weapon. 

Senator Curtis. That is, to cut off the supply of goods, block exits 
and all that sort of thing. I am glad to hear you say so. We have 
spent $2 million of the taxpayers money exposing these things and 
the Congress knows about them. We need legislation and we need 
it now. 

Mr. Duff. Sir, I feel like a great many do that hypocrisy used to 
be part of politics, and now it seems that they have to be a sancti- 
monious hypocrite, because everyone is so afraid of the union vote, 
afraid to take action, they are afraid to move. 

Wliy doesn't someone stand up and start to work on it? This 
thing being brought to the attention by these committees is fine, it 
should be brought to the attention. But they can't continue on for- 
ever. Why can't legislation be had ? It takes action. 

Senator Curtis. There are many people in the Congress who agree 
with you, but not everybody. 

Mr. Duff. Agreement isn't enough, sir. 

Senator Curtis. I mean they are working for legislation. 

IMr. Duii-F. They have to do something. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the time that you had this conference with Mr. 
Bufalino, Mr. Hoffa was appearing before this committee; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Duff. He was here in Washington at the time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you brought attention to that? 



IMPROPER ACTWITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17565 

Mr, Duff. I did. 

Mr. Kennedy. About 30 days after this, the Board ruled against 

Buf alino and for you ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Shortly after this time were you told by one of 
your fellow car washers that Mr. Bufalino, a Teamster official, had 
said that Mr. Bufalino was going to get you ? 

Mr. Duff. Yes, I was, 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate what happened ? 

Mr. Duff. Well, I was in a competitor's carwash, and in a friendly 
manner he told me that I had talked too much at this hearing, and 
which I am probably doing now, and that I was going to be 
straightened out. Well, I disregarded it. I disregarded that at the 
time. Upon repeating, that statement to the authorities after the 
explosion, this same individual called me up and denied it. That is 
the reason I am not bringing his name out now. He denied he had ever 
made that statement and did not want to be involved in it. 

Mr. Kennedy. When you say "explosion," what happened ? 

Mr. Duff. Well, my place of business was bombed. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did that happen ? 

Mr. Duff. That happened last April, a year ago. 

Mr, Kennedy. How much longer after the meeting before the 
State mediation board where you received the decision that the deci- 
sion was against Bufalino ? 

Mr. Duff. I would say somewhere in the neighborhood of 4 to 5 
months, somewhere in that neighborhood. I am not clear on the 
dates. I don't have them before me, any of the dates. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. What happened so far as the bombing of your 
place ? 

Mr. Duff. Well, I was called up one morning, one Sunday morning, 
I believe, and the police came over and told me there had been an 
explosion in my place. 

Wlien I got there, I had been bombed. At the time, we didn't know 
whether it was a bombing or a gas explosion. But as it turned out, 
it was a bombing. The place was just about completely destroyed. 
The equipment in the place was destroyed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did they ever find out who was responsible ? 

Mr. Duff. No, sir. They never have. There are 11 other unsolved 
bombings in that area. 

Mr. Kennedy. How many ? 

Mr. Duff. Eleven. 

The Chairman. All growing out of labor disputes ? 

Mr. Duff. Everyone has been found to be a labor dispute, yes. 

The Chairman. In other words, they followed a labor dispute? 

Mr. Duff. They followed a labor dispute. 

The Chairman. That is a pretty clear pattern, is it ? 

Mr. Duff. It is in my mind, sir. I don't know in whose else. 

The Chairman. Well, you are one of the victims, you have ex- 
perienced it ? 

Mr. Duff. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman, And you have observed about the same pattern in 
this connection with other bombings where there has been a labor 
dispute ? 



17566 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. Would you describe the dynamiting ? What took 
place ? Describe the bombing. 

Mr. Duff. I don't know. The charge was apparently set in the 
middle of the building, thrown through a window, and it exploded 
and blew out all the glass in the building, and one piece of equipment 
in the rear in a separate room wasn't destroyed. It happened to be 
a steam generator. All of the rest of the equipment was destroyed 
from the cashier's cage to the cash register to the automatic equip- 
ment. Everything in the place. 

Senator Curtis. Was it done at night ? 

Mr. Duff. It was done at night. Possibly 3 o'clock in the morning. 

Senator Curtis. No one was in the building ? 

Mr. Duff. No one was in the building. 

Senator Curtis. They would have been killed possibly. 

Mr. Duff. They would have been ; yes, sir. 

Senator Curtis. Was there a watchman around ? 

Mr. Duff. I had a man I more or less encouraged to be a watchman. 
I had fixed him a place to stay and he would stay approximately 5 
nights a week. He didn't stay all the time. He didn't set a pattern. 
He could have been in there very easily. 

Senator Curtis. It just happened that he was out of there ? 

Mr. Duff. It just happened. 

Senator Curtis. What do you figiire to be the amoimt of damage? 

Mr. Duff. Well, my damage 

Senator Curtis. I am not talking about the loss of business, but I 
mean from the bomb. 

Mr. Duff. $12,000, I believe, was established for the building and, 
to me, around $17,000 for my equipment, or somewhere in there. 

Senator Curtis. Was there ever an arrest made ? 

Mr. Duff. No arrest whatsoever, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You, in your own mind, feel or know that the bomb- 
ing was a direct result of your failure to yield to the union ? 

Mr. Duff. I do, sir. 

Senator Curtis. That is all. 

Mr. Kennedy. Did you have insurance covering it ? 

Mr. Duff, I didn't have enough. I had $5,000 worth of insurance; 
$5,500 is all I had. 

Mr. Kennedy. So you had to take the rest of your loss yourself? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. You lost $10,000 from it ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. A little over that. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was your own personal loss ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. But the insurance also covered some of the building? 

Mr. Duff. I did not own the building. I leased the building. 

Mr. Kennedy. The gentleman who owned the building 

Mr. Duff. He was covered completely. 

Mr. Kennedy. That was about another $15,000; is that right? 

Mr. Duff. I think approximately $12,000 to $15,000, or in that 
neighborhood. 

Mr. Kennedy. $12,000. 



IMPROPER ACTIVrTIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17567 

Prior to that time, had you discovered two individuals that came 
around to your place ? 

Mr. Duff, Yes. I would say approximately 3 weeks before that, 
Otis, w'ho was my night watchman, had reported to me that he heard 
noises at the rear doOr. Thinking it was me, he walked back to the 
rear door to open it. Upon opening it from the inside, two men ran. 
He discovered the door had been jimmied, had jimmy marks on it, as 
the police call them, and reported it to the police the next morning. 
But we at that time assumed it was someone trying to break into the 
place and it scared them off. It scared him as bad as it did them, I 
guess. 

Senator Curtis. Before we leave this bombing, you have testified 
to the loss of physical property, but that also deprived you of your 
livelihood, didn't it ? 

Mr. Duff. It did, sir, yes. 

Senator Curtis. And it drove you out of business ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

Senator Curtis. You were providing employment for how many 
people ? 

Mr. Duff. Fourteen, maximum. 

Senator Curtis. So probably counting your own about 15 families 
were involved? 

Mr. Duff. That is right, sir. 

Senator Curtis. And that added very materially to your financial 
loss? 

Mr. Duff. Well, it did, completely at that time. 

Mr. Kennedy. And you were out of that business from then on ? 

Mr. Duff. That is right. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Did you have anything further about the situation 
that you wanted t-o state? 

Mr. Duff. Xo. I believe I mentioned the point that I thought would 
help the small businessman, to take this big club away that the unions 
use for blackmailing and so on. 

I think rather than just talking about it, some action should be done 
and right now, not just tomorrow or next week. I mean just starting 
right now. 

The Chairman. You have in mind what is known as organizational 
picketing ? 

Mr. Duff. Sir? 

The Chairman. You have in mind what is known as organizational 
picketing or recognition picketing? 

Mr. Duff. That is one of the answers. 

The Chairinian. Not where they go to picket just to get a payoff 
but where they go to picket to compel people to join the union or com- 
pel the employer to put his employees in the union. 

Mr. Duff. Well, I believe yeai-s ago in Chicago they used to just 
shoot them, but now they have this method. It is a little simpler. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further? 

Mr. Kennedy. That is all. 

The Chairman. Thank you very much. I think you are to be 
highly commended for your courage to come up here and make your 
statements. 

Call the next witness. 



17568 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chair will have to admonish you. You are here as the 
guests of this committee and the Senate. These demonstrations will 
have to be restrained. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Nemesh. 

The Chairman. Be sworn, 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. Nemesh. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF JOSEPH NEMESH 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation, please. 

Mr. Nemesh. Joseph Nemesh. I live at 21884 Avalon Drive, 
Rocky Eiver, Ohio. I am president of Music Systems, distributors 
of Seeburg coin-operated phonographs. 

The Chairman. Do you waive counsel? 

Mr. Nemesh. I do. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. May, you may proceed. 

