(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 organized crime in interstate commerce. Hearings before a Special Committee to Investigate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce, United States Senate, Eighty-first Congress, second session, pursuant to S. Res. 202 .."

tV^JKKX X^J «M^'i» -JJ ->-.■»' i-»r-< 




INVESTIGATION OF ORGANIZED CRIME 
IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE 

ORGANIZED CEIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

EIGHTY-SECOND CONGBESS 

FIRST SESSION 
PURSUANT TO 

S. Res. 202 

(81st Congress) 

AND 

S. Res. 129 

(82d Congress) 

A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INVESTIGATION OF 

ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



PART 13 



MAY 28; JUNE 19 AND AUG. 6, 1951 



MISCELLANEOUS WITNESSES 



Printed for the use of the Special Committee To Investigate 
Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce 




UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
85277 WASHINGTON : 1951 



./f 



1 



o i-O 



•^ 



INVESTIGATION OF ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE 

COMMERCE 



MONDAY, MAY 28, 1951 

United States Senate, 
Special Committee To Investigate 
Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce, 

Washingtoii, D. G. 

executive session 

The committee met, pursuant to call of the chairman, at 10 a. m., in 
room P-36, United States Capitol Building, Senator Herbert R. 
O'Conor (chairman) presiding. 

Present: Senators O'Conor, Kefauver, Tobey, and Hunt. 

Also present: Richard Moser, chief counsel; George Robinson, 
Alfred M. Klein, and Joseph L. Nellis. 

The Chairman. The hearing will please come to order. 

I sliould like to state for the record in opening the hearing, which 
is to be executive, that this hearing was called pursuant to a resolution 
passed by the entire membership, authorizing the chairman to appoint 
a subcommittee of the full committee, and pursuant to that I have 
designated and requested the Senator from New Hampshire, Mr. 
Tobey, and the Senator from Maryland, the presiding officer, to act 
as a subcommittee, and a quorum of one will be sufficient to conduct 
the hearing. 

Mr. Klein, will you call our first witness ? 

(Mr. Klein complies.) 

The Chairman. The hearing now being in progress, I would like 
to call Mr. George May. 

Mr. May. Where shall I sit, sir ? 

The Chairman. You are George May ? 

Mr. Mat. Yes. Could I have a drink of water? I have a cold, 
please. 

The Chairman. Certainly. 

Counsel, may I ask you to identify yourself, please, for the record. 

Mr. IMcFarland. My name is McFarland, and I am asking leave 
to appear here as counsel for Mr. May. 

The Chairman. We welcome you, sir, and we are very glad to have 
you, and we will be very glad to have you propound any questions you 
may care to ask. 

Senator Tobey. We ought to say also that we welcome Mr. May, 
iMid ^^•c> would have beeii glad to have welcomed him a long time since, 
rather than having him avoid and evade the committee, but before 
we get through with him, we will get the truth from him. 

The Chairman. Now, Mr. May, will you raise your right hand, 
please. 

1 



2 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COJMMERCE 

In tlie presence of the Almighty God, do you swear that the testi- 
mony which you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. May. I do. 

TESTIMONY OF GEOEGE S. MAY, CHICAGO, ILL., ACCOMPANIED BY 
RALPH S. McEARLAND, ATTORNEY 

The Chairman. Now, Mr. May, Mr. McFarland is your legal repre- 
sentative ; is that correct. 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

I would like to make a statement in order to clear up some of this 
misapprehension about me evading the committee. 

Senator Tobey. You will have plenty of opportunity to do that, sir, 
before we are through with you. 

The Chairman. We will just proceed with the questioning. May I 
suggest, Mr. McFarland, that any questions you feel disposed to ask, 
that we will be glad to have you do so. First we will proceed with the 
interrogation, and then at any time if you advise us when there are 
questions which you desire to ask, we will be very pleased to accord 
you the opportunity to do so. 

Mr. McFarland. Since the record shows that IVIr. May is respond- 
ing here to a subpena, and that he has now been sworn, I would like an 
opportunity, first, to give you a statement which I would like to read 
into the record. 

I think that I have sufficient copies of it here. 

I would like the opportunity of reading this into the record, so that 
it may state, and the record may show, our position, that is, the posi- 
tion of this witness, with respect to this hearing, because there will 
be a number of objections that we set forth in a statement of objections 
that we would like to have read into the record. 

The Chairman. Yes. What we might do, Counsel, is to consider 
this as filed in toto, so that it will be included in the record, in full. 

Mr. McFarland. As fully and to the same extent as if I had read 
it completely into the record? 

The Chairman. That is right. 

Mr. McFarland. In other words, there is a document presented here 
which is entitled "Statement of Objections," containing seven type- 
written pages, with two pages of photostatic reproductions of news 
items. 

The CiiAHtMAN. That is right. So as to be sure it is in toto, just as 
you have described it, we will have it marked at this point as "Wit- 
ness' Exhibit No. 1," and it will be included in the record. 

(The document referred to was marked as "Witness May's Exhibit 
No. 1," and reads as follows :) 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Eobinson, will you proceed. 

Mr. Eobinson. Mr. May, would you state what: your address is. 

Mr. May. I reside at 2620 North Shore Avenue, Chicago. 

Mr. Robinson. That is your home address? 

Mr. May. That is right. 

Mr Robinson. Do you have a business address, Mr. May ? 

Mr. May. Well, I have several ; my main address is the Engineering 
Building in Chicago. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 6 

Mr. Robinson. And you liave other branch offices, do you not? 

Mr. May. That is right. 

Mr EoBiNSON. Where are they located? 

Mr. May. "Well, there are two other main offices, 122 East Forty- 
second Street, New York City, and 291 Geary Street, San Francisco, 
Calif., and also the University Building, Montreal, Canada. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. INIay, Avhat is the exact name of your business? 

Mr. May. George S. May Co. 

]\Ir Robinson. And could you briefly describe for the benefit of 
the committee what the nature of that business is ? 

Mr. May. Well, we go into businesses and make a survey to see if 
there is anything wi-ong, first, and second, if there is anything wrong, 
to prescribe recommendations. 

Senator Tobey. What kind of businesses ? 

Mr. May. Any kind of business. We have been in 2,700 different 
kinds of businesses in 2G years. I have over 500 men at the present 
time making surveys in, w^ell, probably a hundred different kinds of 
businesses now. 

The Chairman. It is not, then, confined to one general type of 
operation ? 

Mr. May. No. If you will look at our ad in Nation's Business of 
today, you will see a very unusual ad, "We charge more than ajiy- 
bocly in the business. Why ?" 

Mr. Robinson. How long has the business been organized? 

Mr. JNIay. Twenty-seven years. 

Mr. Robinson. And you do business throughout the entire United 
States, do you? 

Mr. May. And several foreign countries. 

Mr. Robinson. Could you state approximately what the size of the 
business is, cloUarwise or volumewise ? 

Mr. May. Last year we did $4,162,000 worth of business. 

Senator Tobey. Do you mean that is your income? 

Mr. May. No, no, gross. 

Mr. McFarland. Gross business. 

Mr. May. Gross billings. 

Mr. Robinson. And I believe you stated to me at one time that the 
total amount that the business had taken in, and I assume that was 
the gross, since its organization, was around $72,000,000 ? 

Mr. May. $76,000,000 right now. 

Mr. Robinson. What sort of an advertising program do you have 
for your business, Mr. May? 

Mr. May. Every 3 weeks we have an advertisement in every daily 
newspaper in the United States. We are in 1,825 daily newspapers. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you have any other form of advertising for 
your business? 

Mr. ]\Iay. Well, in Nation's Business, and that is about gll in the 
way of publicity. 

We do have direct-mail advertising going out to 150,000 f rms. We 
spend ten cents of every dollar we take in for advertising. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you use any other vehicle except nf v^^spapers 
and periodicals for advertising and getting clients for your business? 

Mr. May. No. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. INIay, are you a member of any golf club ? 



4 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. jNIat. Well, I am sorr}^, but I must decline to answer that, on 
the ground that any answer I give may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. Now, ]Mr. Chairman, I submit that it is very evident 
tliat this bird is going to do everything but answer questions here. 
His brief shows here that he is going to put a clamp on his mouth and 
not answer any questions, and if that is going to be the case, why, we 
will just be wasting the time of this fellow here. Make your record, 
but we will cite him for contempt. 

Now, here is an eminently respectable businessman, but on the prima 
facie end of it, it will show that he is not a respectable businessman, 
and that he has had dealings and has been in cahoots with gamblers 
and all of the crooked element. You cannot stop that evidence from 
coming in, and all the due process that you have put into this docu- 
ment will not keep us from getting the evidence we are after, and you 
can put that in your pipe and smoke it. 

We are sick and tired of all of these criminals coming in here. 
Here he goes out and he plays with the scum of the earth, and we are 
not supposed to be able to find out about it. Well, we will find out 
about it, and we will get it before we get through. 

Mr. McFarland. Senator, I say this to you very respectfully, I 
cannot keep you from feeling as you appear to feel about Mr. May, 
and saying the things that you do say about him. 

Senator Tobey. I mean just what I say. We will establish it before 
we get through. 

Mr. McFabland. I don't doubt that at all. Personally, I think 
that you are mistaken. I don't believe that he associates with the 
scum of the earth, in spite of anything that may appear to the con- 
trary. I think that if you knew him as well as I know him, that you 
would probably find that he is a very reputable man. 

Senator Tobey. Yes. All right. 

Mr. McFarland. Despite anything to the contrary, and I say that 
in all due respect to you and to the committee. 

Mr. Robinson. May I ask this question? I believe the question 
I asked was whether or not Mr. May was a member of any golf club. 
I frankly do not see why membership in a golf club has any bearing 
on any particular crime. 

Mr. McFarland. Well, Mr. Robinson, as a matter of fact, you have 
information on that subject, haven't you? 

The Chairman. But, Counsel, that is not relevant or a proper 
ground for any objection, even though counsel does have information, 
he is not precluded from asking a question of the witness because 
he has information and, frankly, it is impossible for me to under- 
stand why a simple question of that kind would be of such a nature 
that the witness would refuse to answer it. The question was merely 
vi'hether he had membership in a golf club, and that is the only ques- 
tion that is before us. 

Mr. McFarland. That is right. And if the questioning were not to 
go beyond that point, there would be no objection to his answering it. 

The Chairman. Well, Counsel, being as eminent as you are in the 
profession, and as capable, and being a recognized lawyer of high 
standing, you know that we can ask only one question at a time. That 
is the only question that has been asked, and the witness undertakes 
to refuse to answer that. Each question must be decided on its own 
merits, as you know. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 5 

Mr. McFarland. Well, if I were confident of that fact, that by 
merely asking one question that it would not open the door, and per- 
haps preclude him from making objections to any other question, I 
would have no objection to his answering that. 

Mr. MosER. Well, Counsel, we are not going to limit our questions 
according to any such agreement as that. I think you should state 
for the record exactly the grounds, and in detail, on which you are 
instructing your witness not to answer. 

Mr. McFarland. Well, I am not instructing him not to answer. 

Mr. IMosER. Well, we will ask the witness to answer the question and 
state the reason. 

Mr. McFarlaxd. For the purpose of this question, may I read 
into the record certain objections that I think may apply to all of the 
questions that will be put to this witness. 

The Chairman. How can you do that, when you don't know what 
questions will be put? 

Mr. McFarland. Merely as to this particular question. 

The Chairman. I understood from you a minute ago that you had 
no objection to this particular question. 

]\Ir. MosER. Mr. McFarland, let's pass on this one question now, 
what is the decision? Are we going to answer it or not? 

]Mr. jNIcFarland. Let me raise this objection on his behalf. 

The Chairman. To this question ? 

Mr. McFarland. Yes, to this particular question. 

First of all, the committee has information upon that subject. 

Secondly, the question of membership in a golf club does not involve 
a question of interstate commerce, and also, that the question of mem- 
bership in a golf club would not aid this committee in any way in the 
discharge of its legislative function. 

Senator Tobet. That is not for you to say. You forget what posi- 
tion you are in. You are coming here before a Senate committee, 
and these questions have a collateral bearing on the things we know 
the answers to; we know the answers to many of the questions we 
ask before we ask them, and we are trying to produce a chain of evi- 
dence that will be given to the public at large before we get through. 
There is no question about that. 

We have reason to believe that this man is guilty of certain things, 
and we are going to examine him, and if he refuses to answer, we are 
going to cite him for contempt. 

Now, we are not going to play ducks and drakes here, we are not 
going to allow you to play ducks and drakes with this committee. You 
are not going to tell us what questions we are going to ask. We will 
ask what questions we want, and if we don't get the answer, you will 
go to jail for contempt, JMr. May. 

Mr. McFarland. And I don't pretend to tell the committee what 
questions you should ask or which questions you should not ask, but 
for the purpose of this record, because of the fact, as you have stated, 
it appears to me, that you do intend to develop a chain of evidence 

Senator Tobey. We certainly do, all the way down through. 

Mr. McFarland. That as you say, you may use, for the purpose of 
endeavoring to send this man to jail, for that very reason 

Senator Tobey. We hope to send every man to jail who is guilty of 
certain crimes in this country. Our job is to produce the picture, not 
to send them to jail, and we will produce that picture. 



Q ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. McFarland. My understanding is that your job is to seek 
information upon the subject covered by Kesolution 202, which will 
enable you, as a committee, to recommend to the Senate the passage 
of legislation that you feel is necessary or proper or required as the 
result of your investigation. 

The Chairman. Counsel, that obviously is one of the objectives 
of the committee, but now we are confronted with a specific question, 
and I did understand you to say before that you had no objection to 
that specific question. 

Now, are we to understand that you do raise an objection and advise 
3^our client not to answer ? 

(Witness confers with Mr. McFarland.) 

Mr, Mat. Mr. Robinson, would you repeat the question, please? 

Mr. Robinson. Are you a member of any golf club ? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. Robinson. What is the name of the club ? 

Mr. May. Well. I decline to answer that on the ground that any 
answer I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey, Let me say one thing. Here is a man, George S. 
May, who stands before us and tells us about his great business enter- 
prises, and his Nation-wide advertising campaigns, and that he is a re- 
spectable man, and so on and so forth, yet before a committee of his 
peers, a committee of the United States Senate, he hesitates a long 
while to answer a simple question, "iVre you a member of any golf 
club?" 

Before God, is your life so encumbered by these things that you 
cannot even answer a simple question of that sort? Why don't you 
just come out in the open and say, "I'll give you everything you want. 
I know that my life is an open book." 

And then, if your life is an open book, if you are clean and honest, 
just spill it, what do you want to cover up for? 

What a position for a man to be in, with his soul, that he cannot 
answer such a simple question. What is all of your money worth if you 
cannot look men in the face like the men who are sitting here? I 
would rather be dead than to be in that position myself, with all your 
money and all your power. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. May, would you specify under what Federal 
statute the answer to that question would tend to incriminate you? 

Mr. May. Well, I am not an attorney, Mr. Robinson. I cannot cite 
any statutes. I never read any. 

Mr. McFarland. Of course, tlie answer to that question, Mr. Rob- 
inson, is that that question might produce a link in a chain of proof 
that would lead to evidence of the violation of a Federal statute. 
^ As you know, a witness, where he claims the privilege of incrimina- 
tion, certainly does not have to designate the particular section or 
statute or law that he feels he would violate or he would be incrimi- 
nated by. 

The Chairman. Counsel, it certainly is obvious, however, that there 
are a number of objections that he cannot make, and that only matter 
that would enable him to avoid questioning by this committee on a 
Federal offense justifies him in that. 

Mr. McFarl.vnd. That is right. And it is only with respect, I 
would say, to a Federal offense that he raises this question of immunity. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 7 

Now, as a matter of procedure, and as a matter of law, if we were 
before a court, and a prosecutor said to Mr. May, "What particular 
statute is it that you feel that you might incriminate yourself with 
respect to," he would simply make the same answer, and there is not 
any judge that I have ever known or have ever heard of who would 
not say to the prosecutor, "That is an improper question." 

The Chairman. Well, it is very obvious to us that it is a proper 
question, and we, of course, afford you the opportunity to indicate to 
us otherwise, and that is why we do give you the chance now to state 
why you feel that an answer to this question might tend to incriminate 
you. 

Frankly, it does not appear clear to us. 

Mr. McFarland. Senator O'Conor, may I say just this, and again 
1 say this with absolute respect for the committee and for the members 
who are present here this morning ? 

I have tried to find out and to determine as best I can exactly what 
the law is with respect to the rights or the position of a witness who 
is called before a congressional committee and, frankly, we have re- 
viewed the law clear back to, I think, the very first case that was 
decided, and it appears that a witness who comes before a congressional 
committee is in an entirely different position than a witness who ap- 
pears before any other governmental body, particularly with respect 
to the judiciary, and in this sense, you say that you cannot see, and 
that you do not Ijelieve that the answer to a particular question would 
furnish a link in a chain of proof. 

Now, if we were before a court, and that question was put to the 
witness, and the witness refused to answer, we would then be before 
a judge who could say "Yes" or "No." But if this witness waives any 
of his constitutional rights and opens up the door in even the slight- 
est, it is my belief that he would thereby waive the immunity, not only 
of the Constitution, but the immunity of certain Federal statutes, 
and for that reason he is put in the position where he either has to 
be absolutely right or he will be indicted for contempt, and he might 
be convicted for contempt. 

Mr. Moser. Now, look, Counsel, you have given a long dissertation 
on this subject, but the fact is that he has been asked a very simple 
question. Let us make it a square issue now. Your client is going 
to take the chance now on deciding whether or not he is going to 
answer the question or be guilty of contempt. Mr. Robinson, will you 
please ask the question again, or will the stenographer please read it, 
and then let him decide specifically what the chances are that he is 
going to take. 

Mr. Robinson. I will repeat the question. 

Will you name the country club of which you are a member? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question on the ground that any 
evidence I give might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Just at this juncture, the committee instructs the 
witness to answer the question. 

IMr. McFarland. Do you decline for that reason ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer on the grounds I just stated. 

The Chairman. All right. Next question. 

Mr. Robinson. Now I am going to ask you a fair question, Mr. May. 

Is the refusal on your part to answer these questions based upon the 
fact that they may tend to incriminate you, or are you fearful of some 



S ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

physical injury as a result of any information you might give to this 

Mr. May. I will be glad to answer that. My refusal is based 
entirely both from the Federal and State point of view, on the point 
that any evidence I give might be used against me in both Federal 
and State courts. 

Mr. MosEK. In a criminal proceeding? 

Mr. May. That is right. There are criminal proceedings pending 
against me in Cook County, 111., now. 

Mr. EoBiNsoN. And it is not through any fear of any injury which 
you may suffer as a result of any testimony you might give here? 

Mr. May. If it was not for that, I would be glad to cooperate ^yith 
this committee, and I am not trying to flaunt the committee, I am just 
trying to protect my own righs. I certainly do not want to be 
discourteous. 

Mr. KoBiNf?ON. Well, would the name of a country club by the name 
of the Tam O'Shanter Country Club, which is located outside of 
Chicago, would that be the correct name ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that one question, because one 
question leads to another, and I must decline to answer it because 
any answer I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. McFarland. If it would aid the committee, why doesn't the 
committee assume that? 

The Chairman. If you will stay on your side, we will stay on ours. 
Please do not tell us what we are to do. We are well aware of our 
rights, and we want to accord you an opportunity to avail yourself of 
yours. 

Mr. May. I am not trying to be disrespectful. I am trying to 
cooperate. 

Mr. Robinson. May I make this suggestion, from the viewpoint of 
saving time, that if the witness refuses to answer it will be under- 
stood that he will be directed to answer by the chairman. 

The Chairman. Yes. It might expedite matters, rather than stop- 
ping after each question, to say that the chairman instructs you to 
answer it, and then Mr. May will repeat his declination, and if it is 
understood that is to be the procedure on each of the questions, that 
we instruct the witness to answer, and if he declines in the first instance, 
that he will have declined again? 

Mr. McFarland. May it be further understood that all of the 
objections set forth in this formal statement of objections are to be 
considered as made to each question put to the witness. 

The Chairman. That is right. In other words, at the outset he has 
stated this as a general attitude and bearing. 

Mr. May. May I have another drink of water ? 

The Chairman. Help yourself. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. May, can you describe to the committee the 
type of business that vour company performs services for? 

Mr. May. Well, the first thing we do 

Mr. McFarland. When vou say "vour company," you are referring 
to tha George S. May Co. ; is that right? 

Mr. Robinson. Yes ; the George S. May Co. 

Mr. May. Tlie first thing we do is to solicit you as a manufacturer, 
a businessman, or a banker, to come in and make a survey, and we 
charge you $100 for that survey. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 9 

Then Ave send in two men, and we oet about 50 new jobs every week. 
At the present time we have nearly 'iOO waiting that we cannot start, 
most of it being defense work for the Government. 

We come in and make the survey, and then we bring in the report, 
and we say to you, ''Here is what we can do," and then you decide 
whether to go ahead with it or not, and if you do, then we go into the 
work, and for that work we charge $20 an hour per man to make those 
recommendations. 

We have no contracts with any concern, and I could be out of busi- 
ness at 6 o'clock tonight if everybody wanted to terminate their serv- 
ices. We have no set system. 

I started in business February 1, 1925, and I have had 26,700 clients 
in that time. 

Mr. RoBiNSOX. Well, is there any particular type of business that 
you serve more than any other ? 

Mr. May. We have had everything from cemeteries to governments. 
We organized several governments. 

The Chairman. Well, do you have a staff including experts in dif- 
ferent fields of operation, so that if tomorrow an engineering firm in 
New York would request your services, and the next day a totally 
different operation in the South requested your services, that you 
would have experts whom you would be able to send to each of those 
places ? 

Mr. May. You must be quite familiar with the psychology of our 
business. If we have a furniture job, and we had a furniture man and 
a foundry man in our place, one who is experienced or versed in those 
two different trades, we would only send the foundry man to the fur- 
niture factory, because he most likely would see things that the furni- 
ture man would not see. 

Mr. Robinson. Excuse me. Had you finished, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Robinson. Does your company perform services for companies 
like General Motors? 

Mr. ]May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Or Chrysler? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you had those companies as clients? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. You mentioned a moment ago of the reorganization 
of several governments. Could you specify what they were ? 

Mr. May. I forget how many Provinces of Canada we have had, 
but we have had Saskatchewan and Alberta, and a couple of others. 
I don't get out on these jobs myself. We have organized cities, mu- 
nicipal governments, and we had one in your State, Senator. 

Senator Tobey. What town was that ? 

Mr. May. Manchester, I believe, ;Manchester or Concord, several 
years ago. 

Senator Tobey. Do you liave copies of the ad? that you put out, 
soliciting business? 

Mr. ]\Iay. No. We just run one-sentence ads on the theory that if 
you look at it you have got to read it. Right now, as I said, our ad is 
a very daring ad, and it reads : 

We char,tj;e more than anybody else in the business. Why? 



10 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

And that has not been run, an ad of that kind has never been run 
before. 

The Chaieman. Was that in Nation's Business? 

Mr. May. Yes, and in every newspaper in the United States. 

The last ad that we ran, read : 

The road to bankruptcy is paved with wasted assets. 

These are all one-sentence ads, all the time, and if you will look in 
the daily newspapers on Mondays and Tuesdays every 3 weeks, you 
will see that ad on the financial page. 

Mr. Robinson. Can you name any other companies of the size and 
stature of General Motors with whom you have had contracts ? 

Mr. IVIay. Offhand, I cannot. We are under $100,000 bond, every 
employee I have with us is under bond, with the U. S. F. & G. of 
Baltimore, not to divulge the names of the companies, and I could be 
held for $100,000 if this information got out. 

Now, you asked me about those two companies, and I have worked 
a lot for General Motors at different times. 

Mr. MosEB. Why is the information with regard to who your clients 
are confidential? 

Mr. May. Because it is confidential information. A lot of con- 
cerns — suppose you are in the washing-machine business, let us take 
Maytag, up at Newton, Iowa, and you have us in there, and you do not 
want the Thor machine to know that you have got us in there — you 
see, it is confidential. Our work is very confidential. We remove 
presidents and we remove vice presidents, and we go into banks and 
make recommendations. 

Mr. MosER. You are rendering an ordinary professional service, 
aren't you ? 

Mr. May. Yes ; but it is very confidential. Nobody gets a copy of our 
report, onl}^ the president. It is very highly confidential. 

Mr. MosER. I should think you would be proud of the people you 
have as customers. 

Mr. May. We are. But we are under bond not to give that informa- 
tion out. 

Mr. MosER. Don't your competitors state who their customers are? 

Mr. McFarland. Mr. Moser, aren't we getting a little far afield ? 

Mr. MosER. No; we are trying to ascertain the character of this 
man's business. It seems peculiar that anyone in an ordinary profes- 
sion or business should think that it had to be kept secret. 

Mr. McFarland. Let me ask you, wdiat would this have to do with 
organized crime? 

Mr. INIosER. Are you objecting to the question? 

Mr. McFarland. No ; I am just inquiring. 

The Chairman, Counsel, it seems to us that it is pertinent to the 
inquiry of the witness, in a general way, not every detail of his busi- 
ness, but just in a general way, who his clientele is, and in what par- 
ticular fields of operation he is engaged. 

Mr. May. Let me answer that question, if I may. This client was 
with me last Wednesday night, and I will answer your question in 
detail, and take a chance. I am just stating what happened there. 

Mr. C. C. Johnson, president of an oil company, I forget the name, 
it is a grease company, I think it is Esco, came to see me last Wednes- 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE H 

day nifiht and had dinner with me, and he said, "You have told me 
probably a hundred things, and ninety of Ihem I did not like." 

Now, this may answer your question, "But it was good for me, and 
I took it." And he has paid us a tremendous sum of money, $65,000, 
and we will probably be there another year. 

Understand now, he can cancel out any time he wants to. There are 
certain things that we found in that company that I could not dividge 
under any oath, it is too highly confidential. 

The Chairman. Of course, you realize you were not asked that 
question. 

Mr. May. No; but "we run into a lot of defalcations, and a lot of 
income-tax trouble, and we have reported many cases to the Internal 
Revenue Department. 

Mr. MosER. You have reported cases of your clients to the Income 
Tax Department? 

Mr. May. Yes ; where certain things were not right. We consider 
that our duty, to do that. 

Senator Tobey. Did you also report when you saw evidences of 
gambling going on, where they were breaking the laws of Illinois? 
Did you take that to the authorities in Illinois? 

Mr. May. Well, I am talking about 

Senator Tobey. No ; that is the question. Did you or did you not? 

Mr. May. I am talking about my clients. 

Senator Tobey. Answer that question. 

Mr. May. I don't understand. 

Senator Tobey. Well, you are full of self-righteousness because you 
take information about income-tax evasion to the authorities, and 
that is very commendable; but when there came to your notice evi- 
dences of gambling in Illinois, which is illegal in the State of Illinois, 
did you then take that information to the proper authorities? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question. 

Senator Tobey. Why? 

Mr. May. It might incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. Oh, so you hold your self-righteousness in your 
right hand, and your left hand does not know what you are doing? 
So you report any irregidarities you find as to income-tax matters, 
but not as to gambling matters ? 

Mr. May. I cannot answer that. 

Senator Tobey. Why can't you answer it? 

Mr. May. It might incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. Well, you are going to be in a hot spot before we get 
through wath you, I will tell you that. 

Now, do you know Tony Accardo ? 

Mr. May. Never heard of him. 

Senator Tobey. Jake Guzik ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Senator Tobey. Fischetti? 

Mr. May. I don't know him. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know the Capone mob or the remnants 
of it? 

Mr. May. All I know is what I have heard of it. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know them ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Senator Tobey. None of them? 



12 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mat. No, sir. 

Senator Tobey. What ai^e you indicted for in Illinois ? 

Mr. McFarland. He did not say that he was indicted. 

Senator Tobey. Well, what is the charge against you there? 

Mr. May. It is in that report. 

Senator Tobey. I know, but what is the charge ? You tell me. 

Mr. May. I don't know. 

Senator Tobey. Do you mean that he doesn't know what the charge 
is against him? 

Mr. McFari.and. Just a minute. He is under a ruling for contempt 
in the State of Illinois, and the statute of limitations, as we have set 
forth in our statement of objections, has not run. We have reason 
to believe, as is set forth in that statement of objections, that there 
is pending and has been pending since last July in Cook County, 111., 
either an indictment for the violation — or a proceeding, i-ather than 
an indictment — a proceeding before a grand jury to obtain an indict- 
ment eitlier for violation of gambling laws or a conspiracy to violate 
the gambling laws. 

Senator Tobey. Yes. 

Mr. May. If this committee was in session on January 5 I would 
answer every question that was asked me. 

Senator Tobey. January 5 last year or next year? 

Mr. May. If it was in session I would answer every question, and 
that ought to prove my sincerity to you. If you could get an agree- 
mePit from John Bnyle not to prosecute me, I would testify tomorrow. 

Senator Tobey. Who is John Boyle, the Democratic national chair- 
man ? 

Mr. May. No; the State's attorney in Cook County, 111. I am sin- 
cerely afraid of him, and I am honest about this. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. May, may I ask you a question in connection 
with your last statement? I understand that you say that you would 
give full information to this committee if it were not for the fact that 
Mr. Boyle, who is State's attorney of Cook County, would take some 
action against you ; is that correct? 

Mr. May. Certainly. 

Mr. EoBiNSON. Is that the basis upon which you are refusing t* 
answer these questions ? 

]Mr. May. It certainly is. 

Mr. McFarland. He has answered 

Mr. Robinson. Wait a minute. Let the witness answer the question. 
The answer was "Certainly." And it is not on the basis that it would 
tend to incriminate you so far as any Federal statute is concerned; 
isn't that correct? 

Mr. May. I don't know the Federal statute. I just made that state- 
ment to include it. There are newspaper clippings from the Chicago 
Ti'ibune and the Chicago Daily News, that if they can get me to testify 
before this committee, they will then indict me for something there. 

Mr. Robinson. You are speaking of a State violation ? 

Mr. May. Yes; because so far no Federal violation has been 
charged. 

Mr. jNIoser. I tliink it has been made clear that the claim of 
iinmunity is based uiK)n the fear of prosecution for the violation of a 
State law, and not upon the fear of the violation of a Federal law. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 15t 

Mr. McFarland. The answer to that, so that this record will be 
clear, that is the statement of Mr. ISIoser as counsel, and it is not 
supi)orted by the answers which have been given to some prior ques- 
tions. The vritness said that he refused to answer these questions 
for fear of incrimination, both with respect to Federal and State 
charo-es, and he said tliat witli respect to a Federal charge that none 
had been brought against him yet, but that does not mean that they 
will not be brought. 

The Chairman. The committee is of the exact opinion as expressed 
by Ml". Moser, that thus far there has not been a scintilla of evidence, 
there has not been the slightest indication that the witness is refusing 
to answer on the ground tluit such answers might incriminate ]\im 
in a Federal offense. 

Mr. May. 1 said that in orie of my answers. I said that in one of 
my answers a while ago, both Federal and State. 

JVIr. ]MosER. We think the record is clear and we will stand on 
the record. 

l*roceed with the examination. 

Tlie Chairman. Yes : proceed, Mr. Robinson. 

ISIr. Robinson. There was one other statement made in response 
to Senator Tobey's question, I believe, and that was that you had 
never heard of Tony Accardo. 
. ]Mr. May. I did not know him. He asked me if I kneAV him. 

Mr. Robinson. I think the question was whether you had heard 
of him, and the answer was that you never heard of him. 

Mr. May. He asked if I knew him. 

Mr. Robinson. But you have heard of him ? 

Mr. May. Certainly. 

Mr. Robinson. You do not know him ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Mr. ]\IosER. Have you ever met him ? 

Mr. May. No, sir; I never had any occasion to meet those fellows. 

Mr. Robinson. What is your position with the May Engineering 
Co., Mr. May? 

Mv. May. I am managing partner. I have a partnership with 
my three children, and I am managing partner. 

Mv. Robinson. It is not a corporation ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. AVe have a corporation that is a holding company 
that owns all the assets, and the partnership leases from the holding 
company the assets of the holding company. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, without going into any detail, what functions 
do you ])erform for the company, other than the general operation 
of tiie administration of the business ? 

]\Ir. May. Well, we have a strict line of authority in the company, 
and I only deal through one man, John Paul Jones, my general 
manager. I never go below him. If an engineer writes me a letter, 
I turn it over to Jones. So my job is managing Jones. 

Mr. Robinson. Does all your business come from your adver- 
tising? 

Mr. May. None of it — directly. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you travel throughout the country yourself? 

Mr. May. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Robinson. And do you make contacts with businessmen? 

85277— 51— pt. 13 2 



14 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Mat. Yes, sir. I was on the road during the time when I was 
catching the devil for not being with you fellows. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, do you have other means of making contacts 
with businessmen, other than traveling throughout the country? 

Mr. May. I liave about 125 men who do nothing all day long except 
to call on concerns, trying to sell them this preliminary survey. 

Mr. Robinson. I am speaking particularly of yourself; do you have 
any other way of making contacts with businessmen? 

Mr. Mat. Just calling them on the phone, or talking to them, 
wherever there is trouble. My principal ad, you asked me about one 
of my ads, and the best ad we ever run is that : 

A good manager only concerns himself with variations from standard. 

So my job is to watch this- 



Senator Tobet. That is kind of a platitude, isn't it : "A good man- 
ager only concerns himself with variations from standard?" 

Mr. Mat. That is right. We have a certain standard in all three 
of our divisions, and when it falls below that, that is my job. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you occasionally make contact with these bus- 
inessmen at the golf club of which you are a member ? 

Mr. Mat. I did not get that question. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you make contact with the businessmen through 
the golf club of which you are a member? 

Mr. Mat. That is all done by telephone. I hang on the telephone 
all day long. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, do you have any financial interest in the golf 
club of which you are a member ? 

Mr. Mat. I must decline to answer that, Mr. Robinson, on the 
gound that any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Would you specify to the committee what the com- 
pany called Tam O'Shanter Inc. is, if you know ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that one also, on the same 
grounds, that any testimony I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Witness, is this statement filed by you ? 

Mr. McFarland. It is filed by me as his attorney. 

Mr. MosER. But he authorized its filing? Do you authorize its 
filing ? 

Mr. McFarland. Yes, he does. 

Mr. Mat. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. You do? 

Mr. Mat. Yes. 

Senator Tobet. Have you read the statement yourself ? 

Mr. Mat. Yes, I read it on the plane coming down here last night. 

Senator Tobet. And do you approve of it ? 

Mr. Mat. Well, he is my attorney. 

Senator Tobet. No ; answer the question. Do you approve it? 

Mr. Mat. Certainly. 

Mr. Moser. Is the Tam O'Shanter Inc. a nonprofit organization? 

Mr. Mat. I must decline to answer. 

Mr. Moser. I call your attention to this fact : You have stated in this 
statement, which you have authorized 

Mr. McFarland. That is my statement, not his statement. 

Mr. Moser. But you have filed it on his behalf, and it says that the 
Tam O'Shanter Country Club is a nonprofit corporation. Now, do 
you still refuse to answer my question ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 15 

Mr. Mat. Well, I don't know. 

Mr. MosER. Well, will you decide ? 

The Chairman. You may consult with your counsel and then 
answer. 

(Mr. May consulted with his attorney, Mr. McFarland.) 

Senator Tobey. And nonprofit means directly or indirectly. 

The Chairman. What is your answer ? 

ISIr. ISIay. It is incorporated as a nonprofit organization under the 
laws of the State of Illinois. 

Mr. MosER. Excuse me just a second, please. 

]Mr. KoBiNsoN. All right ; go ahead. 

Mr. MosER. Does the Tam O'Shanter Country Club purchase any 
materials from outside the State of Illinois ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Mr. MosER. Does it receive any information used in connection with 
its operations from outside the State of Illinois ? 

Mr. May. No, sir, not to my knowledge. 

Mr. MosER. What is the character of your knowledge of the opera- 
tions of the Tam O'Shanter Country Club? 

Mr. May. Well, only what I get from my managers. 

Mr. MosER. Your managers? 

Mr. May. Yes; my main business is engineering, that is my bread 
and butter. 

Mr. MoSER. You have raised the question as to the method of the 
operation of this country club, and I would like to go into it in some 
detail. As to your managers, are they employed by you ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground that 
it will lead to other questions that may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Moser. My position is that you have opened the door with 
regard to the operation of this country club, and we would like to 
ascertain whether its operations are such as to involve any interstate 
activities outside of the State of Illinois. 

Mr. May. I can answer that. It does not involve those activities. 

Mr. Moser. You say that generally. We want to be specific. 

Mr. May. I will say it specifically. 

Senator Tobey. Have you ever been in the Tam O'Shanter Country 
Club? . 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, in that it might lead to 
other questions 

Senator Tobey. Why? 

Mr. May. Because it might lead to other questions 

Senator Tobey. To your knowledge, are there any slot machines in 
the Tam O'Shanter Country Club ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground that any in- 
formation I may give may tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. How can it incriminate you if there is nothing 
illegal about it ? 

Mr. May. I would be indicted in Cook County. 

Senator Tobey. They cannot do anything if you are not guilty, can 
they ? 

Mr. MosER. When you are at this country club do you ever telephone 
to your clients outside the State of Illinois. 



16 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. ]May. All of my telephoning is done from 205 West Wacker 
Drive, where I spend practically all of my time, and New York and 
San Francisco and Montreal. 

Mr. JNIosER. Do you ever discuss your engineering business with any 
of the members of the club while you are at the club ? 

Mr. Mat. I don't remember ever discussing anything with them— 
Well, I don't because I don't transact business out there in the country 
club. 

Mr. MosER. Who operates the club ? 

Mr. May. A board of directors. 

Mr. MosER. A board of directors? 

Mr. ]VL\Y. Yes. 

Mr. MosER. Where do they live ? 

Mr. May. I don't know their addresses. I knoAV about where they 
live. • 

]\Ir. MosER. What are their names ? 

Mr. May. I cannot give you that information, because 

Mr. MosER. How could that incriminate you ? 

INIr. May. I feel that it would. I don't know. 

Mr. MosER. What are the names of the directors ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that on the ground that it might tend 
to incriminate me. 

The CHAiR:\rAN. Is it a matter of record ? 

INIr. May. Certainly. 

Mr. McFarland. Just a moment. You say it is a matter of record ? 
I doubt that it is officially a matter of record. 

Senator Tobey. Well, Mr. Counsel, don't they have to hold direc- 
tor.-;' meetings once in a while, or is that a pro forma thing? 

Mr. IMcFarland. No. I believe from what I know, that they do 
have directors' meetings. 

Senator Tobey. There must be a record kept by the clerk of those 
directors' meetings. 

Mr. McFarland. Well, I am not connected with the Tam O'Shanter 
Couritry Club; no, sir. 

The Chairman. Let us ask the witness, not counsel. 

Senator ToBiiY. ]\Ir. Witness, the board of directors holds meetings 
once ill a while ; does it not ? 

Mr. May. I will decline to answer that question on the ground that 
it might lead to other questions which might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know whether or not records are kept by 
the directors? 

]Mr. May. I decline to answer that. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know who the directors are ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer. 

Senator Tobey. Or the clerk? 

Ml'. May. I decline to answer. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know where the records are kept? 

Mr. May. I decline to ansM'er that. 

Mv. ]\IcFarlani). State on what grounds. 

Mr. May. On the ground that any testimony I give might tend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Moser. Does the golf club sell golf clubs and balls? 

Mr. INIvY. I imagine so. 

Mr. :Moser. Where does it buy them ? 



ORGANIZED CRIIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 17 

Mr. May. Well, all of the o<)lf companies have Chicago branches, 
such as Spalding, Wilson, Acu&hnet. and those companies. 

Mr. MosER. Does it purchase any by mail i 

Mr. May. Salesmen come around and sell them. 

INIr. Moser. Ho^y many telepliones are there in this golf club? 

Mr. May. I have no idea. 

JNIr. INIosER. Does it have a switchboard? 

Mr. INIay. Certainly. 

Mr. MosER. Do they make long-distance calls from there ? 

Ml'. May. Not to my knowledge. I never made any. 

Mr. MosER. You have never made a long-distance call from there? 

Mr. May. I may have called my mother in St. Petersburg, Fla., and 
my daughter in Pasadena, Calif. 

Mr. jNIoser. You have never called anybody but members of your 
family from the club via long distance? 

Mr. May. No. 

jSIr. ]MosER. Have you ever made a telephone call from outside Illi- 
nois in to the golf club ? 

Mr. May. I don't remember any. I always call my home office. 
I have a secretary, a man secretary, who manages all of my business, 
and everything clears through him at 205 West Wacker Drive. 

Mr. MosER. What is his name ? 

Mr. May. John Colfey. 

IN'Ir. MosER. Who is the manager of the country club? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground that it will 
lead to other questions which, if I give testimony on 

INIr. Moser. You give us the impression that the entire operation 
of this club is a criminal activity; is that the truth? 

Mr. May. I would like to invite you out there to see it. 

Mr. Moser. That is not the answer to the question. 

The Chairman. We would rather have you answer the question 
specifically. 

IMr. Moser. I say, you give us the impression that the operation of 
this cJub is a criminal activity. 

Mr. May. It certainly is nor.. It is the finest club in the world. 

Mr. MosER. Have there evei' been any slot machines there? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground that any 
testimony I give would tend to incriminate mn. 

Senator Tobey. Has the club ever been raided * 

Mr May. I decline to answer on the grounds it mav tend to innrim- 
in ate me. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know of any raids having been made? 

Mr, JMay. I decline to answer on the grounds it may tend to incrimi- 
nate me. 

Senator Tobey. Why would that incriminate you, if it was raided? 

Mr. May. Well, I am just afraid it would. 

Senator Tobey. You say it is the finest club in the world, and then 
you say that you cannot admit whether it has ever been raided on 
criminal charges. 