Mr. May. Mr. Nemesh, you entered the jukebox business about 
1930? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes, I did. I decided to go into the business of 
operating jukeboxes in the early 1930's. 

Mr. May. That was in Cleveland ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Cleveland, Ohio. 

Mr. May. You operated a route at that time ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is correct. 

Mr. May. Did you later become a distributor for the Seeburg 
company? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. I became a distributor for J. P. Seeburg Corp. 
out of Chicago in 1937. 

Mr. May. Wliat territory did you cover at that time? 

Mr. Nemesh. First I covered the Greater Cleveland area, and then 
later on the northeastern Ohio area, and later on I was awarded the 
northwestern Ohio area for Seeburg under franchise. 

Mr. May. In what year was that? 

Mr. Nemesh. 1937. 

Mr. May. Did you experience some difficulty in the Cleveland area 
in selling your machines? 

Mr. Nemesh. About 1939, the then Wurlitzer distributor, a man 
by the name of Leo J. Dixon, organized or had cause to organize a 
union. They had an association, a union, to restrain competition in 
the industry. 

Mr. May. Which union was that? 

Mr. Nemesh. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. May. Which union was involved? 

Mr. Nemesh. First it was the Building Service Employees Union 
and then later they became affiliated with the IBEW. 

Mr. May. Local 442? 

Mr. Nemesh. I believe so. 

Mr. May. Was Mr. Presser involved in that operation ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. Mr. Presser M^as the business agent. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17569 

Mr. May. And due to this union-association combination, you were 
unable to sell very many machines in the Cleveland area? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is correct. 

Mr. May. How did they prevent the sale of the machine ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, they would picket locations that — for example, 
those that didn't belong to the union they would picket their locations 
to coerce the operators to join the union, and after the union had 
signed the operators, whether they were self-employed or not, then 
it was sort of a closed territory for competition. You couldn't go into 
a location and compete even if you had a better piece of equipment, 
with the other man that was in there, because it was a union man. So 
if you were not union you couldn't go in there because he was union. 
If you were union, you weren't permitted because you are not per- 
mitted to take the brother union man's livelihood away, so to speak. 

Mr. May. The operators using the union as an enforcement arm 
could maintain old and ancient machines on locations and were not 
forced to buy new machines ; is that correct ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is correct. 

Mr. May. Did you also experience difficulties in Youngstown, Ohio? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, not until later. That was a later date than 1939. 

INIr. May. What happened then? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, of course, we didn't have any real difficulty ex- 
cept that we did the best we could under the circumstances in the other 
areas. However, for a while, Youngstown was organized with the 
union and then during the war it kind of disintegrated and after the 
postwar period they had sort of a local union situation. We sold our 
equipment. Of coui-se, during the war there wasn't any equipment 
to be sold. I was in the tool manufacturing business during those 
years. 

Later, in 1946, the postwar period, I got back into distributing the 
Seeburg line of jukeboxes and accessory equipment. Then along about 
1949 tlie J. P. Seeburg Corp. introduced a new concept in music. I 
mean by that 100 selections, where they could play classical and 
semiclassical and also popular music on this new machine which you 
couldn't do on all the other machines. 

Mr. May. Were you then searching for a person to handle your 
product in the Youngstown area ? 

Mr. Nemesh. We had been quite successful in 1949 in marketing 
our equipment in all areas in Ohio with the exception of Youngstown. 
In 1950, because we couldn't get any representation there because of 
the operator's boycott on our equipment, we decided to take our case 
directly to the location owner, which we did. 

As a result of that, we were able to place about 15 machines. After 
doing that we searched around to find someone to buy this route be- 
cause the present operators at the time were fearful of buying the 
equipment because they didn't want to expose the equipment to their 
other location owners for fear that they may have to buy some new 
phonographs and make more money. 

Mr. JMay. Were you able to find a gentleman who was interested ? 

Mr. NEiiESii. Yes. Our salesman, Mr. Smith, found a man by the 
narne of Kisan, who was a bar owner, and he decided to go into this 
business, and he did, and we were ready to negotiate and complete the 
transaction when his bar was bombed, stink-bombed. 



17570 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Later, right afterward, he was called and threatened on the tele- 
phone. In addition to that, he took a severe beating in one of his 
locations that called for service, I believe it was a ruse — anyway, that 
is the way the story was related to me. When he went outside, after 
he had finished the call and found out it was just a nuisance call, they 
got him outside of the tavern and beat him up pretty severely. 

Mr. May. Did he lose interest in the operation ? 

Mr. Nemesh. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. May. Did he lose interest ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Immediately. He cooled. 

Mr. May. Did you look for another person ? 

Mr, Nemesh. We looked for another person there in Youngstown 
area. He was interested, a man by the name of Mr. Joseph Abraham. 
He looked over the route, and we agreed on the regular price of the 
machines, not charging anything for goodwill because we didn't feel 
we had any. We just wanted to sell our machines and create a market 
there. During this time, while it was a regular conversation that he 
was going to take over this route, his garage suddenly burnt down, 
a three- or four-car garage where he kept his equipment. 

Shortly after that 

Mr. May. Did anything else happen to him ? Was his house blown 
up? 

Mr. Nemesh. This house where he had his offices, that was stink- 
bombed and the windows broken. 

Mr. May. Did he then lose interest in handling your product ? 

Mr. Nemesh. He immediately lost interest also. 

Mr. May. Were you able to find somebody else ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Our salesman finally found a man by the name of 
Emanuel Amato. He was looking for a bar to go into business for 
himself. Finally Ave interested him in the idea of buying this route 
of phonographs in Youngstown, Ohio. 

In the meantime, while we were having all of this difficulty, prior to 
this we had had the locations picketed when the second fellow's ardor 
cooled, and we took the union to court and obtained an injunction 
against them for picketing. They were going to push us out of 
Youngstown. 

Mr. May. As I understand, the union appealed the injunction. 

Mr. Nemesh. The union immediately appealed the injunction. 

Mr. May. And while that appeal was pending 

Mr. Nemesh. We found Mr. Anuito. We apprised Mr. Amato of 
the situation, that he would buy it subject to this appeal. If the 
union won the appeal, then his locations would be subject to picketing. 

Mr. May. He felt that he could handle union trouble? 

Mr. Neiniesh. That is correct. He wasn't too concerned about it at 
the time. 

Mr. May. I understand that the union did win the appeal. 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. It was a three-judge traveling court and one of 
the judgas was from Newark, Ohio, the former home of Mr. Green. 

Mr. AIay. Did the union cause Mr. Amato some difficulty then? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. They did some picketing and they were going 
to continue the picketing. He tried to stop it and finally he called for 
help and lie brought his father-in-law into the business. 

Mr. May. Who is Mr. Amato's father-in-law? 



IMPROPER ACTR'mES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17571 

Mr. Nemesh. Mr. Frank Cammarata. 

Mr. May. Was Mr. Frank Cammarata successful in solving the 
problem ? 

Mr. Nemesh. No, he wasn't. He tried and he wasn't successful. 
As a result, it was for Mr. Amato to either sell those locations back to 
the original members or they would continue the picketing. 

Mr. AIay. Did the police department take an active interest in the 
situation w^ien Mr. Amato came into town ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. They began to harass our salesmen and arrest 
Mr. Amato and Mr. Cammarata. 

Mr. May. Mr. Frank Cammarata is a notorious gangster who volun- 
tarily deported himself after appearing before this committee some 
time last fall. There came a point in your operation, Mr. Nemesh, 
when you extended your jurisdiction to Detroit ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. Because of our success with this new phono- 
graph, we were awarded the Michigan territory, which is known as 
the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. That encompasses Detroit and all 
the other cities in the Michigan area. 

Mr. May. Did you encounter similar difficulty in the Detroit area ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes, we did. In 1950 we encountered quite a bit of 
difficulty because we went in there with the contracts and the operators 
could see the point and the location owners were happy. After all, 
the public pays for this equipment, the operators never pay for it. 
They buy it for a downpayment, mostly no downpayment, and it is 
financed over long terms. The public, after all, endorses it; so the lo- 
cation owners wanted it. 

When we placed the phonographs, we started to have a lot of 
difficulty. 

Mr. :NiAY. What sort of difficulty ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, our sales manager at the time w^as getting 
threats. The people that were buying our equipment were threatened. 

Mr. ]VL\Y. From whom ? 

Mr. Neiviesh. Well, the unions, I would say. 

Mr. May. Whicli union ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, the local jukebox union. I believe at the time 
it was Mr. Bufalino, or he still is, the head of that union. 

Mr. May. Local 985 ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is correct. 

Mr. ISIay. What sort of actions did they have ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, they harassed the locations where these Seeburgs 
were placed, mostly, and tried to unsell them on the idea of having a 
Seeburg, and tried to get the man that was in there formerly with 
his other phonograph. Just everytliing that the}^ could do to harass 
the location and not permit us free access to that market. 