Mr. May. I am trying to protect my constitutional rights, Senator. 

Senator Tobey. Why are your rights in that above the rights 

Mr. ]May. I think you would feel the same way I did, if you were 
in my position. 



18 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Senator Tobey, Maybe. 

Mr. MosER. Who owns the real estate on which the club is situated? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground it may lead 
to other questions which may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. MosER. It is a matter of record in the county courthouse? 

Mr. May. I suppose so. 

Mr. MosER. Then tell us. 

Mr. May. I decline to tell you. I don't know where the records are. 

Mr. MosER. Your reason for declining is that you don't know ? 

Mr. May. No. INIy reason is that it would lead to other questions 
which, if I gave testimony on, might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. That is not a valid reason. You are being advised 
by capable counsel, and that in itself is not a valid reason. 

Mr. May. If you will let me see what he says, I will do what he says. 

(Mr. May conferred with his counsel, Mr. McFarland.) 

Mr. Robinson. Are you ready ? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. Robinson. You say that the answer to that question might 
tend to incriminate you, and is that the reason why you refuse to 
answer ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. MosER. What is the name of the holding company that owns 
the assets ? 

Mr. May. I refuse to answer that question for the same reason. 

Mr. MosER. That owns the engineering company, the assets of the 
engineering company. 

Mr. May. George S. May, Inc. 

Mr. MosER. Is that the name of the holding company ? 

Mr. May. That is right. 

Mr. MosER. And the names of the partners in the partnership, your 
children, they are your partners — what are their names? 

Mr. May. The partners have leased 

Mr. McFARi,ANn. No, he wants the names of the partners. 

Mr. MosER. Your children, I guess. 

Mr. May. Jean May Rech, Dale Steward May, and Dorothy Canty. 

Mr. McFarland. And yourself. 

Mr. May. Yes; and myself. 

Mr. MosER. Are they directors of George S. May, Inc. ? 

Mr. May. They have no connection with it. 

Mr. MosER. They have no connection with it ? 

Mr. May. No. 

Mr. MosER. Who owns the stock of George S. May, Inc. ? 

Mr. May. Sir? 

Mr. MosER. Who owns the stock of George S. May, Inc. ? 

Mr. McFarland. Just a minute, Mr. Chairman. Again I want to 
rei)eat for the record, it is understood that as to all of these questions 
I am not raising specific objections, even though I think they are 
improper and beyond the scope of the committee, but that all of the 
objections that have been made to any of the questions on my behalf 
stand to each of these questions. 

The Chairman. That is right. That is understood. 
Mr. MosER. Are you objecting to the questions in regard to the 
operations of George S. May, Inc. ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 19 

Mr. McFarland. As a legal matter, I am objectinc: to them because, 
f raiikl}', I think they are far beyond the scope of the authority of this 
committee. 

Mr. MosER. Your objection is noted. 

Who owns the stock of the holding company ? 

Mr. May. Mrs. May and myself, and there are a few minor stock- 
holders ; I think there are about ten who were given some stock about 
20 years ago. 

Mr. MosER. Who are the directors of it ? 

Mr. May. Mr. C. A. Parson and myself, and who is the other one? 

Mr. McFarland. I think John Paul Jones, I believe. I believe that 
to be true. 

Mr. May. The holding company does not transact much business. 

Mr. MosER. Do any of the partners of George S. May & Co. belong 
to the country club, to the Tarn O'Shanter Country Club ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Mr. MosER, None of them do ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Mr. MosER, Do any of them have any financial interest in the 
country club ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground that it might 
lead to other questions financially, that might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know who killed William Drury ? 

Mr. May. If I did, I would tell you. 

Senator Tobey. I asked you a question. Is your answer "Yes" or 
"No"? 

Mr. May. No, sir, but there was a man on the radio last night who 
gave the initials of the man who killed him. 

Senator Tobey. What were the initials? 

Mr. May. "N. B." and "H. S. K." 

Senator Tobey. What do they stand for ? 

Mr. May. I have no idea. 

Senator Tobey. Who was the man who gave the initials ? 

Mr. May. I think it was Drew Pearson. I know I heard it, 

Mr. Robinson. I believe you made a statement that the Tam O'Shan- 
ter Country Club was the finest country club in the world; is that 
correct ? 

Mr. May. Well, maybe I am tooting my own horn. 

Mr. MosER. Yes. 

Mr. Robinson. And that none of its operations were illegal; is 
that correct? 

Mr. McFarland. I don't think he made that statement. 

Mr. May. I said "are illegal." 

Mr. Robinson. Are any of the operations, to your knowledge, of the 
Tam O'Shanter Country Club illegal, in your opinion? 

Mr. May. No, they are not. You said "are illegal?" 

Mr. Robinson. Yes. 

Mr. May. Not at this time. 

Mr. Moser. Not at this time ? 

Mr. May. That is right. 

Senator Tobey. When did they stop being illegal ? When did you 
put the "hush-hush" on ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question. 



20 ORG.\NIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Senator Tobey. There was a time when yon rnng clown the cnrtain 
becanse of fear of prosecntion in Illinois, and stopped. What was 
going on there? 

]\Ir. May. There were 21 other clubs in Chicago 

Senator Tobey. I did not ask you that. 

Mr. Mx\Y. I must decline to answer on the ground any testimony 
I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. No innocent man need worry about anything in- 
criminating him. He can face the world and the devil himself, and 
nothing can bother him. If you have something in your soul that 
is going to burn to a cancer, then it is different, and it looks to me as 
though you are covering up most beautifully. You have not come 
through clean once. 

Mr. MosER. You stated that none of the operations in this club are 
illegal. Are there any slot machines there ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Senator Tobey. Were there any there the last 2 years? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer on the ground that if I give testimony 
it would tend to incriminate me with the State's attorney of Cook 
County. 

Mr. Robinson. And only Cook County ? 

Mr. McFarland. Do you have any other grounds ? 

Mr. May. Federal, maybe, that I am not aware of. 

Senator Tobey. What became of the slot machines that have been 
taken out ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question, because I don't know. 

Mr. MosER. Were they shipped across the State of Illinois 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question. 

The Chairman. Have the proceeds of any slot-machine operations 
in the club been divided with anybody? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question also on the ground 
that the testimony might tend to incriminate me. If you can call 
me here January 5. I will answer anv question you ask me. 

Senator Tobey. Why? 

Mr. May. Because the statute of limitation runs out, and I would 
take a chance on the Federal laws. I am afraid of Cook County. 

Mr. EoBiNSON. What was the remark you started to make a moment 
ago about 21 other clubs? 

Mr. May. Well, it was in the papers Wednesday of this week, in 
the Chicago Dailv News, that 21 other clubs had slot machines. 

Mr. MosER. Is that true? 

Mr. May. I don't know. I am not responsible for the newspaper 
statements. 

Mr. MosER. You submitted some newspaper statements here as 
evidence of something or other, so you must have some confidence in 
them. 

Mr. May. On those particular ones I do. 

Mr. MosER. What are the other clubs? 

Mr. May. I don't know. I have no idea. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, does the Tarn O'Shanter Country Club run 
tournaments, to your knowledge? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, for the same reason, that 
if I did answer it it would lead to other questions, and these other 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 21 

questions, if I were to give testimony on them, might tend to incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. MosER. What I want to know is, wouhl the answer to that 
particular question tend to incriminate you, and is that the reason 
you are refusino- to answer? 

Mr. May. I am afraid it would. 

Mr. Moser. The answer to that particular question? 

Mr. May. It may incriminate me. I am afraid it would. 

Senator Tobey. Do you use the Tam O'Shanter Country Club to 
influence people for the betterment and improvement of your business ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, too, because it will lead 
to other questions that might incriminate me. 

Mr. KoBiNSON. Mr. May, do you know Edward Vogel ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, too, Mr. Robinson. 

The CiiAiRiMAN. Why would jou decline to answer? 

Mr. May. Because if I gave my testimony it might incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Why would a mere answer "yes" or "no" as to 
whether or not you know a certain individual tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. May. I am afraid it would ; it might 

Mr. ]\IcFarland. May I answer that, because that presents a legal 
proposition. 

The Chairman. He has declined to answer. It is not necessary for 
you to make an explanation. 

Mr. McFarland. But then you put the question to him why 
would he? 

The Chairman. Yes. Before instructing him to answer, we wanted 
to know on what grounds he declines to give an answer to that one 
question, as to whether he knows the individual. 

Mr. McFarland. And then he answered, and then you put the ques- 
tion to him as to why it would. 

Mr. May. That is right. 

Mr. McFarland. And that presents a very, very technical legal 
question that I don't think he is competent to answer, from a purely 
legal standpoint; but if I might state for the purposes of the record, 
the decisions of the Federal courts hold that where a witness answers 
a question, for instance, hereby admitting that he knows or does not 
know some particular person, having answered that question,^ you 
ask him how long he has known him, and then you go into a question 
of their relationship, if there has been a relationship, over a period 
of years, and, having opened the door, he would then be compelled to 
answer all the questions along that line. 

The Chairman. Counsel, we certainly cannot follow you in that. 
The very fact that one question is asked, you cannot draw the con- 
clusion that innumerable questions will be asked, because that is for 
the committee to decide. 

Secondly, the very fact that he answered question No. 1 has no 
bearing upon whether he has a right to decline to answer question 
No. 6 or 7, if they are propounded, which they may not be. 

Mr. McFarland. I wish that I could agree with you on that as to 
a legal proposition, but I cannot. 

The Chairman. All right. Now, the witness does, therefore, de- 
cline to state whether he knows Edward Vogel, do you not? 

Mr. May. That if. right, on the grounds 



22 ORGANIZED CRIM^ IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. On what grounds? 

Mr. May. That any testimony I give may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Of a Federal offense or a State offense? 

Mr. May. I will say Federal and State, both, because I don't know 
on Federal ; I admit I am not a lawyer. 

The Chairman. Therefore, you do not make the contention that it 
would involve you in a Federal offense. 

Mr. May. Well, 1 will say it might. 

The Chairman. It might. 

Mr. May. Yes. 

The Chairman. And you decline also to answer the question as to 
why you think the answer to the first quesion would incriminate you. 

Mr. May. I don't know. 

Mr. MosER. You don't know of any Federal offense, do you ? 

Mr. May. No, because I am not a lawyer. 

The Chairman. All right, next question, Mr. Robinson. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you ever have any discussions with Mr. Vogel 
regarding the operaton of the Tam O'Shanter Country Club ? 

Mr. May. I am sorry, but I have to decline to answer that on the 
same grounds, that any testimony I gave 

Mr, McFarland. When you say on the same grounds, what grounds 
do you mean ? 

Mr. MosER. Aren't we assuming that the ground has already been 
stated ? 

Mr. McFarland. I want the record to be sure as to why he refused 
to answer. 

The Chairman. Let him state his reasons. 

Mr. May. On the ground that any testimony I give might tend to 
incriminate me. I had not finished the sentence. 

Senator Tobey. When did you last see or talk by telephone or in 
person to Mr. Vogel ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer on the same grounds, that if I did 
testify it might be used against me and incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. When did you become a member of the Tam 
O'Shanter Country Club? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that also. 

Mr. MosER. Isn't it true that on or about the years 1936 to 1938 you 
acquired the Tam O'Shanter Country Club for approximately $135,- 
000 paid down, and that you thereafter put about a hundred thousand 
dollars a year in the club for a period of approximately 10 years? 

]Mr. May. I decline to answer that question, because any testimony 
that I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Is it also true that the club burned down around the 
year 1936 or 1937? 

Mr. May. It burned down. 

Mr. Robinson. It did burn down? 

Mr. May. It did burn down. 

Mr. Robinson. Wasn't it about that time that you acquired the 
property ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true that in 1938 you organized a corporation 
called Tam O'Shanter, Inc., which is the holding company for the 
operating club? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMJVIERCE 23 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, on the ground that if I gave 
testimony it might tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. During the time that you have been in the club, has 
tliere been any contract with any vending-machine companies? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, too. 

Senator Tobey. What caused this fire, spontaneous combustion, 
things got too hot out there? 

Mr. May, Defective wiring caused it. 

Senator Tobey, I see. 

Mr. May. In fact, we have had two fires, both caused by defective 
wiring. 

Mr. Robinson. Is it true that you own approximately 93 percent 
of the stock in Tam O'Shanter, Inc. ? 

Mr. May, Mr, Robinson, I am sorry, but I must decline to answer 
that, too, on the ground that any testimony that I gave 

The Chairman, Is that a matter of record, the extent of your 
holdings ? 

Mr. McFarland. May I answer ? I don't think he knows whether 
it is. 

The Chairman, Well, let him state whether he knows or not, 

Mr. May, I am not an official of the holding company, I cannot 
answer that. 

The Chairman. Are you not aware of the extent of your own 
holdings ? 

Mr. McFarland, I believe the question was. Is it a matter of public 
record. 

The Chairman. Yes, I will put that question first. Are you aware 
of the extent of your own holdings? 

Mr. May. In a rough way. 

The Chairman, Can you state, then, approximately the extent of 
your holdings ? 

Mr. May, No, because I don't know. 

The Chairman. You do not know ? 

Mr. May. No. 

The Chairman, I thought you said in a rough way that you could 
tell us, that you could tell us in a rough way. 

Mr, May, I must decline, because I don't know exactly. 

The Chairman. Tell us to the best of your knowledge, approxi- 
mately. 

Mr, May, I don't know ; I cannot answer that. 

The Chairman. Are you refusing to answer? 

Mr. May. That is right, because 

The Chairman. Let us get this straight, you are refusing to answer 
the committee on the basis of lack of knowledge ? 

Mr, May, Let me finish. On the grounds that it might incriminate 
me if I did testify. 

The Chairman. That is the reason ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir, 

Mr, MosER. You have stated you are not an official of the Tam 
O'Shanter Country Club. 

Mr. ]May. Well 

Mr, MosER. Or the holding club, the Tam O'Shanter, Inc, you say 
you are not an official of that ? 



24 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. May. I am sure I am not ; am I ? 

Mr. McFarland. Do you want me to answer ? 

Mr. MosER. No ; I want him to answer. 

Mr. Mat. I am not. 

Senator Tobey. Do jou hold any position with Tam 0'8hanter, 
Inc.? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Senator Tobey. Other than being a stockholder? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Senator Tobey. Is the arrangement between the Tam O'Shanter 
Country Club and Tam O'Shanter, Inc., one that the country club 
pays annually to Tam O'Shanter, Inc., $75,000 a year as rent? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground that any 
testimony I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. What is the value of the Tam O'Shanter Country 
Club? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that for the same reason, any 
testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Senator Tobey. Isn't it true it is worth about a million dollars ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that. 

The Chairman. Mr. Moser. 

Mr. Moser. Do you understand that every time you make that state- 
ment claiming self-incrimination that you are being instructed to an- 
swer by the committee ? 

Mr. May. I certainly do. 

Mr. Moser. You understand that? 

Mr. May. I certainly do; yes, sir. 

Senator Tobey. How does a person make application to become a 
member of that countrj^ club and enjoy the facilities. Who does he 
make the application to ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, because it might lead to 
other questions that any testimony I gave might incriminate me. 

The CiiAiRMAx. That is not a valid reason, because it would 

Mr. May. That is my answer. 

Senator Tobey. I should think you would be eaten up inside by all 
of this. W^hy can't you kick the bucket and come out and make a new 
start? Tell us the story. 

Mr. May. Let me make a statement 

Senator Tobey. Well, you have made a lot of them, and you refuse to 
answer. We get so tired of it. 

Mr. May. Well, I withdraw my request. 

The Chairman. You do not desire to make a statement ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. Next question. 

Mr. KoBiNsoN. Mr. May, isn't it true that the country club receives 
about $120,000 a year as dues? 

Mr, May. Will you say that again ? 

The Chairman. Isn't it true that the country club takes in about 
$120,000 annually in dues? 

Mr. May. I must refuse to answer that question on the ground that 
any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. And isn't it true that the country club receives sizable 
revenues from outside parties? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 25 

Mr. May. Mr. Robinson, I must decline to answer that question on 
the ground that any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. And that it receives approximately $650,000 from 
outside parties ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground that any 
testimony I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true that the revenue received from the 
dining room is approximately $400,000 annually? 

Mr. May. I must refuse to answer. 

Mr. Robinson. And from the bar, approximately $325,000? 

Mr. May. I must refuse to answer those questions on the ground 
that it might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true, Mr. May, that the country club receives 
as revenue annually approximately $42,000 from slot machines^ 

Mr. May. I must refuse to answer that question on the ground that 
any testimony I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true that the total receipts from the slot 
machines is approximately $70,000 a year ? 

Mr. May. I must refuse to answer that question on the ground any 
testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. And that the $42,000 represents the amount received 
]iy the club, and that the difference between $70,000 and $42,000 repre- 
sents the amount that is paid by the club to Ed Vogel, on a 00-40 
percent basis ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground that 
any testimony I give might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true that when you acquired the club that 
you found slot machines as a part of the physical assets of the club, 
and that you, in a discussion with Mr. Vogel, made an arrangement to 
continue the arrangement wath the jorevious owner, that payments 
from the slot machines W'Ould be made to Mr. Vogel on a 60-40 per- 
cent basis ? 

Mr. May. I must refuse to answer that on the ground it may tend to 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true, Mr. May, that you at one time had a 
conversation with Mr. Vogel, shortly after you acquired the club, in 
which you agreed to continue the previous arrangement? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer. 

Mr. Robinson. With respect to slot machines ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground that 
any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

iVIr. Robinson. Isn't it true also that Mr. Vogel evinced no interest 
in the profits received from the operation of the wheels which pro- 
duced an annual revenue of $60,000 ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answ^er that question, too, on the grounds 
that any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true also, Mr. May, that you at one time pur- 
chased 8 or 10 slot machines from the Mills Co., and put those in the 
club, along with the other slot machines ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground that 
any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true also, Mr. May, that shortly after you 
nut these new machines in the club you received a visit from the 



26 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

sheriff, or somebody from the sheriff's office in the county, in which the 
Tam O'Shanter Country Chib is located ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the ground that any tes- 
timony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true also that this individual suggested to 
you that you call a certain number? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question, too, on the ground 
that any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. And isn't it true that you called the number sug- 
gested, and that the party on the other end of the line asked you how 
much you paid for the new machines ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground that 
any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. And shortly after the conversation, isn't it true that 
you received a check or funds through the mail to compensate you for 
the amount of money that you spent for the slot machines in the sum 
of approximately $1,800 ? 

Mr. May. Mr. Robinson, I decline to answer that question on the 
grounds that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, isn't it true that every week, around the first 
of the week, a man named Julius comes to the country club and sits 
down with a man named Rezek, who is an employee of the club, and 
at that time counts the proceeds received from the slot machines, and 
makes the 60-40-percent distribution ? 

Mr. May. I must decline also to answer that question, on the ground 
any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Is it true, Mr. May, that the club was raided on 
July 4 of last year ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground 
that any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. The answer to that question would incriminate you ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. As to whether the club was raided on July 4, 1950? 

Mr. May. That is my answer, that is my answer. 

Mr. Robinson. Is it true that the club received prior notification of 
that raid ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground 
that any testimony I give might incriminate me. 

The Chairman. In any instance, to your knowledge, was the club 
advised in advance of the fact that a raid was to be made ? 

Mr. May. I just answered that, if I gave testimony it might in- 
criminate me. 

The Chairman. In any case? 

Mr. May. In answer to that question. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Robinson. Is it true, IVlr. May, that prior to any impending 
raids, the country club or some official or some employee of the 
country club w^as ordinarily tipped off in advance ? 

Mr. May. Mr. Robinson, I must decline to answer that, too, because 
if I gave testimony on it it might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. And is it true that the tip usually came from a per- 
son by the name of Nicky ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question on the ground 
that if I gave testimony it might incriminate me. 



ORGANIZED CRIxME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 27 

Mr. Robinson. Has Tony Accardo ever been at the Tarn O'Shaiiter 
Count rv Club? 

Mr. May. Well 

The Chairman. Answer the question. Has he ever been there ? 

Mr, May. Not to my knowledge. I don't know the man. 

Senator ToBEY. You what? 

Mr. May. I never met the man. I don't know him. 

Mr. Robinson. Has Mr. Vogel ever been at the country club? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question on the grounds if I testi- 
fied it might be used against me to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. To your knowledge is he a complimentary member 
of your club? 

Mr. May. I must also decline to answer that, because if I gave testi- 
mony it might be used to incriminate me. 

Mr. MosER. Is he a member of the club ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that, Mr. Moser, on the grounds 
that it might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. May, do you know or have you heard whether 
any other countiy clubs in Chicago operate slot machines? 

Mr. McFarland. Just a minute now. That is a double-pronged 
question. 

Mr. Robinson. It is not double pronged, it is a very simple ques- 
tion that can be answered very easily. 

The Chairman. What is your objection? 

Mr. McFarland. The objection is that first he asked, does he know, 
which would, in my opinion, require personal knowledge. 

Mr. May. The question was did I know. 

Mr. McFarland. And the second part was, "have you heard." 

Mr. Robinson. Well, I will break it down. 

Do you know of any other country club that operates slot machines? 

Mr. May. I do not, personally. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you heard that any do ? 

Mr. May. I have heard it through the newspapers this week. 

Mr. Robinson. What clubs were those that you heard had operated 
slot machines? 

Mr. May. The Chicago Daily News did not give a list of them. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. May, do you recall giving me the information 
in a talk I had with you in December of 1950 concerning the facts 
which I have just mentioned in the questions I have asked you? 

Mr. McFarland. Just a moment. When you say December 1950, 
are you sure that that is the right date ? 

Mr. Robinson. Well, December, November, or October. 

The Chairman. In the fall of last year, let's say then, if there is 
any question about the date it can be cleared up. 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question. 

The Chairman. Mr. May, in the statement you have submitted to- 
day, it starts off by making a recital of the facts in connection with 
this very conference. 

Mr. May. I still decline to answer it on the ground 

The Chairman. Then are we to understand 

Mr. May (continuing). That if I did give it it might incriminate 
me. 

The Chairman. Let me read what you have stated : 



28 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

On October 30, 1950, George S. May, a resident and citizen of the State of Illi- 
nois, appeared at tlie offices of this committee in Chicago, 111., together with his 
attorney, pursuant to the request of said committee communicated through his 
attorney, and said committee was then and there given all the information that 
was requested of George May and his attorney. Said hearing was not a public 
hearing. The questions were there propounded by Mr. George S. Robinson, Mr. 
Patrick Kiley, and Mr. Edward Norton, attorneys, agents, or representatives of 
the committee; and the information given to the committee representatives pur- 
suant to the questions then and there propounded was true and correct. 

Mr. May. That statement is by my attorney, and not by me. , 

The Chairman. You make it, do yon not? 

Mr. May. No ; he makes it. 

The Chairman. Just a moment. Do you disavow it? 

Mr. May. I did not make the statement. 

Senator Tobey. You said a few minutes ago that you concurred in it 
and approved it. 

Mr. May. He made the statement, and I did not. 

Senator Tobey. You said yoti approved it and concurred in it. 

Mr. MosER. This was filed by your counsel on your behalf, and you 
have, before this committee, approved it. 

Mr. May. I have not signed it. 

Mr. MosER. You have approved it orally. 

The Chairman. I am reading from witness exhibit No. 1, your 
exhibit. Now, can you reconcile that with your present statement that 
you decline to answer when you are asked a direct question with respect 
to the very matter which is incorporated in the first paragraph of your 
own statement? 

Mr. McFarland. May I make a statement? 

The Chairman. Well, counsel, we would prefer to hear from the 
witness and then, of course, any advice you may wish to give him, 
you may do so, but you are not a witness. 

Mr. McFarland. I understand. 

The Cpiairman. I do not wish to prevent you 

j\fr. McFarland. Here is a document which I have prepared- 



The Chairman. I do not think it is necessary to explain to us the 
legal purport of it. It has been adopted by the witness, and it has been 
marked as ''Witness' Exhibit No. 1." 

It seems to be a very inconsistent position when he disavows the 
matter contained in the opening of his own statement. 

Mr. MosER. Mr. May, is it true that questions were propounded to 
you back in October 1950 by Mr. George S. Eobinson, Mr. Patrick 
Kiley, and Edward Norton, attorneys, agents, or representatives of 
this committee, and the information given to the committee repre- 
sentatives pursuant to the questions then and there propounded was 
true and correct? 

Is that statement true? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer at this time, under oath, because the 
testimony I give might be used to incriminate me, both Federal and 
State. 

Mr. MosER. You decline to answer the question I have asked ? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. And you understand that you are directed to answer. 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You are directed specifically to answer that. 

Mr. JNIay. I understand. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 29 

Mr. McFarland. May I confer with the witness ? 

The Chairman. Yes; certainly. 

(Mr. McFarland conferred with Mr. May.) 

The Chairman. Now, Mr. May, do you desire to make any further 
statement ? 

Mr. jMat. JNIy attorney, Mr. Vernon Tliompson, was present and 
answered the questions that Mr. Robinson asked. 

The Chairman. That is not an answer to the question. 

Mr. May. I decline to answer under oath. 

Mr. Moser. You still decline to answer ? 

Mr. Mat. Yes; because the testimony might be used to incriminate 
me. 

Mr. MosER. You decline to answer the specific question I asked 
you? 

Mr. Mat. That is right. 

Mr. Robinson. May I make this statement for the record? Mr. 
May was present, and Mr. May made the statements to me, not Mr. 
Vernon Thompson. 

The Chairman. Do you desire to make any comment on that ? 

Mr. Mat. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Do you deny you made the statements? 

Mr. Mat. I decline 

The Chairman. Let me finish first. 

Mr. Mat. I am sorry. 

The Chairman. Do you deny that 3^ou made the statements in the 
presence of Mr. Robinson as he has just stated i 

Mr. Mat. I decline to answer his question under oath at this time, 
because any testimony that I give might be used against me. 

The Chairman. I see. All right. 

Senator Tobey. Mr. Counsel, I should think that you would have 
mingled emotions right about this time. 

Mr. McFarland. Well, with respect to the question which has just 
been put, I again want to reemphasize all of the objections which are 
contained in there, and which were contained in the specific objections 
that I made to the first questions, that with respect to this question 
the answer to this question would not furnish evidence or informa- 
tion as to the utilization of any facility of interstate commerce, .or of 
any transaction in interstate commerce in furtherance of any viola- 
tion of the laws of the United States, or of any State, and that any 
answer the witness might give would not aid the committee in the 
discharge of legislative function. 

Senator Tobet. That is for the committee to determine. 

The Chairman. That is your position, and it is duly noted. 

;Mr. McFarland. Yes. 

Mr. Robinson. I have a few more questions. 

The Chairman. Mr. Robinson. 

]Mr. Robinson. Mr. May, have you ever heard of a Mr. Ed Vogel ? 

Mr. Mat. Will you please repeat that question ? I am sorry, I can- 
not hear so well. 

Tlie Chairman. Have you ever heard of Mr. Ed Vogel ? 

INIr. Robinson. Have you heard of Mr. Ed Vogel ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question. 

Mr. Robinson. As to whether you have ever heard of him ? 

85277— 51— pt. 13^^3 



30 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. May. I decline to answer the question on the ground that if I 
give testimony it might incriminate me, Mr. Kobinson. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, Mr. May, are you declining to answer the ques- 
tion on the ground that it might tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. May. Exactly. 

Mr. Robinson. On the question as to whether you ever heard of a 
man by the name of Ed Vogel ? 

Mr. May. Exactly. 

Mr. ;McFarland. And the further objection that it is irrelevant. 

Mr. RopiNsON. Have you ever read anything in the newspapers 
about Mr. Ed Vogel ? 

Mr. May. Well, he has been in the paper a lot. 

Mr. Robinson. What has been in the paper a lot? 

Mr. May. Mr. Ed Vogel's name. I think everybody has read it. 
I have read it. 

Mr. Robinson. Wliat have you read about it ? 

Mr. May. That he was supposed to be the slot-machine king of Cook 
County. 

Mr. Robinson. You have heard about Mr. Ed Vogel? 

Mr. May. I have read it. 

Mr. Robinson. If you have read it, you have heard about it. 

Mr. May. That was the question you asked, if I read it in the 
papers ? 

Mr. Robinson. Yes. 

Mr. May. I have. 

Mr. Robinson. i\.nd how long have you had that knowledge from 
the newspapers ? 

Mr. May. Well, I saw it this week in the papers. 

Mr. RobiNson. Had you heard of it before that time? 

Mr. May. I think - 

Mr. McFarl.and. Do you mean had he read of it before that time? 

Mr. May. Sure. 

Mr. Robinson. Had you read it before that time ? 

Mr. May. Sure. 

Mr. Robinson. When did you first read about it? 

Mr. May. I don't remember when it was. It was some time ago. 

Mr. Robinson. Was it a number of years ago? 

]SIr. jMay. The first time I remember was about 6 months ago. I 
am not familiar with the dates. I don't remember those things. 

Mr. Robinson. That was the first time you ever heard of it? 

Mr. May. I am not 'saying that; that is the first time I remember. 

Mr. Robinson. The first time vou remember reading about Ed 
Vogel? 

Mr. IVIay. That is right. It might have been before that, I cannot 
give you the date. 

Mr. Robinson. That was 6 months ago. 

Mr. May. I remember distinctly I read it then. 

Mr. Robinson. But you have no recollection of hearing anything 
about a man by the name of Ed Vogel prior to that time? 

Mr. May. I cannot give you exact dates. That is the only date I 
can give you. 

Mr. Robinson. You don't understand my question, apparently. 
Prior to that time had you ever heard or read anything about a man 
by the name of Ed Vogel ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 31 

Mr. Mat. I don't remember any specific dates. 

Mr. RoBiNsox. It could have been that yon had heard of him prior 
to that time ? 

Mr. May. It conld have been, but I don't remember. 

Mr. RoBixsox. And liave you seen his name frequently in the 
papers? 

Mr. May. The last few months, quite frequently'. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard or read of Mr. Vogel's name in, 
connection with the Capone syndicate ? 

Mr. May. Those were the things that were in the paper. 

Mr. Robinson. And didn't you, in fact, have that knowledge for a 
period of years ? 

]Mr. May. I decline to answer that question on the ground that any 
testimony I give might incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. I think that is all I have, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Tobey. Are you fearful of the Capone syndicate, or the 
remnants of it ? 

Mr. May. No, sir. 

Senator Tobey. No fear of them at all? 

Mr. May. No. 

The Chairman. Mr. Moser — first, Senator Hunt, do you have any 
questions ? 

Senator Hunt. No ; I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Mr. INIoser. 

Mr. MosER. Is there any financial lelationship between the George 
S. Mav Co., the partnership, and either the Tarn O'Shanter Countrj" 
Club 6r Tam O'Shanter, Inc. ? 

Mr. May. They are separate companies, separate managers, and no 
financial connection. 

Mr. MosER. Is there any connection between George S. May, Inc., 
the holding company, and either Tam O'Shanter Country Club or 
Tam O'Shanter, Inc.? 

Mr. May. There are not. 

Mr. MosER. Has George S. May Co., the partnership, or George S. 
May, Inc., ever received anv funds from the Tam O'Shanter Country 
Club or Tam O'Shanter, Inc. ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question on the ground it might 
lead to other questions to which if I gave testimony might incriminate 
me. 

Mr. MosER. Has the Tam O'Shanter Country Club, or has Tam 
O'Shanter, Inc., ever received any money from George S. May Co., 
the partnership, or from George S. May, Inc. ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that on the gi^ound that the 
testimony miglit incriminate me. 

Mr. Moser. No more questions. 

The Chairman. I have just a question 

Senator Hunt. I would like to ask one question, if I may. 

The Chairman. Yes, Senator Hunt. 

Senator Hunt. Is this gentleman the George S. May who advertises 
in National Business Service about analyzing and advising on business 
reorganization ? 
Mr. May. Yes, sir. 



32 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. McFarland. The chairman went into that quite fully before 
you came in this morning. 

The Chairman. Previously in your statement, Mr. May, you ad- 
vised us that this winter you were engaged in traveling for the 
company at the very time that the committee was seeking to serve 
you. 

Mr. Mat. And I would like to make a statement to clear that up, 
because I am a busy man. 

The Chairman. Suppose you do. 

Mr. May. I will tell you what happened, the Chicago Tribune, 
on the night of Monday, the 15th, had a headline 

The Chairman. Of what? 

Mr. McFarland. January, you mean? 

Mr. May. Yes, January 15; that George S. May was called to 
Cleveland to testify, and I waited in my office and in my home Tues- 
day, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and no subpena came. 

I made a speech in the Bismark Hotel, Saturday morning, January 
20, I took the 1 o'clock plane to Los Angeles, where I had to meet 
men on the west coast, and I came back to Chicago on the 28th of 
January, and I left on February 1, and was gone on another business 
trip. No subpena was ever attempted to be served on me, and it 
was very embarrassing to have it all over the country, when I was 
right at home and in the office 

The Chairman. I presume you got in touch with the authorities 
and notified them that you were available ? 

Mr. May. I did not. 

The Chairman. Why? 

Mr. May. Why should I ? Why should I wait at State and Madison 
waiting for a subpena? I was on the west coast, and I was on the 
radio in Los Angeles, and they knew where I was. 

The Chairman. Here you noted it in the press, and you knew that 
process servers were anxious to locate you, did you not ? 

Mr. May. It said that a subpena had been issued, and I waited for 
them to serve me. 

The Chairman. Did you make any effort to notify the authorities 
where you were ? 

Mr. May. No ; because there is no law saying that I should. 

The Chairman. I am asking you whether you did. 

Mr. May. No. 

The Chairman. So from January mitil you were served last week, 
you made no effort to advise the authorities? Will you answer the 
question as to whether you did ? 

Mr. May. Yes ; I did. I would not be here today if it was not for a 
telephone call that I made last Monday night. I was 53 days in 
Chicago, and nobody called on me. 

The Chairman. Up until last Monday night, did you make any 
effort whatsoever to advise the authorities where you were and where 
you could be served ? 

Mr. May. No; I did not. 

The Chairman. Why? 

Mr. McFari.and. Well 

The Chairman. No; let him answer. Counsel. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 33 

Mr. Mat, I was on a business trip, I am a busy man, and I travel 
all the time. I was in and out of Chicago, and nobody called me at 
home or at the office while I was in town. 

The Chairman. While yon were there. But you don't know what 
the}' were attempting to do while you were not there. 

ISIr. May. I was there 53 days and nobody called. I telephoned 
the Daily News last ^Monday night and they said, "When did you get 
back?" I said, "I have been in town 53 days." I told them that I was 
between my place of business and home. They said, "Where will you 
be tomorrow?" I said, "At the Tam O'Shanter Country Club." 

And last Tuesday noon the United States marshal came out and 
served me. 

The Chairman. Is it not a fact you actually were using virtually a 
fleet of automobiles, different automobiles, in order to avoid and evade 
the process servers ? Is that not a fact ? 

Mr. May. No ; it is not. I have a Cadillac all the time, and I had it 
on my trip, the same car — I have a half-dozen cars that I could 

The Chairman. But for weeks or months you were studiously and 
carefully avoiding the process servers, is that not a fact? 

Mr. May. No, sir. I was on a business trip, and I took a 2 weeks' 
vacation, the fii'st I had in 2 years. 

Senator Tobey. A little while ago he said he wasn't in the Tam 
O'Shanter Club, and now he tells us he was there. 

Mr. McFarland, I thought that the hearing had closed. 

Senator Tobey. No ; the hearing had not closed. 

Mr. May. I told the newspapers where I would be last Tuesday, and 
the United States marshal phoned me and I said, "Come on out." And 
he came out and brought all the newspapermen with him. 

Senator Tobey. What is your net worth ? 

Mr. May. I don't know. 

Senator Tobey. You don't know ? To make a shot at it, what would 
you say? 

Mr. May. I will tell you what I made last year ; that is all I know. 

Senator Tobey. What is George S. May's personal net worth ? 

Mr. May. I don't know. 

Mr. McFarland. That is one thing that I certainly don't think you 
have any right to ask any man, or any person, any more than I would 
have a right to say to you, "Senator Tobey, what is your net worth?" 

Senator Tobey. Well, it wouldn't do much good to ask me that. 

Mr. McFarland. It is not a question of what the answer would be; 
it is a question of whether I have the right. 

Senator Tobey. We think we have. You won't answer that ques- 
tion? 

The Chairman. He said he does not know, or do you decline to 
answer ? 

Mr. May. Well, I guess on advice of counsel — well, against advice 
of counsel, last year my partnership made $538,000. 

Senator Tobey. What did you make ? 

Mr. May. Well, about half of that. 

Senator Tobey. That is the total income, net, for the year? That is 
what you paid taxes on ? 

Mr. May. That is right. 

Senator Tobey. Did you make any political contributions last year, 
the year before, or the year before that ? 



34 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. MosER. Directly or indirectly ? 

Mr. May. Well, I am a Democrat and you are a Republican. Now 
I am going to get into it. 

Senator ToBEY. Did you make any political contributions ? 

Mr. McFarland. You may state to the best of your recollection. 

Senator Tobey. Did you make any political contribution to the 
Democratic Party candidates? 

Mr. May. I am going to decline to answer that. It is irrelevant. 

Senator Tobey. Well, you being so good about making successes out 
of failures in large corporations, have you ever been called into con- 
sultation with the Democratic National Party to find out what is 
wrong with them ? 

Have you ever paid any money for protection from police author- 
ities? 

Mr. May. Never. 

Senator Tobey. Have you ever been convicted of a crime ? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. 

Senator Tobey. What was it ? 

Mr. May. Forgery, and I plead guilty 35 years ago. 

Senator Tobey. What was the crime, forgery ? 

Mr. May. Forgery. 

Senator Tobey. Were you convicted ? 

Mr. May. I plead guilty. 

Senator Tobey. Were you sentenced ? 

Mr. May. Eleven months. 

Senator Tobey. Did you serve ? 

Mr. May. Yes, and I came out of that, and I have gone straight 
ever since. 

Senator Tobey. Well, that is to your credit everlastingly. Have you 
been arrested since? 

Mr. May. Oh, for speeding once. 

Senator Tobey. That is all ? 

Mr. May. Well, a couple of times. 

Senator Tobey. Any other crimes besides that? Any felonies or 
misdemeanors? 

Mr. May. Not for felonies or misdemeanors. 

Senator Tobey. Have you ever been investigated by the Internal 
Revenue Bureau? 

Mr. May. Every year, and there is nothing wrong. 

Mr. McFarland. You mean they come over and go over your books. 

Mr. May. Certainly. 

Mr. MosER. You stated what your income was from George S. May 
Co. What is your income from Tom O'Shanter Country Club or 
Tom O'Shanter, Inc. ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question on the ground if I give 
testimony it might be used against me. 

Mr. MosER. Is your income from those sources reported in your 
income-tax returns? 

Mr. May. There is a line which says, "Report all moneys received," 
and I certainly am not guilty of holding out any money from any- 
body, not a cent. In fact, I am getting refunds. 

Mr. MosER. Then you do report the income you receive from those 
sources? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 35 

Mr. May. I do. 

Mr. IVIosER. Then you do receive income from those sources? 

Mr. ]May. I said I reported income received from all sources. 

Senator Tobey. Did you specify the details, as to where it came 
from ? 

Mr. May. '\'\niy, certainly, you have to. I know I have to. 

Senator Tobey'. Well, we have so many who don't. 

Mr. May. Well, I am a businessman, and I have to. 

Senator Tobey. So do I. But a lot of them don't, you know, 

Mr. May. Yes. 

Mr. MosER. Do you specify the income you receive from the coun- 
try-club sources ? 

Mr, May. I decline to answer that, because any testimony I give 
might incriminate me. I have been honest wdth you on all these other 
deals. 

Senator Tobey. What is your best judgment as to the amount of your 
net worth ? 

Mr. McFarland. Again let me interpose an objection to that spe- 
cific question, purely upon the grounds, Senator, that I believe that 
that is one question above all others which rankles me as being some- 
thing that no one has a right to ask any other man about his net worth. 

The Chairman. You need not give the reasons. 

Are there any further questions? 

First of all, you refuse or decline to answer that question ? 

Mr, McFarland, You mean the last one on net worth ? 

The Chairman, Yes. 

Mr. Mat. Well, I don't know. I really don't know. I never 
checked up. Wliat do I care ? 

Senator Tobey. It must be a wonderful situation to be in. 

The Chairman. Senator Hunt asked the question before, and you 
did state in some detail as to the extent of your operations, particularly 
as to the number of individuals that are associated with George S. 
May Co. 

Mr. May. Around four hundred. 

The Chairjvian. What would be the total volume of business, ap- 
proximately ? 

Mr. May. I think I gave that, $4,000,000. 

Mr. McFarland. $4,250,000. 

Mr. May. This year it will be 5 or 6 million. 

Senator Tobey. Any request that you might make to the Tam 
O'Shanter Country Club would be acceded to, any reasonable request 
from you ? 

Mr. May. I have to decline to answer 

Senator Tobey. Out of courtesy? 

Mr. May. Senator Tobey 

Senator Tobey. Will you give this committee a letter, addressed 
to the officials and the board of directors and the clerk and the manager 
of the T.am O'Shanter Country Club : 

Please give the bearer all information and records they require in the course 
of their investigation into the Tam O'Sh-inter Country Club, and hold nothing 
back, and give them any data and material that you have on hand that they 
vrant to furnish it to them. 

Mr. May. I don't understand that. 



36 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Senator Tobey. Well, would yoii write a letter, I will dictate it, 
and you sign it, to the management, the board of directors, the clerk 
and the manager of Tarn O'Shanter Country Club, as follows : 

TTpon receipt of this letter by bearer, will you kindly give him all the informa- 
tion he requires from the books and records of the country club and any data 
which you have submit to him. 

Mr. May, T will have to decline to answer 

Senator Tobey. I asked you if you would sign that letter. 

Mr. May. I decline to answer the question. 

Senator Tobey. As to whether you would sign the letter or not? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer. 

Senator Tobey. Why? 

Mr. May. I don't know. 

Senator Tobey. I don't think you do, either. 

Mr. May. I don't. 

Mr. McFaeland. Wliy put this man in the position of having to do 
that ? After all, you have the power of subpena. 

The Chairman. Well, we will not argue that, but don't you realize 
that it might facilitate it very much if you w^ere to give us coopera- 
tion? There are two different things: (1) to attempt to force them 
to give us information by compulsory process, and (2) the voluntary 
and willing cooperation of a man who says he has nothing to hide, and 
who, if he signed a simple piece of paper, might give to the committee 
detailed information which directly bears on the reason for our 
existence. 

Mr. May. I will give it to you January 5. 

The Chairman. 1952? 

Mr. May. Yes, sir ; you bet your life. 

Senator Tobey. You may not be around here then. 

Mr. May. I may not be, either. 

Senator Tobey. That is what I said. 

Mr. Robinson. I have a few questions. 

The Chairman. Mr. Eobinson. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know a man by the name of E. Benson ? 

Mr. May. Benson?" 

Mr. Robinson. Yes. 

Mr. May. No. 

Mr. Robinson. Is your answer "No" ? 

Mr. May. I don't know anybody by the name of — R. Benson? 

Mr. Robinson. R. Benson. 

Mr. May. What is his first name? 

Mr. Robinson, I don't know his first name. 

Mr. May. I don't know anybody by that name. 

Mr, Robinson, Do you know a man by the name of Grew ? 

Mr. May. Grew? 

Mr. Robinson. Yes, G-r-e-w. 

Mr. May. No. 

Mr. Robinson. I believe you stated that you had been in the Tarn 
O'Shanter Country Club? 

Mr. May. I did "not state that. 

Senator Tobey. Yes, you did ; not more than 5 minutes ago. 

The Chairman. You did. You mentioned about telephone calls; 
that you telephoned to your family, and all. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 37 

Mr. May. Oh ! 

Mr. IvOBiKSON. When you were in the Tarn O'Shanter Country Club, 
did you observe the type of cigarette-vending machines that were in 
operation in the chib ^ 

Mr. jNIay. Will the committee let me make a statement? 

The Chairman. Go ahead ; we have been waiting for it all morning. 

Mr. jMay. Will 3^ou let me make a statement, sincerely ? 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. May. And it will not be held against me ? 

The Chairman. Well, now 

Mr. jVIay. Oh, I am not asking for immunity. I will take that back. 
I wish I could sit here and answer that question. 

The Chairman. Is that your statement ( 

Mr. May. Yes, sir. I wish that I could sit here and answer it, 
because I could give you some help to get legislation to help the 
businessman. 

Senator Tobey, You are a free agent, aren't you ? 

Mr. May. January 5, I will give it to you. I wish I could answer 
that question. 

Mr. Moser. I was asking about cigarette-vending machines. 

Mr. May. I know it. I wish that I could answer that question. 

Mr. Robinson. I asked the question, and do I understand that you 
are unwilling to answer the question on the ground that it would tend 
to incriminate you ? 

Mr. McFarland. Wait just a minute. Let's go back to the question. 
What was the question? 

Mr. Robinson. I think I can restate it. 

The Chairman. Suppose you restate the question ; it will be simpler. 

Mr. Robinson. While you were in the Tam O'Shanter Country Club, 
did you observe the type of cigarette-vending machines that were in 
operation at the club ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question, because the next 
question would be what type they were, and any testimony I give might 
incriminate me. I wish I could answer that question ; I repeat that. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know Dan Gilbert ? 

Mr. May. Yes ; he and States' Attorney Courtney and I got clrunk 
one time in New York at Leon & Eddie's. 

Mr. Robinson. How long have you known him ? 

Mr. ]\Iay. Oh, I don't know — 20 years. 

Mr. Robinson. Is he a close personal friend of yours ? 

Mr. May. No. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you contribute to his campaign ? 

Mr. May. I certainly did not. 

Mr. McFarland. You mean the last campaign ? 

Mr. May. I certainly did not. 

Mr. Robinson. The last campaign. 

Mr. jMay. I certainly did not. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard of the Apex Cigarette- Vending 
Machine Co. ? 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that question on the ground that that 
testimony would certainly incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. As to whether j^ou had ever heard of that company ? 



38 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. May. I read in the paper where State's Attorney Boyle was 
attorney for them at one time. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever read anything else about the com- 
pany? 

Mr. Mat. That is the only thing I can remember. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard the name of Vogel linked with 
the Apex Cigarette Vending Machine Co. ? 

Mr. May. I must decline to answer that question, too, because the 
testimony might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. As to whether you had ever heard of the two 
names ? 

Mr. McFarland. Or read about them. 

Mr. Robinson. Or read about them. 

Mr. May. All I know is what I read, that State's Attorney Boyle 
was their attorney, and you brought that out in your investigation 
yourself. 

Mr. Robinson. You still have not answered my question. 

Mr. May. I have heard it. 

Mr. Robinson. You have heard the two names ? 

Mr. May. And that Boyle, the State's Attorney, was their attorney. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know what position Mr. Vogel has with 
that company ? 

Mr. May. I have no idea. 

Mr. Robinson. You have heard that he is an owner of that com- 
pany, have you not? 

Mr. May. The paper said so, that is all I heard, through the paper. 

I wish I could answer this. The business interests of this country 
need some legislation. 

The Chairman. Well, suppose you give us the benefit of your advice. 

Mr. May. If you fellows knew how business is being held up — I am 
taking a chance at answering this, and you cannot stop me. 

Mr. McFarland. I cannot stop you at any time you want to talk. 

Mr. May. It is me. But this committee can do a terrific service to 
this country if they will invoke legislation against unions, particu- 
larly — I don't want to be quoted on that — but people from the outside 
muscle in and run a business. I know what I am talking about. 

The Chairman. Tell us what you know about it. 

Mr. May. I wish I could. 

The Chairman. You said you were prepared to. 

Mr. May. There are a lot of businesses in this country that cannot 
run, because they come like this [indicating], "You do this or that." 
I cannot be quoted, because my life is worth more than going to jail. 
If I name names in 48 hours — well, I told you that in the investiga- 
tion in Chicago. 

Mr. Robinson. Yes, you did, but I asked you a question earlier in 
the proceedings as to whether or not your sole grounds for re- 
fusing to answer questions were on the basis that it would tend to 
incriminate you or because you had some fear of physical harm. 

Mr. May. Let me answer this. 

Mr. McFarland. All right. 

Mr. May. I am paying you, so let me answer. 

Mr. Robinson. Give me a frank answer to the question. 

Mr. May. My answer is because I was afraid it would incriminate 
me. I am not afraid of the other outside interests. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 39 

The Chairman. Has your life been tlireatened? 

Mr. McFarland. I don't think it has. - 

The Chairman. Well, just a minute. Mr. May is hesitating very 
much. 

Mr. May. I cannot answer that question. 

The Chairman. Mr. May, you stated a few minutes ago that you 
were in a position to give this committee help. 

Mr. May. I decline to answer that particular question on the ground 
it might lead to other questions which would tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. I am now asking you only one question, and you 
have no right to assume that I will ask you any more. On my one 
question, has your life been threatened ? 

Mr. May. I will say "No." 

The Chairman. Why did you hesitate so long? 

Mr. May. Because it has not actually been threatened. 

The Chairman. Why do you say actually ? 

Mr. May. There is a line to draw. 

The Chairman. Well, how near was it to being threatened? 

Mr. May. Oh, not too serious. 

The Chairman. Well, just to what extent was it threatened? 

Mr. May. It was not threatened. There is a line to draw there, you 
understand. 

Mr. Robinson. Let me ask you this : Did you entertain some thought 
that it might be threatened ? 

Mr. May. Why, certainly. 

The Chairman. On the basis of what ? 

Mr. May. I don't know. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, Mr. May, you brought up the subject, and I 
think you stated accurately that you did mention it to me. 

Mr. May. Yes ; you know what 

Mr. Robinson. Let me finish the question, please. 

The Chairman. Yes; just take your time and let him finish his 
question. 

Mr. Robinson. You did mention to me that if you gave the intor- 
mation to me that you would not last 48 hours. 

Mr. May. And you said, "You bet you wouldn't." 

The Chairman. Did you make that statement ? First, did you say 
that? 

Mr. May. Yes. 

The Chairman. All right. Go ahead. 

Mr. May. You bet your life I made it, and I volunteered certain 
information to him. I will take that chance. 

The Chairman. All right. Who did you fear ? 

Mr. May. I can't tell you who, because I don't know. 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true that you entertained a fear from Mr. 
Vogel and the organization to which you know he belonged ? 

Mr. May. No, I did not ; no, sir, I did not. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, you did entertain some fear or possible fear? 

Mr. May. Can I answer that question? 

Mr. Robinson. Now, who was the cause of that fear ? 

Mr. May. It was just a general fear that I had. It was right after 
Drury had been assassinated, and naturally certain fears come up. 
Honestly, I couldn't tell you. 



40 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. MosER. When you put these cigarette-vending machines in first, 
were they tliere when you took the chib over ? 

Mr. McFarland. I was going to say that that is quite a leading 
question. 

Mr. Mosee. Were they there? 

Mr. May. I wish I coukl answer that. I must decline to on the 
ground that any testimony I give would be used against me. 

Mr. MosER. Were any threats of any kind made to you in connection 
with the putting in or maintaining of the cigarette-vending machines ? 

Mr. May. I wish I could answer that. I cannot, on the grounds it 
might be used against me. If it was January 5, I would give you 
enough ammunition to keep Congress busy for 6 months on legisla- 
tion to protect honest businessmen. 

The Chairman. All right. That will conclude the examination 
now. 

Mr. McFarland. I want to say one thing, you asked Mr. May why 
it was that he did not, shall we say, voluntarily go down and seek 
out the process servers. 

Perhaps one of the reasons why he did not 

Mr. May. May I interrupt 

Mr. McFarland ( continuing) . Was because I told him that in my 
opinion there was no legal obligation on his part to do so, and that 
1 could see no real moral obligation on his part to do so, in view of the 
things that occurred, the publicity up to along in January. 

Mr. May. Can I interject a statement? 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. May. I was going to appear voluntarily at the New York meet- 
ing of the committee, and I had reservations in the Commodore Hotel, 
and I had a convention in the New York office, and I became ill with 
virus X in Florida, and I had my personal doctor fly from Chicago 
down. I was in bed at the time of the committee meeting, or I would 
have been there voluntarily, and you remember that. 

Mr. McFarland. That 'is right. 

The Chairman. Well, a 3-cent stamp would have notified us to 
that effect. 

May I say that this committee has been searching all over the United 
States for you without success, and if you had been hiding out you 
couldn't have more effectively avoided and evaded the process servers. 

So long as you attempted to explain, I thought I would state that. 

Mr. May. Well, I am here today by a move that I made. 

The Chairman. Well, we will not argue. 

Mr. McFarland. May I ask this, can a copy of the hearing here this 
morning be made available to us, if we pay for it ? 

The C'hairman. Yes; it may, under the condition that it not be 
made public. 

]Mr. McFarland. Well, I certainly don't want it made public. 

Mr. May. Neither do I. 

The Chairman. All right ; that is all. Very well, let us get our 
next witness in. 

Mr. Fischetti, do you object to having your pictures taken? 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes, I object to it. 

The Chairman. Very well. We are now going into executive 
session. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 41 

You are Rocco Fischetti? 

Mr. Fischetti. That is right, sir. 

The Chairman. We are in executive session, and the only persons 
present are members of the Senate committee or the stall' counsel, and 
the official reporter. 

Now, will you kindly stand and be sworn. 

In the presence of the Almighty God, do you swear the testimony 
you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I do. 

The Chairman. May I say to the witness that the Senate commit- 
tee is meeting pursuant to the direction of the full committee, and a 
quorum is present, and there are certain questions that we would like 
to ask of you through counsel, Mr. Robinson. 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes. 

TESTIMONY OF ROCCO FISCHETTI, CHICAGO, ILL. 

The Chairman. May I ask if you are represented by counsel? 

Mr. Fischetti. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Then I will inform you that any matter you may 
wish to be advised about or to explain or make any statement about, 
you are at liberty to do so. 

Mr. Fischetti. I would like to make a statement. 

The Chairman. Well, wait until a question is as'ied of you. 

Proceed, Mr. Robinson. 

Mr. Robinson. Will you state your full name ? 

Mr. Fischetti. Rocco Fischetti. 

Mr. Robinson. Where do you live ? 

Mr. Fischetti. 3100 Sheridan Road, Chicago, 111. 

Mr. Robinson. Is that Sheridan Road or North Sheridan Road? 

Mr. Fischetti. Well, North Sheridan Road. 

Mr. Robinson. How old are you, Mr. Fischetti ? 

Mr. Fischetti. Forty-seven. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, do you have any other place of residence be- 
sides 3100 North Sheridan Road? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. [Taking paper from 
poc-ket.] 

Mr. Robinson. Did you have a brother by the name of Charles? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that question. I claim my privi- 
lege under the Constitution. I don't wish to be a witness against 
myself. 

Senator Tobey. Just a minute. Ask him who prepared that state- 
ment he just made. 

The Chairman. You have just read from a written memorandum? 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That you brought with you ? 

Mr. Fischetti. That is right. 

The Chairivian. Will you tell us who prepared the statement? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

The Chairman. Did you yourself write it ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

The Chairman. Have you sought advice of counsel in connection 
with your appearance here, JSIr. Fischetti ? 



42 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. FiscHETTi. Can I make this statement, please? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. EoBiNsoN. Go ahead. 

Mr. FiscHETTi. I am going to refuse to answer your questions on 
the ground that I claim my privilege under the Constitution. I do 
not wish to be a witness against myself. Some of your questions may 
look innocent alone, but I cannot answer any. The courts have held 
that if I answer any questions I waive my rights. I do not wish to 
waive anything. You people have already found in your reports that 
I am guilty of many Federal crimes. I wish you would send those 
reports to the grand jury if you vote to hold me for contempt. 

Senator Tobey. Have you ever read the Constitution of the United 
States ? 

Mr. FiscHETTi. I refuse to answer. 

Senator Tobey. Who prepared that statement for you? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know Frank Costello ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

Senator Tobey. Well, I don't think we will get any place here. 

Mr. MosER. Are you married ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. MosER. Have you any children ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. MosER. How did you get to this meeting? Did you come by 
train ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. MosER. Did you come by airplane ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. I am standing on the 
statement. 

The Chairman. Now, I was waiting until a certain number of 
questions were asked to say this to you, that in connection with the 
questions that have been asked of you, the committee feels that they 
are proper questions, and the committee directs you to answer. 

Now, do you still decline to answer ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I still refuse. 

Mr. Moser, Are you in business? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. MosER. Do you have any income ? 

Mr. FiscHEiTT. I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. MosER, Do you file income-tax returns ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

Senator Tobey. Are you going to refuse to answer any and every 
question asked by the committee ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

Senator Tobey. Well, let's not let this man make fools of the com- 
mittee. He says he won't even answer as to whether he will refuse to 
answer. Time is flying, and I move that the gentleman be cited for 
contempt, and let us close this thing out. It is sickening and 
disgusting. 

The Chairman. You do understand that you are directed to answer 
the questions just asked of you by the committee counsel? 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You do understand that ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 43 

Mr. FiscHETTi. Yes, sir. 

Tlie Chairman, And htivinj); been advised of that you still refuse 
to answer ? 

Mr. FiscHETTi. I will stand on this statement. 

The Chairman. Is the committee to understand that you are going 
to refuse to answer any and every question that is asked of you^ 

Mr. FiscHETTi. Well, I am standing on my constitutional rights 
under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. MosER. In other words, you are going to refuse to answer — or 
you do refuse to answer any question that we have asked you or will 
ask you, except your name and address, is that true? 

Mr. FiscHETTi. That is right. 

Mr. Robinson. May I ask one question? 

The Chairman. Mr. Robinson. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. Fischetti, you have filed income-tax returns, 
have you not? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. Robinson. You refuse to answer whether you have ever filed 
income-tax returns ? 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. You filed one in 1947, didn't you? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Robinson. xA.nd didn't you at that time, when you filed the 
tax return, state what your occupation w^as ? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Robinson. Would you say that any information that you gave 
on your tax return was inaccurate? 

Mr. Fischetti. I refuse to ansv\'er that. I stand on this statement. 

Senator Tobey. Question, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Yes, Senator Tobey. We will take that up with 
the entire committee on that subject. 

All right, that will end the examination at this time. 

Mr. Fischetti. May I make a statement for the record ? 

The Chairman. You mean for the record here ? 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes. I would like the record to show that I refuse 
to answer each question, that I claim my privilege under the 
Constitution. 

The Chairman. Would you mind leaving that memorandum with 
us? 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. That will end it. 

Mr. Fischetti, Thank you. 

The Chairman. I might say this before you leave that the bond that 
you gave previously still continues. In other words, the committee 
still wishes j^ou to be under subpena, and you did put a bond up, I 
think, of $3,000? 

Mr. Fischetti. Yes. 

The Chairman. That same bond will be continued for the present. 

Mr. Fischetti. Thank you very much. 

The Chairman. Our next witness will be Mr, Humphreys. 

Mr. Humphreys, do you object to having your pictures taken? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes: I do. 

The Chairman. Then I must ask the photographers not to take any 
pictures. We are going into executive session. 



44 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Humphreys. 

Mr. Humphreys. Pardon me, I have to get my glasses on, I can 
hardly see yon. 

The CHAIR3IAN. Take yonr time. I just wanted to inform you that 
all those present — first, t want to let you know that all of the press 
are out of the room, and there are no reporters or photographers here, 
and that the people who are present are Members of the Senate, or 
members of our staff and counsel, and the official reporter. 

May I ask first that you stand and be sworn. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. In the presence of the Almighty God, do you swear 
that the testimony which yon are about to give will be the truth, the 
whole truth, and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I do, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF MUEEAY C. HUMPHREYS, CHICAGO, ILL. 

The Chairman. Will you state your name? 

Mr. Humphreys. My name is Murray L. Humphreys. I live at 
7710 Bennett Avenue, Chicago, 111. 

The Chairman. And for how long have you lived there ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, you mean in Chicago, or at that address 
there? 

The Chairman. In Chicago. 

Mr. Humphreys. I have lived in Chicago all my life. 

The Chairman. All your life ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes. 

The Chairman. I see. All right. Now, the questions will be pro- 
l^ounded to you by Mr. Robinson, the counsel. 

Mr. Robinson. How long have you lived at that address, Mr. 
Humphreys ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, I have lived there about since 1936. 

Gentlemen, may I make a statement at this time? 

The Chairman. Well, if you will just answer some questions first, 
then you will be given an opportunity to say anything you want to. 

Mr. Robinson. Is it an apartment house? 

Mr. Humphreys. It is a house. 

Mr. Robinson. It is a regular residence, it is not an apartment. 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right. 

Mv. Robinson. And do you have a name on the door? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, I do not think there is a name on the door. 

Mr. Robinson. Is the house listed in your name ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. You are not the owner of it? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you rent it? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. My wife owns it. 

Mr. Robinson. Your wife owns it? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

]\Ir. Robinson. Do you have any name on the house at all to indi- 
cate Vvho the occupant of the house is ? 

Mr. PIumphreys. No, sir; not at all. 

Ml'. Robinson. Do you receive mail there under the name of 
Humphreys ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 45 

Mr. HuMniRETS. Yes, sir ; I do. 

Mr. R.OBINSOX. Do you receive mail there under any other name? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am g'oing to decline to answer that, and I would 
like to get my statement in here, if I ma}^ 

The Chairman. You decline to answer that question, as to whether 
you receive mail there, is that it ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Ask another question, and then it may be that 
you may wish to make a statement. 

Mr. Robinson. Mr. Humphreys, do you recall a case in which you 
were involved before the United States Board of Tax Appeals ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Do I recall it? 

Mr. Robinson. Yes. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, I do. Who could forget it? 

]\Ir. Robinson. Do you recall the date that that case was heard? 

Mr. Humphreys. The date? 

Mr. Robinson. Yes, the year, approximately. 

Mr. Humphreys. No, I don't. 

jNIr. Robinson. Around 1939, would that be about right? 

Mr. Humphreys. Approximately that, yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. And you testified in tliat case rather fully? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, I did. 

Mr. Robinson. And clo you recall what he circumstances were of 
the case ? What was the basis of the case ? 

Mr. Humphreys. It was a tax case, a matter of collecting the tax, 

Mr. Robinson. Certain taxes that you had failed to report, was 
tliat the basis for the charge? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right, sir. 

jSIr. Robinson. Was there also an indictment that arose out of the 
same facts? 

JVIr. Humphreys. Yes, sir, but now I am going to ask to make my 
statement. I have asked for it three or four times. 

Mr. Robinson. That is a matter of public record, isn't it? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right, sir. It is a matter of public rec- 
ord, but I would still like to get my statement into the record at this 
time. 

The Chairman. Does it pertain to the very matter that has just 
been asked of you ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, it does not, Mr. Chairman, but I have re- 
quested to make my statement when I first came into the room. 

Senator Tobey. I'll bet I can guess what it is. 

Mr. Humphreys. It will save your time. 

The Chairman. You are at liberty to do so. 

Mr. Humphreys. Thank you. 

The statement in the public press riuoting members of this com- 
mittee and other Federal officials assert that I am to be prosecuted 
for violation of Federal criminal laws. Because of this statement 
I must assert fully my constitutional right against self-incrimina- 
tion. Accordingly I refuse to answer the questions upon the grounds 
that my answers might tend to incriminate me, under the fifth 
amendment of the Constitution, which provides that no person shall 
be compelled to be a witness against himself. 

Tliank you. 

So277 — 51 — pt. 13 4 



46 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Senator Tobey. Thank yon, sir. 

Mr. Humphreys. I would like to have this in the record. 

The Chairman. It may be placed in the record. 

(The document referred to above appears on p. 238.) 

Senator Tobey. Have you read the United States Constitution ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to refuse to answer that. 

Senator Tobey. That is nothing to be ashamed of, you know. 

Mr. Humphreys. No, it isn't, but I doubt if very many people have 
read the Constitution all the way through. 

Mr. MosER. Do you refuse to answer the simple question as to 
whether you read the Constitution of the United States, "Yes" or 
"No?" Do you refuse to answer on the ground that it would incrimi- 
nate you ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No. Just a minute. Let's get this right in the rec- 
ord. If you want to make a record. I didn't say I refused to answer, 
or I didn't read. I said I have not read it all. Is that clear ? 

The Chairman. Then you stated that you thought few people had. 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right, sir. 

Mr. MosER. You refuse to answer the question of whether or not 
you have read it all ; is that it ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I did not refuse to answer it, no, sir. 

Mr. MosER. Then answer it "Yes" or "No." 

Mr. Humphreys. I said "No," I have not read it all. 

Mr. Moser. All right. 

The Chairman. Now, wait for another question to be asked. 

Senator Tobey. Do you mind telling us who prepared that state- 
ment for you ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I have to refuse that, Senator, I am sorry. 

Mr. MosER. Was it prepared by counsel ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I refuse to answer. I stand on my constitutional 
rights. 

Mr. Moser. Do you claim it would tend to incriminate you to 
refer to the fact that you may have counsel ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I just am refusing. 

Mr. Moser. You are refusing, irrespective of whether it would 
expose you to an accusation of crime ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, I don't know whether it would or would not. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, you must have some reasonable grounds for 
anticipating that it might. Do you have those grounds, or are you 
just stating it categorically? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will stand on my original statement, counselor. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, do I understand that you refuse to answer any 
questions concerning matters that are of public record? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to stand on my statement. 

Mr. Robinson. In other words, whether or not it is not a matter 
of public record that you were involved in a particular case, and that 
you were indicted? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, I thinlc that is leading to other questions, 
and I will have to decline, like I have done already. 

Mr. MosER. Mr. Humphreys. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You understand, I would like to sav this, since you have 
no counsel here with you, you understand that if we ask you questions. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 47 

the answers to which will not tend to incriminate you, that you have 
to answ^er, and that the only questions that you can refuse to answer 
are the ones which will tend to incriminate you. 

If I ask you a simple question, such as, "Wliat is your name and ad- 
dress," you cannot decline to answer. If I ask you a question such 
as how you got here, by train or automobile, or something like that, 
where there is no danger of incrimination, you have got to answer. 

Now, if we ask you about a case which is a matter of public record 
in the Board of Tax Appeals, if your answer will not tend to incrim- 
inate you, you have got to answer it. Do you understand that ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Would you mind telling me your name, sir? 

Mr. MosER. My name is 

The Chairman. This is Mr. Richard Moser, chief counsel for the 
committee. 

Mr. Humphreys. Oh, I am sorry. I just like to know who I am 
talking to. 

Well, I don't understand it that way. I understand that the small- 
est question may tend to incriminate me, so therefore I don't know if 
it is a leading question that you are offering to me, or whether I am 
in good hands or not, if you will pardon my expression. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, is your basis for refusing to answer all ques- 
tions on the ground that some questions might lead to other questions 
that would tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. But the particular question that you might be asked 
would not in and of itself tend to incriminate you ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, I am not a lawyer here, and I would like to 
help this committee if I possibly could, but I don't feel like I am 
amongst friends, just to be plain spoken. 

Senator Tobey. Well, you could, you know; some of us think you 
could open up and tell us an interesting story, if you want to. 

Mr. Humphreys. Isn't that your opinion. Senator? 

Senator Tobey. It certainly is, and I certainly credit you with it. 

Mr. Humphreys. It is not mine, Senator. 

Senator Tobey. But you do agree as a citizen, under the Constitu- 
tion, that we all want to make this country a decent, clean, and 
straight nation; isn't that right? 

Mr. Humphreys. Oh, yes ; that is right. 

Senator Tobey. And with all of this criminal business that is going 
on in Chicago and across the Nation, and if you have information 
of it, don't you think, as a good citizen, that you ought to tell us all 
you know about the sordid characters of the underworld ? 

Mr. Humphreys Don't you think that is just your statement, the 
last part of it? Don't you think that Chicago is as clean as any other 
city ? Were you insinuating that our city is not clean ? 

Senator Tobey. Well, I was not picking on Chicago particularly. I 
will say any city; let's take Nashua, N. H. That was just an illustra- 
tion, that is all. Now, on the basis, don't you think, as a good citizen, 
that you and I should — that it is our job to tell about wrongdoings 
and sin and criminality ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Do you doubt whether I am a good citizen or not? 

Senator Tobey. I have not intimated that, but don't you think that 
you and"I and everybody else should do that ? 



48 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes ; I do. 

Senator Tobey. Won't you take the opportunity to tell this com- 
mittee all you know about crime and those criminals that are carrying 
on an illegal business in this country, starting all the way through ? 

Mr. Hujmphreys. You heard my statement here. 

Senator Tobey. T heard it, but I say — I asked the paramount ques- 
tion : Isn't it our duty to divulge these things and give all the infor- 
mation we can before a body like this, of the United States Senate, 
and the courts, so that we can make a decent America out of it? 

Mr. Humphreys. You have my answer. I think I heard you make 
those speeches before. 

Senator Tobey. I am making them again. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes ; you have trained on that. 

Senator Tobey. You admitted you thought that we ought to, as good 
citizens, do that. 

Mr. Hu.mphreys. That is right. 

Senator Tobey. And you now decline to do that? 

Mr. Humphreys. You asked the question if I was a good citizen. 

Senator Tobey. I asked if we are both good citizens, then shouldn't 
we make public all the information we have and give evidence against 
Avrongdoing in this country? Isn't that right, that we should do 
that as good citizens? 

Mr. HuarPHREYs. Well, you have had my answer. There is no use 
in you and I getting into a discussion here, Senator. I am still stand- 
ing on my statement, and I want that made clear. 

Senator Tobey. Well, I got that. But there is something that 
transcends that statement, and that is that you and I, as good citizens, 
should be doing something for the good of the country. 

Mr. ItuBixsoN. Are you a citizen ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. I was born and raised in Chicago. 

Mr. Robinson. When w^ere you born ? 

Mr. Humphreys. It was 52 years ago, in 1899, April 20. 

Mr. EoBiNSON. And were your parents born here, too? 

INIr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Are your parents living ? 

INIr. Humphreys. My father is living. 

Mr. Robinson. Is he in business ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Is he retired? 

INIr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you support him? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. And you are married? 

INIr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

IVIr. Robinson. Do you have any children ? 

]\Ir. HuarPHREYs. Yes, sir. 

INIr. Robinson. How many children? 

Mr. HuisiPHREYS. One. 

Mr. Robinson. A daughter? 

Mr. Hu.AiPiHiEYS. Yes, sir. 

INTr. RmiNsoN. How old is she? 

Mr. Humphreys. She is 16. 

Mr. RoiuxsoN. And vou liave alwavs lived in Chicago? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 49 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Has Humphre,ys always been your name? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am <2:oing- to decline to answer that, sir. I will 
stand on my constitutional rights there, and I am going to claim my 
privilege and refuse to answer that. We might as well have that 
plain between you and I. 

]Mr. Robinson. What is your father's name ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Bryant. 

Mr. Robinson. Is that his first name or last name ? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right; Bryant Humphreys. 

Mr. Robinson. Bryant Humphreys? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. So you were born with the name of Humphreys? 

Mr. Humphrey's. I hope I was. Nobody has told me differently. 

Mr. Robinson. The question I was trying to ask was whether you 
always had the name of Humphreys, the name that you were born with. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever used the name of Harris ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes ; I have. 

Mr. Robinson. And J. Harris ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes ; I have. 

Mr. Robinson. And did you ever have your name legally changed 
to Harris ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you use that for business reasons ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will have to decline to answer that. Are you 
a Senator? Pardon me. 

Mr. Robinson. No ; I am counsel. 

The Chairman. Mr. Robinson is counsel for the committee. 

]Mr. Humphreys. I am sorry, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you used the name Harris long? 

Mr. Humphreys. A long time ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Would you say why you used that name? 

Mr. Humphreys. No; I wouldn't say why I have used that name. 

Mr. Robinson. At the time you were indicted, did you serve time 
for income-tax violations? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, that is a matter of record ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. You were sentenced to about 18 months ; isn't that 
correct ? 

]Mr. HuMPPiREYs. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Where did you serve your time? 

Mr. Humphreys. Leavenworth, Kans. 

Mr. Robinson. And you were released after serving how long? 

Mr. Humphrey's. Well, the maximum, I think, was almost 15 
months. I am not quite sure. I think it was that, or they give 
90 days, or something, off for good behavior. It is so long ago I 
don't recall. 

Mr. Robinson. Were you arrested immediately after your in- 
dictment. 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to refuse to answer that. I will claim 
my privilege on that. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, you have testified to that before, haven't you? 

Mr. Humphreys. What have I testified to ? 



50 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. KoBiNSON. That you were not arrested immediately after your 
indictment ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I have not testified to that. 

Mr. Robinson. You did not testify to that in the tax case, that you 
left Chicago before you were arrested, and had been gone about a 
year ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I don't recall that. 

Mr. Robinson. And that you came in and surrendered? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will decline to answer that. I don't know what 
you are getting at, Counselor, but I am going to decline to answer 
that, and claim my privilege on that question. 

And I think so long as we are going into that, and you are going 
to try to insist on me answering questions here, that I am going to 
claim my privilege on all answers from now on in this hearing, and 
stand on nij^ constitutional rights under the fifth amendment. 

Mr. Robinson. In other words, you will refuse to answer any more 
pertinent questions that are put to you by any members of the com- 
mittee or counsel ? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right. 

Mr. MosER. On any subject? 

Mr. Humphreys. On any subject ; yes, sir. 

Mr. MosER. Even though it may be relevant for the purposes of this 
hearing ? 

Mr. Humphreys. You just heard my statement, Counselor, and that 
is what I stand on. 

The Chairman. We do want to make it plain, we want to get it 
straight from you, as to just what your attitude is. Are we to under- 
stand in regard to any and every question that might be asked, of any 
kind, that you will decline to answer ? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you been to the Mayo Clinic recently ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will decline to answer that. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you have some trouble with your eyes? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am blind in one eye; yes, sir. 

The Chairman. The reason I made that statement is that I wish 
to explain to you that the committee directs you to answer. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir; I understand that, and I am going to 
decline. 

The Chairman. I did not want to repeat it each time. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes. And may we have it understood that I am 
standing on my constitutional rights? 

The Chairman. Yes ; in regard to each question. Counsel, will you 
then ask the questions you have in mind ? 

^ Mr. Robinson. Did you at one time, or were you at one time, asso- 
ciated in any way with the Meadowmoor Dairy ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to decline to answer that. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you ever know any people who were associated 
with that company? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privileges on that. 

The Chairman. Now, just in this connection, the instructions are 
given to you by the committee to answer each of those questions, and 
you refuse? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes; I understand; and you understand that I 
claim my privilege. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 51 

The Chairman. Yon claim your privilege in each case? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right, sir. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard of Charles Fischetti? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to decline to answer that. I claim my 
privilege. 

Mr. KoBiNSON. What business was he in ? 

]Mr. Humphreys. I claim my privilege. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you recall testifying in the tax case that Charles 
Fischetti w'as a bookmaker? 

ISIr. Humphreys. I will decline to answer that, sir, and claim my 
privilege. 

Mr. Robinson. You claim your privilege as to whether you recall 
making that statement ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will claim my privilege ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. It is a fact you made the statement; is it not? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know Ralph O'Hara? 

Mr. Humphreys. I claim my privilege on it also, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard or read about the R. & H. 
Publishing Co. ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will refuse to answer that question on the ground 
it might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard or read about the Trans- 
America Publishing Co. ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to refuse to answer that question on 
the ground that my answers might tend to incriminate me. 

Mr, Robinson. Do you know what the business was of the Trans- 
America Publishing Co.? 

Mr. Humphreys. I still claim my privilege on that, sir, 

Mr, Robinson, That was a legitimate business, was it not? 

Mr, Humphreys. You have had my answer on that. I still claim 
my privilege. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know whether Ralph O'Hara was an officer 
of that company? 

Mr. Humphreys, I still claim my privilege on that, also. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know James Ragen ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I claim my privilege on that, also. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard of James Ragen ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that also, 
Senator. 

Mr, Robinson. Do you know, or have you ever heard of the Conti- 
nental Press Co.? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr, Robinson, Did you ever have any conversations regarding the 
wire service with James Ragen ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I claim my privilege on that. 

Mr. Robinson, Did you ever have any conversations with Jake 
Guzik regarding the wire service ? 

Mr, Humphreys. I will have to claim my privilege on that also, 
sir. 

The Chairman. Do you know Jake Guzik ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will have to claim my privilege. That may be 
a leading question, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever heard of the Mid-West News Service? 



52 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. HuMPHRETS. I will claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you know Al Capone ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will have to claim my privilege on that also. 

Senator Tobey. Is that a privilege ? Do you mean it is a privilege 
to have known him? 

Mr. Humphreys. You know what I mean, Senator, You under- 
stand that very plainly by now. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you know Jack McGurn ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will have to claim my privilege on that also, 
sir. That is a leading question. I feel like that is a leading question. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you know Frank Nitti ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you ever have any business relations with any 
of these individuals I have just recently named? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, I am going to have to stand on my consti- 
tutional rights and refuse to answer that, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Now, what business are you presently engaged in ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to have to refuse to answer that. I 
claim my privilege. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you filed in recent years tax returns ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that. I think 
that is a leading question. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, can you answer the simple question as to 
whether you have filed a tax return in recent years ? 

Mr. Humphreys. You know that, sir; you know that without me 
answering it, and you have had my answer. I am going to claim my 
constitutional right and refuse to answer. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you recall reporting in your tax returns for the 
past 2 years the sum of $45,000 for each year of miscellaneous or 
sundry income ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to refuse to answer that, sir, and claim 
my privilege. 

Mr. Robinson. Would you state what the source of that income is? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to refuse to answer that. I am claim- 
ing my privilege. 

The Chairman. Have you been engaged in any legitimate activity 
in the last 10 years ? 

Mr. HuMi'HREYS. Well, Senator, I will have to stand on my con- 
stitutional rights on that question. I am sorry, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you ever invest any money in either the R. & H. 
Publishing Co. or Trans- America ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to have to refuse to answer that, sir, 
and stand on my constitutional rights. 

jNIr. Robinson. Did you know Hymie Levin? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege. 

Mr. Robinson. Or Phil Katz or Roy Jones ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that, sir. 

Tlie Chairman. Or Willie iSTemoth? 

Mr. Humphreys. What was that, sir ? 

Tlie Chairman. Or Willie Nemoth. 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to have to claim my privilege. The 
name is strange, but I will claim my privilege on it. 

Mr. Robinson. Does your business keep you in Chicago all the 
time ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 53 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to revert to my privilege on that also. 
Counselor. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you been to California ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to refuse to answer that on the ground 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Robinson. Or Florida, or New York? 

Mv. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege also on that, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know Frank Costello ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr. Robinson. Or Joe Adonis ? 

Mv. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that also. 

Mv. Robinson. Or Jack Dragna ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that also. 

Mv. Robinson. Have you ever heard — I might have asked you this, 
but I would like to ask it again — have you ever heard of the Con- 
tinental Press Co. ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to have to refuse to answer that ques- 
tion. I think that is a leading question. 

The Chairman. You do understand in regard to all of these that 
you are directed to answer by the committee, and you still decline for 
the reasons you stated ? 

Mv. Humphrey's. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Robinson. Does your wife have a separate business from 
yours ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to have to refuse to answer that, and 
claim my privilege on that. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know or did you know William Drury? 

Mr. Humphreys, I am going to claim my privilege on that also, 
sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know who killed James Ragen ? 

Mr. Humphrey's. I am going to have to claim my privilege on that, 
also, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know who killed William Drury ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will have to claim my privilege on that also, sir. 

INIr. Robinson. If you had any knowledge of circumstances of the 
killing of either of those two, would you give it to the police officials ? 

Mr. HuisiPHREYS. I am going to claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know Ralph Pierce? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr. Robinson. Have you ever been in business with him ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to refuse to answer that on the ground 
it may tend to incriminate me. 

]Mr. Robinson. Did you know the gentleman who preceded you into 
the hearing room? 

Mr. Humphrey's. I will refuse to answer that also. 

Mr. Robinson. Do you know him under the name of Rocco Fis- 
chetti ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to claim my privilege on that also. 

Mr. Robinson. How did you get to Washington for this hearing? 

Mr. Humphreys. Oh, for this hearing? 

Mr. Robinson. Yes. 

Mr. HuJiPHREYS. I flew in. 

Mr. Robinson. From Chicago? 



54 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Senator Tobet. When did you come in, last night? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Senator Tobey. On nine fourteen? 

Mr. Humphreys. I don't recall. 

Senator Tobey. Capital Airlines? 

Mr. Humphreys. You mean the number of the flight — yes; it was 
Capital Airlines. 

Senator Tobey. Did you get in about 10 o'clock ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Something like that. 

Senator Tobey. I was on that plane, too. 

Mr. Humphreys. You were? Well, we had a distinguished guest 
on it then, didn't we? 

Senator Tobey. I can say that that goes both ways. However, if I 
had seen you there, maybe we could have settled this all up before we 
got in town, 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, if I had seen you. Senator, I think I would 
have tried to get off. 

Mr. Kobinson. Do you know Paid Ricca ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to have to decline to answer that. 

Mr. RoBixsoN. Did you know Louis Campagna ? 

Mr. HuaiPHREYs. I claim my privilege on that, sir. 

Mr. EoBiNSON. Isn't it true that you visited Capone fairly fre- 
quently ? 

Mr. Humphreys. What was that question ? 

Mr. Robinson. Isn't it true that you visited Al Capone fairly 
frequently when he was alive? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will have to claim my privilege on that, sir. 
I don't know where you get all these questions. 

Mr. Robinson, Do you recall testifying as to that before the tax 
board ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir ; that is not so. That is not so at all. 

The Chairman. You did not testify to that? 

Mr. Humphreys. He is referring way back to 1930 now, and he is 
putting the question wrong. Yes; I did say that I met Al Capone 
once or twice at that hearing, and that is all. 

Mr. Robinson. And that you were friendly with him and discussed 
matters with him ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Oh, no, no. 

The Chairman. You did not testify to that ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I don't remember just what the testimony was, but 
I remember meeting him back in 1930, or thereabouts. It could have 
been 1929 or 1928, somewhere. 

The Chairman. In that testimony at that time that was given, 
which you have already admitted, were there any questions asked 
concerning a ransom paid for a kidnaping? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, Senator, that is a leading question, and I 
will have to decline; not that I don't feel that I can answer the 
question, but I feel that it leads to something else. 

The Chairman. My only question is whether or not it was included 
in that testimony, whether there was some testimony about that. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir; there was. If that is what you would 
like to know. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 55 

The Chairman. We wanted to identify whether it was tl*e same 
record. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes ; it is all the same case. 

The Chairman. Can yon give ns any details as to what was testified 
to or what the record showed as to the qnestions concerning the 
payment of a ransom of $50,000 for kidnaping'^ 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, is that the only thing yon w^ish to talk 
about on it ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Humphreys. I can make that very clear to yon. It seemed 
that 1 went to prison for my income tax, and I think that was in the 
year 1934, and I was released in right close to 1936, and at the time 
I went in and pleaded guilty to my income-tax charges, and at that 
time this kidnaping was brought np, and we threatened to withdraw 
the plea, because there was no such thing ever happened between Mr., 
I think his name was Ficci, if I remember, and, in fact, I never even 
knew the man. 

So it was withdrawn by the district attorney at that time, and he 
accepted the plea on the income tax. At least, I understood it that 
way. 