Mr. M\Y. Why would the Teamsters Union harass locations han- 
dling the Seeburg machine? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, there is an interest. Mr. Bufalino's brother- 
in-law — it is common gossip, I have no proof of this, but it has been 
common gossip — has an interest in the Wurlitzer distributorship there 
because of the fact that prior to this man coming in as a distributor, 
Mr. Bufalino and Mr. ]\Ieli were the Wurlitzer distributors. 

Mr, May. Did this harassment continue? Was your place of busi- 
ness damaged in any way ? 



17572 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. Our windows were broken. The police depart- 
ment has all the records. Our windows were broken and our show- 
rooms were stink-bombed. Our sales manager's life was threatened. 
For a time there he had to have police escort. 

Mr. May. In order to combat evident union-association combina- 
tions, did you, yourself, search to create another union? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, sir, here is what I did. The operators came to 
me with the thought that they were getting nowhere, they couldn't 
get any protection from this union as far as the independent operators 
were concerned. They came to me for advice and I thought that they 
ought to have their own union. After all, there was nothing wrong 
with having your own union if you can't get any backing from the 
local union. 

So we looked around for some sort of an organizer. I happened 
to be reading the papers a number of years prior to that that a Mr. 
Edward Duck had created quite a disturbance at Gallon, Ohio, at the 
North Electric Co. He was from Toledo, a UAW-CIO organizer. 
Being in the Cleveland market, I looked up Mr. Duck. At the time, 
Mr. Duck had not been with the CIO for some time. He was selling 
the Encyclopedia Americana. 

So I promptly became a proud owner of the Encyclopedia Amer- 
icana and our association began. 

I put Mr. Duck in touch with the Detroit operators. Several of 
the operators I remember as Mr. Patterson, Mr. Berman, and others. 
They started to form a separate, independent union and draw up a 
charter and go through all the routine, because the feeling was that 
they had to have some respite from this constant harassment. 

Mr. May. The purpose of such a formation of a union was to combat 
the hold that local 985 and the association had on the Detroit area? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is right. We felt by harassing the union back 
"we would give them a little bit of their own medicine. 

Mr. May. Did you finance Mr. Duck in any fashion? 

Mr. Nemesh. I did at certain times when he ran short of funds 
and the operators didn't give him as much as he thought he ought to 
have for living expenses and general expenses. 

Mr. May. Did you furnish some office equipment? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes, I did. I had some used office equipment and I 
furnished that to him so he could set up his office and see what he 
could do. 

Mr. May. You had a strong desire that Mr. Duck be quite successful 
in this operation? 

Mr. Nemesh. Of course I did. 

Mr. May. Was he? 

Mr. Nemesh. No. He was for a little while and then, of course, I 
didn't know it but Mr. Duck was an alcoholic and he would take the 
bottle too literally and too often. Therefore, that collapsed and we 
weren't successful. 

Mr. May. Mr. Chairman, we had testimony from August Scholle, 
who at that time was head of the CIO in the State of Michigan. He 
Stated that Mr. Duck had approached him prior to this occasion and 
attempted to get a CIO charter which would embrace Detroit, Toledo, 
and the northern Ohio area, and he was turned down by the CIO. 

Mr. Nemesh. That is riirht. 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17573 

Mr. Mat. Mr. Duck then formed this independent union ? 

Mr. Nemesh. He attempted to affiliate himself with the CIO-UAW. 

Mr. May. But he did form an independent union and was unsuc- 
cessful ? 

Mr. Nejiesh. Yes. 

Mr. May. A^Tiile you were having difficulty with local 985 did you 
meet on some occasion with Mr. Cammarata, Mr. Vincent Meli, and 
Mr. William Bufalino? 

Mr. Nemesh. Are you referring the incident about the phonograph 
that was hijacked? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nemesh. We were having a lot of great difficulty and all this 
harassment. We felt sometime — you know, some days you get a 
break if you just look long enough. It so happens that one of the 
local operators whom we had sold to had a phonograph picked up. 
It turned out that the man that picked up that phonograph was a man 
that was working for Mr. Meli, a bartender or something. Naturally, 
Mr. IVIeli was concerned. He wanted to make restitution if the opera- 
tor whose box was picked up by a truck wouldn't prosecute. I was 
in Detroit one day and Mr. Meli and Mr. Cammarata came in. I was 
a little surprised. We had a conversation that took place. Mr. Bufa- 
lino also came in later. 

Mr. May. Mr. William Bufalino ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is right. 

Mr. May. Of the Teamsters Union ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. They wanted to make amends. Mr. Cammarata 
said that we were nice people and they were nice people and every- 
thing would be forgotten, and everything would be just rosy from 
then on in. 

Mr. May. "Wliat did Mr. Bufalino say on that occasion ? 

Mr. Nemesh. He didn't have too much to say. He just felt that we 
could get along now and there wouldn't be that constant harassment. 

Mr. ]VL\Y. Did Mr. Bufalino suggest that your company join his 
union ? 

Mr. NejMESh. At a later date that came about. 

Mr. A'Iay. He didn't suggest it at this meeting ? 

Mr. Nemesh. No. You see, we were distributoi*s and they had 
mostly an operators union that was set up for operators. 

Mr. May. Did Mr. Cammarata serve as a mediator in this dispute? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, I don't know that he was a mediator. He was 
in Detroit, maybe, and maybe he was called into it, knowing that we 
had had some business relationship with his son-in-law. I had met 
him before. I just assumed that he felt it would be a good medium to 
have to intercede. 

Mr. May. His function was sort of like a mediator ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. 

Mr. May. "Wliat was Mr. Bufalino doing there? Why was Mr. 
Bufalino present ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, Mr. Bufalino is a brother-in-law of Mr. Meli. 

Mr. May. Did Mr. Bufalino have an interest in INIr. IMeli's business? 

Mr. Nemesh. That I don't know, sir, except that I Imow of that 
relationship that I related before with Mr. Meli and the general 
conversation around Detroit that there is an interest in the Wurlitzer 
distributorship. 



17574 IIVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. May. Do you recall anything that Mr. Buf alino said that day ? 

Mr, Nemesh. Not specifically, sir. It has been quite a few years 
a^o. 

Mr. May. After this occasion, you had some temporary peace? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, yes, for a time. But it still continues on the 
basis that all the favoritism is still shown to our competitor, the 
Wurlitzer distributor. Operators are told if they want to jump a 
location or compete with somebody else, if they use Wurlitzer equip- 
ment they are given a pass, so to speak. 

Mr. May. Does that exist today, that situation ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is correct. 

Mr. May. After this meeting with Mr. Cammarata, Mr. Meli, and 
Mr. Bufalino, and the following temporai-y peace, there came an 
occasion when you were again harassed? You eventually signed 
with the union ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes, we signed a contract with the union. We had 
worked one out that we felt was equitable to our type of business, 
because we were ninning a training program to train these men. 
After all, our equipment is quite complex. We felt by training our 
men and having these men available as a ^raining ground for our 
customers, the mdustry would be better served. 

Mr. May. I don't miderstand w4iy you signed the contract with 
the union, Mr. Nemesh. 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, because they had already gone to the men and 
had signed up the men prior to that. 

Mr. May. Your employees wanted to join the union ? 

Mr. Nemesh. No; I don't think they wanted to, but they were 
talked into it, because everybody else was going to be in the union, 
and our competitor was, I believe, giving the union a headache because 
we weren't in. 

They were operating phonographs and we were not operating phono- 
graphs. We were strictly distributing, not competing with our 
customers. 

Mr. May. At this time you were distributors ? 

Mr. Nemesh. We were distributors right along. 

Mr. IVIay. And the contract that you signed was a contract which 
involved operators ; in that true ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes ; it was an operator's contract. 

Mr. May. Have your machines in the Detroit area recently been 
damaged ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Some of the operators have had their machines dam- 
aged by liquid solder, several of the operators. 

Mr. May. You are able to sell some machines in the Detroit area 
today, though ? 

Mr. Nemesh, Well, we are able to sell some ; that is correct. 

Mr. May. You are still having some trouble ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. We are having difficulties in marketing our 
equipment freely, without interference from the union and their busi- 
ness agents. 

The Chairman. Why did they give you trouble, this union, and 
not the others in the same business ? You are a member of the union, 
aren't you? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is true. But there is still that relationship and 
that friendship that exists between the brother-in-law of Mr. Bufalino 



EVTPROPER ACTIVmES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17575 

and the Wurlitzer distributor. I can't prove that he has an interest. 
It is just sort of general knowledge. I think that is one of the under- 
lying factors. 

The Chairman. At least he is favoring his brother-in-law to the 
extent that you say Buf alino is giving you trouble, although you are 
a member of the union. 

Mr. Nemesh. That is right. 

The Chairman. And he makes it difficult for you to make sales, 
whereas, he undertakes to make it easier for his brother-in-law to 
make sales ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is right. 