Then when I tried to make the offer and compromise, of course, 
that was more ignorance on my part, not being familiar with the 
Government's ways, and they had offered to make a settlement with 
me outside of the tax board of appeals, and at that time whoever the 
lawyers were representing the Government, not to me personally, 
but to my lawyer, and he turned down the offer Avithout consulting 
me about it. I think he offered them a ridiculous figure of some kind, 
and the case was carried over for another year. 

When we went before the tax board of appeals they brought Mr. 
Steve Summers in, and other members of the union, and Mr. Steve 
Summers claimed at that time there was a $50,000 ransom paid for the 
release of Mr. Ficci. I think that is the right pronunciation. And 
that he had seen, if I recall his testimony, he had seen two fellows 
pick up the ransom money, and he had delivered the money and stuff 
to a church, I am quite sure it w^as a church doorway, and that one 
of these fellows was myself and another was Barker, if I recall. 

At that time my lawyer questioned him, when he was on the wit- 
ness stand, and asked him if he saw the car that picked this ransom 
money up in front of his office the next day, and he declined to answer 
that at that time, and the commissioner, I think that is what you call 
him on those hearings, isn't it, a commissioner, he demanded that 
he answer the question, and told him to answer that question and come 
back with the lawyer the next morning and answer that question 
or he was going to cite him. 

The next morning he come back on the stand and he said he wasn't 
sure whether that was the car, so the commissioner let it go, and I had 
to pay for it, in other words. 

But the whole question there now, I am making this statement now, 
and I realize what perjury is in this hearing, but I had nothing to do 
with the kidnaping of Mr. Ficci, and his whole trouble was, this 
Mr. Summers was quite an elderly fellow, and he was childish, and he 
had a vindictive state of mind, and his revenge was caused by my 
being in the milk business, and that was one way to get me out of the 
milk business. 



56 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

That is my story, anyway, and I am trying to get it as correct as I 
can now. 

Mr. MosER. You have been in the milk business, then? 

Mr. Humphreys. I said I would answer that one question. I was 
just bringing it up. 

Senator Tobey. Which side of the cow do you sit on to milk? 

H^r. Humphreys. Beg your pardon? 

Senator Tobey. Which side of a cow do you sit on to milk ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, I don't know if I have ever gotten that 
low yet. 

Senator Hunt Were your father and mother born in this country ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Senator Hunt. Has Chicago been their home for a great many 
years ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. In fact, they had their sixtieth anni- 
versary a few years back, before I lost my mother. 

Senator Hunt. Was your wife born in this country, too ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Senator Hunt. What was her maiden name? 

Mr. Humphreys. Brendel. 

Senator Hunt. Do you have just the one child? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is all ; yes, sir. 

Senator Hunt. And she is 16 ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Senator Hunt. Is she in high school ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Senator Hunt. Was she born before or after you were in Leaven- 
worth ? It must have been about that time ; wasn't it ? 

Mr. Humphreys. It was just about the time; yes. But my wife 
was away with me at that time, before I surrendered. 

What does that have to do with this hearing? 

Senator Hunt. It is very interesting, to those of us who know of 
the records that you gentlemen have, to learn something about the 
family, to ascertain what it is in their background of family life that 
brings about situations like yours. I am trying to get a social back- 
ground of your family. 

Are you a high-school graduate? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. But you are going into things that I 
don't think should be brought up in this. Idon't see where that has 
anything to do with this hearing. 

Senator Hunt. All you have to do is to say you refuse to answer. 

Mr. Humphreys. Let's start riglit now. I refuse. 

Senator Hunt. Do you want to tell me what year your daughter 
is in high school? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will have to refuse to answer that, so long as 
you have suggested that. 

Senator Hunt. Does your daughter know you are down here today ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I refuse to answer that. 

Senator Hunt. Does she knoAv vrhy you are down here? 

Mr. HuMPPiREYS. I have to refuse to answer that. 

Senator Hunt. What church does your daugliter belong to? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to have to refuse to answer. I don't 
see what that has to do with this meeting here, with these honorable 
gentlemen. I cannot understand why my daughter should be brought 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 57 

into a meeting like this. Yon wonldn't like yonr clangliter or wife 
brought into it. 

Senator Hunt. That is not any of your business why I am asking 
questions. All you need do is refuse to answer. You need not com- 
ment on wdiy I ask you questions, I am sure, and I am sure that 1 have 
not asked you any questions 

Mr. Humphreys. I am sure that I would not say it was none of your 
business; I would be more of a gentleman about it. 

Senator Hunt. Sometimes in an official capacity which we occupy 
we have to ask questions, and w^e have to get these things done by 
finding out these things. 

Mr. Humphreys. That I realize, sir. 

Senator Hunt. Now, you don't care to tell me what church your 
daughter belongs to ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. 

Senator Hunt. And you don't care to tell what year she is in in 
high school ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No, sir. 

Senator Hunt. Do you care to tell me what high school she 
attends ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I could tell you; it is already in the record, but 
I am going to refuse to answer, because I think you are asking the 
wrong questions. Are you a Senator? 

The Chairman. This is Senator Hunt of Wyoming. 

Senator Hunt. What is your daughter's first name ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I am going to decline to answer those questions. 
I don't see where my daughter has anything to do with this hearing. 

Senator Hunt. All you have to do is to say you do or do not care 
to answer it. It is not for you to pass on the type of questions I ask 
at all. If you don't care to answer, just say so. 

Mr. Humphreys. Would you like to have people asking questions 
about your family? 

Senator Hunt. It is immaterial. You are not questioning the 
Senator; the Senator is questioning you. You are the one who is the 
witness. 

Mr. HuMPHi?EYS. I realize that, but I still resent the line of ques- 
tioning. Senator. 

Senator Hunt. You are going to be cited for contempt ; I can tell 
you that. 

]\Ir. Humphreys. I am sorry to hear that, sir. 

Senator Hunt. When somebody is asking you a decent line of ques- 
tions, and nothing that you should refuse to answer. What I am 
getting at is the sociological aspect of this situation that causes so 
much crime in the country, and we are trying to find out something 
about your home life and what brought this on. We are not going 
to solve these problems until w^e get to the very basis of what causes 
crime in the United States. 

]Mr. Humphreys. Then you are under the impression that I am a 
criminal ; is that it ? 

Senator Hunt. I would refuse to answer the question, because it 
might incriminate me. I have no other questions. 

The Chairman. All risht. 



58 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Humphreys. I am sorry, Senator ; I did not mean to go against 
you there, but that is talk about my family, and I don't think they 
should be brought into the hearing. 

The Chairman. Mr. Moser, the chief counsel, has several questions. 

Mr. MosER. Do you know that the purpose of this committee is to 
investigate the conditions that give rise to organized crime through- 
out the United States in interstate commerce ? 

Do you know of any illegal activities that are being carried on that 
woukr be of interest to this committee, in which you are not involved 
yourself? 

JSIr. Humphreys. I am going to have to decline to answer that. I 
will stand on my constitutional rights. 

The Chairman. Counsel makes it plain that he is only referring to 
knowledge on your part about matters that do not in any way involve 
you. 

Mr. MosER. Crimes that you could not be accused of. Do you know 
of any such illegal activities ? 

Mr. Humphreys. After the statements this committee has made to 
the press, and such as that, I cannot answer questions like that. 

Mr. MosER. You decline to answer ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes ; I do. 

The Chairman. You are instructed by the committee to answer, 
and you still decline ? 

Mr. Humphreys. For, and you understand on what grounds. 

The Chairman. For the reasons you have stated ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. In other words, you have already stated the reasons 
why you have declined, and the same reasons hold good in this 
connection ? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is correct. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. EoBiNSON. I believe you testified you have been a resident of 
Chicago practically all your life ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. RoBiNSON. Do you know anything about the problem they have 
in Chicago with respect to narcotic traffic among high-school children? 

Mr. Humphreys. Only wliat I have read in the newspapers, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, could you describe what you have read in the 
newspapers ? 

Mr. I-Iumphreys. Well, it is a terrible thing if the children are 
getting hold of narcotics and such as that, but I wouldn't know any 
more than you know about it, and I am quite sure you don't know 
much about narcotics. 

Mr. Robinson. Well, the purpose of my asking is to ascertain what 
information we can obtain with respect to that particular problem, 
and I assume that you have a daughter who is in high school. 

Mr. Hi MPHREYS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. And I wondered whether or not there had been any 
information brouglit back to you through her about the very serious 
problem that I know and assume you know from the newspaiiers that 
exists in high schools of Chicago. 

Mr. Humphreys. I have heard such things only in the newspapers 
sir. I don't know anything about that, and I don't let my dauo^hter o-et 
that far away from me. I keep her home nights. "^ '^ 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 59 

Mr. EoBiNsoN. You have read about the initial approach of the sale 
of marijuana cigarettes to high-school students? 

]Mr. Humphreys. I have read it in the newspapers. 

Mr. KoBiNSON. And the graduation from the use of that form of 
narcotics to heroin and other stronger forms of dope? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Robinson. You have not been involved in that as a citizen in 
any way, to try to do something about that problem? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, I don't think we have it on our district. 
I don't know, and I have never had anyone bring it up. 

Mr. Robinson. What district is it most prevalent in, from your read- 
ing of the papers ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I imagine it is more in the slum areas. I don't 
think it is around in the outlying districts. 

Mr. Robinson. Is it particularly acute in the South Side? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, from what I have read, it is mostly in the 
colored schools. I don't know, of course; I don't go by newspapers 
either, and I don't know how true it is. In other words, mostly like 
the reports you have read and I have read on it, that is all I can say. 

The Chairman. I think that will end the examination. 

Mr. Humphreys. Thank you, sir. 

May I ask to have the interim report sent to the court or to the grand 
jury if this committee intends to ask for an indictment on this hearing? 

The Chairman. Just in that connection 

Mr. Humphreys. Where my name has been involved. 

The Chairman. You mean you want to have the committee reports 
sent to the grand jury ? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right. If this committee has intentions 
of recommending my indictment, like the honorable Senator sug- 
gested, then I would like to have the report sent to the district attorney. 

The Chairman. It is interesting for me to observe that in the case 
of the preceding witness, Rocco Fischetti, that he made the same 
request. 

Had you together discussed the matter before you came here? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes ; we had. 

The Chairman. You had? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, and you know, the longer you fellows work, 
the more we understand what our rights are. 

The Chairman. I see. So, there was a conference between you so 
as to decide on a joint statement of your attitude; is that right? 

Mr. Humphreys. No. I just told him that I was going to ask for 
it, and I suppose he asked for it, too. 

The Chairman. The only reason I mentioned it, in his comment 
he does have a similar request, and it struck me as significant that 
the two requests were made along the same lines. 

You did discuss it together? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes. I had breakfast with him. 

Senator Tobey. Your minds met on the procedure to follow? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. I think we are right on that. 

Mr. Robinson. Where did you have breakfast with him ? 

Mr. Humphreys. At the — what is the big hotel ? — The Mayflower. 

Senator Tobey. What did you have for breakfast? 

Mr. MosER. You and Mr. Fischetti have the same lawyer ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I have no law^yer on this, sir. 



60 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Robinson. How long have you known Mr. Fisclietti? 

Mr. Humphreys. Now, you are starting it all over. 

Mr. Robinson. You did know liim. You had breakfast with him. 

Mr, Humphreys. That is right. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you come here to Washington with him? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes; I was on the same plane with him. The 
Senator should know that. 

Mr. Robinson. Did you have arrangements to meet him in Chicago 
before you came here? 

Mr. Humphreys. Sir? 

Mr. Robinson. Did you arrange to meet Rocco in Chicago before 
you came here? 

Mr. HumphPvEys. Well, I am going to decline to answer that, sir, 
on the ground that it may tend to incriminate me. 

The Chairman. You have asked the committee in the event there 
is any action looking toward contempt that the record be sent in 
order that we can understand and give consideration to what you are 
requesting? 

Mr. Humphreys. I met him at the airport, sir. 

The Chairman. I am not talking about him. I am talking about 
you, now. 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. I misunderstood you. 

The Chairman. Let me start over agani. You have asked for 
yourself in the event this committee decides to take steps looking 
toward your being found or cited for contempt, that the record be 
sent up ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Why do you want that? 

Mr. Humphrey. Because I just feel that the court can decide better 
on my testimony here, and what the committee is looking for, and 
I think I will have more chance to explain it to the court. 

The Chairman. If the whole record is sent up ? 

Mr. Humphpjeys. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. With particular reference to what phases of the 
committee's investigation? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, mostly, sir, on my own basis. 

The Chairman. I see. As relating to you ? 

Mr. Humphreys. That is right. 

Mr. Robinson. How did Rocco know that you were coming to 
Washington ? 

Mr. Humppireys. Beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Robinson. How did Rocco know you were coming to Wash- 
ington ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, there wouldn't be any secret on that. It has 
been in the newspapers. 

Mr. Robinson. How would he know you were coming, too ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Robinson. How would he know you were coming, too, or how 
would you know he was coming today ? 

Mr. Humphreys. How would I know ? 

Mr. Robinson. Yes. 

Mr. Humphreys. Well, I suppose by talking to him. How else 
would a person know? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 61 

Mr. Robinson. When did you talk to him about it? 

Mr. Humphreys. I have talked to Mr. Fischetti several times. 

Mr. Robinson. About his appearance here ? 

Mr. Humphreys. No ; not about his appearance here. I just knew he 
was coming, and I come with him. 

The Chairman. In other words, you talked about coming in on the 
same plane? 

Mr. Humphreys. Oh, yes, sir. 

Senator Tobey. Do you know Charles, the one who died, the one that 
died? 

Mr. Humphreys. I will decline to answer that. 

Senator Tobey. Did Charles resemble, physically, this Rocco Fisch- 
etti ? They looked alike, did they ? 

Mr. Humphreys. I decline to answer that. Senator. 

The Chairman. All right. I think that will end the statement. 

Now, you have given bond before ? 

Mr. Humphreys. Yes, sir, I have. 

The Chairman. The committee considers you are still under sub- 
pena, and without requiring a new bond, the same bond will be 
continued. 

Mr. Humphreys. Thank you very much. 

(Whereupon, at 1 p. m., the committee adjourned.) 



85277— 51— pt. 13- 



INVESTIGATION OF ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE 

COMMERCE 



TUESDAY, JUNE 19, 1951 

United States Senate, 
Subcommittee of the Special Committee To Investi- 
gate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce, 

Washington, D. C. 
executive session 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call of the chairman, at 10 a. m., 
in room 457. Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C, Senator 
Herbert R. CConor (chairman) presiding. 

Present : Senator O'Conor. 

Also present : Richard G. Moser, chief counsel ; Joseph Nellis, spe- 
cial counsel; James M. Hepbron, administrative assistant; Lawrence 
Goddard, investigator. 

The Chairman. All right, gentlemen, the committee is now going 
into executive session. Will you kindly clear the room. 

The committee will come to order. The committee is now in execu- 
tive session. 

I should like to note for the record that by resolution of the full 
committee, a subcommittee has been authorized to sit in connection 
with the interrogation of the witnesses summoned for today, and the 
subcommittee has been duly appointed, one Senator constituting a 
quorum, and the Senator from Maryland, pursuant to that authority, 
will proceed with the interrogation of the witness, Samuel Haas. 

Now, Mr. Haas, it is customary for everyone appearing here to be 
sworn. I don't suppose you have any objection to that. 

Mr. Haas. No objection. 

The Chairman. Very well. Will you please raise your right hand. 

In the presence of the Almighty God, do your swear that the testi- 
mony which you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Haas. I do. 

The Chairman. Now, we understand that your counsel accom- 
panies you. 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

The Chairman. Will you be good enough to give the reporter your 
name for the record, please. 

Mr. Becker. My name is Samuel Becker, and my address is 1 Wall 
Street, New York. 

The Chairman. We welcome you here. We are very pleased to 
have you with us. At any time during the proceedings we will be 

63 



64 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

glad to have you make any statement or any suggestion as to any 
questions you may wish to ask. 

Mr, Becker. Thank you. I wonder if I may be permitted now just 
to say briefly two things that I would like to call your attention to. 

The Chairman. You are welcome to go ahead, sir. 

Mr. Becker. First, I have something that I regard as rather serious. 

On June 7 there ap]:)eared in the Cleveland press a news story with 
a Washington date line, and I would like to show you the paper. It 
contains information obviously taken from Mr. Haas' income-tax re- 
turns, and the news writer says that he got the information from the 
staff of the committee. I consider this a very serious matter. It is 
a violation of at least two Federal statutes, and more particularly a 
violation of the President's proclamation and the Treasury's decision 
thereon, which had to do with the opening of income-tax returns to 
the inspection of your committee. 

The President's proclamation and the Treasury decision made on 
it so that it is confidential. That confidence, I believe, has been vio- 
lated, and I earnestly request your conmiittee to make an investigation 
as to how this information became public. 

It happens to be a criminal offense to publish this information. 

The Chairman. Mr. Becker, in response to your remarks, I may say 
that the connnittee never gave out or authorized the giving of any such 
evidence or information to the j^ublic press. The committee would 
not do such a thing, and would not countenance the doing of such a 
thing, but would strongly disapprove of such action. 

Mr. Becker. That is what I thought. 

The Chairman. And the committee will undertake to find out 
about it. 

Mr. Becker. I earnestly request that that be done. 

Now, there is one other thing that I would like to mention. I feel 
you are entitled to this explanation, and to know about this. There 
has been talk in the papers and elsewhere about Mr. Haas evading a 
subpena. I would like to clear that matter up, if I may. 

The Chairman. Don't you think that that may be cleared up during 
the interrogation ? 

Mr. Becker. Well, I don't know if you are going to question him 
on that matter. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes ; he will be questioned on that matter. 

Mr. Becker. All right. 

TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL T. HAAS, CLEVELAND, OHIO, ACCOMPANIED 
BY SAMUEL BECKER, ATTORNEY, NEW YORK, N. Y. 

The Chairman. Mr. Hass, will you state your name for the record, 
please. 

Mr. Haas. Samuel T. Haas. 

The Chairman. What is your business or profession ? 

Mr. Haas. I am an attorney at law. 

The Chairman. And your residence ? 

Mr. Haas. 17600 Parkland Drive, Cleveland, Ohio. 

The Chairman. For what period of time have you been a member 



ORGANIZED CHIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 65 

of the bar ? 

Mr. Haas. Thirty-seven years. 

The Chairman. And you have practiced 

Mr. Haas. Thirty-seven years. 

The Chairman (continuing). Where? 

Mr. Haas. Cleveland. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Nellis, you may proceed. 

Mr. Nellis. Thank you. 

Just for the record, what does the "T" stand for ? 

Mr. Haas. Tilden. 

Mr. Nellis. What is your office address ? 

Mr. Haas. 540 Leader Building. 

Mr. Nellis. How long have you held offices or occupied offices in 
that building? 

Mr. Haas. Since 1921. 

Mr. Nellis. In a discussion with your attorney, Mr. Becker, some 2 
weeks ago, I was requested to provide some information with respect 
to the line of questioning we were going to conduct on some matters 
where you might have an opportunity to refresh your memory by 
looking at your records, and I obtained Mr. Moser's consent for that 
disclosure, so at this time I would like to ask you to provide us for 
the years 1947, 1948, 1949, and 1950 a list of clients who have paid 
you the sum of $5,000 or more during that period. 

Mr. Beckler. I think I have that all prepared. 

Mr. Nellis. Fine ! And while you are at that, Mr. Becker, do you 
remember we discussed the documents concerning the deal by which 
Mr. Haas and various others got into the Detroit oteel Co. in 1944? 

Mr. Becker. You did not ask me for any documents on that, Mr. 
Nellis. 

Mr. Nellis. You have no documents on that here ? 

Mr. Becker, No. You did not ask me for them. I have the nota- 
tion right here. 

Mr. Nellis. But are you prepared to discuss that ? 

Mr. Becker. Yes, sir. Now, these are the notes that I made and 
prepared. 

Mr. Nellis. But in any event you are prepared to discuss it? , 

Mr. Becker. Yes, we are. 

Mr. Nellis. And your memory has been refreshed on them, Mr. 
Haas? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Nellis. And that goes for Thistledown, River Downs, and 
Detroit Fair Grounds, and the administration of the estate of Mr. 
Strong ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. And also with respect to the Modern Music Co. at 
Colorado Springs? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And the Phoenix Century Music Co. ? 

Mr. Haas. That is rijiht. 



66 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nj:llis. And your real-estate holdings in Florida, Cleveland, 
and elsewhere? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. 

Mr. Becker. Excuse me one second. I am just looking for the 
list of clients. 

Mr. Nellis. While you are getting that I will proceed with the 
interrogation. 

Mr. Haas, are you a native of Cleveland, Ohio ? 

Mr. Haas. I am, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you become a member of the bar, what year? 

Mr. Haas. 1914. 

Mr. Nellis. Subsequent to that time, did you have any difficulties 
with the law ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Nellis. Would you like to explain that? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. I was indicted for arson in 1919. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Haas. And I was convicted in the common police court. The 
supreme court reversed the decision of the lower court, without a 
dissenting opinion, and after that I was brought up for disbarment, 
and on the same testimony that I was convicted for, the case was 
dismissed against me for disbarment proceedings, involving moral 
turpitude. 

Mr. Nellis. Was there a prior indictment to 1919? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, 1916, but it was dismissed. 

Mr. Nellis. That indictment was dismissed, was it not? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Actually the Ohio Supreme Court remanded it for 
a new trial ? 

Mr. Haas. There was a nolle. 

Mr. Nellis. There was a nolle entered after the remanding of the 
case by the Ohio Supreme Court ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Can I get this straight ? Was the nolle in the 1916 
case? 

Mr. Haas. No, the court made a decision and dismissed that case. 

The Chairman.^ I see. "Wliat was the judgment in the 1919 case, 
as to sentence originally ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, that is very vague. Senator, very vague. 

Mr. Nellis. May I ask this question. Senator? 

The Chairman. Yes. 
. Mr. Nellis. Wasn't the sentence 1 to 20 years? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Becker. Do you want that list now ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. May we have it, please ? 

Mr. Becker. I do have some other material there that I would not 
want to part with. Do you want me to read this off ? 

Mr. Nellis. No. May I have that, please ? 

Mr. Becker. Yes, but I do have some other material on here, and 
I will tear that part off. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IK INTERSTATE COMMERCE 67 

(The document is as follows :) 

Fees over $5,000 



1947: 

Empire Service Co $7,800 

B. E. Rand 14,000 

Jacobs Bros 12, 000 



Total 33, SOO 

1948: 

Empire Service Co 7, 800 

B. E. Rand 13,750 

Jacobs Bros 11,500 



1949: 

Empire Service Co $7,800 

Jacobs Bros 7,500 



Total 15, 300 

1950: Jacobs Bros 10,000 



Total 33, 050 

Real estate. 

Mr. Nellis. Thank you, sir. 

May I have the last question read ? 

(The record was read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Nellis. That sentence was from 1 to 20 years ? 

Mr. Haas. It was, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And that sentence was reversed, and it was remanded 
for a new trial ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Has there been any other trouble with the law since 
then ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever since that time been brought before the 
bar association on grievance charges ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Is it not a fact that sometime in 1932 you filed a petition 
in bankruptcy ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And at that time you listed assets of $100 and law 
books ? 

Mr. Haas. That is vague. I would not be sure of that. 

Mr. Nellis. And liabilities far in excess of that amount? 

Mr. Haas. I wouldn't say far in excess of that. 

Mr. Nellis. How much would it be ? 

Mr. Haas. My recollection is that is was $3,000. 

Mr. Nellis. That was sometime in 1932 ? 

Mr. Haas. In 1932? 

Mr. Nei.lis. Now, in 1934, shortly after your declaration of bank- 
ruptcy you appeared as counsel for the Lubeck Brewery or distribut- 
ing company, did you not? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You did not? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What are the facts ? 

Mr. Haas. I never represented the Lubeck Brewery. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever represent Al Polizzi ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know Al Polizzi? 

Mr. Haas. Very well. 



68 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. How well do you know him ? 

Mr. Haas. I have known him on and off for 25 years, 15 or 
20 years, I could not be certain about that, but for a long period of 
time. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you recall how you met him ? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. What was the nature of your association with him, Mr. 
Haas? 

Mr. Haas. Casual, just like I know many, many people in Cleve- 
land. 

Mr. Nellis. You never had dinner at his house ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, on one occasion I did. 

Mr. Nellis. But you say you did not represent him in any respect ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nelus. Throughout the years you have known him ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What about Thomas J. McGinty, how long have you 
known him ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, I would say 35 years. 

Mr. Nellis. Under what circumstances did you meet him, do you 
recall that? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, I was the attorney for the circulation department 
of the Cleveland Plain Dealer and he was the circulator for the circu- 
lation department of the Cleveland Plain Dealer. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you meet Mr. McBride about that time, too ? 

Mr. Haas. No, I met Mr. McBride when he first came to Cleveland 
as a circulator on the Cleveland News. That was an opposition paper. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes, I know. You have had some business dealings 
with Mr. McGinty, sir, have you not ? 

Mr. Haas. I have not, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever had any real estate dealings with him ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes ; not with him, not directly with him, no, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, will you explain that ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. I had a call from Mr. Strong sometime in 1944, 
I imagine, I am not quite certain of the date, but I would say that that 
was about the date, saying that Mr. McGinty had come to him saying 
that he, Mr, McGinty, had an opportunity to acquire some property in 
Florida, and he did not have enough money to handle the deal. 

Mr. Strong said that he would like to join in it, and he asked me 
if I would join with him and take one-third of the property that Mr. 
McGinty was able to acquire. 

It was a piece of property in common 

Mr. Nellis. In Florida? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you remember where? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, on Collins Avenue. That is about all I can tell you. 

Mr. Nellis. And that was the extent of your business dealings with 
Mr. McGinty? 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What is Mr. McGinty 's business, Mr. Haas? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you aware of the fact that he is known as a gambler ? 

Mr. Haas, I am, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 69 

Mr. Nellis. And do you know that lie is a partner in tlie Desert Inn 
at Las Vegas? 

Mr. Haas. I have read that in the newspapers. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you read his testimony that he gave at Cleveland, 
Ohio? 

Mr. Haas. I have. 

Mr. Nellis. Then you are aware of his background and business 
activities ? 

Mr. Haas. To that extent, that I read it. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, have you had any other dealings with Mr. 
McGinty, whatsoever ? 

Mr. Haas. None whatsoever. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you had any dealings with Mr. McBride? 

Mr. Haas. None whatsoever. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you had any dealings wdth Mr. Morris Wexler? 

Mr. Haas. I represent him in the Empire News. 

Mr. Nellis. What is the business of the Empire News? 

Mr. Haas. Disseminating news service. 

Mr. Nellis. What kind of news service? 

Mr. Haas. Racing information. 

Mr. Nellis. To whom ? 

Mr. Haas. That I don't know. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, you represent Mr. Wexler, you say. 

Mr. Haas. I do. 

Mr. Nellis. In that business? 

Mr. Haas. Not in the business. I am his attorney. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, are you his personal attorney or an attorney for 
the service? 

Mr. Haas. I am attorney for the news service. 

Mr. Nellis. And you profess ignorance of the type of customer 
that Empire service company has? 

Mr. Haas. I have not the slightest idea who his customers are. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you heard who his customers are? 

Mr. Haas. By general rumor and newspaper reports. 

Mr. Nellis. You don't want to be coy, now, do you, Mr. Haas? 

Mr. Haas. I am not trying to be coy. I am trying to tell you 
truthfully. 

Mr. Nellis. You know the man you represent operates a service that 
goes to bookmakers ; don't you ? 

Mr. Haas. That is the general report, but of my own personal knowl- 
edge I do not know that. 

Mr. Nellis. How well do you know Morris Kleinman ? 

Mr. Haas. I have known Morris Kleinman, I would say, since 1925. 

Mr. Nellis. Wliat is his business, Mr. Haas? 

Mr. Haas. His business, he is known as a gambler. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you had any business dealings with him? 

Mr, Haas. Btlsiness dealings ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you hedging with us, sir? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you had any real-estate business with him? 

Mr. Haas. No ; nothing whatsoever. 



70 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. MosER. Is it what you mean that you have represented him as 
attorney and client ? 

Mr. Haas. No ; I have never represented him. 

Mr. Nellis. You have never represented Kleinman ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And you have had no business dealings with him ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know the property at 2515 Kemper? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know the exact number. I do own a piece of 
property on Kemper, but as to the exact number, I don't know. It 
could be 2515. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, you own a piece of property at 2525 Kemper. 

Mr. Haas. That is right. I didn't know whether you referred 
to the piece I own or the piece that he owns. 

Mr. Nellis. He owns the piece at 2515. 

Mr. Haas. That is what I am told. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is Mr. A. E. Gordon ? 

Mr. Haas. Mr. A. E. Gordon is a lawyer in my office. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you know that he gave the quitclaim deed to Morris 
Kleinman and Louis Rothkopf at that address ? 

Mr. Haas. No ; I do not. 

Mr. Nellis. He was the trustee in August of 1947. 

Mr. Haas. I do not know that. 

Mr. Nellis. For an amount of $615,000, after which he quitclaimed 
the property to Morris Kleinman and Louis Rothkopf . 

Mr. Haas. I do not know that, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. But he is an associate of yours, isn't he ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, he is an office associate. 

Mr. Nellis. How many years has he been associated with you ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, I would say about 18 years. 

Mr. Nellis. Is he related to George Gordon ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know George Gordon ? 

Mr. Haas. I have met him. 

Mr. Nellis. He is a gambler, too, isn't he ? 

Mr. Haas. That is his reputation. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, now, let's see, how long have you known Louis 
Eothkopf? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, I wduld say about 15 years. 

Mr. Nellis. And he is in the same business as Kleinman ? 

Mr. Haas. That is liis reputation ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. He has had very extensive operations throughout the 
United States? 

Mr. Haas. That is what I have read, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. Now, do you know someone by the name of Dal- 
itz ? You may have known him by the name of E)avis. 

Mr. Haas. I know him as Dalitz ? 

Mr. Nellis. He is also in the gambling business, is he not? 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 71 

Mr. Nellis. How long have you known him ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, I would say I have known him around 18 or 19 years. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Haas, all of these people whom I have mentioned, 
with the exception of Samuel Tucker, whom I presume you know 
also 

Mr. Haas. I do, sir. 

Mr. Nellis (continuing). Were in the Detroit Steel deal with you, 
were they not ? 

Mr. Haas. They were, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How did that come about? How did that happen that 
you obtained the common stock of that company ? 

Mr. Haas. By purchase. 

Mr. Nellis. llow did it all come about ? 

Mr. Haas. Mr. Dalitz called me up one day, I don't recall the 
exact year, but it was in the forties, and he asked me if he could come 
over and see me. He had someone with him that he wanted to bring 
with him. I told him that he was welcome to come in and see me. 

He brought in a man whom he introduced to me by the name of 
Zivian. Mr. Zivian explained to me that he was then acquiring the 
stock of the Reliance Steel Co., and that he intended to merge it with 
the Detroit Steel Corp., and that he needed $200,000 to complete his 
transaction. 

He had, oh, I would not know, around three of four, let's say five 
thousand shares of the Eeliance Steel which he had acquired, but he 
had to pick up $200,000 more in order to complete the deal so that he 
could merge it. 

Mr. Nellis. From Sol Friedman ? 

Mr. Haas. From Sol Friedman. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. Go ahead. 

Mr. Haas. And he said that he wanted to make a loan of $200,000, 
but the stock, not being a listed stock, it was quite difficult for him to 
borrow $200,000 on the stock he had already acquired by purchase, I 
imagine, though he did not say that. 

He asked me if I could be helpful. I said, "What is your collateral ? " 
And he told me this. I said : "You will never be able to borrow $200,- 

000 on that type of collateral." He said, "I am quite aware of that." 

1 said: "What are you here for?" He said, "I have told Mr. Dalitz 
that if he would purchase or cause someone to purchase for me $100,000 
worth of Detroit Steel stock, and put the money up, as a certificate of 
deposit, to borrow $200,000 against the certificate of deposit, plus the 
Reliance Steel Co. stock." 

Mr. Nellis. Did you borrow that from the Bank of Ohio ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

]Mr. Nellis. You sent him over to the Bank of Ohio ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Who did they see over there, do you remember ? 

Mr. Haas. I imagine they saw Mr. Strong. I was not there. That 
is what I imagine. Mr. Strong said that their bank was not able to 
loan $200,000, but he thought that with the certificate of deposit, plus 
the stock, that he could raise the loan at the Industrial Bank of New 
York for that amount of money, inasmuch as it was a short-term loan, 
3 or 4 months, I think, and for the $100,000 I put up $33,000, and 
Dalitz put up $66,000, and when the loan was paid the stock of the 
Detroit Steel Co. was turned over to me for my $33,000, which was 



72 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

333 and a fraction shares, and I had taken it for granted, I was not 
shown that, but Dalitz got his 660 shares. 

Mr. Nellis. What did you do with your shares ? 

Mr. Haas. Why, I kept them. 

Mr. Nellis. You kept them? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. And you have them today ? 

Mr. Haas. No ; I sold them. 

Mr. Nellis. Who did you sell them to ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, I don't know the name of the company, Fenner, 
Beane, Price, Miller. 

Mr. Nellis. You sold them through a regular broker ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Becker. I have the dates on that. 

Mr. Nellis. Very well. Will you put them in the record ? 

Mr. Becker. The stock was sold in the open market through Merrill 
Lynch, Fenner & Beane between March 8 and March 28, 1950. 

Mr. Nellis. 1950? 

Mr. Becker. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. Now, Mr. Dalitz put up $66,000, right? 

Mr. Haas. I was not there, but I take it for granted he did. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, obviously, since you were the person w^ho was 
approached by Dalitz and Zivian, you must have known how he 
distributed his stock. 

Mr. Haas. No ; I did not know at that time. 

Mr. Nellis. How is that possible? 

Mr. Haas. I had no interest in Mr. Dalitz' stock. 

Mr. Nellis. How did Mr. Zivian come to your office ? 

Mr. Haas. Mr. Dalitz brought him. 

Mr. Nellis. And you were going to provide the necessary advice by 
which Mr. Zivian could swing this deal ? 

Mr. Haas. No; I just showed him the channel, through whom I 
thought he might be able to borrow the money. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, we w^on't quibble about words. But Dalitz put 
up $66,000, and you know that he distributed the stock he received; 
don't you ? 

Mr. Haas. No; I do not. 

Mr. Nellis. You never found out who got the stock ? 

Mr. Haas. I found out, but at that time I did not know. I think 
Dalitz got it in his name, and it was separated later. 

Mr. Nellis. How was it separated. 

Mr. Haas. Tliat I do not know. 

Mr. Nellis. "WHio was it separated to ? 

Mr. Haas. Tucker, Kleinman, Rothkopf, and Dalitz. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes ; the same old syndicate ; is that right? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know about the same old syndicate. 

Mr. Nellis. The same group that had been doing business for many 
years ? 

Mr. Haas. That I do not know. 

Mr. Nellis. And the total result of this whole transaction was that 
Samuel Haas, Dalitz, Kleinman, Rothkopf, and Tucker accumulated 
the stock ? 

Mr. Haas. Samuel T. Haas accumulated his stock, and they pur- 
chased their stock ; yes, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 73 

Mr. Nellis. AVas it a lucrative investment, Mr. Haas? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir ; very much so. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Mr. Haas, directing your attention back to the 
summer of 1932, when you went into bankruptcy 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis (continuing). Would you tell us briefly how shortly 
thereafter you began to accumulate capital gain to get back on your 
feet. 

Mr. Haas. Well, I could not tell you that right oifhand ; no. 

Mr. Nellis, Obviously it was a struggle after 1932, for a short 
period, was it not ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. It was a panic, and everything was a struggle. 

Mr. Nellis. And shortly thereafter you began to represent the 
persons in police court, is that right ? 

Mr. Haas. Not shortly after that. I have been doing that since 
1914, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Since 1914? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And I take it you would explain it that is how you hap- 
pened to meet so many people prominent in police dossiers, is that 
right? 

Mr. Haas. I would not say so. I met plenty of other people, not 
through police courts at all. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you become Wexler's attorney for the race 
wire service ? 

Mr. Haas. I first represented William Swartz, who owned the serv- 
ice before Wexler and Miller owned it. 

Mr. Nellis. This is the same William Swartz who killed somebody 
behind the Hollenden Hotel and went to jail ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. And also the same William Swartz who was owner 
of the Chesapeake Operating Co. that ran the club on the border 
between West Virginia and Ohio, is that right ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. You represented him ? 

Mr. Haas. In 1924 a policeman was stationed in front of his office, 
where he was running a news service similar to Wexler, and he came 
to me and asked me if I could have him removed. I said that I would 
get an injunction against it. 

We filed an injunction in the common police court, and that is how 
I came to legally represent Swartz. 

Mr. Nellis. And have you continued in your business relationship 
with Mr. Swartz ? 

Mr. Haas. No, no ; that is the first and only case I ever had with 
him. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you stayed in contact with him in any way ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Haas. I am sure about it. 

Mr. Nellis. Suppose I were to tell you that we have a list of some 
tele])hone calls you made to him in 1950, what would those be about? 

Mr. Haas. For another client. 

Mr. Nellis. For what client ? 



74 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. James Patton. 

Mr. Nellis, "Shimmy" Patton? 

Mr. Haas. I said James Patton. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you going to contend that he is not also known as 
"Shimmy'- Patton? 

Mr. Haas. I am not contending anything. 

Mr. Nellis. But do you know him as "Shimmy" Patton ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes ; but 

The Chairman. Well, does he have a nickname? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Let's not quibble. We are getting along splendidly, I 
think we are doing well. Let's not be technical. 

Mr. Haas. I am not being technical. 

Mr. Nellis. What is Mr. Patton's business? 

Mr. Haas. At the present time I don't think that he has any. 

Mr. Nellis. What business w^as he in formerly ? 

Mr. Haas. He was in the gambling business. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know 4601 Harvard Street in Cleveland? 

Mr. Haas. Not offhand ; no, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever hear of that place referred to as the 
Harvard Club? 

Mr. Haas. I have heard of the Harvard Club frequently. 

Mr. Nellis. It was headquarters for the slot distribution outfit, was 
it not? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. It was not? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is Morris C. Haas? 

Mr. Haas. My brother. 

Mr. Nellis. Was he at any time connected with the Buckeye Cater- 
ing Co.? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What was the business of the Buckeye Catering Co. ? 

Mr. Haas. Vending machines. 

Mr. Nellis. What kind of vending machines? 

Mr. Haas. Mint machines, all kinds of vending machines. 

Mr. Nellis. Slot machines? 

Mr. Haas. That is reputedly slot machines. 

Mr. Nellis. Of course they are slot machines, and you know that, 
don't you ? 

Mr. Haas. No ; I never was there. 

Mr. Nellis. It is a matter of record, and you know it, don't you? 

Mr. Haas. Not as a matter of record. 

Mr. Nellis. Who were liis partners? 

Mr. Haas. He had no partners. He was an employee. 

Mr. Becker. Who are you talking about ? 

Mr. Nellis. Morris C. Haas. 

Mr. Haas. He was an employee. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you know Al Polizzi was one of his employees? 

Mr. Haas. I was told that later. He was not at that time. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Polizzi testified under oath to that effect. 

Mr. Haas. Not at the time my brother went in there, he was not an 
associate or a partner. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 75 

Mr. Nellis. But there did come a time when Polizzi was a partner 
at a time when your brother was employed there ? 
Mr. Haas. That is rio;ht. 
Mr. Nellis. Did you know Nate Weisenberg? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. He is the one through whom I secured my 
brother a job there. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. He was known as the slots king of Ohio, is that right? 

Mr. Haas. Not of Ohio. 

Mr. Nelos. Well, perhaps of the United States? 

Mr. Haas. Maybe probably in Cleveland. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Weisenberg met a very untimely and messy death, 
did he not? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. In 1945 ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't recall the year. 

Mr. Nellis. But he was found in a ditch, is that right ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What were the circumstances? 

Mr. Haas. I read about it in the newspapers. I was not in Cleveland 
at that time. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you have any idea which one of his former associates 
might have done him in ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You have no idea ? 

Mr. Haas. Of course not. 

Mr. Nellis. You knew him very well ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, intimately. 

Mr. Nellis, Do you know Jerry Milano ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You never met him? 

Mr. Haas. Not to know him by that name. 

Mr. Nelijs. By what name might you have known him ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. 

Mr. Nellis. You know that he is the present operator and owner 
of Buckeye Catering, don't you ? 

Mr. Haas. I do not know that. 

Mr. Nellis. Who were the other partners in Buckeye ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know, only of Al Polizzi and Weisenberg. 

Mr. Nellis. Polizzi and Weisenberg? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know James Licavoli ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know Vincent "Doc" Mangine? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You never met him ? 

Mr. Haas. Not to my knowledge, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Mr. Haas, you had an interest in a company in 
Colorado Springs, did you not? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you not? 

Mr. Haas, Yes, sir. 



76 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. What was the name of that ? 

Mr. Haas. The Modern Music Co. 

Mr. Nellis. What was the business of that company ? 

Mr. Haas. Music boxes. 

Mr. Nellis. Wliat else besides music boxes ? 

Mr. Haas. Nothing. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever see an inventory at the time that that 
business was liquidated? 

Mr. Haas. No ; I don't think I did. 

Mr. Nellis. Would it surprise you to find 

Mr. Haas. When it was liquidated, did you say ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Haas. No ; I am sure I did not. 

Mr. Nellis. The business is not going on, is it? 

Mr. Haas. No; H went through bankruptcy, as I recall it. 

Mr. Nellis. That is what I meant. 

Mr. Haas. I did not see it. 

Mr. Nellis. You did not see the final inventory ? 

Mr. Haas. Not to my recollection. 

Mr. Nellis. Would it surprise you to know that approximately 35 
percent of the final inventory was slot machines? 

Mr. Haas. Well, it would not only surprise me, but I would not 
believe it, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You would not? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir, 

Mr. Nellis. Did you have an interest in a company down in 
Arizona ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. In Phoenix? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Your brother's company? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Your brother has a company down there ? 

Mr. Haas. He had a company, which he liquidated in 1946, a music- 
box company. 

Mr. Nellis. That was also a music-box business ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And Giesey and Sauer were partners ? 

Mr. Haas. Stockholders or partners. 

Mr. Nellis. I think it was a partnership. 

Mr. Haas. It may have been, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is in there ? 

Mr. Haas. Mr. Heiins, Mr. McGinty. 

Mr. Nellis. And Mr. McGinty's son-in-law and daughter? 

Mr. Haas. I would not know, because I was not familiar with that. 

Mr. Nellls. Did you engineer the partnership? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How did it happen so many friends of yours from Cleve- 
land got into a business in Phoenix with your brother ? 

Mr. Haas. My brotTier went down there to acquire a business in 
Denver. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 77 

Mr. Haas. And \\'liile he was there he met someone who told him 
there was a bnsiness that conkl be acquired in Phoenix. He came back 
to Clevehmd and talked to certain people and got them to invest in 
that bnsiness. 

Mr. Nellis. And your idea is that your brother engineered the 
partnership ? 

Mr. Haas. I had nothing to do with engineering anything, partners 
or financing of that business, whatsoever. 

Mr. Nellis. Were you in the business at all ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You had no interest whatsoever? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How about the business in Colorado Springs? 

Mr. Haas. In Colorado Springs, yes. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you get into that? 

Mr. Haas. Through Mr. Weisenberg. 

Mr. Nellis. Through Nate Weisenberg? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Was his son Francis in that bnsiness also ? 

Mr. Haas. He may have been ; I don't know. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Mr. Haas, before we get onto the other subject, 
or rather, to the other substantive portions of the testimony which we 
hope you will give, I would like an explanation of your disappearance 
from Cleveland on or about the 12th of December. 

Mr. Haas. I object to the word "disappearance." There was no 
such thing as any disappearance. 

Ml-. Nellis. You took a regularly scheduled trip ; is that your con- 
tention. 

Mr. Haas. That is not only my contention, but that is the fact. 

Mr. Nellis. When did it come to your knowledge that the commit- 
tee was seeking your presence in Cleveland ? 

Mr. Haas. The latter part of January. 

Mr. Nellis. You mean after the hearings were over? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How do you explain the fact that we were unable to 
find you, either at your office or at home? 

Mr. Haas. Because I was not there. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. Now, did you give instructions to the peo- 
ple at your office to advise no one as to where you might be reached ? 

Mr. Haas. Of course not. 

Mr. Nellis. You did not ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What is your secretary's name? 

Mr. Haas. Kathleen Shannon. 

]Mr. Nellis. AVould it surprise you to know that Miss Shannon was 
visited three times a day for a period of at least 3 weeks with a request 
that we be furnished your address, and that we were unable to locate 
3^ou in that manner ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't believe that, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, I state that as a fact. I realize I am not under 
oath 

Mr. Haas. Well, I don't know it. 

Mr. Nellis. Would it surprise you to know that ? 

8o277— 51 — pt. 1.3 6 



78 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas, It certainly would. 

Mr. Becker. Are you stating this of your own personal knowledge ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Becker. You are testifying ? 

Mr. Nellis. I am not testifying. 

Mr. Becker. Well, let us get this straight. 

Mr. Nellis. Let me say that I was in charge of that investigation 
from December 12 until approximately 

Mr. Haas. No, not December 12. 

Mr. Nellis. Just a moment. 

Mr. Becker. Yes, let him finish. 

Mr. Nellis. I was in charge of that investigation from December 
12 until approximately the 14th of January, and through the good 
offices of the police dei)artment of Cleveland we had a squad visit 
Mr. Haas' office asking for knowledge as to his whereabouts, and we 
were informed that Mr. Haas had left on his vacation, and that he 
had left no forwarding address and could not be reached. 

Now, you may make any statement you care to. Let Mr. Haas make 
any statement he cares to. 

Mr. Becker. Well, what I object to, if I may, I object to counsel 
saying that unless he is prepared to state it of his own personal knowl- 
edge that people visited there three times a day. 

The Chairman. Counsel, I think the question is very simple, and 
one that is easily answered by such an intelligent person as the wit- 
ness. 

Mr. Nellis states what in his, Mr. Nellis' knowledge, are the facts, 
concerning the efforts made. 

Now Mr. Haas is at perfect liberty to explain or make any state- 
ment he wishes to bearing on that, whether those facts are accurate 
or inaccurate, and what explanation there is for his not being present. 

Mr. Becker. All I am saying. Senator, is this, that I have conducted 
investigations myself, and I know something about this business, 
and it is a serious question when counsel makes statements and he is not 
under oath, he is not accountable for what he says, except as an advo- 
cate, and unless he is prepared to say that they did visit his office 
three times a day from his own personal knowledge, I don't think 
that statement should be made. 

Mr. Nellis. I think that is very strange, coming from an attorney. 

Mr. Becker. He is prepared to meet testimony, but he is not pre- 
pared to meet counsel's statement. It is not fair to the witness. 

The Chairman. This matter is one which you indicated at the out- 
set that you desired Mr. Haas to explain. 

Mr. Becker. Right. 

The Chairman. Then how about Mr. Haas going ahead and giving 
us his version of the matter. 

Mr. Haas. I left Cleveland on the 12th day of December, and I went 
to New York City. I stayed at the Savoy-Plaza Hotel. I stayed 
there 2 days, and then I went to Miami and I stayed at the McAllis- 
ter Hotel, and I left there on the 20th. 

I purchased my tickets on December 2 from the Pan-American at 
Cleveland, from Miami to Montego Bay. 

Mr. Nellis. Wliere is Montego Bay ? 

Mr. Haas. Jamaica, British West Indies. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 79 

I had arranged in October of 1950, 1 sent out two letters in response 
to advertisements I had seen in a magazine of homes to be rented 
for the season. 

One of them was in the Virgin Islands, and one of them was at 
Montego Bay. 

The one in the Virgin Islands, unfortunately, was not what I 
wanted, I think it was on St. Thomas Island, and we didn't like it. 
I was going with a friend, Mr. Goodman and his wife, and the one I 
answered the ad to in Montego Bay, the owner lived in London, and 
it took around 6 or 7 weeks before an answer was liad from him. 

In the meantime, I had gotten in touch with a man w^hom I knew 
or had met in Montego Bay — I had been there many times — a man 
by the name of Dennis Cook, who was then in the brokerage business, 
the renting of houses, and renting automobiles and things of a travel 
nature, and he secured a house for me in Montego Bay. 

I will have to refresh my recollection from this document. On De- 
cember 2, 1 have his receipt, where I sent out a check for the rental of 
that house, sir. 

Everyone that I knew personally in Cleveland knew where I was ; 
there was no attempt at secrecy, and there w^ere many telephone and 
telegraph calls from me to my office, and there was plenty of mail sent 
to me from my office, and in return mail sent to my office from me. 

Tliere was no attempt at any time, and I doubt very much that Miss 
Shannon would say there was no instruction left to say where I was, 
or rather, that there was an instruction left not to tell where I was. 

The Chairman. How long were j^ou there? 

Mr. Haas. In Montego Bay? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Haas. On my first trip 

The Chairman. Dating from December 12. 

Mr. Haas. It was December 20. I stayed there until the latter part 
of February, sir. 

The Chairman. The latter part of February ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You never came back to the United States until 
when ? 

Mr. Haas. The latter part of February. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Nellis. May I proceed? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, do you want to tell me what happened in Feb- 
ruary ? 

Mi*. Haas. Yes. In Puerto Rico, I was in Puerto Rico with my 
friends, and I picked up the paper at the hotel there, and I saw an 
item there relating to the Crime Commission, where my name was 
mentioned as having a senatorial warrant issued for me. 

The Chairman. Was that the first knowledge you had that you 
were wanted? 

Mr. Haas. No ; I knew it in the latter part of January, because of a 
clipping I had received from a friend of mine, where my picture ap- 
peared in the Cleveland Press, and the statement was made by the 
director of public safety, and that was the first knowledge that I had 
that I was subpenaed or wanted. 

Mr. Nellis. Can you fix that date, approximately? 



80 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. "Well, it was after your hearing. I don't know exactly 
wlien your hearing was. 

Mr. Nellis. The hearing was from January 17 through the 19th. 

Mr. Haas. Well, I would say 3 or 4 days after that. 

Mr. Nellis. That was your first knowledge? 

Mr. Haas. That is. right. 

Mr. Nellis. You received no communication from your office? 

Mr. Haas. None whatsoever. 

Mr. Nellis. And you received no forwarded mail from your home ? 

Mr. Haas. My home? No, my home would send any mail to the 
office, and they in turn would forward it to me if they thought it was 
personal. 

Mr. Nellis. What did you do when you heard you were wanted ? 

Mr. Haas. I communicated with Mr. Garey. 

Mr. Nellis. I am not talking about February, I am talking about 
the end of January. 

Mr. Haas. I did not do anything. 

Mr. Nellis. You did not do anything ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you make your effort to make your whereabouts 
known to the Federal authorities? Did you make any effort to 
make your whereabouts known to the Federal authorities ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you communicate with the marshal, asking him to- 
serve you with a subpena? 

Mr. Haas. I did not. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you have any reason for not doing it ? 

Mr. Haas. I didn't have any reason for doing so, either. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you think it is proper for a member of the bar to 
avoid service? 

Mr. Haas. I did not avoid service. 

Mr. Nellis. Why didn't you make yourself available for service? 

Mr. Haas. Because I read the subpena had been issued and the 
hearing had been held. 

Mr. MosER. But you ignored the subpena, did you not ? 

Mr. Haas. I had no subpena. 

Mr. Becker. May I say something 

Mr. MosER. Just let me ask some questions here. 

Mr. Becker. I am sorry. 

Mr. MosER. You knew about the fact that you were wanted, didn't 
you? 

Mr. Haas. Only from a statement in the newspapers. 

Mr. MosER. Yes. And you ignored the fact that you were wanted. 

Mr. Haas. I made no effort to get in touch with anyone. 

Mr. MosER. In other words, you did not feel you had any responsi- 
bility to respond to this committee, is that correct? 

Mr. Haas. I would not say it that way. 

Mr. MosER. Until you were served ? 

Mr. Haas. I took it for granted, and maybe I was wrong in doing 
that, but the hearing being over, my presence was no longer being 
required. 

Mr. Becker. I just want to interject something here that I said to 
Mr. Mosei*. I said that the committee was at perfect liberty and had 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 81 

perfect authority and power to serve Mr. Haas exactly where they 
tnew lie was, in Jamaica. He was there in his correct name. 

The Chairman. That is not the whole point. 

Mr. Becker. I would like to have the record show that. 

Mr. Nellis. That was the end of January. Now, then, in February, 
"vvliat happened ? 

Mr. Haas. AVhen I read this I got in touch with Mr. Eugene Garey. 

Mr. Nellis. That is right, of New York City ? 

Mr. Haas. Of New York City. I said, "I have read this in the 
paper, and I am dumf ounded. What is it all about ? Can you find out 
for me ?" He said that he would attempt to do so. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HxVAs. He called me back the next day and he said that he had 
T3een in contact with a Mr. Halley, who was chief counsel for this com- 
mittee, and had arranged for me to be in there a week from the next 
Monday, whenever that was. 

Mr. Nellis. On March 5. I have the letter here. 

Mr. Haas. Not the 5th. The 5th would have been on a Sunday, I 
am sure. Maybe I am mistaken about it. 

Mr. Becker. No, just a minute. 

Mr. Nellis. Let me read you this letter from Garey dated February 
16: 

In re Samuel T. Haas. 

Dear Mk. Halley : I communicated with Mr. Haas following my talk with you 
on Saturday morning last, and he advised me he will come to my office on Monday, 
the 5th of March next. As soon as he arrives I will call you so that you may 
serve him with a subpena. 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. I was a little confused. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, let's fix the dates, and let's be accurate about what 
happened. 

Mr. Haas. I am just depending upon my recollection. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes, sir. We appreciate that. 

Mr. Haas. And then I came to New York, and I got in there on Fri- 
day at midnight. Mr. Garey came over to see me at the Savoy-Plaza 
Hotel, and Mr. Becker came over to see me at the Savoy-Plaza Hotel. 

Mr. Becker advised me that this hearing was going to be televised 
commercally, the hearing in New York City. He told me that jn his 
opinion the televising of this committee hearing for commercial pur- 
poses was illegal. So I decided to return to Jamaica, which I did. 

Mr. Nellis. Did Mr. Garey tell you that he had telephoned me? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir ; he never mentioned your name, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You returned to Jamaica, when, that same Friday 
nidit? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. I am telling you, I came in on Friday, and I 
spoke to Mr. Garey on Saturday. I left Sunday morning, and on 
Monday morning following I left for Jamaica, back to Montego Bay. 

Mr. Moser. In other words, you had made an agreement with coun- 
sel for this committee to submit j^ourself to service. 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. MosER. And you broke your agreement because you thought 
that after service had been legally made upon you, you could not be 
legally called to testify before television, is that a correct statement ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 



82 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. MosER. In other words, you deliberately broke your agreement 
to submit yourself to service. 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. MosER. On the ground that you thought you might be required 
to testify before television after you had received legal service ? 

Mr. Haas. I considered, and I was so advised, that it was an illegal 
proceeding. 

Mr. MosER. How would you know that you would be called before 
television ? 

Mr. Haas. "Well, I was subpenaed in New York, and I was told I 
was to appear. 

Mr. MosER. But who told you that you were going to be televised? 

Mr. Becker. I did. 

Mr. Haas. Mr. Becker. 

Mr. MosER. Mr, Becker told you. Does he decide the policy of this 
committee ? 

Mr. Haas. No, I haven't the slightest idea in that regard. 

Mr. Nellis. You heard that the public proceedings were going to b.e 
televised, but you yourself did not know whether you would be called 
in executive session or public session. What assurance did you have 
that you would be called in any event? 

Mr. Haas. Well, certainly when they want to serve a subpena, they 
do not serve it as a gesture. 

Mr. MosER. Did it state that you would be called for public session ? 

Mr. Haas. I did not see it. 

Mr. Nellis. You never accepted service? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. MosER. Solely on Mr. Becker's idea as to what the policy of 
this committee might be, you refused to carry out your agreement to 
submit to service ? 

Mr. Haas. I refused to submit myself to commercialized television. 

Mr. MosER. Nobody asked you to submit yourself to commercialized 
television, did they? 

Mr. Haas. I was told that it was going to be televised. 

Mr. MosER. You were told by Mr. Becker ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. I was not under subpena. 

Mr. MosER. Nobody had asked you to appear before television had 
they? 

Mr. Haas. Well, it would be tantamount to the same thing, when 
you want to serve a man with a subpena, and with the hue and cry 
that was raised at that time 

Mr. MosER. Wouldn't you have a right to raise that question when 
you appeared? 

Mr. Haas. I doubt very much if I would have much of a right before 
a committee. I don't have the same legal right that I have in a 
courtroom. 

Mr. MosER. You therefore avoided the process of the committee? 

Mr. Haas. I would not say that that was proper, but if you want ta 
use that, it is perfectly all right with me. 

Mr. MosER. I think it is a perfect characterization of what hap- 
pened. 

Mr. Haas. Then that is perfectly all right. 

The Chairman. How long did you remain away ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 83 

Mr. Haas. Until the latter part of April. I advised Mr. Becker 
I was returning, and he in turn advised the Federal Bureau of Investi- 
gation that I would return on a day certain at Miami on a certain 
flight. 

The Chairman. So it is fair to state that from about December 20 
until the last part of April you were outside of the country, with the 
exception of that brief period, those 2 days you came back? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

The Chairman, It was not all on vacation? 

Mr. Haas. It was all on vacation, on account of my throat, I do 
this every year. 

The Chairman. Of course, if it had not been for what you say was 
the information submitted to you, which caused you not to accept 
service, you would have been able to remain in the country ? 

Mr. Haas. I would not have returned. I didn't have any inten- 
tion of returning to the United States from Puerto Rico. My inten- 
tion was to return to Montego Bay. 

The ChxVIrman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you have any other statement in connection with 
your avoidance of the subpena ? 

Mr. Haas. I think not. 

Mr. Becker. Well, I have some. I mean, I know some things I 
can tell you of my own personal knowledge, which I do know 

The Chairman. Well, I think it would be preferable for Mr. Haas 
to testify. 

Mr. Becker. But these are things I did on his behalf that he can- 
not testify to. 

The Chairman. Well, maybe at a little later time. 

Mr. Becker. Thank you. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Becker has handed me a list of fees received in ex- 
cess of $5,000 for 1947, 1948, 1949, and 1950. 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. That is a list I suppose you prepared with your 
attorney ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. You already testified that the Empire Service Co. was 
W^exler's race distribution outfit or outlet? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is B. E. Rand? 

Mr. Haas. He is an attorney, sir. 

Mr, Nellis. In your office? 

Mr, Haas. He was, 

Mr. Netj^is. When did he come to your office? 

Mr. Haas. I would say about 1944 or 1945, somewhere around there, 
1944 probably. 

Mr, Nellis. He was associated with you and Mr. Gordon there, is 
that right? 

Mr. Haas. He rented space in the same suite that I did. 

Mr. Nellis. I see. And when did he leave your office suite? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, about 2 years ago, 1949, something like that, maybe 
1948, I cannot recall exactly. 

Mr. Nellis. So that from 1944 until 1948, approximately, let us 
say, he was associated with you ? 



84 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. What did he pay you $14,000 for in 1947 ? 

Mr. Becker. Just one minute. Do you remember, and I agreed with 
you, that we were not going to ask a lawyer what he did for the money 
he got. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, I was not assuming that he would give me a list 
saying that he had received $14,000 from another lawyer. 

Mr. Haas. Legal services. 

Mr. Nellis. Rendered to Rand? 

Mr. Haas. I did legal services in connection with a client of Rand's. 

Mr. Nellis. Of Rand ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. He brought the case to me, the same as forwarding 
a case to another lawyer. 

Mr. Neli.is. Let me ask you in connection with 1947, were any of 
the persons involved Kleinman ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How about Rothkopf ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Tucker? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Miller? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Patton? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Swartz? 

Mr. Hj^las. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Haas, would it not be simpler to tell us who 
it was for ? 

Mr. Hx\As. I think that is privileged. 

The Chairman. Let us see if we cannot get your position straight. 

Mr. Haas. I will say this to the 

The Chairman. Will you let me finish, please, and then you can 
say what you like. 

You were asked, as I understand it, to produce records which indi- 
cated the receipt by you of any fees in excess of $5,000, and you under- 
took to do that, and you submitted this statement, which shows the 
pertond item is a payment of $14,000 under the name of Rand. 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 

The Chair]\l\n. Actually that was not Mr. Rand. Mr. Rand was 
not your client? 

Mr. Haas. I took care 

The Chairjman. But I say, he was not your client? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

The Chairman. He was another attorney through whom you did 
receive fees from clients? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

The Chairman. Why then do you undertake to report that you 
received in excess of $5,000 from other than the name of the client, and 
why don't you 

Mr. Haas. Because I received it from Mr. Rand. 

The Chairman. You received it through him ? 

Mr. Nellis. By his check? 

Mr. Haas. By check; yes, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 85 

The Chairman. You received it through him. Was it Mr. Rand's 
check ? 

Mr. Nellis. That is what I wanted to know. 

Mr. Haas. That I would not remember, it would be a check. 

The Chairman. That would be the crux of the matter. 

Mr. Haas. It was by check. 

The Chairman. Because, actually, you did not receive the money 
from 

Mr. Nellis. I am sorry; go ahead. 

The Chairman. I say, because actually you did not receive the 
money necessarily from Mr. Rand. 

Mr. Haas. I did, though. 

The Chairman. You received it through him. Did you receive it 
from him? 

Mr. Haas. It was for his clients, not my clients. 

The Chairman. Actually, were they Mr. Rand's checks or the 
clients' checks made payable directly to you ? 

Mr. Haas. That I cannot remember, sir. 

The Chairman. Well, wouldn't that be very important ? 

Mr. Haas. I would say it would, but at this moment I do not 
remember. 

The Chairman. That would indicate that the client paid it directly 
to you. 

Mr. Haas. The checks were never made payable to me. 

The Chairman. Who were they made out to ? 

Mr. Haas. Mr. Rand, and then it was endorsed. 

The Chairman. Endorsed over to you ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Did you deal directly with the clients ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir ; with Mr. Rand. 

The Chairman. Did the clients know that you were receiving the 
money ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. 

The Chairman. Did you have any relation with them as attorney 
and client? 

Mr. Haas. In some instances, I did. 

The Chairman. But you do decline now to give us the names of 
the clients? 

Mr. Haas. My client was Mr. Rand. My services were engaged 
by Mr. Rand, not by his clients, sir. 

Mr. MosER. Mr. Haas, Mr. Rand did not want your legal advice 
for his own interest, did he ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. MosER. He wanted it in behalf of other people ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. MosER. Therefore you rendered legal services to other people 
through him. 

Mr. Haas. Through him, yes, sir. 

Mr. MosER. So actually you were rendering legal advice to those 
people through him, and then those people were your clients; were 
they not? 

Mr. Haas. I would say that is putting it a little broad, sir. 

Mr. MosER. You were rendering legal advice to them ? 



86 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. I was having no contact with the clients directly, 

Mr. MosER. But they were your clients just the same. 

Mr. Haas. I would say that Mr. Rand was my client in this instance. 

Mr. MosER. Mr. Rand was really a conduit through which you 
rendered legal advice to his clients. 

Mr. Haas. To Mr. Rand, and Mr. Rand was the conduit through 
which the legal advice was given. 

Mr. MosER. You knew who the clients were; did you not? 

Mr. Haas. I knew who they were. 

Mr. MosEJt. And they knew who you were ? 

Mr. Haas. I imagine so. 

Mr. MosER. They knew their money was being used for your advice? 

Mr. Haas. Not all of it. This was only part of the fee; this was 
not the entire fee. That is what Rand paid me. 

Mr. Nellis. ^Vliat was your arrangement with Rand — pardon me, 
Mr. Moser — did you get half of the total? 

Mr. Haas. I wouldn't know what the total fee was. 

Mr. Nellis. Look, Mr. Haas, when I asked Mr. Becker to have you 
get up a list listing your receipts of $5,000 or more, I did not think 
that you would come in, and in a sense obscure the real facts. 

Now, if I ask you who Jacobs Bros, is, I assume you can tell me. 

Mr. Haas. May I interrupt you a minute ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes ; surely. 

Mr. Haas. Well, if you think for one moment that any of these fees 
came from any of those characters you mentioned awhile ago, I would 
say definitely they did not. 

^r. Nellis. Well, they are your friends; aren't they? 

Mr. Haas. Friends ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. Aren't they friends of yours? 

Mr. Haas. Friendly ; yes. But not in a social way. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, you don't want to leave on the record that word 
"characters" ; do you ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, people are known as characters when they can be 
clowns, you know. 

Mr. Becker. I might say that that is the way he describes me, as a 
character. 

Mr. Haas. I do. I do not mean in the sense that you might say he 
is a clown, or something like that. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, let's get back to the substance, to the meat of this 
question, which is why have you obscured $14,000 of your 1947 income, 
so far as reporting to this committee is concerned, by the name of B. E. 
Rand? . 

Mr. Haas. That is where I received it. Those are the checks I 
received, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And you will not tell us who the principals were ? 

Mr. Haas. I think that is privileged. 

Mr. Nellis. You think that is privileged ? 

Mr. Haas, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You claim the privilege ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What kind of a privilege is it ? What kind of a privi- 
lege is it that you are claiming? 

_ Mr. Haas. That I w'as doing legal services and these communica- 
tions, I say, are privileged. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 87 

Mr. Nellis. Well, I don't quite understand your answer. 

Mr. Haas. Well, I don't know how I can make it any clearer. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you claiming attorney-and-client privilege 
between you and Mr. Rand ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Is there an attorney-and-client privilege between you 
and the principals that were paying Rand ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. I don't know those people. I didn't do 
business direct with them. 

Mr. Nellis. But you knew who they were ? 

Mr. Haas. I have a suspicion. 

Mr. Nellis. You saw the checks from them, and you said they were 
endorsed over to you. 

Mr. Haas. I didn't say that. 

Mr. Nellis. Didn't you testify that Rand gave checks payable to 
;him which were endorsed over to you ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know if I did. 

Mr. Nellis. Surely you did. 

The Chaikman. I so understood you. 

Mr. Becker. Yes, I think that is what he said. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes, I so understood him. I am sorry, Mr. Moser, I 
"did not mean to stop your line. Go ahead, if you have any questions 
to ask. 

Mr. Moser. You said these "characters," that you didn't receive any 
•money from any of these "characters" for legal services? 

Mr. Haas. Any of the people mentioned in the gambling business. 

Mr. Moser. Did you receive any money through somebody else from 
them ''( 

Mr. Haas. No, sir, not $1, sir. 

Mr. Moser. None of the clients that Mr. Rand represented were 
these people ? 

Mr. Haas. Not one of them, sir. 

Mr. Becker. It is a simple matter, I mean to say, Mr. Haas is 
claiming a privilege from Rand, and if Rand releases Mr. Haas there 
is no reason why he cannot testify, or you could get the information 
from Mr. Rand. 

Mr. Nellis. I have my own idea as to whether or not the aljeged 
privilege that he has asserted would cover him. 

Mr. Becker. And I have mine, too. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, I don't think that is important. I think the im- 
portant thing is that Mr. Haas says, for example, that in 1949 out of a 
total income from practice as an attorney of $105,000, he received only 
two fees in excess of $5,000. 

Mr. Becker. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Can you tell me how the balance of that $105',000 was 
made up? 

Mr. Haas. Fees from clients. 

Mr. Nellis. You mean a hundred here and a hundred there? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, no. 

Mr. Nellis. How many clients do you have? 

Mr. Haas. $500, $750, $1,000. 

Mr. Nellis. I say, how many clients did you have in 1949 ? 



88 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. I could not answer that right now. I was asked to bring 
in this information and I brought the information I was asked to 
bring. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, let's go beyond that. 

Mr. Becker. Perhaps I misunderstood the figure you just gave. 
Would you repeat that ? I did not hear that. 

Mr. Nellis, Mr. Haas reported a figure of $105,300, as his gross 
from practice as an attorney, less payments to attorneys, and I see 
he paid Mr. Gordon and Mr. Rand and others a certain amount, which 
leaves a net income from law practice of $84,998. 

Mr. Becker. I think if you are reading that information from the 
income-tax return that you will find that that income is from his total 
income, and I think the income-tax return so shows. 

Mr. Nellis. No. 

The Chairman. Well, now, Mr. Haas 

Mr. Haas. I could not say. I don't recall those things. I have 
many clients. 

The Chairman. Mr. Haas, do you doubt that the figure as men- 
tioned by Mr. Nellis is the figure representing that ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. 

The Chairman. You don't know? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

The Chairman. But you don't challenge it? 

Mr. Haas. I do not challenge it. I don't know. 

Mr. Becker. Well, I think if you are reading from the income-tax 
return I think you are supposed to state that 

The Chairman. I think Mr. Nellis has stated that that is what it 
was. 

Mr. Becker. You will find that it shows income from investments 
as well. 

Mr. Nellis. I am talking about, Mr. Becker 

Mr. Becker. Is that just a portion of the income tax you are talk- 
ing about ? 

The Chairman. I understood that Mr. Nellis w^as refemng par- 
ticularly to the one item of legal services. 

Mr. Nellis. That is right. 

Mr. Becker. Oh, I did not so understand. I thought he was talking 
about the total income. 

Mr. Nellis. I would like to relate that to what Mr. Haas gave. 
Let's talk about the net income of $85,000, approximately ; how come 
you only received two items in excess of $5,000, and then I asked you 
the question how many clients you had in 1949 ? 

Mr. Haas. I could not tell you that, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, how many clients do you have today, Mr. Haas, 
approximately ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, a man could be my client today and next month he 
may go elsewhere. How could I say with certainty? It is impos- 
sible ; don't you think ? 

Mr. Nellis. Well, is it five ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, gosh, it would be 50. 

Mr. Nellis. It would be 50 ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. And you think it might have been that figure in 1949 
as well? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 89 

Mr. Haas. It could have been, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And you understand you have only accounted for $15,- 
300 of your $85,000, and there remains $65,000 balance to be ac- 
counted for. 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. It would be your contention that that $05,000 was 
spread around in 1950 among the others? 

Mr. Haas. Not only my contention but that is a fact. It is a fact 
that I received it from my clients. 

Mr. Nellis. For what type of service ? 

Mr. Haas. Counsel and advice, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did it involve litigation? 

Mr. Haas. In some instances, yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. In 1949? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Nellis. In the county courts ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't practice in the courts. I refer cases. 

Mr. Nellis. You refer cases to other attorneys ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And you say you refer cases to other attorneys ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And it is your sworn testimony that these two items 
of $7,800 and $7,500 are the only two you received over $5,000 for that 
year; is that right? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you offering this as sworn testimony ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. I would like to have this made as exhibit 1 of Mr. Haas' 
testimony. 

The Chairman. That may be done. 

(The document referred to above was marked "Haas Exhibit 1" 
and is as follows:) 

Mr. Nellis. All right. Now, Mr. Haas, we have a number of other 
things to go through, and I would like to expedite this as much as 
possible. 

Mr. Haas. That is fine. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, who is Fred Koehler, Mr. Haas ? 

Mr. Haas. Fred Koehler is a man who was formerly chief of police 
of Cleveland, county commissioner, mayor, and sheriff. 

Mr. Nellis. When he died, there was some substantial amount of 
cash found in a strongbox ; was there not ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. That is not a fact ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did vou read Mr. Giesey's sworn testimony ? 

Mr. Haas. I think I did. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, may I refresh your recollection concerning the 
fact that he testified he was one of the agents in connection with that 
matter, and that is how he happened to meet you, he said. 

Mr. Haas. That is true. 

Mr. Nellis. He said that there was a fabulous sum of money found 
in Mr. Koehler's strongbox. 



90 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. That is not true. They were securities, United States 
Government securities. 

Mr. Nellis. What were they worth, Mr. Haas? 

Mr. Haas. Well, only what I know from the newspapers. 

Mr. Nellis. What were they worth ? 

Mr. Haas. They were supposedly worth $500,000. 

Mr. Nellis. Were you the administrator of this estate? 

Mr. Haas. I was not. 

Mr. Nellis. Were you his attorney ? 

Mr. Haas. I was not. 

Mr. Nellis. What was your relation with Mr. Koehler? 

Mr, Haas. A friend. 

Mr. Nellis. You never represented him ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How did Mr, Giesey happen to meet you during an 
investigation of Mr. Koehler's estate ? 

Mr. Haas, I will tell you. He saw in the newspapers that Mr, 
Koehler left a sum of $5,000 in his will, and he took it for granted, 
seeing my name in there, that I would be the attorney for Mrs. Koeh- 
ler, who was the administratrix or executrix of the estate. 

Mr. Nellis. He told you that ? 

Mr. Haas. He came to me with another agent, and I directed him 
to who the counsel was for Mrs. Koehler, 

Mr, Nellis, Who was that, Mr. Haas ? 

Mr. Haas. I cannot recall at this time. I know that he was con- 
nected with Mr. Gensh, but it was a man I did not know. 

Mr. Nellis, So you directed Giesey to him ? 

Mr. Haas, I said that Mrs, Koehler told me whom she had secured 
to be her counsel, 

Mr. Nellis. And that is how you happened to meet Giesey in the 
first place? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. That was your only connection with the estate of Fred 
Koehler? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. You had known him for many, many years? 

Mr. Haas, I have known him since I was a boy. 

Mr. Nellis. Where did he accumulate $500,000? 

Mr. Haas, Well, I was not privy to him. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, you were privy enough to him to be named a& 
beneficiary in the amount of $5,000. 

Mr. Haas. Well, I hardly think you have to be privy to a man's 
business to have money left to you. He was a very close dear friend 
of mine, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, you are a very sophisticated and intelligent man. 

Mr. Haas, Thank you. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you mean to tell me that a man occupying all these 
high positions in a modern city of today, and accumulating $500,000 
woith of securities at his death, and you have been his friend and 
beneficiary to the amount of $5,000, and you don't know where it 
came from ? 

Mr. Haas. I certainly do not, 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know anything about his business affairs? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 91 

Mr. Haas. Not one thing about liis business, and I doubt if any- 
body else did. He was very uncommunicative. 

Mr. Nellis. I should think so. 

Mr. Haas. He certainly was. That was his reputation. 

The Chairman. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. Back on the record. I am sorry, gentlemen, but 
we will be in recess until 12 : 45. 

(Whereupon, at 11 : 15 a. m., a recess was had until 12 : 45 p. m., this 
same day.) 

AFTERNOON SESSION 

The Chairman. Mr. Nellis, you may resume, please. 

rURTHER TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL T. HAAS, CLEVELAND, OHIO, 
ACCOMPANIED BY SAMUEL BECKER, ATTORNEY, NEW YORK, 
N. Y. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Mr. Haas, do you know Frank Costello? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. "W^ien did you meet him ? 

Mr. Haas. In the twenties sometime. 

Mr. Nellis. Under what circumstances? 

Mr. Haas. I was introduced to him by a man by the name of Louis 
Bleat. 

Mr. Nellis. What was his business? 

Mr. Haas. He is a restaurant man in Cleveland. 

Mr. Nellis. You were introduced to him in Cleveland? 

Mr. Haas. No, in New York City. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you had occasion to meet with him or converse 
with him in recent years? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. What was the last time you met with him, or when 
was the last time you met with him ? 

Mr. Haas. Eight, 9, or 10 years ago, probably. 

Mr. Nellis. Before the war? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, yes — wait a minute now. When did the war start? 

Mr. Becker. 1941. 

Mr. Haas. Yes, before the war. 

Mr. Nellis. You know that he testified in New York that he knew 
you? 

Mr. Haas. No, I did not see that testimony. I did not read that 
testimony. 

Mr. Nellis. You did not read that testimony ? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. What did you understand about his connections with 
a certain liquor company in New York? 

Mr. Haas. I was told, I cannot recall the man's name that was at 

the head of this business 

Mr. Nellis. Was it Irving Heim? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, I think so, yes. I am trying to get, or I was trying 

to get for a client of mine the local franchise 

Mr. Nellis. Was it Siegried Lowenthal Co. ? 



92 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. It was. 

Mr. Haas. Yes. The agency for that particular brand, I was try- 
ing to get that for him, and I was told that Mr. Costello was a friend 
of his. 

Mr. Nellis. It was your understanding that Costello was connected 
with 

Mr. Haas. No. I understood he was a friend of his. I did not 
know Mr. Heim. 

Mr. Nellis. Under what circumstances did he propose that Costello 
could be helpful to you ? 

Mr. Haas. He didn't. I was told. 

Mr. Nellis. Then I don't understand the course of the meeting. 
Explain it again. 

Mr. Haas. I went up to see Mr. Heim down in lower New York. 
I don't know just where it is because I am not too familiar with New 
York City, and I told him that I thought that the Lowenthal Co. 
could give him good representation in Ohio, and he said that they 
were very much interested in having a representation in a monopoly 
State, and I tried to show him where we could be helpful. 

Later on I mentioned it to somebody, and they said that Mr. Costello 
was a friend of this fellow's. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Costello was a friend of Heim ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. And you met Costello through Mr. Bleat many years 
before that? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, many years. 

Mr. Nellis. In any event, you had Costello's name and address in 
your address book ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. I take it you have telephoned him occasionally ? 

Mr. Haas. I never called him. 

Mr. Nellis. You never called him at all ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know Joe Adonis ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Br. Nellis. Did you ever meet him ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Before you leave that, you say you never tele- 
phoned him, but I am wondering whether you conferred with him 
otherwise. 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

The Chairman. I was just .«»nxious to get the facts one way or 
the other. 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

The Chairman. But you have met him ? 

Mr. Haas. In New York two or three times at a restaurant or so, but 
not by any appointment. It would be an accident if I would see 
him in a restaurant. 

Mr. Nellis. In all fairness, that was Mr. Costello's testimony. You 
don't know Joe Adonis? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever meet Willie Moretti, sometimes known 
by the name of Willie Moore ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 93 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, let's get down to the real estate transactions in 
Florida. I am interested in those. 

You testified previously that A. E. Gordon was an associate of yours, 
is that right ? 

Mr. Haas. That — let me explain that. Mr. Gordon has office space 
in my office. He does work for me and sometimes shares in my fees. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. Well, you pay him occasionally ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't pay him exactly, but we share fees on some 
matters that he handles, and on some matters I don't pay him because 
he doesn't pay rent. 

Mr. Nellis. You have paid him sums of money over the years ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is Metzger, by the way ? 

Mr. Haas. An insuance man. 

Mr. Nellis. In the city of Cleveland? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Gordon and Metzger turn up as trustees on many 
of these real-estate transactions, and if you want me to be specific 

Mr. H^\as. Yes ; I don't remember them. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you recall any case where they turned up, the two 
of them, as trustees ? 

Mr. Hass. Well, you refresh my recollection, and I will be glad 
to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. A corporation thereafter took over the assets ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. 

Mr. Nellis. How about this block of apartments at 2255, 2539, and 
2533 North Moreland Avenue? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Metzger was trustee for those? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. What is your office address ? 

Mr. Haas. 540 Leader Building. 

Mr. Nellis. He gave your office address. 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Then in 19-18 you showed up as having a mortgage of 
$50,000 on that property, along with the Allied Manufacturing Co., 
is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. Allied. 

Mr. Nellis. And the Prudential Insurance Co., I take it? 

Mr. Haas. Allied Co. is an insurance company — well, I don't know 
what you call them, they place insurance. 

Mr. Becker. Brokers? 

Mr. Haas. Insurance brokers, for the placing of money for 
mortgages. 

Mr. Nellis. And that is one instance where Mr. Metzger served as 
trustee and gave your office address ? 

Mr. Haas. That may be so, 

Mr. Nellis. All right. Now, in other cases as well, specifically in 
the case of your Florida real estate deals? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

85277—51 — pt. 13 7 



94 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Neu^is. Doesn't Mr. Metzger show up there as trustee? 

Mr, Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. On no occasion? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How about Mr. Charles Bernstein, do you know him? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Haas. He is a builder. 

Mr. Nellis. And did he build the Green Heron Hotel ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did he build the Palm Beach 

Mr. Haas. Ambassador? 

Mr. Nellis (continuing).- Ambassador? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. That is right? 

Mr, Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And was that land owned by you ? 

Mr. Haas. It was. 

Mr. Nellis. Was that land owned by you with other interests? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Or by you solely ? 

Mr. Haas. Solely. 

Mr. Nellis. I see. And who is the manager of that hotel? 

Mr. Haas. Mr. Bernstein is the owner and manager, so far as I 
know. I don't know who his particular manager may be. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you had any cash dealings with Mr. Bernstein? 

Mr. Haas. What do you mean by "cash dealings" ? 

Mr. Nellis. Dealings involving real estate where currency was 
used as the exchange instead of checks as normally ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. None whatsoever? 

Mr. Haas. None whatsoever. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. Now, what is the Mid-West Chemical Devel- 
opment Co.? 

Mr. Haas. That was a company I was in and I have sold out. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you happen to get into that ? 

Mr. Haas. Through Mr. Howard Hirsch, an attorney in Cleveland. 

Mr. Nellis. And in tlie course of that you met Mr. Fisher, I take 
it? 

Mr. Haas. I never met Mr. Fisher. 

Mr. Nellis. You did not? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nei^is. Didyouknowthat he had an interest? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And he sold you his control of the company, did he 
not? 

Mr. Haas. He did not sell me it, I never met Mr. Fisher, so he 
could not very well sell it to me. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, what were the facts ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, Howard Hirsch came to m*^ and said that this was 
a small, well, I call it a drug firm, more tha« a chemical firm, manu- 
facturing vitamins and drugs of that type, ind that he had an idea 
of a preparation that he thought would have a big sale and he asked 
me to invest with him, which I did. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 95 

Mr. Nellis. How much money did you invest ? 

Mr. Haas. $8,000. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, this area around Larchmont — is that the correct 
pronunciation ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

]\Ir. Nellis. And North Moreland Boulevard ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, 

Mr. Nellis. You own quite a bit of property around there, do you 
not? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What is the total value of the property you own in 
Cleveland, Mr. Haas? 

Mr. Haas. I would not know, sir. 

The Chairman. Well, can't you estimate it, just about? 

Mr. Haas. May I make a statement at this time ? 

The Chairman. Yes, indeed. 

Mr. Haas. I am under investigation by the special agents of the 
T'reasury Department, and I don't think it is fair at this time to ask 
me any questions regarding my holdings. 

The Chairman. Yes. Well, noAv, ISTr. Haas, we would like to 
make it plain to you that we are not seeking any information which 
would bear upon any matter having to do with your income tax, any 
income-tax dfhculties; in other words, just so that we understand 
each other, we are not directing any inquiry toward the disclosure of 
data that might bear upon income-tax requirements or violations. 

Mr. Haas. Senator, if I start telling — Mr. Nellis has asked me 
what these holdings are worth, and that is equivalent, in my opinion 
at least to my making a declaration of my net worth. 

The Chairman. Well, except this, Mr. Haas, and I am not arguing 
it, but just putting out the facts, they are matters of record, are they 
not? 

Mr. Haas. As to what they are worth? 

The Chairman. No, your holdings. 

Mr. Haas. The holdings I am very willing to testify to. 

The Chairman. So I rather assume that they would be matters of 
record that anybody could get. 

Mr. Haas. Definitely so, and I will be glad to tell you of my 
holdings. 

The Chairman. And insofar as they are identifiable, their approxi- 
mate value could be ascertained by one way or other, by appraise- 
ment, so we are not asking you for anything confidential, but rather 
what might be your estimate. And then again, your estimate might 
not be accurate. 