The Chairman. You are all members of the same union ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is right. 

The Chairman. You cannot account for it except for the marriage 
relationship? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is correct. 

Senator Curtis. What is the purpose of the union ? 

Mr. Nemesh. The purpose of the union ? 

Senator Curtis. As it relates to this business of yours. 

Mr. Nemesh. "Well, as far as we are concerned, we were paying as 
well prior to the time of our men joining the union as we are today. 

Senator Curtis. It had nothing to do with improving the wages, 
hours, and working conditions of your employees, did it? 

Mr. Nemesh. I don't think so, sir. 

Senator Curtis. It was a matter of financial control of the business ? 

Mr. Nemesh. That is right. 

Senator Curtis. And the union idea is being used for that purpose ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Surely. 

Senator Curtis. Do you think that union is a labor organization, as 
defined by law? 

Mr. Nemesh. Well, I don't see how it can be; self-employed people 
in that business, I dcn't see why they should have to belong to a union 
and pay $20 a month dues. 

Senator Curtis. It doesn't sound to me like a union, but it sounds 
like a conspiracy. 

Mr. Nemesh. I would say so, sir. 

Mr. May. We discussed the situation where your display window 
was broken by a metal bolt. On that occasion was the individual that 
caused the damage identified ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes ; that man was identified by one of our salesmen 
at the time. That was about the same time that this phonograph was 
picked up by that man that was driving that truck. It was either 
before or after. I am not quite sure now. 

Mr. Mat. Was that Mr. Cecil Watts, business agent of local 337 
of the Teamsters? 

Mr. Nemesh. Yes. 

Mr. May. He was identified by your employee, George Kelly ? 

Mr. Nemesh. Right. 

Mr. May. That is all, Mr, Chairman. 

The Chairman. Is there anything further ? 

If not, thank you very much. 

Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have had the testimony before 
the committee that a number of business agents of the Teamsters have 



17576 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

gone into the coin-machine business. In that connection, I would like 
to call Mr. Morris Coleman as the first of several business agents that 
we understand had some interest in this. 

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. Coleman. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF MORRIS COLEMAN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFORD ALLDER 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of business, and your 
residence. 

Mr. Coleman. Morris Coleman, 24330 Dante, Oak Park, Mich. 

The Chairman. What is your business or occupation, Mr. Coleman ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Are you a member of a union ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you have counsel present ? 

Mr. Coleman. I do. 

The Chairman. Identify yourself, Counsel. 

Mr. Allder. H. Clifford Allder, Washington, D.C. 

The Chairman. Do you know what I think about a fellow who is 
a member of the union who takes the fifth amendment and says that 
he honestly believes a truthful answer to that question might incrimi- 
nate him ? I think he is telling a falsehood. I think everybody else in 
here is thinking the same thing. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Coleman, you came originally from Joliet, 111., 
and you were bom September 24, 1914 ; is that right 'i 

Mr. Coleman. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. When did you leave Joliet ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestlj- 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Curtis. Are you referring to Joliet Penitentiary, Mr. 
Counsel, or the city of Joliet ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The city of Joliet. 

Senator (Iurtis. How would it incriminate you to leave a fine citv 
like Joliet, 111.? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer miglit tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Coleman is presently a business agent for Local 
337 of the Teamsters, which is the Teamster local that is run by Owen 
Bert Brennan, who is now a vice president of the Teamsters. 

According to the information that Mr. Coleman gave a member of 
our staff, he was hired by Jinuny Hoffa in about 1040 or 1041 to 
represent the Teamsters joint council in Detroit. 

Is that correct, Mr. Coleman ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Is that because the question involves the name 
of James Hoffa ? 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17577 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestlj'^ 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. All right ; proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Coleman has been arrested a number of times^ 
and was convicted twice, in 1945 and 1944. 

Is that correct? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. What was he convicted for, Mr. Counsel? 

Mr. Kennedy. While he was a business agent for the joint council, 
he was convicted for receiving stolen property and sentenced to pay 
a $300 fine. Then in 1946 he was indicted for extortion. He was 
sentenced to pay a $500 fine and put on 2 years' probation. 

Is that correct ? 

IVIr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I don't see how that could incriminate you, if you 
have already served your sentence after having been convicted. 

I don't see how, Mr. Chairman, that could tend to incriminate 
him. 

The Chairman. There is a statement here made by counsel to the 
effect that you have been convicted and sentenced according to what 
he has said, that might sound a bit incriminating unless you deny it. 

Do you want to deny that what he said is true? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Well, if you won't deny it, I will have to believe it. 

Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. He continued to hold his union position despite 
those two convictions, Mr. Chairman. 

He also had some outside interest. He was a partner of the Hotka 
Trucking Co. for 1952, 1953, 1954. 

Is that correct ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. It was not a profitable operation and was given 
up in 1954. He was also an equal partner with John Hotka in a 
company called the Bruce Coffee Vending Co. 

Is that right, Mr. Coleman ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. The operation started in January 1955 and operates 
about 125 coin operated vending machines, dispensing coffee, soup, 
ice cream. 

Is that right? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Is there anything about the coffee or the soft drinks 
or the soup or the milk or the ice cream that would incriminate you ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 



3C751— 59— pt. 4S 24 



17578 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. In 1956 the gross receipts were $48,000-plus. A 
net income was $8,000-plus. In 1955 the net income was just under 
$7,000. 

Is that correct ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. And also a third interest was held by his wife, an- 
other interest, Mr. Chairman, that he had, in the Bruce Vending Co., 
held in the name of his wife as sole owner of the company, operating 
175 cigarette vending machines. 

Is that correct ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He solicits and obtains locations and works on the 
books of accounts and repairs the machines. 

Is that right? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, could I call Mr. Kaplan to ask him 
what the gross receipts of that company have been ? 

The Chairman. Yes, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

Mr. Kennedy. Round off the gross receipts of 1953. 

Mr. Kaplan. From an examination of the books and records of the 
company, we found that the gross receipts of the company in 1953 
were almost $11,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1954? 

Mr. Kaplan. $61,000 

Mr. Kennedy. 1955 ? 

Mr. Kaplan. $130,000. 

Mr. Kennedy. And 1956 ? 

Mr. Kaplan. $158,000. 

The Chairman. What company is that ? 

Mr. Kennedy. The Bruce Vending Co. 

We have also found him in the John Hotka Trucking Co. 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the Bi-uce Coffee Vending Co. as a partner with 
John Hotka ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. My statements in connection with that have been 
verified by the records? 

Mr. Kaplan. An examination of the records and license records 
and accounting records. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Coleman represents the drivers of the Peter P. 
Ellis Trucking Co. ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it coiTect that we also found that he stores 
his vending machines in the Peter P. Ellis warehouse? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he has his machines sent to the Peter P. Ellis 
Trucking Co. to store his machines? 

Mr. Kaplan, Yes, sir. 



EVIPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17579 

Mr. Kennedy. And he represents those drivers ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he also stated to an investigator that Mr. 
Iloffa was well aware of the fact that he had an mterest in these 
cx)mpanies ? 

Mr. Kapi^n. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Is tliat correct, Mr. Coleman ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Mr. Kaplan, did you interview Mr. Coleman? 

Mr. Kapl.\n. Yes, sir; I did. 

The Chairman. You may then testify to any statement that Mr. 
Coleman made to you at the time you interviewed him. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chaimian, we have a rather important matter 
in connection with Mr. Coleman, in connection with which I would 
like to call a witness, if I may. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger. 

Mr. Chairman, we fomid Mr. Coleman in the coin machine business 
and in the trucking business. We have also gone into another facet 
of Mr. Coleman's activities which shows again a pattern for the 
Teamster business agent operations in the city of Detroit. 

Senator Curtis. Is Mr. Coleman still an employee of the Teamsters 
Union ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. He is a business agent with local 337. 

Senator Curtis. And he was during all of this period we are 
talking about ^ 

Mr. Kennedy. Yes. He had the two convictions and all of these 
outside interests. And he works for local 337, which is headed by 
Owen Bert Brennan, the vice president of the Teamsters. 

Do you want to swear Mr. Salinger? 

The Chairman. Do you solemnly swear the evidence you shall give 
before this Senate select conmiittee shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. Salinger. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF PIERRE E. G. SALINGER— Resumed 

The Chairman. State your name. 

Mr. Salinger. My name is Pierre Salinger. I reside in Washing- 
ton, D.C, and I am an investigator for this committee. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Salinger, you have made a study and investi- 
gation of the linen industry in the city of Detroit ? 

Mr. Salinger. I have, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have we found, as we found in the laundry industry 
in the city of Detroit, that certain business agents of the Teamsters, or 
representatives of the Teamsters, have worked in the interest of one 
or more companies ? 

Mr. Salinger. We have, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And have used their union position to further the 
interests of a company ? 

Mr. Salinger. We have, sir. 