Mr. Becker. Well, let me put it this way: I submitted a memoran- 
dum to Mr. Nellis and to Mr. Moser in which I told them in my opin- 
ion the net worth was an important and substantial ingredient in tax 
cases. It always is. 

Mr. Nellis. Pardon me. You are jumping the gun. I have not 
asked the man that. . 

Mr. Becker. I know you have not. I am coming to that. It is a 
substantial ingredient, "it is a very well-recognized method of deter- 
mining a man's income. 



96 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

There are United States Supreme Court decisions, and the one 
especially in the Rogers case, and that case had to do with a man start- 
ing giving certain testimony, and that may open the door. 

Now, when you begin to ask about one asset and another asset and 
another asset, you are getting to the question of net worth, and you 
can do that by asking about one asset, and it is arguable that you 
have opened the door to being questioned about the value of all of 
your assets, and I think the Rogers case is pretty clear on that point. 

The Chairman. Counsel, I really don't agree with you on that, 
insofar as this is concerned. 

Mr. Becker. Have you examined the authorities on that? 

The Chairman. I have read the case you are referring to. I am 
only talking about this one particular matter, which is a matter of 
record, and about which the general appraisal may be made by any 
competent person. 

Mr. Becker. Well, if you wish to make an appraisal it is all right, 
but there is a question when the man himself tells you what it is worth, 
a question is raised as to whether or not he has not begun to open the 
door about his worth generally, and you may ^et it the minute you 
question him to state those things, you are getting pretty close to it. 

The Chairman. Would you make the same answer as to what the 
purchase price of the properties were ? 

Mr. Becker. I think not. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, let's rephrase it. 

The Chairman. We are not going into the income tax phase. 

Mr. Nellis. No. I thought I made that plain to you in our con- 
ference, that I felt that that was the type of questioning we would try 
to stay away from. 

Mr. Becker. You did, and I did not want to go into the question 
of values. 

Mr. Nellis. What was the purchase price of the properties you own 
around Cleveland? 

Mr. Haas. You ask me the specific ones and I will be glad to answer 
them. 

Mr. Nellis. Can you give us an over-all estimate to save us time of 
having to go through each parcel because you are a very active trader? 

Mr. Haas. Well, let us take Kinsman Center. These were orig- 
inally in my name and I turned them into corporations, because I was 
hopeful of selling them within a year or so and getting a capital tax 
gain, but when I found I could not, naturally, I turned them into 
corporations. 

Kinsman Center is at Warrensville Road and Kinsman. I pur- 
chased that lot in 1944, at a cost of $100,000. There were back taxes 
on it of $55,000, and I bought it from the Van Swearingen Co., and 
the building cost $600,000, 1 mean, the building cost $600,000 to build, 
and the land cost $100,000. 

Mr. Nellis. You built the building ? 

Mr. Haas. Charles Bernstein procured a mortgage for $700,000, I 
think it was from the Ocean, or something like that, out in California, 
I think it is the Ocean Insurance Co., or something like that. You 
have got that one. 

Mr. Nellis. I have got Kinsman Center. 

Mr. Haas. Then there is my house on Parkland 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 97 

Mr. Nellis. That is your personal home? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Xellis. Well, let's go on to the Kemper property. 

Mr. Haas. The Kemper, I purchased that property in January of 
1948. The cost of the property was $525,000. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, is it just coincidence that Kleinman and Roth- 
kopf own buildings right next door? 

Mr. Haas. I think I had mine later ; I am not certain, though. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you get any tips from them as to the availability of 
this building? 

Mr. Haas. No, Bernstein is a very close friend of mine. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, let's be frank. Is Bernstein the key to all of this ? 

Mr. Haas. What do you mean by the key, sir ? 

Mr. Nellis. Well, this little coincidence which occurs so often. 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. How does it happen that Kleinman and Rothkopf hap- 
pen to own that property then ? 

Mr. Haas. I could not tell you. 

Mr. Nellis. It is just by the sheerest coincidence? 

Mr. Haas. Sheer coincidence, yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. It couldn't happen more strangely. 

Mr. Haas. Well, it is just coincidence that they happen to own that 
building. I don't know whether they purchased it before or after me. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, I have the facts, and it was about the same time. 

Mr. Haas. You are asking about Kemper ? 

Mr'. Haas. $525,000 cost, and $366,000 mortgage, and $159,000 paid 
in. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. 

Mr. Haas. What next? 

Mr. Nellis. Is that 2525 you are talking about? 

Mr. Haas. Well, you called it Kemper. 

Mr. Nellis. There are other properties on Kemper. 

Mr. Haas. Well, Miss Shannon takes care of these things. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you mean that you have so much property that it 
is hard for you to tell ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know the exact numbers. 

Mr. Nellis. What about South Park Manor ? That is in the same 
area. Maybe you can tell me about that. 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. That is the Shaker Fairhill Co. That is at 1300 Fair- 
hill Road. 

Mr, Haas. Yes ; I know where it is. 

Mr, Nellis. May I ask you a question in order to expedite this 
proceeding ? 

Mr. Haas. Why, certainly. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Becker. 

Mr. Becker. Yes, 

Mr. Nellis, Would you be willing to submit that record as exhibit 
No. 2 to Mr. Haas' testimony ? Then I would not have to ask him 
about it. 

Mr. Becker. Well, you had better ask him about this one. I don't 
see it on here. Oh, yes ; here it is. 



98 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. The cost to me of that was $97,000, I only owned part 
of it. 

Mr. Nellis. Who owned the rest of it ? 

Mr. Haas. A Mr. Nickman and Mr. Spohn. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that George P. Nickman ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes ; and Spohn also ; $97,500 was my cost. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. In 1948? 

Mr. Haas. In 1948 and 1949. My records show 1948 and 1949. 

Mr. Nellis. Would you be willing to submit that piece of paper 
that you have ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, can't you put that down ? 

Mr. Becker. These are my working papers. 

Mr. Haas. There is something else on here. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. We have it in the record. Again, does 
that cover all of your Cleveland properties ? 

Mr. Haas. Just a minute. 

Mr. Nellis. Let me hand you this paper [handing paper to witness]. 

Mr. Haas. Yes; everything I have ever owned prior to this here, 
yes ; everything is on this paper. 

Mr. Nellis. On this paper and what you have read into the rt cord. 

Mr. Haas. No; there is another lot on Woodland Avenue, \'?'hich 
they missed, which I thought of, a lot that cost $12,000, $6,000 cash 
and $6,000 mortgage. 

Mr. Nellis. What year is that ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, gosh, I don't know, I can't tell you. 

Mr. Nellis. Approximately. 

Mr. Haas. Well, when they started to separate the motion-picture 
houses from 

Mr. Nellis. That was 1943. 

Mr. Haas. No ; this was much later. 

Mr. Nellis. That was when they started. 

Mr. Haas. Well, I bought this lot on a tip. The Warners were 
going to build a house there, and when these proceedings started, 
well, of course, it blew it up. It is still vacant. 

Mr. Nellis. Who gave you the tip ? 

Mr. Haas. It was generally known around Cleveland, it was prob- 
ably Louis Kaufman, he worked for them. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Chairman, I offer this as exhibit 2 to Mr. Haas' 
testimony, which is a summary of his real-estate holdings, with the 
exception of • 

Mr. Haas. With the exception of the two I mentioned. 

The Chairman. With the exception of those you have mentioned. 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Subject to those qualifications it may be admitted. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 



99 



(The document referred to above was marked "Haas Exhibit No. 
2" and is as follows) : 



Location 



Year 



Cost 


Mortgage 


$700, 000 


$700, 000 


45, 000 
10,000 
3.000 
39,000 
15, 000 
525, 000 


25,000 




20,000 


366,000 


25, 000 

47, 500 


10,000 
36, 500 


175, 000 


157, 500 


75. 000 
33, 000 
26, 250 


52, 500 
22, 000 
15, 000 


50,000 
75, 000 


33. 000 
50, 000 



Net 



Kinsman Center, hand cost $100,000 including 
back taxes of $55,000 payable over 10 years; 
building cost $600,000; $700,000 mortgage. 

House, Parkland 

Lomond lot 

Seven Hills 

Lorain Street 

Fairview 

Kemper, Cleveland 

Palm Beach: 

Sunrise-. 

Royal Park 

Bessemer 

500 Palm Beach 

300 Palm Beach 

Worth Ave- 

Miami: 

Collins Ave 

Do 



October 1944... 

1937 

1943 

1944 

January 1946... 
1944 

January 1948... 

September 1944 
November 1944. 
October 1944- _. 
September 1944 
October 1944... 
May 1945 

August 1944 

February 1949.. 



None 



$20, 000 
10, 000 
3, 000 
19, 000 
15, 000 

159, 000 

1.5,000 
11,000 
17. 500 
12, 500 
11,000 
11, 250 

17, 000 
25,000 



Toiccr bowl. — Partnership formed 1941. Original investment $12,500 for 121.^ 
interest. Operated bowling-alley enterprise in San Diego, Calif. Partners: 
Albert Hanson, Ruth Hanson, Wayne A. Hanson, George M. Strong, Virginia 
Berdge, Blanche Levy, S. Charles Lee, Oscar Oldnow, all of Los Angeles, Calif. 

Mr. Haas. I mean, there are two others not on that list. 

Mr. Nellis. What about your Florida holdings? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Becker. They are on there, on the same sheet of paper. 

Mr. Nellis. May I see this, please ? 

Mr. Haas. All that has been sold. 

Mr. Nellis. You say these are all of your acquisitions in the Flor- 
ida area; that is in California? 

Mr. Haas. That is true, all of them. There is the cost price, the 
mortgages, and the equity. 

Mr. Becker. And the net investment. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you have any other real estate anywhere else ? 

Mr. Haas. Not that I can think of. 

Mr. Nellis. Or any other business interests anywhere else that are 
productive of income or capital gain? 

Mr. Haas. Well, the Tower Bowl in San Diego. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that a Hanson partnership? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know how many partners there were. 

Mr. Nellis. There are the others on the list also. 

Mr. Haas. There are some others down here not on the list. 

Mr. Nellis. Read them off, please. 

Mr. Haas. I cannot remember Metzger's name. He is now dead. 
He was living in Los Angeles, and he was in the motion-picture busi- 
ness, living in San Diego. 

Mr. Nellis. Is he related to Kern Metzger? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Is he related to Harold Metzger? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know him. 

Mr. Nellis. Of Los Angeles, a motion-picture man, a dark-com- 
plexioned man, a friend of Hanson's. 

Mr. Haas. It might be. 

Mr. Nellis. O. K., proceed. 



100 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. And Donna Strong. 

Mr. Nellis. That is what? 

Mr. Haas. This is part of the partnership that is not rejflected on 
that paper here. 

Mr. Nellis. Donna Strong is who? 

Mr. Haas. Widow of E. P. Strong. Walter E. Green, New York, 
whom I don't know, and J. A. McCalley, Chicago, whom I don't know. 

They were friends of Hanson and mine. 

Mr. Nellis. That was the Tower Bowl; is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That was a bowling alley in San Diego. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Haas, going back for one moment, do you remem- 
ber I asked you whether you ever represented Lubeck or Al Polizzi? 

Mr. Haas. I never did. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you remember a libel action in 1936 ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you remember your testimony? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Didn't you testify in that case that you represented 
Polizzi and the Lubeck Brewery Co. ? 

Mr. Haas. I am sure I never represented the Lubeck Brewing 
Co., never. 

Mr. Nellis. What about Polizzi, Mr. Haas? Remember, this is 
important. 

Mr, Haas. You are asking me to remember what I said in 1936. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes ; what you testified to under oath. Wouldn't you 
remember that? 

Mr. Haas. No ; they asked me about so many people. 

Mr. Nellis. Is it your answer that you don't remember you testi- 
fied to that effect ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. So you may have represented Al Polizzi? 

Mr. Haas. My recollection is that I did not. 

Mr. Nellis. Your recollection is that you did not ? 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Your testimony is that without refreshing your mem- 
ory as to your actual testimony of the 1936 libel action you could not 
say whether you testified to that at that time? 

Mr. Haas. I could not say as to that time. 

Mr. Nellis. That you represented Al Polizzi ? 

Mr. Haas. I could not say one way or the other. 

Mr. Nellis. I want to get it straight if I can. 

Mr. Haas. My recollection is that I never represented them. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you acquire the Burroughs Book Store? 

Mr. Haas. From the owner, the former owners. 

Mr. Nellis. And who were they? 

Mr. Haas. A man by the name of Bingham, Mr. Howard Klein, 
and a lawyer by the name of Schlesinger handled the negotiation. 

Mr. Nellis. How much did you pay for that investment? 

Mr. Haas. I think the total investment ran $450,000. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you pay for that ? 

Mr. Haas. What do you mean by that ? 

Mr. Nellis. Was it over a period of time ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, no, no. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 101 

Mr. Nellis. You paid cash for it? 

Mr. Haas. Spot cash for it; yes, sure. 

Mr. Nellis. You laid it on the line? 

Mr. Haas. Of course. 

Mr. Nellis. What year was that? 

Mr. Haas. In 19-44, I recollect. 

Mr. Nellis. In 1944? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. NiXLis. You are the sole owner of Burroughs ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir ; I was a 371/2 percent owner. 

Mr. Nellis. Who were the other owners ? 

Mr. Haas. The other owners was E. P. Strong, Howard Klein, and 
B. E. Rand. 

Mr. Nellis. That is the same Mr. Rand ? 

Mr. Haas. The same Mr. Rand. 

Mr. Nellis. Who paid you the $14,000? 

Mr. Haas. One year. 

Mr. Nellis. What about the Green Heron Hotel in Florida ? 

Mr. Haas. I know nothing about that, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know anything about that ? 

Mr. Haas. Nothing at all, sir, 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been there ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You have never been inside the place ? 

Mr. Haas, No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, let's see. In 1946 you transferred title to some 
property 

Mr. Haas. Say that again. I didn't quite hear it. 

Mr. Nellis. In June 1946 you transferred title to some property at 
Palm Beach, Fla. ? 

Mr. Haas. In 1946 I transferred title? 

Mr. Nellis. To the Cleveland Shaker Apartment Co., a Florida 
corporation, 

Mr. Haas. That is the land that the Palm Beach Ambassador Hotel 
is built on. 

Mr. Nellis. That is the Palm Beach Ambassador? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. What was the consideration you received for that 
transfer ; do you recall ? 

Mr, Haas, I cannot remember, 

Mr. Nellis. Would it be about $75,000? 

Mr. Haas. I would say approximately. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, the Cleveland Shaker Apartment Co., which 
owns the Palm Beach Ambassador Hotel, is owned by Charles Bern- 
stein ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, I think he is one of the stockholders. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes ; he is the president of the company. 

Mr. Haas. I don't know who the other stockholders are. 

Mr. Nellis. Would it surprise you to know that A. E. Gordon is 
secretary of that at all ? 

Mr. Haas. Not at all. I didn't know that, however. 

Mr. Nellis. How does it happen that an associate in your office 
turns up as Bernstein's associate? 



102 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. He has handled a lot of real-estate transactions for 
Bernstein, you know, and it is common practice for a lawyer, some- 
times, to be secretary or some officer of a company. I consider that 
nothing unusual, 

Mr. Nellis. Do you own any portion of Mr. Gordon's ownership of 
that hotel ? 

Mr. Haas. He has no interest in that hotel at all. 

Mr, Nellis. Why would he be serving as secretary of that corpo- 
ration ? 

Mr. Haas. Because Mr. Bernstein asked him. 

Mr. Nellis. You mean as an accommodation to Bernstein? 

Mr. Haas. I am sure that he does not own one share of stock. 

Mr. Becker. Wait, he may have a qualifying share. 

Mr. Haas. I don't know if you need a qualifying share, but he 
has no financial interest. 

Mr. Nellis. He is the secretary of that corporation. 

Mr. Haas. Well, if you say so. 

Mr. Nellis. I am reading from the real-estate records. 

Mr. Haas. I don't doubt it. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know Harris Drew, former city attorney at 
Palm Beach? 

Mr. Haas. He is an attorney ; yes, I know him. 

Mr. Nellis. He was the individual who represented the group that 
acquired this property from you and built the Palm Beach Ambas- 
sador Hotel? 

Mr. Haas. Will you say that again? 

Mr. Nellis. Mr, Drew represents a group, the group to which I 
have been referring. 

Mr. Haas. I don't know that. 

Mr. Nellis. You don't know that ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know that. 

Mr. Nellis. The land upon which the hotel was built belonged 
to you ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Bernstein is president of a company that owns 
the hotel ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. And Mr. Gordon, who was your associate, is secretary 
of that corporation ? 

Mr. Haas. So you say. I don't know that of my own knowledge, sir, 

Mr. Nellis. I understand that. That is perfectly all right. Now, 
who is Herman Cohen? 

Mr. Haas. Herman Cohen is a former law associate of mine in 
Cleveland, now practicing law in Florida. 

Mr. Nellis. That is right. Can you describe him? I am curious 
about him, 

Mr, Haas. He is a man, I would say. about 5 foot 5 or 6 ; semibald, 
a little gray hair, a little fluffy on the sides, a man I would say 
aroimd 56 years of age, weighing about 140 pounds. 

Mr. Nellis. That fits the description of the gentleman who repre- 
sented Jack Friedlander before this committee. 

Mr. Becker. That is the man. 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 103 

Mr. Nellis. That is the same man? 

Mr. Becker. Yes, sir. 

Islr. Nellis. Mr. Cohen is practicing law in Miami 

Mr. Haas. Miami Beach. 

Mr. Kellis (continuing). Beach, Fla.? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

]\Ir. Nellis. And he is your former associate; is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

]Mr. Nellis. Do you know the area in Dade County, Fla., known as 
Millionaires' Row ? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever hear of it? 

Mr. Haas. I know very little about Miami proper, or Miami Beach, 
either, for that matter. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever own any property in Miami Beach? 

Mr. Haas. I told you ahput these lots on Collins Avenue. 

Mr. Nellis. Was that Millionaires' Row ? 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. 

Mr. Nellis. You never heard of it that way ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever own any property with William Bur- 
bridge? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever own any property with Sammy Kaye ? 

Mr. Haas. He had a half interest in one piece of property, 500 
feet, he took a deed for 250, and I took a deed for 250, but I was hold- 
ing my 250 in trust for Tom McGinty and E. P. Strong. 

Mr. Nellis. That was the piece of property that you testified to pre- 
viously when I asked you about McGinty? 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is Sammy Kaye ? 

Mr. Haas. He is a real-estate operator in Miami Beach. 

Mr. Nellis. He is the same individual, I presume, then, if you have 
read the record, who recommended a deal to Mr. Polizzi for Mr. Mc- 
Bride. 

Mr. Haas. I don't know. I did not read that record. 

Mr. Nellis. You did not know that ? 

Mr. Haas. I did not read the record. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever hear of the S. & G. syndicate? 

Mr. Haas. I have read about that. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know Levitt ? 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Or Ben Cohen ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Or Harold Salvey? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, some of the property records down in this area 
near your lot indicate that members of that syndicate, Mr. Kaye, 
and Mr. Burbridge, who is city councilman in Miami Beach, own ad- 
joining property. 

Mr. Haas. Adioining? 

Mr. Nelms. Yes. 

Mr. Haas. Well, I wouldn't know that. sir. You surprise me. 



104 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. In any event, no property you ever owned in that arer 
has also been owned in part by any of the S. & G. syndicate is that 
right? 

Mr. Haas. Definitely. 

Mr. Nellis. Did I ask you whether or not you had ever given any 
sums of money in cash to Mr. Bernstein ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, you did. 

Mr. Nellis. And your answer was what! 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Never? 

Mr. Haas. Never. 

Mr. Nellis. How about Alvin Giesey, have you ever given him 
any money ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, of course not. 

Mr. Nellis. Has he represented you in connection with your tax 
returns ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, yes, he prepares my tax returns. 

Mr. Nellis. Then presumably you have paid him for that. 

Mr. Haas. Oh, certainly. 

Mr. Nellis. Aside from that you have never given him any money ? 

Mr. Haas, No, sir. 

Mr, Nellis. Does Giesey manage the race track at Thistledown? 

Mr. Haas. There is no race track there, it burned down in 1943. 

Mr. Nellis, What is there? 

Mr, Haas, Nothing; vacant land. 

Mr. Nellis. Vacant land? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. "VYlio manages that land, do you know? 

Mr. Haas. It was sold to the Detroit Racing Association. I don't 
know what they did with it. It was sold to the Detroit Racing Asso- 
ciation early in 1944, I mean early in 1943, right after the fire. 
I think the fire occurred in 1943, though I am not positive of the exact 
date. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you own any land, or did you own any land, on 
which a drive-in theater was built at 11211 Brook Park Road? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Giesey's office was listed as the place of business 
for this drive-in theater; was it not? 

Mr. Haas. That is true. That was a man by the name of Oakes, 
who had his office in there, in the Buckley Building, whatever the 
number is I do not know. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, on this land on which this drive-in theater was 
built, I understand that you owned it? 

Mr. Haas. That is true. 

Mr. Nellis, And you sold it to the corporation which built the 
theater ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Adjoining this was the land owned by "Mickey" 
McBride? 

Mr. Haas. That I do not know. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever do any business with McBride in that 
area ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. This land was purchased at a sheriff's sale. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 105 

Mr. Nellis. The bulk of your income is from the practice of law ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, when you say "bulk," what do you mean? 

Mr. Nellis. The majority. 

Mr. Haas. I would say from investments and practice, both. I 
would say close to 55-50, although I am not certain. 

Mr. Nellis. And your income has been in the six figures for the 
last few years, would you say ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Approximately when did you begin earning income in 
the six figures ? 

Mr. Haas. You had better judge that. You have my returns there. 

Mr. Nellis. No, no, you are on the stand. 

Mr. Haas. I cannot truthfully tell you when. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, in 1932' you were in bankruptcy. 

Mr. Haas. That is true. 

Mr. Nellis. And in 1933 did you earn six figures in income ? 

Mr. Haas. In six figures ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Haas. No. 

Mr. Nellis. In 1934? 

Mr. Haas. I doubt it. 

Mr. Nellis. In 1935? 

Mr. Haas. I would not remember, really. 

Mr. Nellis. Beginning when? Surely you must remember when 
you started becoming successful. 

Mr. Haas. Well, I was successful in 1934 and 1935. I was sup- 
porting my family. I consider that being successful. 

Mr. Nellis. You don't remember when you began to earn really 
big money? 

Mr. Haas. No ; I can't say. 

Mr. Nellis. Has it been within the last 10 years ? 

Mr. Haas. In six figures ? I couldn't tell you. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you acquire your first parcel of real estate, 
aside from your home ? 

Mr. Haas. That sheet I gave you should show it. I see it is in J943. 

Mr. Nellis. In 1943, is that right? 

Mr. Haas. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. And prior to that you owned no property at all? 

Mr. Haas. Outside of my house. 

Mr. Nellis. Outside of your house? 

Mr. Haas. No. sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been a legal representative of any gam- 
bling syndicate? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you at any time represented any combination of 
persons who were in the gambling business, outside of the State of 
Ohio? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you at any time been a partner in any enterprise 
engaged in the gambling business ? 

Mr. Haas. No, sir. 



106 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. Aside from the slot machines and the companies we 
spoke of. 

Mr. Haas. I disagree with you, there were no slot machines, that 
I know of, and I was there in Colorado Springs. 

Mr. Nellis. Were you at the Phoenix, Ariz., place of business? 

Mr. Haas. I was there for 5 weeks. 

Mr. Nellis. And you observed no slot machines there at that time ? 

Mr. Haas. There were no slot machines. I had nothing to do with 
that, but I still say there were no slot machines. I had no interest in 
the business at Phoenix. 

I am now talking about Colorado Springs, and there were no slot 
machines there at all, and none were operated, because if there were 
I would have known about it. 

Mr. Nellis. What is the — I can't quite make out the name, but it is 
a manufacturing company. 

Mr. Haas. That is a screw-machine company. 

Mr. Nellis. Giesey had an interest in that, too? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ? 

Mr. Haas. I had an interest. 

Mr. Nellis. But I mean, did you solicit Giesey's interest in that 
company ? 

Mr. Haas. It was brought to me by Giesey, it was his son, he has a 
son by a first marriage who is, I don't know, say in his late twenties, 
and he brought the deal to him. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you last see Kleinman or Rothkopf ? 

Mr. Haas. I saw Kleinman last week. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you meet with him ? 

Mr. Haas. He came to see me in my office. 

Mr. Nellis. He did ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. What was the occasion of his visit? 

Mr. Haas. Nothing in particular. 

Mr. Nellis. Just wanted to chat ? 

Mr. Haas. Well, I had not seen him since I returned from down 
south, from Jamaica. 

Mr. Nellis. And did you talk about your prospective testimony 
here? 

Mr. Haas. No, I just told him I was coming in here on this day. 

Mr. Nellis. Did he bring you any business proposition of any sort ? 

Mr. Haas. No, no ; I never had any business proposition in my life 
of any kind from him. 

Mr. Becker. You mean from Kleinman ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. From Kleinman ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you last see Rothkopf ? 

Mr. Haas. In the last 2 or 3 weeks, I saw him in a restaurant. 

Mr. Nellis. But this was not a prearranged meeting ? 

Mr. Haas. Oh, no ; definitely not. 

Mr. Nellis. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. That will conclude your examination. 

I want to ask you whether you feel that your examination and the 
hearing has been entirely fair and proper. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 107 

Mr. Becker. I would say so. I still think 

Mr. Haas. I just want to say this, may I make a statement at this 
time ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Mr. Haas. The statement that representatives of the Cleveland 
Police Department, or any other officials, came to my office three times 
a day or four times a day for weeks, I cannot believe, sir. 

Miss Shannon has been with me a long while, and she is a very 
truthful person. She told me, what day it was I don't know, but after 
my departure, that a marshal who said he knew me, although I don't 
know him, came to the office and asked if I was there. She said "No." 
He said, "When will he return?" She said, "May 1." With that he 
left. 

Then when I returned to Cleveland Miss Shannon told me that a 
marshal, and I take it for granted it was the marshal, although she 
didn't know, went to my office and inquired if I was present, and they 
said no, that I was away, and I would be gone until May 1. That 
is all I know. I want to clarify that. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, I don't want to leave the record that way, Mr. 
Chairman. I would simply like to add this fact, that the police re- 
ports stating the number of times, and the police officers who visited 
Mr. Haas' home and his place of business, and the number of places 
in New York are available, and I think they should be made part 
of this record, and I will ask Mr. McCormick to see to it that they 
are furnished this committee. 

I don't want to leave the record with the impression that we did 
not seek Mr. Haas' testimony diligently. 

Mr. Haas. I am not stating that. 

Mr. Becker. Nobody contends that you did not. 

Mr. Haas. I just have to take Miss Shannon's word for it. I was 
not there. 

Mr. Nellis. Yoij made no effort to be there. 

Mr. Haas. It is a very, very improper statement which you just 
made, an improper statement, and I think that that should not be part 
of the record. 

Mr. MosER. I want to ask you a couple of questions. You said you 
have in interest in slot machines? 

Mr. Haas. That is right, sir. 

Mr. JNIosER. You are not quibbling with regard to what slot ma- 
ichines mean? 

Mr. Haas. No. A slot machine is a thing that you put money in 
and money comes out, is that what you mean ? 

Mr. MosER. Yes. 

Mr, Haas. Or even a mint machine. 

Mr. MosER. Or even a minute machine. 

Mr. Haas. Yes. 

Mr. MosER. You said if there had been any slot machines m Phoenix 
when you were there that you would have known about it? 

Mr. Haas. I would have known about it. 

ISIr. MosER. How would vou be sure ? 

Mr. Haas. I used to go to my brother's place of business frequently. 
I lived at the Arizona Biltmore and he was downtown. I was there 
l^rimarily because my stepson was working in Phoenix at that time. 

Mr. MosER. What was your stepson's business? 



108 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Haas. He was working for a commission merchant. 

Mr. MosER. You went to all the places in Phoenix at the time you 
were there? 

Mr. Haas. All the places, restaurants, and places of that kind. 

Mr. MosER. Any places that would have had slot machines ? 

Mr. Haas. Yes, sir. I never saw one in the 5 weeks I spent there. 

Mr. MosER. Were there gambling casinos ? 

Mr. Haas. Not that I know of. 

Mr. MosER. Or any bookie joints? 

Mr. Haas. That I don't know. I don't play horses. 

Mr. Becker. Can we get a copy of the transcript, Counsel ? 

Mr. Nellis. You may ask the chairman. 

The Chairman. Mr. Haas may have a copy of the transcript, it can 
be purchased with the strict understanding that it is for your use only. 

Mr. Becker. Very well. My address is 1 Wall Street, New York. 

Mr. Haas. Before I go, would you be good enough to notify the 
sergeant-at-arms that I am released? 

Mr. Becker. So that we can get the $3,000 back. 

The Chairman. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. On the record. 

All right, will you call your next witness. 

Mr. Nellis. Our next witness will be Morris Wexler. 

The Chairman. Your name is Morris Wexler ? 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

The Chairman. Mr. Wexler, we are in executive session, and only 
those present are members of the committee or the staff. You, of 
course, are welcome to have your counsel or anybody you desire to 
have, and I assume that these gentlemen are with you ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. According to the usual practice you will be sworn. 
You don't object to being sworn? 

Mr. Wexler. Not at all. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand, please. 

In the presence of the Almighty God, do you swear that the testi- 
mony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, 
and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Wexler. I do. 

The Chairman. Now, for the record, may we identify these other 
gentlemen ? 

Mr. Feighan. My name is John T. Feighan, Jr., and my address 
is 722 National City Bank, Cleveland, Ohio. 

The Chairman. And you are a member of the bar ? 

Mr. Feighan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And your name, sir ? 

Mr. McCormack. Martin A. McCormack, 1202 Engineers Building, 
Cleveland. 

The Chairman. And you are also a member of the bar? 

Mr. McCormack. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And you both are representing Mr. Wexler ? 

Mr. Feighan. Yes, sir. 

Mr. McCormack. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Very well. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 109 

TESTIMONY OF MORIIIS WEXLER, CLEVELAND, OHIO, ACCOMPANIED 
BY JOHN T. FEIGHAN, JR., AND MARTIN A. McCORMACK, ATTOR- 
NEYS, CLEVELAND, OHIO 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Nellis, you may proceed. 

Mr. Nellis. Will you give us your full name, please? 

Mr. Wexler. Morris Wexler. 

Mr. Nellis. Morris Wexler. 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you known by any other name? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, "Mushy." ' 

Mr. Nellis. M-u-s-h-y? 

Mr. Wexler. That is the closest way to spell it. 

Mr. Nellis. What is your address, Mr. Wexler? 

Mr. Wexler. 1635 Eiderdale Road, Cleveland Heights, Ohio. 

Mr. Nellis. And your business address ? 

Mr. Wexler. 715 Vincent Avenue. That is the business of the 
Theatrical Grill, which is my business. 

Mr, Nellis. Any other business address? 

Mr. Wexler. Chester and Ninth Building. At one time that was 
my address. I have not been using that office. 

Mr. Nellis. That is the address of the Empire News Co. ? 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Of which you are president? 
• Mr. Wexler. Well, I am one of the owners and I iiin the business. 

Mr. Nellis. Is it a corporation? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Or a partnership? 

Mr. Wexler. A partnership. 

Mr. Nellis. Let's get that on the record. Who are your partners 
in that ? 

Mr. Wexler. Sam Miller and Robert Kaye. 

Mr. Nellis. Sam Miller is known as "Gameboy"? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. They are tlie same individuals ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. Mr. Wexler, when did you leave Cleveland 
during the month of December 1950 ? 

Mr.'WEXLER. I left in October. 

Mr. Nellis. Were you not in Cleveland during the month of Decem- 
ber 1950? 

Mr. Wexler. December? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes ; just before Christmas, Mr. Wexler. 

^Ir. Wexler. I might have stopped — I might have stopped there 
and picked up something. I cajne back, I don't know whether it was 
December. It could have been in the latter part of November or the 
early part of December ; I am not sure. 

Mr. Nellis. And when did it first come to your attention that this 
committee of the United States Senate was seeking your presence in 
a hearing? 

Mr. Wexler. While I was away, I was told, and I read that there 
was a subpena goine to be served on me. 

Mr. Nellis. When was that, Mr. Wexler? 

85277—51 — pt. 13 — —8 



110 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Wexler. Well, is was in December. 
Mr. Nellis. It was in December ; was it not ? 
Mr. Wexler. I think it was the latter part of December. 
Mr. Nellis. What did you do when that information came to your 
notice ? 

Mr. Wexler. I didn't do anything. Wherever I was, I just stayed. 
I was scared to come back, that is all. 
Mr. Nellis. Where were you? 

Mr. Wexler. Well, I was at that particular time in Florida. 
Mr. Nellis. Where in Florida? 

Mr. Wexler. Miami Beach, and I was also in Hollywood and Palm 
Beach. I visited some friend. 

Mr. Nellis. Where did you stay, at a hotel ? 

Mr. Wexler. I stayed at a hotel, or an apartment rather than a 
hotel. 
Mr. Nellis. What was the name of the place ? 

Mr. Wexler. The Surf and Sand Apartments, but I think that 
was around the middle of January that I stayed there. 

Mr. Nellis. That was when the hearings were going on in Cleve- 
land; is that right? 

Mr. Wexler. Well, they could have been going on right at that 
time. 

Mr. Nellis. Who were some of the friends you stayed with while 
you were in Florida ? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer that and stand on my 
constitutional rights. 

Mr. Nellis. You refuse to answer as to who you stayed with? 
Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 
Mr. Nellis. On what grounds? 

Mr. Wexler (counsel talking with witness).' It may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Nellis. It may what ? 

Mr. Wexler (counsel talking to witness). It may incriminate 
me. 

Mr. Nellis. Of what? 

Mr. Moser. Just a moment. Mr. Chairman, if he wants time to 
consult with his attorneys, I am sure that you will not object, will 
you ? 

The Chairman. No, indeed. 

Mr. Wexler. Well, I was indicted years ago on a lottery indictment 
in the same business I am in now. 

Mr. Nellis. What do you mean by the same business ? 
Mr. Wexler. In the news business. 

Mr. Nellis. Was that the indictment with Russell Brophy ? 
Mr. Wexler. Well. I don't know who was in there. I was indicted. 
Mr. Nellis. Was William Molasky of St. Louis in that ? 
Mr. Wexler. I know there was a lot of people indicted. I don't 
remember who. 

Mr. Nellis. You were indicted, but you don't know who you were 
indicted with and for what? 

Mr. Wexler. I was indicted on a lottery charge. 

Mr. Nellis. In what court ? 

Mr. Wexler. In the Federal court in Chicago. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE HI 

Mr. Nellis. Yes; and how many years ago was that? 

Mr. Wexler. Here is this indictment [handing document to 
counsel]. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes; I am familiar with this, but I am trying to get 
you to tell me how long ago it was. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. ]May that be made a part of the record at our 
request ? 

The Chairmax. Yes. We will liave it introduced and marked as 
an exhibit. 

Counsel, I understand you wish it marked as an exhibit in the case? 

Mr. McCoRMACK. Yes. 

The Chairman. That will be done. 

(The document referred to above was marked "Wexler Exhibit Xo. 
1" and is as follows:) 

Ix THE District Court ob' the United States of America for the Northern 
District of Illinois, Eastern Division. Of the February Term, in the 
Year 1940 

The Grand .luiors of the United States of America, duly empaneled and sworn 
in the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the 
Northern District of Illinois in the Fehruary Term of the said court in the year 
1940, having begun but not finished during the said Febrviary term of court, 
among other things, an investigation of the matters charged in this indictment, 
and having duly continued to sit by orders of this court in and for the said 
Division and District during the March and April terms of the said court for 
the purpose of finishing investigations begTin but not finished during the said 
February term of court, and continued but not finished during the said March 
term of court, the said investigation of the matters charged in this indictment 
not having been finished in the said March term of court, such orders having 
been duly made pursuant to the requests of the United States Attorney and 
upon the motion of the said Grand Jury, and inquiring for the said Division and 
District at the April term of the said court in the year 1940, upon their oaths 
present and charge that — 

James M. Ragen, Sr., 

Arthur B. McBride. otherwise known as Arthur McBride, sometimes doing 

business as Continental Press Service, 
Lionel C. Lenz. 
Thomas F. Kelly, 

Thomas J. Kyan. alias Frank Walsh, 
Russell L. Brophy. sometimes doinig business as Los Angeles Journalist 

Publishing Company, 
William G. O'Brien, alias Walter Keough, 
William Molasky. sometimes doing business as St. Louis Scratch Sheet and 

St. Louis Scratch Sheet Publishing Company, 
Morris Kopit, sometimes known as "Flowers" Kopit, 
Morris Wexler. sometimes doing business as Empire News Service and 

Empire Advertising Company, 
Alfred J. Goodman, sometimes doing business as Metropolitan Scratch Sheet, 
Western Union Telegrajih Company, a corporation organized and existing by 

virtue of the laws of the State of New York, 

defendants herein, whose full and true names other than as herein stated are 
unknown to the Grand Jurors, heretofore knowingly, willfully, feloniously, and 
unlawfully conspired, combined, confederated, and agreed together and with each 
other and with divers other persons to the Grand .lurors unknown, at a time 
and times and at a place and places unknown to the Grand Jurors, except as 
hereinafter stated and described, and continued thereafter to conspire, combine, 
confederate, and agree together and with each other and with the said other 
persons, throughout the period beginning about October 2.5, 19.39. and to and 
including the date of the return of this indictment, in the City of Chicago, State 
of Illinois, in the Northern District of Illinois, and within the jurisdiction of 
this court, knowingly, willfully, feloniously, and unlawfully to commit offenses 
against the United States, to wit, to carry from certain states of the United 



112 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

States to other states of the United States, and to a foreign country, lists of the~ 
prizes awarded by means of certain lottery schemes offering prizes dependent 
upon chance, in violation of Section 237 of the Criminal Code of the United States : 
in the manner and for the purposes hereinafter set forth, and more particularly 
as follows, that is to say : 

That, as the defendants and each of them then and there well knew and agreed, 
lottery schemes offering prizes dependent upon chance were then, had been for a 
long time and would thereafter be, in operation in various States of the United 
States the o] erator> of which said schemes required, to enable them to operate 
their said schemes, prompt, accurate, and complete information concerning the 
running of horse races at race tracks in various States of the United States, 
including States other than those in which the said lottery schemes were, or 
would be, operated, as hereinafter set forth, and that the said operators would, 
and they did, pay as the prizes awarded by means of their said lottery schemes, 
as hereinafter set forth, sums of money identical with the combinations of figures 
known as "mutuels" or other closing prices payable at the said race tracks and 
that the said figures would, and did, constitute the prizes awarded by means of 
the said lottery schemes and that the said operators would, and they did, require 
for the operation of their said schemes that lists of the said prizes so awarded 
should be promptly and accurately carried to the said lottery scheme operators 
in the State's wherein the said lottery schemes were so operated ; 

That the defendants and each of them did then and there and as part of the 
said conspiracy undertake, plan, and contrive to gather and cause to be gathered' 
by various means, in large part surreptitious, wrongful and fraudulent, the in- 
formation and data necessary to the operation of the said lottei'y schemes and 
originating at various race tracks in the United States and concerning the horse- 
races run thereat, including the "mutuels" and other prices payable thereat, as 
herein described, and to carry and cause to be carried the said information and 
data from the said race tracks as promptly as possible to places from which such 
information and data might be thereupon promptly and accurately carried by 
means of communications facilities under the control and operation of the said 
defendants or their agents for the said purpose into the various States wherein 
the said lottery schemes were or should be operated as herein described ; and 
further that communications facilities would be obtained from the various per- 
sons and public service corporations providing such facilities and in large paVt 
from the defendant Western Union Telegraph Co., and that the defendant West- 
ern Union Telegraph Co. would, and it did, provide such facilities for the purposes 
of the said conspiracy, combination, confederation, and agreement, in the form 
of telephone, telegraph, ticker, teleprinter, telemeter, teletypewriter, and other 
communications devices for the rapid and accurate carriage of the said informa- 
tion, including the said lists of prizes, the said communications facilities com- 
prising an interstate and international network ; and that arrangements would 
be made, anil they were made, with lottery scheme operators in various States 
of the United States to carry to them for their respective lottery schemes the 
information and data, including lists of prizes as aforesaid, from the various 
States through which the said information and lists of prizes were so carried,. 
and for the mode and method of payment therefor ; 

That the said defendants, as part of the said con.spiracy, planned, undertook, 
and contrived that the defendant McBride would, and he did, in association with 
the defendants herein other than the defendant Western Union Telegraph Com- 
]>;)ny, purport and pretend to engage, luider the name of Continental Press 
Service, in the business of disseminating racing news foi- publication in sheets 
commonly known as "scratch sheets" and to induce or cause, and they did induce 
and cause, persons disseminating and carrying such news in behalf or for the 
account of the said Continental Press Service to purport and pretend to publish 
such "scratcli sheet," and the said defendants further undertook, planned, and 
contrived, as aforesaid, that operators of the said lottery schemes would be 
induced to purport and pretend to purchase such scratch sheets upon the condition 
and representation and for the consideration that they would be entitled to 
receive promptly and accurately from the defendants or their agents for that 
purpose liy means of the communications facilities afore-mentioned the informa- 
tion and data required by the said operators as aforesaid, inchiding lists of 
prizes as aforesaid; and the said defendants, as part of the said conspiracy,, 
did plan and undertake to construct, maintain, provide, and operate the said net- 
work of communications facilities so as to cover thereby many States of the 
United States as well as the Dominion of Canada and so as to extend from one 
State of the United States into another, and into the Dominion of Canada, and to 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 113 