17580 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Kennedy. And have we found that Mr. Coleman specifically has 
worked for a particular company in the city of Detroit? 
Mr. Salinger. We have, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you relate to the committee what we have 
found and what documents we have in connection with it? 

Mr. Salinger. First, sir, to give a little background on this, there 
is a large drug chain in the city of Detroit called the Kinsel Drug 
Stores. In early 1954 a building was purchased in Detroit which 
housed one of these Kinsel Drug Stores. It was purchased by a 
gentleman named Mr. Nick Genematas. Mr. Genematas is also the 
president of the Marathon Linen Service Co. in Detroit. 

After purchasing this building which housed this Kinsel Drug Store, 
he then attempted to get the account of the Kinsel Drug Stores and 
was successful in getting the account for this one drugstore which was 
located in the building he then owned. 

Subsequently he was able to negotiate a contract with the Kinsel 
Drug Stores for a 2-year period, covering all 23 of the Kinsel Drug 
Stores in the city of Detroit. 
Mr. Kennedy. What was he going to do for them ? 
Mr. Salinger. As a condition of getting this contract, the Marathon 
Linen Co. agreed to give the Kinsel drug chain a 5 percent cut in the 
prices they had to pay over those the supplier had at that time, the 
Progressive Linen Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. The companies we will be talking about, then, today,, 
are the Marathon and the Progressive ? 
Mr. Salinger. That is correct, sir. 

In addition, they also agreed, which was a side thing, but which 
was important as far as the Kinsel Drug Stores were concerned, they 
agreed to deliver the linens in individually wrapped packages. 

I might explain that the Progressive Linen Co. was a member of 
the association in Detroit, which at that time was called the Mich- 
igan Linen Board of Trade and then became known as the Michigan 
Linen Service Institute. This is an association made up of linen 
suppliers in the city. On the other hand, the Marathon Linen Co. 
was not a member of the association. They operated outside of the 
association as an independent. 

Mr. Kennedy. We made an investigation of this association, did we 
not? 

Mr, Salinger. We did, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. And subsequent to our investigation and the report 
that you made back to the committee, not in public session, but the 
report which has been mailed to members of the committee, that asso- 
ciation has gone out of existence? 
Mr. Salinger. The association has gone out of business. 

Soon after the contract was signed 

Mr. Kennedy. On the association, who was the head of the asso- 
ciation ? 

Mr. Salinger. The head of the association was Mr. Monroe Lake. 
Mr. Kennedy. TIow long had he been head of the association? 
Mr. Salinger. He had been head of the association since approxi- 
mately 1950 or 195 L 

Mr. Kennedy. By whom was he placed as head of the association ? 
Mr. Salinger. From my conversation with members of the linen 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES Ds THE LABOR FIELD 17581 

industry in Detroit, I was told that he had been pUiced there at the 
suggestion of Mr. James Hoffa. 

Mr. Kennedy. "Was he also an associate of Mr. Fitzgerald ? 

Mr. Salinger. He had operated out of Mr. Fitzgerald's office for 
a period of time on a project that he was interested in at that time. 

Soon after the contract was signed — it was signed on August 1, 1954 ; 
I have here a copy of the contract — soon after the contract was signed, 
the president of the Kinsel drug chain, Mr. William Downey, made a 
vacation trip to Montana, and while he was away to visit was paid 
to his office by Mr. Morris Coleman. 

I think maybe at this time, Mr. Kennedy, it might be good to read 
Mr. Downey's affidavit into the record in regard to this matter. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have an affidavit from this individual who is of 
some importance, Mr. Chairman. He has been in ill health, however. 
We felt that we could get the necessary information into the record 
through the affidavit. 

The Chairman. The affidavit may be printed in the record in full 
at this point. You may read the substance of it. 

Mr. Salinger. This is the affidavit of William D. Downey, who 
resides at 207 Abbey Road, Birmingham, Mich., and identifies himself 
as the president of the Kinsel Drug Co., a chain which operates some 
23 drugstores throughout the Detroit area. 

For the last 10 years, the Kinsel Drug Co. has been obtaining its linen supplies 
from the Progressive Linen Co. Some time in 1954 Kinsel's acquired an inde- 
pendent drug company which was located in a building owned by Mr. Nick 
Genematas. Mr. Genematas is the proprietor of the Marathon-Bryant Linen 
Supply Co. The Marathon Linen Co. had been supplying the service to this 
independent drug company and, following our acquisition of the store, they 
continued to service it. Mr. Genematas sought to take over the service at the 
remainder of the Kinsel Drug Stores in the Detroit metropolitan area. 

Some time in July of 19.54 they made an attractive proposal to us which in- 
cluded an overall 5 percent price reduction plus the delivery of the linens in 
individually wrapped packages. As a result of this offer, we signed a contract 
with Marathon Linen for a 2-year period. 

Following the signing of this contract, I took a vacation trip to Montana. 
In my absence, a call was made to my office by Mr. Morris Coleman, a business 
agent for local 337 of the Teamsters Union. Kinsel's has union contracts with 
three unions, one of which is local 337 of the Teamsters, the others being the 
Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union and the Retail Clerks Union, local 876. 

Upon my return to Detroit, Mr. Coleman came to see me and told me that he 
wanted to have Kinsel's return the linen service to Progressive Linen. Mr. 
Coleman stated that he did not want to see a price war start in the linen indus- 
try in Detroit, because it would adversely affect the wages of the laundry drivers 
who were members of the Teamsters Union. 

Mr. Kennedy. So this witness, a representative of the Teamsters 
Union, went to this company and told them they should not make 
u contract with the Marathon Linen Co. and should, in turn, give 
their business back to the Progressive ? 

Mr. Salinger. That is correct. The reason he gave was that he 
didn't want the price war to start, but we will go into that matter. 

Mr. Kennedy. And this company had contracts with the Teamsters 
Union ? 

Mr. Salinger. That is correct. They had contracts with local 337, 
and Mr. Coleman was the business agent and represented the Team- 
sters at the Kinsel drugstores. He was their active business agent. 

Mr. Ivennedy. As well as local 876 of the Retail Clerks, which at 
that time was a captive local of the Teamsters ? 

Mr. Salinger. That is correct. 



17582 IMPROPER ACTivrriES m the labor field 

I told Mr. Coleman that we had receive a price differential which was- 
attractive to the company and Mr. Coleman said they were not going to allow 
this. Following Mr. Coleman's visit, I talked to the Marathon Linen Co. and 
was told that the price cut would in no way be reflected in the drivers' earnings 
at Marathon. 

Mr. Coleman paid a second visit to me, this time in the company of Alex- 
Nichamin, who is one of the owners of Progressive Linen. At this meeting, Mr. 
Coleman was adamant that we give the business back to Progressive. His state- 
ments to me were more than a request. 

Following this visit, I received a telephone call from Mr. Joseph MaiuUo, 
who is the attorney for the Marathon-Bryant Linen Co. I told Mr. MaiuUo 
about Mr. Coleman's request that we give the service back to Progressive and 
he told me that he could straighten the whole problem out. He called me back 
later and told me that he had talked to Mr. James Hoffa of the Teamsters 
Union and that the whole matter had been straigthened out. 

Following this, however, I received another visit from Mr. Coleman, who 
insisted that we return to Progressive. Mr. Coleman said that Marathon was 
not in the linen association and the association did not want its members losing 
business to noiunembers. 

Following this visit, I discussed the entire matter with my attorney, Mr. 
Glen R. Miller, who advised me that in the interests of continuing good relations 
with the Teamsters Union, we should give the business hack to Progressive. 
Accordingly, we canceled the Marathon contract at all but the original drugstore- 
which was in the building owned by Mr. Nick Genematas. 

Mr. Kennedy. Who got the contract then ? 

Mr. Salinger. Progressive got it back and still has it. 

(The full affidavit referred to follows :) 

Affidavit 

July 17, 1958. 
State of Michigan, 
County of Wayne, ss: 

I, William D. Downey, who resides at 207 Abbey Road, Birmingham, Mich., 
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 affidavit is not the result 
of either threat or promise and is made with the understanding that it may be 
read at a public session of the Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities 
in the Labor or Management Field. 

I am the president of the Kinsel Drug Co., Detroit, Mich., a chain which 
operates some 23 drugstores throughout the Detroit area. I have served as 
president of this company since March 1958 and, prior to that, I was vice 
president and have been associated with the management of Kinsel Drug Stores 
since 1935. 

For the last 10 years, the Kinsel Drug Co. has been obtaining its linen supplies 
from the Progressive Linen Co. Sometime in 1954 Kinsel's acquired an inde- 
pendent drug company which was located in a building owned by Mr. Nick 
Genematas. Mr. Genematas is the proprietor of the Marathon-Bryant Linen 
Supply Co. The Marathon Linen Co. had been supplying the service to this inde- 
pendent drug company and, following our acquisition of the store, they continued 
to service it. Mr. Genematas sought to take over tlie service at the remainder of 
the Kinsel Drug Stores in the Detroit metropolitan area. Sometime in July of 
1954 tliey made an attractive proposal to us which included an overall 5 iKjrcent 
price reduction i)lus the delivery of the linens in individually wrapiMKi package*. 
As a result of this offer, we sipied a contract with Maratlion Linen f<»r a 2- 
year period. 