<earry such information and data, inchuling the aforesaid lists of prizes, from one 
State to another and to the Dominion of Canada, contriving that operators of 
lottery schemes in various States of the United States and in Canada, to the 
oi)eration of which the afoi-esaid information and data were necessary and 
integral parts as herein stated, miglit receive such information and data by 
"drops," relay, and similar devices used in cari'iage by telephone, telegraph, 
ticker, teleprinter, telemeter, teletypewriter, and similar communications facili- 
ties ; and it was planned, undertaken, intended, and contrived that, while appar- 
•ently unorganized and unrelated in the segments and circuits thereof, the total 
of segments and circuits was to C(mstitute, and did constitute, a single, unified, 
correlated, and integrated network for the carriage from one State into another 
and to the Dominion of Canada of the aforesaid information and data, including 
lists of prizes awarded by means of the lottery schemes operating in the said 
several States and the Dominion of Canada, and while apparently operating as an 
agency for the collection and dissemination of racing news for publications, it 
was to be and was in truth and in fact a scheme to carry information and data 
■as aforesaid and, however simulated and pretended, the motive, purpose, and 
Intention of the said defendants was to cause the said lottery scheme operators 
to pay to the said defendants or their agents large sums of money in considera- 
tion of the said carriage to or for the account of the said lottery scheme operators 
of the information and data, including lists of prizes awarded by means of the 
said lottery schemes, as herein stated, all for the profit of the said defendants; 

And the defendants undertook, planned, and contrived, as part of the said 
■conspiracy, combination, confederation, and agreement, that the said lottery 
scheme oi>erators would pay, as the consideration for the carriage of the infor- 
mation and data, including lists of prizes as aforesaid, money dependent in 
amount upon the profits made by the said lottery scheme operators from the 
operation of their said schemes, the greater the profits of the said lottery scheme 
operators the larger the amounts payable by them ; 

That, as part of the said conspiracy, combination, confederation, and agree- 
ment, it was planned and undertaken by the defendants and each of them that 
the defendant Ragen would, and he did, supervise and direct the activities of 
each of the other defendants herein in the said conspiracy, combination, con- 
federation, and agreement ; that the defendant McBride would, and he did, under 
the title and tiade name of Continental Pi-ess Service, assume the financial and 
directional control of the said activities of the defendants from the City of 
Cleveland, in the State of Ohio, opening an oifice for such purpose in the said 
city under the said name ; that the defendant Lenz would, and he did, assume 
direction of the technical and mechanical functions of gathering and communi- 
cating the information and data above mentioned ; that the defendant Kelly 
would, and he did, assume the function of entering into arrangements with 
lottery scheme operators and collecting compensation on account of the de- 
fendants' services : that the defendants Western Union Telegraph Company, 
Molasky, Kopit, Wexler, Brophy, Ryan, and O'Brien, singly and together, with 
the assistance and collaboration of the defendant Lenz, would, and they did, 
provide the communications facilities network above mentioned by using appli- 
cations to be made and to be accepted therefor, and payments to be made, and 
to be received and accepted on account thereof, to persons and public service 
corporations providing such communications facilities, including the defendant 
Western Union Telegraph Company ; and, further, as part of the said con- 
spiracy, that the defendant Western Union Telegraph Company would, and it 
did, provide for the purposes of the said conspiracy, a continuous, unified, corre- 
lated, and integrated communications facilities network for the carriage of 
communications by Morse telegraph, comprised of leased circuits extending 
through many states of the United States and feeding, for the purpose of relay 
and further carriage, leased ticker, telemeter, and teleprinter circuits covering 
additional areas of the United States, and Canada, by interstate carriage, and 
both said Morse and ticker circuits further integrating with local and long dis- 
tance telephones, teletypewriter circuits and other facilities, so that while pur- 
porting and pretending to lease the said circuits in segments to single individuals 
the same would be so interconnected and unified, by means of switches, loops, 
and similar devices provided by the defendant Western Union Telegraph Com- 
pany as to constitute the said single communications network as aforesaid 
over which the information and data, including lists of prizes, could, would be, 
and they were, carried as aforesaid ; and that territorial allocation would be, 
and it was, made among the conspirators, the territory in and near Ohio being 
allocated to Wexler, the territory in and near the Pacific Coast to Brophy, the 



114 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

territory in and near New York City to Ryan, the territory in and near Missouri 
and Illinois to Molasky and Kopit, the territory in and near Florida to O'Brien;: 

And the grand jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do further say 
that the defendants and each of them at all the times herein mentioned well 
knew, intended, undertook, and planned, and it was an essential part of the 
said conspiracy, combination, confederation, and agreement, that the said 
lottery scheme operators would, and they did, operate, own, and conduct lottery 
schemes offering prizes dependent upon chance at various places throughout 
the United States and Canada, and that the said lottery schemes and each of 
them would, and they did, consist of and contain as essential parts thereof the 
elements of chance, consideration, and prize, the prizes awarded by means of 
the said lottery schemes being, and they were, the combinations of figures known 
as "mutuels prices" or closing odds for each race run at various race tracks 
operating in various states of the United States; and it was further intended 
that the payment of such prizes so awarded by means of each said lottery scheme 
should be made promptly upon the receipt of the list thereof, carried, as promptly 
as possible after the same should be determined, by the defendants from the 
said race tracks or other places at which such information should be gathered 
or received by the said defendants over the various communication facilities 
available and suitable for such purpose, including telephone, telegraph, ticker, 
teleprinter, telemeter, teletypewriter, and other communications devices, and 
made known and audible to each said operator or his employee for such purpose 
and to the purchasers and prospective purchasers in each said lottery scheme 
by the various appropriate devices, including sound amplified and loud speaker ; 

And the essential character and purpose of each said lottery scheme and the 
component parts thereof being, and the schemes being contrived and operated, 
as the defendants and each of them well knew and intended, to assure profit 
to themselves as well as to the operators of said lottery schemes, which profit 
was to be and was derived from an excess of consideration received from the 
persons induced to purchase tickets in the said lottery schemes over the prizes 
paid therein to the persons entitled to receive prizes in accordance with the 
list thereof awarded by means of the said lottery schemes and carried by the 
defendants. The method of operation of each said lottery scheme was contrived 
and intended to be, as the said defendant and each of them at all times herein 
mentioned knew, and was, as follows : 

That each operator of a lottery scheme was to induce, and he did induce, as 
many persons as possible, by divers appeals to their cupidity, to purchase tickets 
for a consideration to be then and there paid, the said tickets to be purchased 
from and the said consideration to be paid to the said operator or his agent for 
that purpose upon the promise, representation, and consideration that each 
such purchaser or holder of a ticket would be entitled thereby to receive, and he 
would thereby receive, from the said operator or his agent a chance to win a 
certain prize or prizes in money dependent upon the outcomes of certain horse 
races about to be run at certain race tracks as aforesaid, the said prizes to be 
further dependent for their amounts upon other numerous elements of chance, 
some of which are hereinafter described; 

Upon the purchase of each of the said tickets as aforesaid, the respective pur- 
chaser vrould, and did, designate one or more horses entered in one or more 
races thereafter to be run at the race tracks aforementioned and signified a 
position for each of the horses so designated in the finish of the respective races 
so designated, such as first (sometimes called "win" or "straight") or second 
(sometimes called "place") or third (sometimes called "show"), or certain com- 
binations of positions called "across the board," "parlays," "quinellas," and 
"daily doubles," all of which said designations were then and there caused to 
be transcribed and written upon the said tickets by the said operator or his 
ticket seller ; 

Payments to purchasers of winning tickets were to be, and were, made upon 
the receipt of the list of prizes awarded by means of each said scheme and 
carried by the defendants, as aforesaid. 

The purpose of assuring profit to each said lottery scheme operator as well 
as income to the defendants herein, as herein set forth, was to be, and was 
achieved, and the said schemes were, as the defendants then and there well knew, 
so contrived and intended, by reducing or eliminating as many as possible of the 
elements of risk militating against the making of profit by the said operators 
and introducing as many as possible elements of chance in connection vfith the 
designations and purchases by the said purchasers. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 115 

Among the elements of chance upon which the prizes paid to the said pur- 
chasers of tickets were, as part of the said scheme, made to, and did, depend 
were : 

1. The conduct and physical condition of the horse designated by the said 
purchaser, which conduct and physical condition were to he detei'rained by 
circumstances and factors beyond the control, and beyond the knowledge, of the 
said purchaser ; 

2. The separate conduct and physical condition of each of the horses competing 
with the horse so designated, which conduct and condition were to be determined 
by circumstances and factors beyond the control, and beyond the knowledge, of 
the said purchaser ; 

3. The separate conduct, motives, purposes, and physical and mental condi- 
tions of the jockeys, owners, trainers, and other persons concerned with the 
running of the horse so designated and of the competing horses, which conduct, 
motives, purposes, and physical and mental conditions were to be determined by 
circumstances and factors beyond the control, and beyond the knowledge, of the 
said purchaser ; 

4. The state of the weather and the race tracks and the effect on each or any of 
the competing horses, which were to be determined by circumstances and factors 
beyond the control, and beyond the knowledge, of the said purchaser. 

The remaining factors and circumstances constituting elements of chance 
characterizing the said lottery schemes are too numerous to be mentioned herein. 

Among the various means and devices, as the defendants then and there well 
knew, intended, and contrived, assuring such excess of profit as aforesaid were : 

1. The multiplicity of races run, upon the respective outcomes of which the 
payment of prizes depended ; 

2. The diversity and multiplicity of the events in the said races, known as 
"place," "show." "parlay." "daily double," "quinella," "across the board," and 
other combinations of events in such races ; 

3. The excess with regard to each race concerned in the purchasing of tickets 
and the payment of prizes of possible losing designations over possible winning 
designations, the greater the total number of designations, signified by the 
number of horses entered in each such race, the greater the assurance of profit; 

4. The dependence of the payment of prizes upon the payment of prizes at 
the respective race tracks, which payments in turn were devised, and known 
by the said defendants to be devised, to guarantee a profit to the awai'ders of 
such prizes at the said tracks in varying amounts of, to wit, from about seven 
to about ten per cent of the total consideration received at the respective tracks 
upon the respective races ; 

5. The "hedging," "re-insuring," or "laying-off" of excess risks by each said 
lottery scheme operator with other lottery scheme operators, bookmakers, bet- 
ting commissioners, or parimutuel race track operators, relieving the said 
lottery scheme operator from loss in the event of any ticket purchaser's becom- 
ing entitled to receive a larger amount by way of prize than consistent with 
the said lottery scheme operator's making a profit upon his said business ; 

6. The limitation of risk by refusing, and refraining from accepting, from any 
single purchaser a consideration in am<mnt so large that the payment of the 
referable prize to be awarded would be larger than consistent with a profit upon 
the total business handled and the total moneys received ; 

7. The limitation of risk by the diversification and spreading of designations 
among horses, races, race tracks, and combinations by the dissemination among 
prospective purchasers of a multitude of diverse and contradictory predictions, 
opinions, and alleged information, recommending designations of particular 
horses, known as tips and handicapping, known to the said defendants and to 
the said operators of each said scheme to be largely inadequate, misleading, and 
essentially unreliable, and, if followed by purchasers in making purchases, to 
tend to yield a profit to the operators of each said scheme, as well as to the de- 
fendants, and a failure on the purchasers' parts to obtain any prize; the said 
eontradictorv predictions, opinions, and alleged information being contained m 
large part in certain periodicals published and distributed for use by purchasers 
and prospective purchasers in the said lottery schemes, as the defendants and 
each of them at all times well knew, such as racing forms, scratch sheets, and 
similar publications. 

The remaining factors and circumstances constituting means and devices 
assuring such excess of profit are too numerous to be mentioned herein: and 
the elements of chance above-mentioned were intended to be, and were, effective 
as means and devices for assuring profit to the operators as aforesaid and 



116 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

the means and devices for assuring such profit, as above-mentioned, were intended 
to be, and vi^ere, effective as elements of chance in each said lottery scheme. 

And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths aforesaid, do further present 
and charge that to effect the purpose and object of the said conspiracy, combina- 
tion, confederation, and agreement the said defendants knowingly, willfully, 
feloniously, and unlawfully did, and did cause to be done, the following acts, 
to wit : 

OVERT ACTS 

1. On or about October 27, 1939, A. C. Cronkhite, in the City of Chicago, 
State of Illinois, sent a certain telegram to B. D. Baruett, in the City of 
New York, State of New York, reporting that Nationwide News Service, Inc., 
requested cancellation of all leased-wire service furnislied to Nationwide News 
Service, Inc., and its subsidiary companies effective November 1, 1939. 

2. On or about November 3, 1939, one John J. Gorman applied to the Indiana 
Bell Telephone Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, for the installation of six tele- 
phones, thereafter designated as Riley 4381, 4382, 4383, 4384, 4385, and 4386, 
in Room 811, Lemcke Building, in the City of Indianapolis, Indiana. 

3. On or about November 3, 1939, one John J. Gorman applied to the Indiana 
Bell Telephone Company, Indianapolis, Indiana, for the installation of three 
telephones, thereafter designated as Riley 3846, 6000, and 8272, in Room 1039, 
Lemcke Building, in the City of Indianapolis, Indiana. 

4. On or about November 4, 1939, the defendant Brophy made application to 
the defendant Western Union Telegraph Company at Los Angeles, California, 
for telemeter service to the Telefiash Loudspeaker Corporation, Room 729, 431 
South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois. 

5. On or about November 10, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company approved and placed in service telemeter service between the Los 
Angeles Journalist Publishing Company, Los Angeles, California, and the Tele- 
flash Loudspeaker Corporation, Room 729, 431 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, 
Illinois. 

6. On or about November 13, 1939, in the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, 
within the Northern District of Illinois, and within the jurisdiction of this court, 
one Willard T. Lenz, applied to the Illinois Bell Telephone Company for the 
installation of two telephones, thereafter designated as Wabash 7928 and 8839, 
in Room 1514, Fisher Building, 343 South Dearborn Street, in tlie City of Chicago. 

7. Oh or about November 15, 1939, in the City of Chicago, State of Illinois, 
within the Northern District of Illinois, and within the jurisdiction of this court, 
one Willard T. Lenz applied to the Illinois Bell Teleplione Company for the 
installation of two telephones, thereafter designated as Wabash 1623 and 8041, 
in Room 1514, Fisher Building, 343 South Dearborn Street, in the City of Chicago. 

8. On or about November 15, 1939, the defendant Kelly caused a letter to be 
sent to Mr. C. G. Hickcox, Superintendent, Western Union Telegraph Company, 
108 East Baltimore Street, Baltimore, Maryland, applying for the installation of 
leased wire ticker service between Elkridge, Maryland, and certain locations in 
the states of Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia. 

9. On or about January 25, 1940, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a single Morse circuit 
with stations at Elkridge, Maryland, 1 North Presbyterian Avenue, Atlantic City, 
New Jersey, and the York Publishing Company, Union City, New .Jersey, was 
made, signed "Howard Sports Daily, Inc., applicant, by H. E. Bilson, Gen. 
Manager," at Baltimore, Maryland. 

10. On or about January 26, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph Com- 
pany by T. W. Carroll accepted in writing the next above-mentioned application 
of tlie Howard Sports Daily, Inc. 

11. On or about December 1, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a single Morse circuit 
with connection at the York Publishing Company, Jersey City, New Jersey ; 
Providence Sporting News Company, Providence, Rhode Island ; Trojan Publish- 
ing Company, Troy, New York ; Salt City Distributing Company, Syracuse, New 
York ; and Monroe Scratch Bulletin, Rochester, New York, was made, signed 
"M. J. Madden News Co. for Providence Sporting News, Co., applicant, by Joseph 
P. Lewis, Rep." 

12. On or about December 19, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned applica- 
tion signed "M. J. Madden News Co. for Providence Sporting News Co." 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 117 

13. On or about December 1, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telesrapli Company for a tiolvcr-operatecl circuit 
with stations in the states of Rliode Island, Connecticut, and Massachusetts was 
made, signed "M. J. Madden News Co. for Providence Sporting News Co., appli- 
cant, by Joseph P. Lewis, Rep." 

14. On or about December 19, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation signed "M. J. Madden News Co. for Providence Sporting News Co." 

15. On or about December 1, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company extended the Providence Sporting News Company's Providence-Troy- 
Syracuse-Rochester Western Union single Morse circuit to the Bison Sports News 
at Buffalo, New York. 

16. On or about December 7, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a ticker circuit with 
stations located in the state of Massachusetts was made, signed "Metropolitan 
Scratch Sheet, applicant, by P. R. Elwell (Mgr)" at Providence, Rhode Island. 

17. On or about January 8, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of the Metropolitan Scratch Sheet. 

IS. On or about December 7, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a single Morse circuit 
between Buffalo, New York, and Youngstown, Ohio, was made, signed "William 
N. Hamilton, applicant," at Youngstown, Ohio. 

19. On 6v about December 13, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of William N. Hamilton. 

20. On or about December 7, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for single, high si>eed 
teleprinter service with drops at designated locations in the state of Ohio was 
made, signed "William N. Hamilton, applicant," at Youngstown, Ohio. 

21. On or about December 13, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of William N. Hamilton. 

22. On or about December 28, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a single Morse circuit 
between Youngstown, Ohio, and Indianapolis, Indiana, was made, signed "Wil- 
liam N. Hamilton, applicant," at Youngstown, Ohio. 

23. On or about January 8, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of William N. Hamilton. 

24. On or about January 1, 1940, a supplemental written application for spe- 
cial contract service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for single, 
high speed teleprinted service with drops at designated locations in the state 
of Ohio was made, signed "William N. Hamilton, applicant," at Youngstown, 
Ohio. 

25. On or about January 15, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of William N. Hamilton. 

26. On or about December 5, 1939, an application for special contract service 
from the Western Union Telegraph Company for an 8-A ticker circuit with 
drops at designated locations in the states of Ohio, West Virginia, and Mary- 
land was made by H. F. Crowley at Steubenville, Ohio. 

27. On or about December 5, 1939, the next above-mentioned application of 
H. F. Crowley was accepted and service was begun by the defendant Western 
Union Telegraph Company. 

28. On or about January 23, 1940, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a single, high speed 
teleprinter circuit from Detroit, Michigan, to Toledo, Ohio, was made, signed 
"Consolidated News Co., applicant, by P. J. Walsh, Mgr.," at Detroit, Michigan. 

29. On or about January 29, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned applica- 
tion of the Consolidated News Company. 

30. On or about January 2, 1940, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for single, high speed 
teleprinter service with drops at designated locations in the state of Indiana 
was made, signed "Capitol City Pub. Co., applicant, by J. J. Gorman, Mgr.," at 
Indianapolis, Indiana. 



118 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

31. On or about January 8, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted the next above-mentioned application of 
the Capitol City Publishing Company. 

32. On or about December 20, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a Morse leased wire 
from Indianapolis, Indiana, to Memphis, Tennesseee, with drops at St. Louis 
and Kansas City, Missouri, was made, signed "St. Louis Scratch Sheet Pub- 
lishing Company, applicant, Morris Kopit, Partner," at St. Louis, Missouri. 

33. On or about .January 8, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned applica- 
tion of the St. Louis Scratch Sheet Publishing Company. 

34. On or about January I.''), 1940, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a commercial leased 
wire connecting Des Moines, Iowa ; Omaha and Lincoln, Nebraska ; St. Joseph, 
Kansas City, and Joplin, Missouri ; and Wichita, Kansas ; was made, signed 
"Eagle Scratch Sheet Publishing Company, applicant, Simon Partnoy, xAgt.," at 
Kansas City, Kansas. 

35. On or about January 23, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of the Eagle Scratch Sheet Publishing Company. 

36. On or about January 1.5, 1940, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for a single, high speed 
teleprinter circuit with drops at designated locations in the states of Iowa and 
Illinois was made, signed "Charles J. Peck, applicant," at Moline, Illinois. 

37. On or about January 23, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of Charles J. Peck. 

38. On or about December 9, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for leased ticker service 
with drops at designated locations in the states of Mississippi and Arkansas was 
made, signed "Tri State Publishing Co., applicant, by Geo. H. Sullivan, Mgr.," 
at Memphis, Tennessee. 

39. On or about December 15, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of the Tri State Publishing Company. 

40. On or about December 9, 1939, the application for special contract service 
froni the Western Union Telegraph Company for leased ticker service with drops 
at designated locations in Mississippi and Arkansas was supplemented, signed 
"Tri State Publishing Co., applicant, by Geo. H. Sullivan, Mgr.," at Memphis, 
Tennessee, and included drops at designated locations in the states of Kentucky, 
Tennessee, Missouri, and Alabama. 

41. On or about December 15, 1939, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned sup- 
plemental application of the Tri State Publishing Company. 

42. On or about December 21, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for private ticker leased 
wire fi'om Memphis, Tennessee, to New Orleans, Louisiana, including drops at 
Shreveport, Lake Charles, and New Iberia, Louisiana, and Biloxi, Mississippi, was 
made, signed "Crescent City Publishing Company, applicant, by J. J. Fogarty, 
owner," at New Orleans, Louisiana. 

43. On or about January 8, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph Com- 
pany by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned application 
of the Crescent City Publishing Company. 

44. On or about January 0, 1940, a written application for special conti'act 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for ticker service between 
Shreveport, Louisiana, and Fort Worth, Texas, was made, signed "Premier Pub- 
lishing Company, applicant, by J. L. Montgomery, Owner," at Fort Worth, Texas. 

45. On or about January 10, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by C. J. Ince accepted in writing the next above-mentioned application 
of the Premier Publishing Company. 

46. On or about December 21, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for private ticker leased 
wire between Lake Charles, Louisiana, and Galveston, Texas, was made, siuned 
"Galveston Press Publishing Company, applicant, by Sam Serio, Owner," at Gal- 
veston, Texas. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 119 

47. On or about Decembor 27, 1939, tbe defendant Western Union Telegraph 
'Companj' by C. J. luce accepted in writing tlie next above-mentioned application 
of the Galveston Press Publishing Company. 

48. On or about December 22, 1939, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegraph Company for one duplex, low speed 
telemeter circuit connecting the offices of the Western Union Telegraph Com- 
pany at Chicago, Illinois, with the offices of the Continental Press, Indianapolis, 
Indiana, and the Los Angeles Journalist, Los Angeles, California, was made, 
signed "L. A. Journalist Pub. Co., applicant, by K. L. Brophy, Owner," at Los 
Angeles, California. 

49. On or about January 3, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation signed "L. A. Journalist Pub. Co." 

50. On or about January 15, 1940, a written application for special contract 
service from the Western Union Telegi-aph Company for a single, high speed 
teleprinter circuit connecting Seattle, Washington ; Tacoma, Washington ; Port- 
land, Oregon ; Vancouver, British Columbia ; and Victoria, British Columbia ; 
was made, signed "Northwest News Co., applicant, by G. W. Johnston, Manager," 
at Seattle, Washington. 

51. On or about January 23, 1940, the defendant Western Union Telegraph 
Company by J. C. Willever accepted in writing the next above-mentioned appli- 
cation of the Northwest News Company'. 

52. On or about March 25, 1940, the defendants Molasky and Kopit <:arried 
news concerning horse races by telephone from St. Louis, Missouri, to the lottery 
scheme establishments of Vic Doyle in East St. Louis, Illinois. 

53. On or about March 25, 1940, the defendants Molasky and Kopit carried 
news concerning Horse races by telephone from St. Louis, Missouri, to the lottery 
scheme establishment of Fritz and Dwyer in East St. Louis, Illinois. 

54. On or about March 25, 1940, the defendants Molasky and Kopit carried 
news concerning horse races by telephone from St. Louis, Missouri, to the lottery 
scheme establishment of Ray Nash in East St. Louis, Illinois. 

Against the peace and dignity of the United States of America, and contrary 
to the form of the statute in such case made and provided. (Sec. 37, C. C. ; 
Sec. 88, Title 18, U. S. C.) 

William J. Campbell, 
United States Attorney. 

Mr. Nellis. I don't think you have explained to the satisfaction of 
the chairman in what way it would incriminate you to tell us who 
you stayed with. 

Mr. Wexler. I have to refuse to answer and stand on the grounds 
that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Nellis. Of a Federal offense ? 

Mr. Wexler. Of a Federal offense. 

Mr. Nellis. What offense? 

Mr. Wexler (conferring with counsel). I refuse to answer. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. On the same grounds. 

Mr. Nellis. AVhere did vou go after you left Florida ? 

Mr. Wexler. After I left Florida ? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Wexler. I went to Pittsburgh. 

Mr. Nellis. And where did you stay in Pittsburgh ? 

Mr. Wexler. I stayed at a hotel, it is a hotel out— I forget the name- 
it is out of the city, I don't remember the name. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you stay with any friends in Pittsburgh? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. I stayed at this hotel. 

Mr. Nellis. How many friends did you stay with in Florida, going 
Taack to Florida? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer that on the ground that it may 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Wexler. 



120 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You testified a moment ago now that you refused ta 
answer the questions as to who you stayed with in Florida because of 
this lottery charge; is that right? 

Mr. Wexler. No, no, I did not. I just refused to answer and I stand 
on my constitutional rights that it may incriminate me. 

Mr. Nellis. That it may incriminate you of what offense? 

Mr. Wexler (talking to counsel). I still refuse to answer that. 

Mr. Nellis. How long ago was this brought against you ? 

Mr. Wexler. Well, that answers it. 

Mr. Nellis. Don't you remember when you were indicted? 

Mr. Wexler. To the best of my recollection, I think it was around 
1937. 

Mr. Nellis. 1937? 

Mr. Wexler. I think so. 

Mr. Nellis. And wouldn't you assume that the statute of limitations 
had run on an offense that might have occurred in 1937 ? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know anything about law [conferring with 
attorney]. 

Mr. Nellis. That is not an answer. , The offense of which you were 
indicted for apparently occurred in 1937 or prior to that date; is that 
right? 

(Mr. Wexler conferring with counsel.) 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Chairman, I think it should be noted for the record 
that when a question is given, that counsel whispers the answer. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. Well, that is quite all right with us. 

Mr. Feigiian. If we were in error, I may say that I assumed that 
that would be all right, that he could consult with us. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, if 3'ou want to take time to consult with him, that 
is all right, but Mi'. Moser's point was very well taken, namely, that 
you were coaching him on each reply. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. Well, wouldn't we be coaching him if we had a 
conference? 

Mr. MosER. I have no objection to your advising him, but I do object 
to your telling him what to answer in each case, telling him what his 
answer is. We allow counsel to attend as a courtesy to the witness 
and to counsel, but if it gets to the point where the witness is just a 
puppet repeating what counsel says, that is another matter. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. We only intervene when the fifth amendment is 
brought into being. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, you may take time out to consult with him, if you 
wish. Do you want to do that ? 

Mr. McCoRMACK. What was the last question ? 
(The record was read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Nellis. I will rephrase the question. You say the answer to 
that question might incriminate you, is that right, of a Federal offense ? 
Is that your statement ? 

Mr. Wexler. The answer to the question you just read? 

Mr. Nellis. That I asked you, concerning who you stayed with and 
how many friends you stayed with in Florida. 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Right? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 121 

Mr. Nellis. Now, the offense wliicli you have in mind, I take it, 
is one which occurred more than 10 years ago, because you just told 
me that the indictment was issued in 1937 against you, is that right '^ 

Mr. McCoRMACK. Now may we have a conference, sir ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(Counsel conferring with Mr. Wexler.) 

Mr. Nellis. What is the answer ? 

Mr. Wexler. There is nothing to prevent them from indicting me 
again or other indictments. 

Mr. Nellis. You mean for some other crime, some other offense? 

Mr. Wexler. For this business that I am in. 

Mr. NelixEs, For the news business ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right 'i 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that a State offense that you are concerned about? 

Mr. Wexlek. I am concerned about a Federal offense. 

Mr. Nellis. You are not concerned about a State offense? 

Mr. Wexler. Both. 

Mr. Nellis. Both? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 

Mr. Moser. Is it your position that there is a Federal law that for- 
bids the wire business that you are in ? 

Mr. Feighan. May we have a conference ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(Counsel conferring with witness.) 

Mr. Nellis. What is your answer ? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know the law, but I was indicted once, and it 
could happen again on that charge or other charges. 

Mr. MosER. You were indicted once under the State law? 

Mr. Wexler. A Federal law. 

Mr. Nellis. The Federal lottery statute, is that right? 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. All right. Now, Mr. Wexler, let us get down to this 
avoidance of the subpena. After you left Pittsburgh you went to 
Nevada ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You never went to Nevada during the period December 
to February or March of this year? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You said when you first started to testify that you 
were scared, isn't that what you said ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. What were you scared of, Mr. Wexler ? 

Mr. Wexler. Of another indictment. 

Mr. Nellis. Of another indictment for what ? 

Mr. Wexler. For anything, for the business I am in. 

Mr, Nellis. For the Theatrical Grill business you are in ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. For the horse racing business you are in ? 

Mr. Wexler. For the wire service. 

Mr. Nellis. For the wire service ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir, and income tax also. 



122 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. Income tax? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. You are just worried about an indictment, is that 
ri^ht? 

Mr. Wexler, I was brought into Chicago once and I was scared 
about it again. 

Mr. Nellis. In any event, you made no effort whatsoever to com- 
municate with any authority to indicate you were ready, willing, 
and able to testify, is that right ? 

Mr. Wexler. Well, I came in on my own. 

The Chairman. When ? 

Mr. Wexler. And I reported here in, I think it was the latter part 
of ]March, I think it was the latter part, I am not sure. 

Mr. Nellis. When you got notice that there was a warrant out for 
your arrest, is that right ? 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Wexler, are you in any illegitimate business ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Is the Empire News Service Co. a legitimate business? 

Mr. Wexler. So far as I know it is. 

Mr. Nellis. You are concerned about an indictment with respect 
to what you do in that company, but you think it is a legitimate busi- 
ness, is that right ? 

Mr. Wexler. I thought it was legitimate when got indicted before^ 

Mr. Nellis. What is the business of the Empire Service Co. ? 

Mr. Wexler. It is a news business, the dissemination of news. 

Mr. Nellis. What kind of news do you disseminate ? 

Mr. Wexler. Race-horse news. 

Mr. Nellis. Who are your customers? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer and stand on my constitutional 
rights, because they may incriminate me. 

Mr. Nellis. At this point I would like to ask the chairman to direct 
the witness to answer the previous questions concerning who he was 
with while avoiding service of this committee, and the question con- 
cerning who his customers are. 

The Chairman. Let us take them one at a time. 

Mr. Wexler, you do understand the first of the two questions to which 
counsel refers, namely, the question as to whom you were with at the 
time that attempts were made to serve a subpena on you? I mean, 
you understand the question ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Now, Counsel, just a second, so we may get the 
record clear, in the opinion of the subcommittee that is a proper ques- 
tion to be asked of you, and the committee directs that it be answered. 

Now if you desire to confer with counsel, it is permissible to do so. 

Mr. McCormack. Thank you. 

Mr. Feighan. Thank you. 

(Witness conferring with counsel.) 

The Chairman. What is your answer ? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer, and have to stand on my constitu- 
tional rights there. I could be charged with conspiracy if I answered 
that question. 

The Chairman. Now, the second of the two questions is who are 
the customers of the Empire News Service, and we do instruct that 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 123 

you answer that, and are we to understand that you take the same 
position of refusing to answer 'i 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. That is right. 

JNIr. Nellis. Where do you obtain your service, Mr. Wexler? 

Mr. Wexler. From the Continental Press. 

Mr. Xellis. And how nuich do you pay tliem for the service, Mr. 
Wexler? 

Mr. Wexler (conferring Math counsel). I have to refuse to answer 
that question. I will have to stand on my constitutional rights. 

Mr. Nellis. Can we have an agreement, gentlemen, so that the 
Chair does not have to ask you to direct your answer each time, Mr. 
Chairman, would you be agreeable? 

The Chairman. Would it be agreeable to counsel, could we under- 
stand that rather than go through this routine each time, could we 
have it understood that he is directed to answer the question? 

Mr. McCormack. Yes, and may we have this further understand- 
ing, Mr. Chairman, may the record show, and if you agree to it, 
that if he fails to supplement his refusal by the fact that the answer 
may incriminate him, that it is understood and agreed to that it is 
implied that that is part of his testimony ? 

The Chairman. It will be understood that if he made a full answer 
he would have included that, and that what he has said in response 
to the previous questions will be considered as having been stated in 
response to the others. 

Mr. McCormack. Thank you. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you first go into the news-service business, 
Mr. Wexler? 

Mr. Wexler. I would say about 26 years ago. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you first take the service of Continental 
Press ? 

Mr. Wexler. Oh, I think maybe when they formed that company. 

Mr. Nellis. How much did you pay them at that time for the 
service which you obtain? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. That happened 15 years ago? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't remember, to be truthful. 

Mr. Nellis. Then why don't 3'ou state that ? That is your answer, 
that you don't remember? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't remember what I did pa3\ 

Mr. Nellis. Do you remember what you paid them 10 years ago? 

Mr. Wexler. No, to be truthful, I don't remember how much I 
paid tliem. 

Mr. Nellis. What about 5 years ago ? Do you remember what you 
paid then ? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer that and stand on my 
constitu.tional rights. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you remit everything but a nominal salary to you 
back to Continental ? 

(Counsel talking to witness.) 

Mr. Nellis. Just a minute, please. 

A [v. McCormack. I beg your pardon. 

Mr. Wexler. Will you ask the question over again, please? 



124 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. Do you remit everytliino; back that you obtain in your 
news-service business to Continental, except a salary which you keep 
for yourself ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, I pay them a flat sum, whatever it is. They have 
nothing to do with my business, outside of my buying their news. 

Mr. Nellis. Does the amount which you pay them fluctuate from 
year to year'^ 

Mr. Wexler. Well, it does not. There has been in a matter of years 
different amounts, but it does not fluctuate. 

Mr. Nellis. What is the difference based upon, if you know ? 

Mr. Wexler. Just my bargaining, trying to save more money. 

Mr. Nellis. Tliey come to you and try to get the highest price they 
can, and you try to get the lowest price? 

Mr. Wexler. Well, they have not tried to get the highest price, but 
I have went and tried to get mine reduced, if I could. I had nothing 
to lose if I did not. 

Mr. Nellis. You have a unique set-up as a distributor for Con- 
tinental, because many of their other outlets return practically every- 
thing to Continental except nominal fees of the officers, who run the 
outfit. 

Mr. Wexler. I know nothing about their business. 

Mr. Nellis. You know nothing about that ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. So far as you are concerned, you always paid them a 
stated fee ? 

Mr. Wexler. I was in the news business before Continental ever 
was in business. 

Mr. McCormack. Just a moment. Don't vouchsafe anything. 

Mr. Nellis. You have always paid tliem a flat sum ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How well do you know Mickey McBride? 

Mr. Wexler. I know Mr. McBride very well. 

Mr. Nellis. For many years ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, many years. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you work for him when he was in the news circula- 
tion business ? 

Mr. Wexi^er. I worked for the Cleveland News, and he was the cir- 
culator. I was a newsboy, and then I drove a wagon for a short 
while. 

Mr. Nellis. He so testified in Cleveland. 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you get into the news-service business, or 
whatever you call it ? It is a wire-service business ; isn't it ? 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you get into the business, Mr. Wexler? 

Mr. Wexler. When I left the newspaper business, my brother-in- 
law, who is Sam Miller, he had the wire at that time, and I went to 
work for him, and it was very small, and he turned it over to me. 

Mr. Nellis. Wlio were your customers those days, when you first 
started ? 

Mr. Wexler. I wouldn't remember them. 

Mr. Nellis. You would not remember them? 

Mr. Wexler. It is 26 years ago ; I would not remember them. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 125 

Mr. Nellis. How many customers do you have now, can you tell 
us that ? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer that ; period. It may 
incriminate me. 

Mr. Nellis. Are they located outside the State of Ohio, as well as 
in the State of Ohio? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer that. 

Mr. Nellis. Isn't it a fact that you have some outlets in Michigan? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer that also. 

Mr. Nellis. And the same question as to Indiana? Do you have 
any customers in Indiana? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Wexler, who is William Kirkland ? 

Mr. Wexler. William Kirkland? 

Mr. Feighan. May we confer ? 

Mr. Nellis. Well, now 

Mr. Feighan. May we confer, Mr. Chairman? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(Counsel conferring with witness.) 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer that. 

The Chairman. I would specifically note that you are directed to 
answer that question. And you still refuse? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. sir. 

The Chairman. Just on the mere question of who he is? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. As to who this person, this Kirkland, is ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is AVilliam Kirkwood? 

Mr. Wexler. The same answer. 

Mr. Nellis. Wliat answer? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. Isn't he located, whoever this William Kirkwood is, at 
your office, at the Chester and Ninth Building? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. Isn't it a fact that both Kirkland and Kirkwood are 
fictitious names? 

Mr. Wexler. I will give the same answer. 

Mr. Nellis. Isn't it a fact that you removed their names from the 
building after the McFarland committee of the United States Senate 
issued its report? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. Isn't that the reason you removed the names? 

Mr. Wexler. I would not have to answer — I refuse to answer that. 

Mr. Nellis. Why do you use fictitious names in the newspaper 
business? 

Mr. Wexler. I will have to refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you going to testify about your ownership in the 
Theatrical Grill ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You are not going to give us your information on that ? 

Mr. Wexler. I will testify to that, but I thought you asked me 

Mr. Nellis. The answer is that you are going to testify ? 

Mr. Wexler. I am going to testify. 

85277—51 — pt. 13- 9 



126 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. Before we get to that, how well do you know Pete 
Licavoli ? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. You know that he testified in Detroit that he calls you 
frequently, that he is a friend of yours. 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know what he testified. I don't know anything 
about it. 

Mr. Nellis. He so testified. I am not trying to take advantage of 
you. That is a fact, in the record, he so testified. 

Mr. Wexler. Well, I don't know anything about it. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you last speak to him on the telephone ? 

Mr. Wexler (conferring with counsel). I refuse to answer, 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know his business? 

Mr. Wexler. The same answer, I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. Calls from j^ou at the Theatrical Grill have been noted 
to Mr. Allen Smiley. Who is Allen Smiley, Mr. Wexler ? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know him. 

Mr. Nellis. You don't know Allen Smiley ? 

Mr. Wexler. No ; not that I remember. 

Mr. Nellis. Would you deny that calls had been made from the 
Theatrical Grill to him ? 

Mr. Wexler. Well, the Theatrical Grill has three or four stations 
in it. 

Mr. Nellis. This is not from the pay station. 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know. 

Mr. Nellis. What is the telephone number? 

Mr. Wexler. The number for reservations is 1-6092. 

Mr. Nellis. You don't know Smiley, is that right ? 

Mr. Wexler. Not that I know of; not to my recollection, I don't 
know him. 

Mr. Nellis. How well do you loiow Mike Farah ? 

Mr. Wexler. From coming into the Theatrical Grill, I have met 
him. I had met him many years ago on the street. 

Mr. Nellis. Just a moment, please. 

(There was a brief interruption.) 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know what business Farah is in ? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer. 

Ml-. Nellis. You did telephone him from the Theatrical Grill, 
didn't you ? 

Mr. Feighan. Just a minute. 

Mr. McCormack. Just a minute. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you refuse to answer the last question ? 

Mr. Wexler. YevS, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You know that he owned the Jungle Inn in Mahoning 
County, in Ohio, isn't that right? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Nellis. And why did you call the Merchants Club in northern 
Kentucky? Who do you know there? 

Mr. McCormack. Just a minute. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, gentlemen, I really think you are taking ad- 
vantage of the committee to confer after every question. 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer this question. 

Mr. Feighan. We certainly do not want to do that. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 127 

Mr. Nellis. It really amounts to coaching the witness on each 
question. I say this in the utmost kindness. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. We want him to answer every quevStion that may 
not incriminate him, and certainly we have to know who you are ask- 
ing about before we can advise him, 

Mr. Nellis, He is the witness. Let him decide who are the people — 
who are the people you know at the Merchants Club ? 

Mr. AVexler. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know Jimmy Brink ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Nellis. How well do you know liim ? 

Mr. Wexler. I know Jimmy very well. 

Mr. Nellis, What would be the occasion for your calling him so 
often ? 

Mr. Wexler. (No answer). 

]Mr. Nellis. Do you have any business dealings with him ? 

Mr. Wexler. I could have had, with some horses. 

Mr. Nellis. Involving your stables? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir, 

Mr. Nellis. Now, you know Anthony Milano, don't you? 

Mr. Wexler. I may know him, and I may have met him, not too 
well. 

Mr. Nellis. In 1948 you did some business with him, didn't you? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't remember it. 

Mr, Nellis. Well, if I told you that the records of the Theatrical 
Grill indicate they were business transactions, you would not deny, 
that, would you ? 

Mr, Wexler, You would have to tell me what they were, to refresh 
my memory, 

Mr, Nellis, Do you know Dalitz ? 

Mr, Wexler, Yes, 

Mr. Nellis. You have done business with his company, haven't you, 
or his companies ? 

Mr. Wexler. Which are his companies ? 

Mr, Nellis. Well, let's take Pioneer Linen, You do business with 
them ? 

Mr. Wexler, Yes, 

Mr, Nellis, That is a company that was owned by Dalitz? 

Mr, Wexler, I don't know whether he owns it or not, 

Mr. Nellis. You don't know whether he owns it or not? 

Mr. Wexler. Just from hearsay. 

Mr. Nellis. So he testified that way under oath; did vou know 
that? 

Mr. Wexler. No ; I did not read his testimony. 

Mr. Nellis. Wlio is Clarence Rothkopf ? 

Mr. Wexler. He is a fellow that is in the towel business — in the 
linen business, rather. 

Mr. Nellis. Is he related to Louis Rothkopf ? 

Mr. Wexler. No ; his name is Rosscup, I think. 

Mr. Nellis, Do you know Louis Rothkopf? 

Mr, Wexler, Yes, sir, 

Mr. Nellis. How well do you know him ? 

Mr. Wexler. Very well. 