Following the signing of this contract, I took a vacation trip to Montana. In 
my ah.sonce, a call was made to my oflSce by Mr. Morris Coleman, a business agent 
for local 337 of the Teamsters Union. Kinsel's has union contracts with three 
unions, one of which is local 337 of the Teamsters, tlie others being the Hotel 
and Restaurant Workers Union and the Retail Clerks Union, local S7C. Upon 
my return to Detroit, Mr. Coleman came to see me and told mo that he wanted to 
have Kinsel's return the linen service to Progressive Linen. Mr. Coleman stated 
that he did not want to see a price war start in the linen industry in Detroit 
becau.se it would adversely affect the wages of the laimdry drivers who were 
members of the Teamsters Union. I told Mr. Coleman that we had received a 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17583 

price differential which was attractive to the company and Mr. Coleman said 
they were not going to allow this. Following Mr. Coleman's visit, I talked to the 
Marathon Linen Co. and was told that the price cut would in no way be reflected 
in the drivers' earnings at Marathon. 

Mr. Coleman paid a second visit to me, this time in the company of Alex 
Nichamin, who is one of the owners of Progressive Linen. At this meeting, Mr. 
Coleman was adamant that we give the business back to Progressive. His state- 
ments to me were more than a request. 

Following this visit, I received a telephone call from Mr. Joseph MaiuUo, who 
is the attorney for the Marathon-Bryant Linen Co. I told Mr. MaiuUo about Mr. 
Coleman's request that we give the service back to Progressive and he told me 
that he could straighten the whole problem out. He called me back later and 
told me that he had talked to Mr. James Hoffa of the Teamsters Union and that 
the whole matter had been straightened out. 

Following this, however, I received another visit from Mr. Coleman, who 
insisted that we return to Progressive. Mr. Coleman said that Marathon was 
not in the linen association and the association did not want its members losing 
business to nonmembers. 

Following this visit, I discussed the entire matter with my attorney, Mr. Glen 
R. Miller, who advised me that in the interests of continuing good relations with 
the Teamsters Union, we should give the business back to Progressive. Accord- 
ingly, we canceled the Marathon contract at all but the original drugstore which 
was in the building owned by Mr. Nick Genematas. 

I believe all the above statements to be the truth to the best of my knowledge^ 

William D. Downey. 

Dorothy Kemnitz, 
Notary Puilic in and for Wayne County, Michigan. 
My commission expires August 19, 1961. 

The Chairman. What was the intimation or tlireat that apparently 
caused them to give it back ? 

Mr. Salinger. I have some other documents here which bear directly 
on that, Senator. If I can go through these in chronoligcal order, I 
think it might give us a good picture on the situation. 

The Chairman. All right. I didn't know what other documents 
you had, but there is a connection ? 

Mr. Salinger. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Salinger. Mr, Downey's affidavit states that Mr. Maiullo had 
gotten in touch with Mr. Hoffa and the whole matter had been 
straightened out. As a matter of fact, on Friday, August 6, 1954, a 
meeting was held in Mr. Hoffa's office at the Teamsters Union at which,, 
among others, were present Mr. Hoft'a, Mr. Bert Brennan, Mr. William 
Genematas, the son of the president, and Mr. Joe Maiulio, his 
attorney. 

This is a memorandum of the meeting which was made by Mr. 
William Genematas right following the meeting, and was found in 
the files of the Marathon Linen Co. pursuant to a subpena we served 
upon them. 

Mr. Hoffa told Mr. Maiullo that his only interest was to see that his men did 
not suffer any pay cut. 

That is the principal substance of this memorandum. 

The Chairman. That memorandum may be made exhibit No. 83. 

(Memorandum referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 83" for refer- 
ence and will be fomid in the appendix on p. 17695.) 

Mr. Salinger. If we can make the contract part of that also, sir,. 
the 2-year contract signed between Marathon and the Kinsel Drug 
chain 



17584 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. You have already testified about that ? 

Mr. Salinger. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. It will be made exhibit No. 83-A and the memoran- 
dum exhibit No. 82. 

(Contract referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 83-A" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Salinger. A further memorandum found in the, files of the 
same company, dated August 19, 1954, reflects two conversations, one 
between Mr. William Genematas and Mr. Downey, who made the 
affidavit, and the other between Mr. George, who was the manager of 
the Marathon Linen Co., Mr. Genematas, and Mr. Morris Coleman. 

In the first instance, Mr. Downey told Mr. Genematas that the rea- 
son they had enlisted Mr. Coleman in this matter was because — 

he had acted like a gentleman whenever Kinsel's had negotiated with him for 
drivers and warehousemen contracts. In fact, Mr. Coleman had gone out of his 
way to help Kinsel's in a difficult negotiation with a very radical agent of an- 
other local. Mr. Downey said he would like to return this favor if possible. 

Further on in this memorandum it reflects the fact that Mr. George 
and Mr. Genematas went to visit Mr. Coleman, who told them that he 
had talked to no one about this but Mr. Monroe Lake, of the Michigan 
Linen Supply Board of Trade. Mr. Lake had been identified as the 
executive secretary of the association. 

The Chairman. That may be made Exhibit No. 84. 

(Memorandum referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 84" for refer- 
ence and may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Mr. Salinger. Of the following two memorandums, one is a letter 
from Mr. Genematas to Mr. Maiullo, and the second is a letter from 
Mr. Mauillo to Mr. Hoffa, reflecting the fact that the Marathon Linen 
Co., in order to meet Mr. Hoffa's objections about the price cut, 
negotiated a new contract with the Kinsel Drug chain which called 
for the exact same price that Progressive had paid. 

In other words, there was going to be no pay cut, so that no one could 
say that the drivers were going to get less money, because they were 
going to charge them exactly the same as the previous supplier had 
charged. 

As the letter to Mr. Hoffa points out, Mr. Maiullo writes : 

I believe that the matter is now satisfactorily taken care of, and inasmuch as 
no member of any local in the joint council will suffer a reduction in wages 
because of the reduction in price, the union no longer has any interest in this 
matter and it will become a matter of exchange of business. 

However, the record shows that the union continues to have an 
interest in it through Mr. Coleman, because on September 17, 1954, 
the Marathon Linen Service Co received a notice of cancellation from 
the Kinsel Drug chain. 

The Chairman. Lot's get those into the record. Do 3^011 have two 
letters? 

Mr. Salinger. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The two letters may be made exhibits 85-A and 
85-B, and the cancellation letter exhibit No. 85-C. 

(Documents referred to were marked "Exhibits 85-A, 85-B, and 
85-C" for reference and will be found in tlie Appendix on pp. 17696- 
17G98.) 

Mr. Salinger. Right after the cancellation, Mr. Maiullo again 
wrote a letter to Mr. Hoffa in which he stated the following, which I 



IMPROPER ACTIVITIES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17585 

think is significant in the question you asked a minute ago, Senator : 

On September 21, 1954, my son Joe had a conference with Mr. Glen R. Miller, 
attorney for Kinsel's, with regard to the matter. Miller stated that Kinsel was 
reluctant to take the action it did, but was forced to, to avoid future union 
trouble. Miller further stated that Kinsel's relationship with Coleman had 
always been harmonious in the past and to insure future harmony he advised 
Kinsel's Mr. Bill Downey to accede to Coleman's demand that Kinsel again do 
business with Progressive Linen Co. 

The Chairman. That letter may be made exhibit No. 85-D. 

(Letter referred to was marked ''Exhibit No. 85-D" for reference 
and will be found in the appendix on p. 17699.) 

The Chairman. Do I understand that Mr. Coleman had an interest 
in this Progressive Linen Co. ? 

Mr. Salinger. We have no indication that he had any interest in it. 
The implications of this correspondence and of the affidavit of Mr. 
Downey is that Mr. Coleman actively assisted the Progressive Linen 
Co., in getting the account of the Kinsel Drug Stores back from the 
Marathon Linen Co. and the further implication that he did so 
because the Marathon Linen Co. was outside of the association and the 
Progressive Linen Co. was inside the association. 

It is important to bear in mind that both the Progressive Linen Co. 
and the Marathon Linen Co. both have Teamster Union contracts, so it 
was not a question of preferring one company over another because 
one was union and the other nonunion. They were both union firms. 

When Mr. Downey says in his affidavit that Mr. Coleman made 
more than a request, a letter from Mr. Genematas to Mr. Hoffa on 
October 12, 1954, quotes Mr. Downey as saying that Mr. Coleman 
came to him after the meeting in Mr. Hoifa's office, after which every- 
thing was supposed to have been settled, and said, "I don't care what 
has happened. I want you to go back to Progressive, and now, not 
next week." 

The Chairman. Who said that? 

Mr. Salinger. That is what Mr. Downey quoted Mr. Coleman as 
saying. 

Mr. Kennedy. The point of this is that this was after the meeting 
in Hoffa 's office where they made a complaint to Hoffa that Coleman 
was doing this, was trying to cost them business, and Hoffa said he 
would straighten it out. 

Shortly afterward, Coleman came back and said, "I don't care what 
you think has been agreed to. You return the contract to Progressive.'^ 

Mr. Salinger. Yes. In fact, the understanding of what Mr. Hoffa 
said to them was that his main objection was that if it was a price- 
cutting matter, he didn't want the price war. But they had met that 
objection through the renegotiation of the new contract. 

So far as they were concerned, they met Mr. Hoffa's objections. 
After that, Mr. Coleman still Ment back to KinseFs Drug Stores and 
told them he wanted them to change back to the Progressive Linen Co. 
Following that, Marathon attempted for 4 months to get in touch 
with Mr. Hoffa to get it straightened out. 

Finally, on September 28, 1954, Mr. Nick Genematas wrote a letter 
to Hoffa which stated in part : 

For the last 4 months my sons Bill and George and Anthony Maiullo have been 
trying to see you. They have written and received no answer. I am writing 
and sending it to your home as I want you to be sure you will receive it. 



17586 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Your office has been a party in helping to destroy the free enterprise of America. 
A year ago, Klnsel Drug Stores, ui>on finding a Progressive Linen driver stealing, 
attempted to change siuppliers. The suppliers he called refused to serve him. 
When he found Marathon would and could serve him, he changed over. After 
he had signed the contract, he was forced to break it and return to his original 
supplier. 

Your office was the cause of the contract being broken. The general opinion 
is that 30 pieces of silver have been used. No doubt you have been very busy 
with the international union and have not kept up with the happenings in Detroit. 

That is signed by Mr. Genematas, president of the Kinsel Drug Co. 

The Chairman. 'That will be exhibit No. 86. 

(Letter referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 86" for reference and 
may be found in the files of the select committee.) 

Senator Curtis. Was there a reply to that letter ? 

Mr. Salinger. There was no reply in the files, and I understand 
there was no reply to it. The fact of the matter is that the Kinsel 
Drug Stores today are doing business with the Progressive Linen Co. 

Mr. Kennedy. So it shows clearly that the union was used to inter- 
fere to obtain the business for the Progressive Co. ? 

Mr. Salinger. That is correct. 

Mr, Kennedy, And Mr. Coleman was the instigator ? 

Mr. Salinger. That is correct. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the record also shows that despite the fact that 
this was all brought to the attention of Mr. Hoffa, no disciplinary 
action as far as the removal of Mr. Coleman was taken ? 

Mr. Salinger, No. As a matter of fact, Mr. Hoffa was quoted in 
one of his lettei's as telling Mr. Coleman not to have anything to do 
with it, and despite that, Mr. Coleman continued to do this. 

Mr, Kennedy. And it was all brought to Mr. Hoffa's attention but 
nothing happened ? 

Mr. Salinger. There are at least four or five letters to Mr. Hoffa, 
and we know of the meeting with Mr. Hoffa. 

Mr. Kennedy. Can you tell us about it, Mr. Coleman? 

TESTIMONY OF MORRIS COLEMAN, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFORD ALLDER— Resumed 

Mr. Coleman, I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You have your cigarette machines at the Progres- 
sive Linen Co., do you not ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. You also have your machine at the Commercial 
Carriers Co. ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr, Kennedy. And that was the company that set Mr. Hoffa and 
Mr. Brennan up in the trucking business, was it not? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. According to the records, Mr. Kaplan, did we find 
that Mr, Coleman received some money from local 876 of the Retail 
Clerks? 



IMPROPEB ACTIVmES INT THE LABOR FIELD 17587 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

Mr. E^APLAN. Yes, sir, in the year 1956. 

Mr. I^NNEDY. Now how much money did he receive ? 

Mr. ILvpLAN. $1,250. 

Mr. ICennedy. He received a total of $1,250 ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. IvENNEDY. That was at the same time you were working for 
the Teamsters Union. Would you tell us what you did with the 
$1,250? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Was it a bribe of some kind ? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Would you tell us how you have been able to run 
the trucking company, get business for the Progressive Linen Co., 
run the Bruce Coffee Vending Co., run and help your wife operate 
the Bruce Vending Co., which runs these cigarette machines, help 
her by soliciting and obtaining locations, working on the books of 
account, and repairing machines, receiving money from the Retail 
Clerks, and also being a full-time business agent of the Teamsters? 
Would you tell us how you could do all those things? 

Mr. Coleman. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. KJSNNEDY. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Are there any questions ? 

Mr. Coleman, you will remain under your present subpena, subject 
to being recalled at such time as the committee may desire to hear 
you further, upon reasonable notice being given to you or your 
attorney. Do you accept such recognizance ? 

Mr. Coleman. Yes, I do. 

Mr. KJENNEDY. Mr. Larry Welsh, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Do 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. Welsh. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF LAWRENCE WELSH, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIITORD ALLDER 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and 
your business or occupation. 

Mr. Welsh. My name is Lawrence Welsh. I reside at 15851 Ever- 
green, Detroit, Mich. 

The Chairman. Have you any sort of business or occupation ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment to the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

The Chairman. Do you have counsel ? 

Mr. Welsh. I do. 

The Chairman. Counsel, identify yourself. 

Mr. Allder. H. Clifford Allder, Washington, D.C. 



17588 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. All right. 

You say you do have a business? I didn't quite hear you. Did 
you say you had a business, or did you say you declined to answer? 

Mr. Allder. He declined to answer, Senator. 

The Chairman. Are you engaged in some kind of business, pro- 
fession, occupation, or enterprise that, if you divulged the name of 
it or the nature of it, such name or nature of it you think or honestly 
believe might tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I don't know whether you understood the question. 

Will you repeat the question to him, Mr. Reporter? 

(The question was read b;^ the reporter.) 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Welsh. I honestly feel that if I am forced to answer the ques- 
tion, I will be forced to be a witness against myself in violation of 
my rights under the U.S. Constitution. 

The Chairman. Then your answer is "Yes." You could have 
answered it that way. 

Proceed, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Welsh, you are an employee and have been an 
employee since June 1952, and the recording secretary and organizer 
since August 1952, of Teamster Local 985; is that right? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. For a crime committed while in the Army, you 
received a dishonorable discharge ; is that right ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

The Chairman. According to our information, you were convicted 
for sodomy and given a sentence for 5 years. Is that true or untrue ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Welsh, we first became interested in your activi- 
ties when Ziggy Snyder, who was a Teamster Union official, founded 
or established a nonunion carwash in the city of Detroit. 

Do you know anything about that, the Fort Wayne Manor Auto 
Wash, which was operated nonunion ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the 'fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. At the time he was operating the nonunion carwash, 
he was a union oflicial operating on the docks in the city of Detroit 
for Local 290, and at the same time he had a docking company which 
was also operated as nonunion. He had also received a 20- to"40-year 
sentence in Jackson State Penitenfiary for armed robbpiy. 

According to our information and the sworn testimony before the 
committee, you went to various companies and sought to get business 
for Ziggy Snyder's noimnion carwash; is that right? 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES EST THE LABOR FIELD 17589 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we had a witness appear before the 
committee who was working for Ziggy Snyder's nonunion carwash 
by the name of J. B. Wadlington. Wadlington testified last year 
that the day before he came to Washington, for an lli/^-hour day he 
received $1.60, and that his weekly wage at Ziggy Snyder's carwash 
would average between $6 and $7 and possibly up to $12 a week. 

Is that correct, Mr. Welsh ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy, William John NefF, manager of the Patent Garage, 
testified that soon after the Fort Wayne Manor Auto Wash appeared, 
he received a call from you, of Local 985, and you told him that some 
of your friends were opening a carwash, and that you wanted him 
to send the Patent Garage cars there to be washed. Is that right? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. And he told you at that time he was satisfied with 
the service he was getting from the Cass Auto Wash; is that right? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. And shortly after that a picket line appeared, a 
picket line of Local 985 appeared in front of the Cass Auto Wash; 
is that right? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said that shortly afterwards you then phoned 
him again and told him not to send his cars to the Cass Auto Wash 
because there was a picket line on the place, and again suggested 
that he send his cars to the Fort Wayne Manor Auto Wash of Ziggy 
Snyder ; is that right ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. We also had testimony from Bernard Bialkin, of 
the Cass Auto Wash, in connection with this matter. 

Do you know Bernard Bialkin, in front of whose business a picket 
line from the Local 985 was established ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy, Your brother operates a trucking company, does 
he not, Mr. Welsh, Joseph Welsh ? 

(The witness conferred with his counsel.) 



17590 iMPROPFm ACTivrrrES m the labor field 

Mr. Kennedy, And he also operated a vending company up until 
November of 1958 called the J. M. Welsh— no, the S. & W. Vending 
Co. of Pleasant Avenue, St. Clair Shores, Mich. ; is that right? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the information we have is that this company- 
was operated nonunion. Is that right ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitu- 
tion not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. We also understand you were distributing these 
weighing scales during 1953. Is that correct? 

Mr. Allder. He didn't hear the question, Mr. Kennedy. 

Mr. Kennedy. That you were operating a company which had some- 
100 Mills vending scales during the period of 1953. 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Kaplan, did Mr. Welsh state to you in an 
interview that he had Mills vending scales ? 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. He said he had approximately 100 of them ? 

Mr. KLaplan. Yes, sir. That he had organized the company and 
that he had been familiar with scale operations at the time he had 
joined 985, and that he had told Mr. Buf alino about this route. Then 
in response to questions as to whether he still had the route, he said 
he had sold it. We tried to determine who had been the purchaser 
and he said all he could remember was that it was a man from Ar- 
kansas, and that he sold a few locally. 

Mr. Kennedy. We had the testimony of Carl Hopkins, Mr. Welsh, 
that he received a call from you that you wanted him to buy some of 
these gum machines, and you offered to sell him the machines for $20 
each and he did purchase them. Is that right? 

TESTIMONY OF LAWRENCE WELSH, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIEFORD ALLDER— Resumed 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. Have you done any work for Mr. Angelo Meli, Mr. 

Welsh? ^ J ^ , 

Mr. Welstl I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. We have had testimony that you have gone around 
and have been the muscleman for local 985, you have gone around 
and threatened car wash owners that they better join the union or 
otherwise a picket line will be placed in front of them? 



IMPROPER ACTIVmES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17591 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. And the fact that you were not interested in the 
employees is shown by the testimony of Mrs. Anderson this morning, 
and the testimony that we had about you last year in connection with 
your trying to get business for Snyder's nonunion car wash ; isn't that 
correct ? 

Mr. AVelsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and ex- 
ercise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

Mr. Kennedy. And despite the development of these facts, you 
still remain a union official with local 985 ? 

Mr. Welsh. I respectfully decline to answer the question and exer- 
cise my privilege under the fifth amendment of the U.S. Constitution 
not to be a witness against myself. 

The Chairman. What is his position ? 

Mr. Kennedy. Recording secretary of local 985. 

The Chairman. You will remain under your present subpena sub- 
ject to being recalled at such time as the committee may desire to have 
further testimony from you. 

Do you agree to such recognizance upon receiving reasonable notice 
of time and place when the committee desires to hear you ? 

Mr. Welsh. Yes, sir, I do. 

The Chairman. Stand aside. Call the next witness. 

Mr. Kennedy. Cecil Watts. 

The Chairman. 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. Watts. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF CECIL WATTS, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLTFEORD ALLDER 

The Chairman. State your name, your place of residence, and your 
business or occupation. 

Mr. Watts. Cecil Watts, 18707 Lindsay, Detroit, Mich. 

The Chairman. Have you any business or occupation ? 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. How would it incriminate you ? 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. If you told how it would incriminate you, it would 
incriminate you ; is that right ? 

Mr. Watts. It respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Do you have a lawyer ? 

Mr. Watts. I do. 

The Chairman. What is his name ? 

Mr. Watts. H. Cliflord Allder. 

The Chairman. Thank you. Proceed. 

Senator Curtis. Did you provide your own attorney or did the unioiL 
provide the attorney? 



17592 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Cuetis. Mr. Chairman, I insist the witness answer the 
question. 

The Chairman. Under the rules of the committee, you are only 
permitted to have an attorney here of your choice. If you didn't pro- 
vide liim, the attorney will be excused. 

Did you provide yourself an attorney ? 

Senator Cuims. He took the fifth amendment on the question. 

Mr. Watts. Yes. 

The Chairman. You provided your own attorney ; is that right ? 

Mr. Watts. I said yes. 

The Chairman. Let's say it so I can hear you. 

You did provide your own attorney ? 

Mr. Watts. Yes. 

The Chairman. Now, do you feel incriminated ? 

Mr. Watts. No. 

The Chairman. Proceed. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Wn^^ts is a business agent for Teamster Local 
337 and has been for some 13 years. 

Is that right, Mr. Watts ? 

Mr. Watts. 1 respectfullv decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Prior to that, he was a business agent for the Cul- 
inary Workers and for a period of time he was — at least, the records 
of local 349 of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 
in Miami, the coin machine union down there, show that Watts was a 
member and was employed by the Master Music Corp. 

Is that right? 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. That company was run by the wife of James Pass- 
anante, who was a partner of Angelo Meli at a much earlier time in the 
Detroit jukebox operation. 

You have one conviction and a number of arrests. You were con- 
victed in 1946 for conspiracy, Mr. Watts ? 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. On the morning of January 23, 1950, an employee 
of the Music Systems, Inc., George Kelly, identified you as the indi- 
vidual throwing a bolt through the window of the company. 

Did you do that? 

Mr. Waits. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. He secured your license plate number and gave chase 
and was able to identify you as the occupant of the car. 

Subsequently, the assistant prosecuting attorney for Wayne County 
refused to have a warrant issued for you. Is that right ? 

Mr. Watps. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer miglit tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. On tlie ground tliat the witness had not seen the 
bolt actually leaving your hand ; is that correct? 

Mr. Watfs. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 



IMPROPER ACTIYITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 17593 

Mr. Kennedy. Isn't it correct that the assistant prosecuting at- 
torney is also a business partner of William Buf alino, or has been a 
business partner of William Bufalino ? 

Mr. Watps. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. I will strike that. 

The partner of the prosecuting attorney was a business partner of 
Mr. Bufalino; isn't that correct? 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy, Isn't it also correct that you have owned a number 
of jukebox routes youreelf ? 

Mr. Kaplan, what have we found as far as Mr. Watts is concerned ? 

TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR G. KAPLAN— Resumed 

Mr. KLaplan. Mr. Watts has had several jukebox coin machine and 
game operations under his wife's name, from at least 1953 on to the 
present. He has used several different names for these companies. 

i\Ir. Kennedy. From 1953 to 1958, Ruth's Music, which was 
jukeboxes? 

Mr. Kapl.\n. Yes. 

Mr. Kennedy. 1953 to 1955, R & C Coin Machine Co., and up to 
1957, Ruth's Ski Ball Machine ; is that right? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kennedy. Those are the companies ? 

Mr. ICvPLAN. And also Variety Music, which was being formed at 
the end of 1958, after this investigation had started. 

Mr. Kennedy. Will you tell us anything about your companies? 

TESTIMONY OF CECIL WATTS, ACCOMPANIED BY COUNSEL, 
H. CLIFFORD ALLDER— Resumed 

Mr. Watts, I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be 
lieve my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

JMr. Kennedy. Well, it is correct that 5^our companies are not or- 
ganized, isn't that right, IMr. Watts ? 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly be- 
lieve my ansAver might tend to incriminate me. 

]Mr. Kennedy. Despite all the effort in behalf of these other com- 
panies, to try to get others organized, you don't have any sticker on 
your own machines ; isn't that right ? 

Mr. Watts. I respectfully decline to answer because I honestly I 
believe my answer might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Kennedy. Mr. Chairman, we have some documents to put in, 
but I guess we can't do it. 

The Chairman. We will put them in Monday. 

The witness will remain mider his present subpena, subject to being 
recalled at such time as the committee may desire further testimony 
from him. Reasonable notice will be given your attorney. 

Do you accept that recogTiizance ? 

Mr, Watts. I do. 



36751— 59— pt. 48 23 



17594 IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE LABOR FIELD 

The Chairman. All right. 

The committee will stand in recess in public session mitil next 
Tuesday morning at 11 a.m. 

We will now resolve the committee into an executive session. 

(Members of the select committee present at time of recess: Sena- 
tors McClellan and Curtis.) 

(Whereupon, at 4 :40 p.m., the select committee recessed, to recon- 
vene at 11 a.m., Tuesday, April 14, 1959.) 



INVESTIGATION OF IMPROPER ACTIVITIES IN THE 
LABOR OR MANAGEMENT FIELD 



TUESDAY, APRIL 14, 1959 

U.S. Senate, 
Select Committee on Improper AcTivi'nES 

IN the Labor or Management Field, 

Washington^ D.G. 

The select committee met at 1 :40 p.m., pursuant to Senate Resolu- 
tion 44, agreed to February 2, 1959, in the caucus room. Senate Office 
Building, Senator Jolin L. McClellan (chairman of the select com- 
mittee) presiding. 

Present: Senator Jolin L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; Sena- 
tor Barry Goldwater, Republi