128 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been in business with him? 

Mr. Wexler. Not that I know of. Not that I can remember. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know Morris Kleinman? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. How well do you know him? 

Mr. Wexler. Very well. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you been in business with him ? 

Mr. Wexler. Not that I can remember ; I can't remember any busi- 
ness with him. 

Mr. Nellis. No dealings of any kind ? 

Mr. Wexler. Not that I can remember. 

Mr. Nellis. Wlio is Henry Beckerman ? 

Mr. Wexler. He was my attorney, but he has been dead 

Mr. Nellis. He has been dead for several years, has he not ? 

Mr. Wexler. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. And he was associated with Mr. Gordon, who was Mr. 
Haas' associate, isn't that right? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know, he wasn't when he was representing me, 
I don't think. 

Mr. MosER. Mr. Wexler. 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. You know, do you not, that this committee is engaged 
in an investigation of whether organized crime utilizes the facilities 
of interstate commerce, or otherwise operates in interstate commerce, 
do you not ? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes. 

Mr. MosER. Have you any information that does not involve you, 
and which would not incriminate you, regarding transactions of an 
illegal character in interstate commerce, or using facilities of interstate 
commerce, or which are otherwise within the jurisdiction of this com- 
mittee? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't understand that question too thoroughly. 

Mr. MosER. I will restate it. Have you any information that does 
not involve you and would not incriminate you regarding transactions 
of an illegal character in interstate commerce, or using the facilities 
of interstate commerce? 

Mr. Wexler. May I talk to my lawyers ? 

Mr. MosER. Yes. 

(Witness confers with counsel.) 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know anything about anybody else^s business. 

The Chairman. Well, that is not quite responsive to the question, to 
say you don't know anything about anybody else's business. You have 
heard the question, and you do understand it. You have consulted 
with counsel about it, and the question is as to whether or not you have 
any information that would enlighten us in that connection, that is, not 
concerning you and not incriminating you at all, but any activities of 
others. 

Mr, Wexler. No ; I don't kow anything about it. 

Mr. Nellis. About the wire service, for example, that does not in- 
criminate or affect you. 

Mr. Wexler. No. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know how the wire service operates ? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know how they operate. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 129 

Mr. Nellis. How does a distributor operate, any distributor, not 
you. 

Mr. Wexler. Well, I can only answer for myself. I know I take 
care of my own business, I never bother with anybody else. 

Mr. Nellis. Why don't you answer for yourself? How does your 
business operate, generally, without telling us specifically who your 
customers are? You obtain service from Continental? 

Mr. Wexler. And I sell it. 

Mr. Nellis. How do you sell it, by telephone ? 

Mr. Wexler. Telephone and telegraph, whatever way we have. 

Mr. Nellis. What ways, just those two ways? 

Mr. Wexler. That is all, that is the only way I know of. 

Mr. Nellis. How many telephones do you have in your establish- 
ment? 

Mr. Wexler. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you have any Western Union ticker boxes? 

Mr. Wexler. May I talk to counsel ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(Witness confers with counsel.) 

Mr. Wexler. We have some tickers. 

Mr. Nellis. You have some Western Union facilities, is that right? 

Mr. Wexler. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Wlio is Joe Uhle, do you know Joe Uhle ? 

Mr. Wexler. I don't know the name. 

Mr. Nellis. Or Jerome Newstadt ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. McCormack:. Keep your voice up so the stenographer can 
get it. 

Mr. Wexler, Those names are not familiar to me. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know the address of 208 Noble Court in Cleve- 
land ? Have you ever been there ? 

Mr. Wexler. I have never been there. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been given any money by Mr. McBride 
for any purpose? , 

Mr. Wexler. I have borrowed money off of Mr. McBride, that is, 
I borrowed money that Mr. McBride signed collateral for from the 
bank. 

Mr. Nellis. Has he given you any money for any other purpose or 
in any other connection ? 

Mr. Wexler. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. No other questions. 

The Chairman. That concludes the questioning. 

Mr. McCormack. May I offer this as substantiating of real and not 
imaginary fear of prosecution and have that made part of the record? 

Tlie Chairman. Well, it will be introduced as an exhibit. 

Mr. Feighan. Yes, and with the further statement that it contains, 
in our judgment at attorneys for Mr. Wexler, a violation on the part 
of the newspaper and publishing in violation of section 55 of the In- 
ternal Revenue Code. 

The Chairman. Of course, you mean in regard to the disclosure. 
I may say to you that the committee has not disclosed that in any 
way. 

Mr. McCormack. We do not think so. It is unfortunate that a 
paper from our town can indulge in such things. 



130 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. It will be filed and placed in the record as an 
exhibit. 

(The newspaper item referred to above was marked "Wexler ex- 
hibit No. 2" and is as follows :) 

[From the Cleveland (Ohio) Press, Wednesday, June 6, 1951] 

$500,000 Is Paid Mushy's Wire 

(By Forrest Allen, Press staff writer) 

Washington, June 6 — Ohio bookies pay more than $500,000 a year to Mor- 
ris (Mushy) Wexler's horse-bet news service. 

This is indicated by records and other evidence the Senate Crime Committee 
is readying for the Cleveland horse-wire boss next week when he will put in a 
belated appearance on the crime probe's hot seat. 

Investigators have arrived at the $500,000 "and up" figure on the bookies' 
wire-service cost by analyzing the net profits taken off the top by Wexler 
and others. 

Wexler's personal cut on the lucrative racewire take has been running be- 
tween $90,000 and $100,000 a year, committee investigators have found. 

Sharing the take of Emprie News and Empire Service Co., names under 
which the racetrack news of Continental Press is distributed in Ohio, are 
Wexler's partners, Sam (Gameboy) Miller and Robert Kaye, according to tes- 
timony already on record. 

Miller, now operating a fancy gaming casino in Miami, Fla., is scheduled to 
appear here with Wexler next week. Kaye, like Miller a former Clevelander, 
now is cashier of the fabulous Desert Inn, Las Vegas, Nev. 

Other records in the committee's hands, the Press learned today, show that 
in the years since 1944 or 1945, Wexler has : 

Operated his Theatrical Grill on Vincent Avenue at a net yearly profit of 
about $1,500, although the restaurant's gross business runs better than $600,000. 

Won purses with his own ponies amounting to $60,0(X» or $70,000 a year, with 
1 year's winnings reaching between $170,000 and $175,000. 

Bought about $2,000 worth of Cleveland Browns and Cleveland Indians tickets 
a year, charging them to the Theatrical Grill. 

Received about $100,000 in a recent year from a "Robler Products Co., Cin- 
cinnati." (Cincinnati newspaper reporters have been unable to find such a 
firm.) 

Evidence now being assembled for the questioning of Wexler by the Sen- 
ate probers, it was learned here, is much more nearly complete than it would 
have been had not Wexler dodged a Kefauver subpena and thus avoided the 
Cleveland hearings in January. 

While Wexler was hiding out for months — not reappearing until after the 
first round of the crime probe ended in March — committee investigators con- 
tinued to dig into the activities of the Ohio bookie-wire boss. 

Investigators will attempt to show through questioning of Wexler at a closed 
session here next week that he is a good example of a man who operates a 
legitimate business — the Theatrical Grill — either as a profitless "front" or, 
in another view, as a "hobby." 

W^hile in the years since 1945 Wexler's gross income has reached from 
190,000 to $200,000 a year, virtually none of it has been reported as coming from 
Theatrical Grill operations. 

LENT LARGE AMOUNTS OF CASH 

Wexler, over these years, lent large amounts of cash to the restaurant. De- 
spite heavy repayments, the cafe business still owed him between $170,000 and 
$175,000 a little over a year ago. 

In 1 year the restaurant repaid Wexler about $140,000 of loans he had made 
to it. 

Committee investigators have learned that early in 1947 Wexler bought 50 
of the 250 shares of stock outstanding in the grill corporation. He paid $25,000 
for his stock and became president of the corporation. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 131 

gameboy's sister 

Bessie Miller, sister of "Gameboy" Miller, became vice president and treasurer. 
Irving B. Spitz became secretary. 

Investigators, it was learned have gone over Wexler's books and bank ac- 
counts. Some of the items charged to business expense of the restaurant will 
be questioned. 

At one period, Wexler was sending Theatrical Grill checks in large amounts 
to an L. E. Hunt and F. J. Mangier in Chicago. He will be asked about these 
payments. 

OTHER QUESTIONS 

other questions will seek explanations of a $10,000 loan to Clarence Roskoph, 
payments to Cleveland Raceways, Inc., and checks to Sam Berk, Joe C. Geraci, 
Frank Dindia, Johnny Kapona, and others. 

Wexler's purse winnings on his own ponies, it was learned, were in connection 
with his stables ; Greenlawn Farms, 12051 Valley Road, Parma. 

In this connection, investigators have wondered about a payment to Wexler 
during the war of about $35,000 by the Miami Jockey Club. 



Vote To Cite Three in Crime Probe 

Washington, June 6 — (UP). — The Senate Crime Committee has voted to cite 
for contempt two committee-named Capone mobsters and the president of a 
Chicago country club. 

The witnesses, who shied away from the Crime Committee's questioning during 
a recent hearing, were Murray (the Camel) Humijhreys and Rocco Fischetti, 
long-time Chicago underworld characters, and George S. May, president of the 
Tam O'Shanter Country Club. 

Chairman Herbert R. O'Conor said the committee voted the contempt cita- 
tions at a closed meeting late yesterday. The full Senate must act on the 
citations before they are sent to the Justice Department for a final decision 
on prosecution. 



Probe Windup Stars Haas, Wexler 
(By Forrest Allen) 

Washington, June 6. — Cleveland's two Kefauver runaways — Samuel T. Haas 
and Morris (Mushy) Wexler — share top billing in the Senate Crime Committee's 
plans for a wrap-up of the unfinished business on the Copeland gambling 
syndicate. 

That was api)arent here today as committee staff members worked to set 
a date next week for all the subpena dodgers who, like Haas, the lawyer, and 
Wexler, were picked up on Senate arrest warrants after the first phase of the 
crime probe had closed. 

Senator Herbert O'Conor who has replaced Senator Estes Kefauver as chair- 
man, said he hoped to complete all unfinished business, in the way of carry- 
over witnesses, by the end of next week. 

From here on, according to Richard G. Moser, who has taken Rudolph Halley's 
place as chief committee counsel, the probe will concentrate on the narcotics 
trade, with at least one small city coming in for a study of its commercialized 
prostitution. 

Joseph L. Nellis, who was in charge of preparing the material on the Cleveland 
witnesses, will conduct the questioning, of Haas, Wexler, and the others. Al- 
though he has resigned his positon as assistant counsel for the crime probers, 
Nellis has agreed to a recall for this final job. 

IMPORTANT witnesses 

"The two most important witnesses remaining," Nellis said, "are Haas and 
Wexler. Haas appears to be at the center of many of the operations of that 
tight little circle composed of Morris Kleinman, Lou Rothkopf, Tommy McGinty, 
and Moe Dalitz. 



132 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Testimony already in tlie record shows Haas to liave been in partnership 
in western slots operations with the late Nate Weisenberg, McGinty, his brother, 
Morris Haas, and others. Haas was in real-estate dealings in Florida with 
McGinty. 

"He was in the Detroit Steel Co. stock deal with Kleinman, Dalitz, and 
Rothkopf. 

The Chairman. All right, call your next witness. 

Mr. MosER. Mr. Weis. 

The Chairman. Mr. Weis, will you take your seat there ? 

We are in executive session, and we are altering the course of wit- 
nesses because of the fact that I understand counsel assured you that 
you would be taken out of order, and we have other witnesses out 
there, and we hope to serve your convenience. 

Mr. Weis. Fine. 

The Chairman. In all cases we have been swearing witnesses, so 
I suppose you have no objection ? 

Mr. Weis. No objection. 

The Chairman. Raise your right hand, please. 

In the presence of Almighty God do you swear that the testimony 
you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but 
the truth? 

Mr. Weis. I do so. 

TESTIMONY OF W. NORRIS WEIS, BALTIMORE, MD. 

The Chairman. Mr. Moser, will you please conduct the examina- 
tion? 

Mr. Moser. Mr. Weis, you were foreman of the January term of the 
1951 grand jury in Baltimore? 

Mr. Weis. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Moser. Will you please state your full name ? 

Mr. Weis. W. Norris Weis. 

Mr. Moser. And your address ? 

Mr. Weis. 3609 Alameda Circle, Baltimore 18. 

Mr. Moser. As you know, we have requests from all over the coun- 
try to investigate various areas. 

Mr. Weis. That is right. 

Mr. Moser. And your grand jury report, which I think is an ex- 
cellent job, came to our attention, and we thought that rather than 
doing it informally we would like to have you actually appear before 
the committee, and perhaps you could give us some ideas about Balti- 
more so that we can get the benefit of your own experience and your 
own views on it. 

Mr. Weis. Fine. 

Mr. Moser. Now, I know that you must have spent quite a lot of 
time in this investigation, and it might save us a great deal of time 
if you would enlighten us about it. Would you like to do that? 

Mr. Weis. Surely. 

We came into session January 8, and Judge Sherbow, when giving 
us his charge, pointed out a good many things he thought we ought 
to look into in some detail, and we did that. 

The Chairman. He is the presiding judge of the criminal court? 

Mr. Weis. Right, yes, for the record. He called us in and had 
several people appear before us, and one was Captain Emerson and 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 133 

another Avas Beverly Ober, the police commissioner, and then we 
watched the pattern that seemed to be prevalent unfold. 

One was that in the first 6 weeks, no gamblint; cases were brought 
before us by any member of the police force of Baltimore, with the 
exception of Captain Emerson's group. 

Then we went back and looked and found that Mayor D'Alesandro, 
in appearing before the United States Attorney General, in the Com- 
mittee on Crime and Corruption, read a paper which quoted him as 
saying that Baltimore was a hot seat of vice and crime. I believe that 
is an exact quote. I am not sure. I have not found it in the press, but 
I believe it was in October. 

Then we watched the pattern unfold, according to what Judge Sher- 
bow said to us, through our term. 

He pointed out that these numbers and gambling people were going 
on, and that those that Emerson did catch and bring in were of fairly 
long standing within the bailiwick of the particular police precinct 
in which he was caught. 

This seemed to us to be a little odd. 

We also checked geographical locations in the city as to the sources 
of these arrests and we found that they were strategically located 
geographically, and they seemed to be centered more in some districts 
than others. 

In Captain Emerson's testimony, he said pretty much exactly what 
he told in the court last Friday, so we had that information 2 months 
before the public had it. 

The Chaikman. If I may interrupt, while some of us know that, 
previously when you said he told it to the court last Friday, it may 
not be clear what it was he told. 

Mr. Weis. On Friday morning he was called into court by Judge 
Sherbow and examined on the stand publicly concerning the fact that 
the higher-ups, so-called, in the gambling game, had not been appre- 
hended, and he was finding it very difficult to get to the people other 
than the players, pickup men, and so on, in the numbers game. 

He then verified the statement which he had made earlier, that he 
had quoted the fact there w^ere tip-offs or leaks, and when he gets to 
the various places he always finds them very clean. 

The names which I read in the paper that you have summoned are 
names which Mr. Sodero, the State's attorney, told us were people who 
have been convicted before, or at least are known to have been involved 
in the gambling game in Baltimore. 

We were very concerned about it, perhaps even more concerned, 
because so many people that came before us, when you delved a little 
bit into the circumstances, were not men who had small incomes, but 
they were men who made from $60 to $120 a week, and invariably it 
was liquor or gambling that seemed to be the source of the trouble. 
That was on nonsupport cases, I should have said. 

Therefore, we found that we were paying not only in the policing, 
paying that as taxpayers, but we were also paying to keep the families 
of the men who were victimized because of it, as well as being very 
sensitive about the children that were hurt through that practice. 

We concentrated our attention upon that very much. 

Mr. MosER. Did you indict anybody in the gambling operation? 

Mr. Weis. No indictments, other than the cases that Emerson kept 
bringing through, we indicted those, of course. 



134 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The thing that dismayed us was the fact, first of all, that there were 
practically no arrests from any of the policemen in the area. In fact, 
Emerson made this statement to us, and I will quote him, he said, 
"I get a better reception when I break into a place to raid it than I do 
from the police in the district when I take them into that district." 

That kind of testimony from a man that high up in the squad con- 
cerned us very much. 

Also, of course, our friends, the writers of New York and Wash- 
ington Confidential got a good play in the newspapers, because it was 
picked up in the mayoralty campaign, and there were meetings where 
citizens were called together to hear the findings as reported, allegedly, 
in Washington Confidential. 

There was a great desire, in fact 

Mr. MosER. Mr. Weis, you did not have any evidence presented to 
you about these gambling operations, did you, specifically ? 

Mr. Weis. No ; we did not. 

Mr. MosER. Except the cases actually brought there ? 

Mr. Weis. We did not. 

Mr. MosER. You just had testimony that other gambling operations 
existed, or the captain thought so, anyway, because he thought they 
had gotten a tip-off ? 

Mr. Weis. That is right. 

Mr. MosER. He never actually found any when he got there ? 

Mr. Weis. That is right. 

Mr. Moser. So it was suspicion on his part ? 

Mr. Weis. That is right. 

Mr. MosER. Was there any evidence that it involved interstate op- 
erations as distinguished from local ? 

Mr. Weis. Well, if the report of the Kefauver committee was right 
in saying that the Continental News Service is a syndicated Nation- 
wide kind of thing, and the Howard News daily operated by 
Mr. Bilson in Baltimore is a subsidiary of that, or at least draws its 
information from that, we had Mr. Bilson in before us, and we asked 
him who the people were who subscribed to the service, and he said he 
did not know. 

Wlien we summoned the records, we found signs. Judge Sherbow 
had adopted the plan of sending people to jail, rather than just fining 
them when they were picked up, and we found that he was serving 
people at $40 per week, giving this information by numbers, on a pay 
she^t, as they came in. 

No. 1, he didn't know who No. 1 was. He didn't know who No. 17 
was. They had been coming for as long as 5 years and they paid $40 
a week cash, and under oath 

Mr. MosER. He was supplying information ? 

Mr. Weis. He was, he testified he didn't know, and had no way to 
find out, even though we subpenaed his records, who they were, and 
we found them to be as he said, in code numbers. 

The only ones intelligible to us was the Sunday papers and WMKr— 
or whatever the television station is in Baltimore, and so on. 

Mr. MosER. Yes, but if he gets his news from Continental News 
Service, he is getting the news that has been shipped in interstate com- 
merce, presumably, and that is probably the only hookup between 
these gambling operations in interstate commerce. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 135 

Mr. Weis. We found no evidence of tie-ins with operators outside 
of the city or outside the State. First I said outside the city, but 
there were some in the county. 

Mr. MosER. I have been wondering about this, our committee has a 
limited time, you know^, and we only have until September 1. The 
committee, heretofore, in investigations conducted, has proved really 
that there is an interstate tie-up among these gambling operations 
through the service. 

Now, I can see how Baltimore might like to have us investigate 
Baltimore, but I am wondering, from the point of view of the Senate 
problem of ascertaining what legislation it should adopt, whether we 
would get additional information from examining a city like that, 
or whether it would just be make-way to what we already have. 

Mr. Weis. Of course, when you have a judge on the back page of 
the paper every day from January 8 on, calling the public's attention 
to these things, and you couple that with the concomitant information 
through the book, and the mayor's statement, and of course through 
Senator O'Conor being appointed as chairman, there is added interest 
in the State. Also, Mr. Hepbron's appointment to the commission has 
added interest, insofar as the Baltimore people are concerned. 

Emerson's statement in the press, and the raids that have gone on 
since just over the weekend, incidentally, give the Baltimore people 
a great feeling of insecurity and unrest. They do not trust the police 
department in the main, and I say "they" advisedly. 

Mr. Moser. I see what you mean. 

Mr. Weis. What we are saying is, first, our grand jury decided it 
might not be worth the commission's time, because we did not find 
evidence that might have helped you in your plan to build national 
legislation. 

So we went to the Governor of our State, first, and suggested that 
he might do something like Tom Dewey did in New York ; he might 
have a commission with time and personnel and money to do the job, 
first, and then if he refused to do that, then we would request Senator 
O'Conor to look into it. 

When the Governor got it he rejected our plan, and he said it was 
the commission's job, in the press. 

Mr. MosER. Yes. You know, our activity has been such as to arouse 
interest throughout the country. 

Mr. Weis. Of course it has. 

Mr. MosER. We have always hoped that local people like yourself 
and other local citizens would take advantage of what we have done, 
and use that as a means of compelling local people to do it, hoping 
we would arouse local interest. 

But the thing that gives me concern, as chief counsel, whose job it 
is to try to plan a progi'am, is that we must avoid acting as a police 
department for localities all over the country, when it is their basic 
responsibility. 

We have already rendered the service of advising them as to what 
the situation is. 

Now, we hope that the people in the country will rise and do some- 
thing about it. I am trying to decide in my own mind to what ex- 
tent we should lend the services of our committee for the purpose of 
doing what the local people should do, and that is what gives me 
concern. 



136 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Weis. We were interested in the fact that when it was printed 
in the press, and that is what gave me the idea, Mr. Hepbron, that 
the commission was going to confine itself to a survey of narcotics in 
Maryland, which indicated two things, one, that the commission was 
coming in to do a job 

Mr. MosER. The committee, you mean. 

Mr. Weis. Excuse me, it was going to do a limited job. 

The Chairman. Who said that ? 

Mr. Weis. I am sure I saw it in the press, and I am sure since Mr. 
Hepbron's statement, and I have checked this with a number of other 
people, all of whom had the same concept, that your group was com- 
ing in to do a job on narcotics. 

The Chairman. Can you refer us to any statement authoritatively 
made? 

Mr. Weis. No. I went to the Enoch Pratt Library to look back 
through the Sunday papers, and I could not find it. But I do not 
give birth to statements like that in my mind, without having seen 
evidence of it somewhere. 

The Chairman. Apparently there was nothing in the paper, if 
you searched it through and could not find it. Certainly I have never 
seen it. 

Mr. Weis. The library does not have every edition of every paper. 

The Chairman. Well, I follow the papers very closely, and I do 
not remember any such statement, and apparently you cannot refer 
us to any. 

Mr. Weis. I could not find it in the library. I did not go to the 
Sunday papers. 

Mr. MosER. This gives me a good deal of concern, because I have 
the personal responsibility of planning and presenting the progi^am 
to the committee, and I observed that you stated last week that the 
committee had agreed to investigate Baltimore. 

Have you any evidence that they agreed to investigate Baltimore? 

Mr. Weis. None other than tliat which has come through an accu- 
mulation of facts, and conversation with people, that seems to bear 
that out. 

Mr. Moser. It is sort of a general impression. 

Mr. Weis. That is right, there is that general impression. 

Mr. Moser. There is no specific evidence. 

Mr. Weis. There is now, since Mr. Hepbron made his statement on 
Friday, it seems to be conclusive, that there was going to be thorough 
full-scale investigation. 

Mr. MosER. Before he said that, you stated publicly that the com- 
mittee had agreed to investigate, and had decided to limit their ac- 
tivity to narcotics. That is what you said. 

Mr. Weis. First of all 

Mr. Moser. Please let me finish what I am saying. 

Mr. Weis. I am sorry. Please go ahead. 

Mr. Moser. The point I am making is that I have the job of deciding 
what will be proposed to the committee, and I never heard of the 
agreement to investigate. 

Also, I never heard of any such thing as limiting our activities to 
narcotics. You have evidence that those decisions were made, yet I 
never knew about it. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 137 

Mr. Wets. All right. In the statement I made, which was jnst a 
report on the report, I was not critical of the Govermnent nor was I 
critical of the conniiission. I read then the answer the judge had 
given me from the Government, and the answer he had given me from 
Senator O'Conor, and then I said, "From what I have been able 
to discern, and from what I believe, it seems that the commission 
is limiting its investigation to narcotics," and that is all they have 
done so far, incidentally. 

You know, you cannot be responsible for the way in which a thing 
is printed in the paper, can you? 

The Chairman. Have you ever corrected it, Mr. Weis? 

Mr. Weis. I beg your pardon ? 

The Chairman. Have you ever corrected it? 

Mr. Weis. Unfortunately, I had to leave for camp, which is one 
of my responsibilities in my county, and I returned to Baltimore just 
this morning. Mr. Moser called me Thursday, and I had not been to 
this particular meeting. 

The letter from the Senate committee indicated that we have assur- 
ance that the matter would be brought to the attention of the com- 
mittee, and when that was circulated around, at least among our 
jurors, they all got a copy, and I suppose others did, too, and you 
went into the house of correction, and so forth, and it appeared that 
that was the limitation of the w^ork, and that is all I said to the group 
that evening. 

Mr. MosER. Well, the only evidence of the fact thnt we agreed to 
investigate and we had decided to limit our activities, was the fact 
that the matter was being referred to our committee, and the fact we 
had actually investigated narcotics. 

Mr. Weis. That is right. 

Mr. Moser. And the fact that we have not yet openly investigated 
anything else was the only evidence of the fact that we were not going 
to investigate. 

Mr. Weis. That is all I said. It appears it has been limited to this 
kind of thing. 

Mr. Moser. The general impression created by wdiat you said was 
that you were attacking the committee. 

Mr. Weis. By the way it was reported. 

Mr. Moser. Yes, sir; that is the general imj^ression of what you 
said. 

Mr. Weis. That is right. 

Mr. Moser. Well now% I wrote you on the 14th, as I remember. 

Mr Weis. That is right. 

Mr. Moser. And called you and invited you to come down here. 

Mr. Weis. And I said that that evening to that group. 

Mr. Moser. Was that the same evening? 

Mr. Weis. I said that I had been invited to come. 

Mr. Moser. I was surprised to discover afterward that we were sort 
of being attacked. I had the impression that I was asking you for 
help. 

Mr. Weis. Mr. Moser, what reason would I have had to make any 
kind of attack on the commission? I have none. 

Mr. Moser. I could not think of anything. 

Mr. Weis. I am in this thing as a layman, and we are on the same 
team. 



138 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. MosER. I agree with 3^011. One thing that gave me some concern 
is that we liave been actively conducting investigations' in Baltimore, 
not only of narcotics, but of other things. 

Mr. Weis. So Mr. Hepbron says. 

Mr. MosER. We were very careful not to reveal it, just like a grand 
jury investigation, it has to be kept secret, and the minute it is 
publicized, you are working in a goldfish bowl, and you have no 
secrecy. 

Mr. Weis. I had some feeling about upsetting a timetable. 

Mr. MosER. Well, it definitely had that effect. 

Mr. Weis. I was not aware of that, and I assure you that my in- 
tentions were of the best. 

Mr. MosER. I think they were. It was perhaps caused by not know- 
ing what was going on. At the same time, you can see why we did not 
want to reveal what was going on, for the same reason that the grand 
jury had not done that, I had instructed my investigators to keep it 
very secret. Then we were accused, practically, of not doing what we 
were actually doing. 

The result was that we had to reveal what we were doing, and I 
know you Avill be sorry to hear this, but the fact is just by having to 
reveal it a day early, we lost a very important piece of evidence. 

JSTow, I cannot tell you what it is, but it is very unfortunate that 
it was lost, and it would not have been lost if we had been able to keep 
it quiet. 

Mr, Weis. Was Judge Sherbow aware of your work ? 

The Chairman, Why do 3'ou say that? 

Mr. Weis. Because I went in and asked him whether or not it was 
all right to appear before the two groups, and he elaborated on the 
report, and he said it was all right to say what I had, with the excep- 
tion of revealing any evidence I had in the grand jury room. I went 
there for legal counsel. 

Mr. Moser. We talked to him some time in advance before we 
started. 

Mr. Weis. He did not mention it. 

Mr, MosER, Anyone we talked to, we just talked to them about 
their own interest in it, and did not tell what we did generally. 

Mr, Weis. Well, would it make it absolutely necessary for you to 
make your statement immediately following? Couldn't you have 
waited a day? 

Mr. MosER. The paper reported that the committee had decided to 
concentrate on dope, and we were immediately subject to criticisms 
from anywhere. 

Mr. Weis. A call from you to me would have gotten a refutation 
of what was quoted. 

The Chairman. And a call from you, sir, to the newspapers would 
have corrected it, but you have never done that, and a week has elapsed. 

Mr. Weis. Well, if Mr. Moser called me briefly to say what he 
wanted to have done, I would have been glad to do it. 

The Chairman, You mentioned, Mr. Weis, that there were two 
places that you spoke. 

Mr, Weis. I spoke before the Grand Jurors Association on Wednes- 
day night, and before the United Christian Citizens Committee, which 
I had never heard of before. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 139 

The Chairman. Did you tell the Grand Jurors Association the 
same thing that you told the other people ? 

Mr. Weis. I assume I talked on the same brief outline, only part of 
which was the idea of gambling. They wanted to hear a discussion 
of juvenile delinquency, and exactly what is in the report is what 
I reported to them. 

Mr. MosER. I think, ]Mr. Weis, that you and we have the same mo- 
tive, and we want to work together. That is the reason we wanted you 
to come over here. 

On the other hand, then, you would not want to do anything to 
hamper us. 

Mr. Weis. I would not. 

Mr. MosER. I wanted you to know that perhaps purely innocently 
you did do something that in fact hampered us. 

Mr. Weis. I am sorry. 

Mr. MosER. I don't know exactly what you said at the meeting, but 
it created the impression, you know, that we had decided not to come 
into Baltimore, and I certainly would have appreciated it, if anything 
that you said, or I will appreciate it if anything you say in the future, 
you will indicate that we had not made any decision not to come in. 

We have not limited our activities to dope, and you should generally 
correct the situation that seems to exist. 

Mr. Weis. After you finished a piece of grand-jury work that you 
are particularly goaded into doing something about it by so many 
people who indicated to you, it is just like last week's newspaper, it 
is nothing, and it is going to be forgotten, then you wait a reasonable 
length of time, which was 5 weeks, and even then I did not take to the 
rostrum to arouse anybody. I went to these two places because I was 
invited ahead of time, and I said very innocently the things that I be- 
lieved to be true at the time. 

The Chairman. In regard to the matters which you say were pre- 
sented to you by Mr. Sodero, and the names of the people given to 
the grand jury which have recently appeared in the press, did you 
investigate that matter? 

Mr. Weis. No. You see the grand jury could only investigate 
through the police department. We have 23 members, none of whom 
are skilled investigators, and they cannot go out after these various 
people and do a spying job. 

We asked the police department to check, and we asked Emerson, 
and we asked for their reports back. 

The Chairman. I mean, have you at this time, or have you had any 
information to make you believe that there is a foundation for the 
fact that these individuals may be engaged in big-time operations? 

Mr. Weis. Well, the things that have happened in the past 5 days 
would certainly bear out the fact that such is true. 

The Chairman. I mean as to these individuals. 

Mr. Weis. No ; only that the names which I have seen in the paper, 
plus a few others, were mentioned to us by Mr. Sodero, and Captain 
Emerson early in January, as people of long standing engaged in 
this kind of thing. 

Mr. Moser. From January until May, and you didn't do anything 
about it? 

Mr. Weis. We didn't find out. 



140 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Hepbron. In addition to the names of those you have seen 
subpenaed in the papers, can you think of any other names that you 
might give us that are big shots ? 

Mr. Weis. I, of course, remember the ones you mentioned. I know 
there was a man named Barshack. I don't know where his place is, 
and there was the other one, and then there was a third one, I remem- 
ber, as I read your list. 

Mr. Hepbron. Well, I think we might say to you in confidence 

(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. On tlie record. 

Mr. MosER. I would like to suggest that w^e carry through the plan 
of what we have in mind, of having our men come to see you, sit 
down with you, and you can give them the benefit of any information 
you have. 

Mr. Weis. I will be glad to do that. I am sorry about the timetable. 

Mr. MosER. Well, so long it does not happen again, I guess we will 
be all right. 

Mr. Weis. I would not be presumptuous enough to be critical pub- 
licly of any public official. I am smart enough for that. 

Mr. MosER. Thank you again. We appreciate it. 

The Chairman. Call your next witness. 

Mr. Neixis. All right ; we will call Mr, Angersola, John Angersola. 

The Chairman. Good afternoon. May I have your name? 

Mr. Black. My name is Loring M. Black. May I make a short 
statement ? 

The Chairman. First of all, we would like to 

Mr. Black. Do you want to swear the witness first ? 

The Chairman. Yes. Will you raise your right hand? 

In the presence of the Almighty God, do you swear that the testi- 
mony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth ? 

Mr, Angersola, I do, 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN ANGERSOLA, CLEVELAND, OHIO, ACCOM- 
PANIED BY LOEING M. BLACK, COUNSEL 

The Chairman, What is your full name? 

Mr, Angersola, John Angersola, or John King, either one. 

Mr. Black. Mr. Chairman, I want to briefly make application, but 
first I want to thank the committee for permitting my appearance. 
On Saturday I was called by Fred Kaplan, an attorney in New York, 
whom I have known a good many years, and I am making this appli- 
cation for both of them ; he had expected to represent them, and he 
knows a great deal more about them than I do. In fact, I practically 
know nothing. 

He asked me to ask this committee to put over this examination, 
because he has been laid up. He has had a very serious operation, 
and I know it. He has been laid up in a room, and the operation had 
to do with his legs. He has had a bad condition, and he is in the hands 
of a doctor. It is a postoperative case and he has nurses, and he 
tliouglit that the committee might be willing to put this over, say, for 
3 weeks, or something like that. 

My own view of it is, from the point of view of the committee, that 
you might get a more expeditious investigation, so far as this situa- 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 141 

tion is concerned, and more cooperation, if he was here, because I 
know something about it. 

However, if you do not see fit to do that, for reasons of the com- 
mittee, Mr. Angersohv and his brother have asked me to ap])ear for 
them and advise them on the hiw. 

The Chairman. We are ghid to have you present, and have you 
appear for the witness. 

Mr. Black. In connection with the application, I would like to put 
in the record a wire that he received on the train, from Mr. Kaplan, 
stating why he would not be here. 

The Chairman. Mr. Angersola, do 3^ou wish to add anything to 
what counsel has said? 

Mr. Angersola. Outside of I could not very well stand here and 
answer questions without my counsel being here. I don't know this 
gentleman. 

Mr. Black. I know Mr. Kaplan very well. 

Mr. Angersola. I never saw this man before. 

Mr. Black. He is very anxious to handle this situation. He is a 
very able lawyer, and he is very much concerned about it, see? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

Counsel will make a statement for the committee. Mr. Moser. 

Mr. MosER. I would like to state to JNIr. Angersola that the function 
of this committee is to obtain information regarding illegal activities 
in interstate commerce, for the purpose of ascertaining whether any 
legislation should be adopted for the purpose of correcting it. 

We are not aiming at you, we are not trying to get you, and we are 
not trying to incriminate you. We are trying to get information that 
will be helpful to the country as a whole. 

Now, in the light of that, it does not seem to us that you are ■ 

Mr. Angersola. I am very sorry, but I am hard of hearing. I have 
a sore ear. Do you mind if I move up a little closer ? 

Mr. Moser. No; sit right up here. 

Mr. Black. I am just as bad. 

The Chairman. Move right up with him. 

Mr. Moser. Have you heard me so far ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I think I have. 

Mr. Moser. Well, just let me make sure that you have. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes ; please repeat it. 

Mr. Moser. I was stating that our purpose is not to get you or 
incriminate you or cause you any trouble. We are just trying to 
get information for the purpose of ascertaining whether this com- 
mittee should recommend to Congress legislation regarding interstate 
illegal activities, and in view of that it does not seem to me it is 
necessary for you to necessarily have your regular counsel. 

I am sure that Mr. Black is fully qualified to advise you as to your 
rights. All we want you to do is to tell us the truth, and if there is 
something you think you are privileged not to answer, Mr. Black 
can advise you. 

The Chairman. That is correct. That represents the committee's 
advice, as just expressed by Mr. Moser. In other words, you are not 
here on trial, and there is no accusation against you, and the com- 
mittee is not bent on getting anything that would be detrimental to 
your interest. 

85277—51 — pt. 13 10 



142 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. Sure, but I 

Mr. Black. The only difiiciilty with that is that counsel who knows 
the facts can so much better advise the man as to the clangers involved 
in a particular question. Counsel who does not know the facts must, 
in the protection of his client, and that is what I meant by better 
cooperation, must advise the client differently than the man who 
might say, "Go ahead and answer." 

Now, I appreciate being here at all. I know the rights of counsel. 
T have been on congressional committees and legislative committees, 
and I want to say for this committee, as a member of the bar, that 
this committee has been most liberal so far as the appearance of coun- 
sel has been concerned. I have no right to talk, I realize that. 

Mr. MosER. As you say, you know, of course, that witnesses have 
no real right to have counsel, but we have just leaned over back- 
ward to be fair. 

Mr. Black. This committee has been very liberal in that respect. 

Mr. MosER. Do you intend to claim the privilege with regard to 
most of the material we are likely to ask you about? Is that your 
plan ? 

Mr. Angersola. How is that? 

Mr. MosER. Do you intend to claim the privilege not to answer? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir: so long as counsel is not here. 

Mr. Nellis. On any and all questions ? 

Mr. Angersola. If counsel was here, no. 

Mr. MosER. If your counsel was here, you would answer ? 

Mr. Angersola. I am afraid I don't know how far I could go. I 
don't know my rights. I am not an attorney at law. I don't know 
what I could answer and what I could not answer. 

Tlie Chairman. Mr. Angersola, are we to understand that if a 
postponement for a reasonable time is granted, that you will answer 
questions ? 

Mr. Angersola. Within my rights, I think, yes. 

The Chairman. Wliat do you mean by within your rights ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know ; I don't know what questions you are 
going to ask me. 

The Chairman. I see. Well, I have no doubt that you have some 
idea, because just now you said that you would not answer questions. 

Mr. Angersola. I didn't say that. I said I would not answer with- 
out counsel. I don't know, I am afraid I may answer something 
wrong. 

One thing I do know, I don't want to be held for perjury. I don't 
want to say something that I may not know what I am talking about. 
It might be a little thing, and the first thing you know, I might have 
said something I should not have said. 

Mr. Black. We are all lawyers, and are familiar with the need for 
a lawyer. 

Mr. Angersola. I need somebody to advise me. 

The Chairman. That is not the point, however. The specific 
point to which I would like to direct your attention is as to whether 

Mr, Angersola. I would like to answer, if my attorney is here. 

The Chairman (continuing). If you intend to do so. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. You will ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 143 

The Chairman. So that that matter, or as to matters generally with- 
in your knowledge you will testify to ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. When Mr. Kaplan is here ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And that is in connection with your association and 
dealings with other individuals in business or otherwise ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know what you are going to ask me. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, we are not going to make a deal with you. The 
chairman asked you 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know what you are going to ask me. 

Mr. Nellis. Will you testify freely and fully ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. As to all matters that the committee will question you 
on? 

Mr. Angersola. All within reason. 

Mr. Nellis. What is the qualification ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know ; I don't know what questions you are 
going to ask me. 

Mr. Black. I think a better way to put it would be that he will 
testify freely and fully as to questions that counsel will advise him he 
might properly testify to, instead of leaving it to his judgment. 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Black. I am in a position where I know nothing of the facts. 
I cannot tell the implications of a question. 

The Chairman. Well, now, you have already put a claim in for ex- 
l^enses for your appearance? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Or you will? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

The Chairman. Or you expect to ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir; I don't think so. 

The Chairman. Doesn't the matter of expenses mean anything to 
you? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

The Chairman. If the postponement is granted? 

Mr. Angersola. I will be on my own expense. 

The Chairman. You will be here at your own expense ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And you will defray any expenses incident to the 
postponement? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Black. Will that be true of your brother, too ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Well, now, Mr. Angersola, we are safe, then, in as- 
suming that if the postponement is granted, that you will come back 
and will be willing to tell us anything you know ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And just discuss with us the associations you have 
had, and your knowledge of the activities of other people. That would 
be your intention, would it not? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know just what you are talking about. 

The Chairman. You would be willing to tell us what you know 
about the activities of other people ? 



144 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. I will tell you about myself. I couldn't tell you 
anything about other people. 

Mr. Nellis. What you know, the Chairman said, would you be will- 
ing to tell what you know of the activities? 

Mr. Angersola. What I know. 

Mr. Nellis. You would not claim privilege with respect to that 
knowledge; is that right? 

Mr. Angersola. Not if my attorney is here. 

Mr. Black. Well, the way Kaplan put it to me, he said. "I do not 
want the man held for contempt, I do not want him to commit perjury. 
I want him to answer where he can answer, and I want him to tell the 
truth." 

You see, I cannot advise him. I know the implications of no ques- 
tions, and I know nothing about these people at all. 

The Chairman. Well, under the circumstances we feel that a con- 
tinuance ought to be granted. 

Mr. Black. Thank you. 

The Chairman. And we are putting it down, therefore, for hear- 
ing 3 weeks hence, 3 weeks from today, and, of course, it is under- 
stood that it is at your own expense and you will return then with 
Mr. Kaplan, prepared to answer the questions that are put to you. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. That is agreeable to you? 

Mr. Angersola. Just a minute, Mr. Chairman. What if, say. 
accidentally, he is not ready to come '? I am just saying that — ■ — 

The Chairman. Counsel has been very fair about it. Mr. Black 
has been very fair. 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I don't know. 

The Chairman. He is the one who stated that, and he has long expe- 
rience. He knows what reasonable things are. 

Mr. Black. Let it rest this way 

The Chairman. Well, we won't talk about that, we are not talking 
about a postponement on a postponement. 

Mr. Black. That is right. 

The CiiAHoiAN. And we will make that telegram an exhibit. 

(The telegram referred to above was marked "John Angersola 
Exhibit No. 1," and is as follows:) 

New York, N. Y., June 18, 1951. 
John King, 

The champion left Miami, 915-A, car F-155, hcdroom B, Florida East Coast 
Railroad, due about 3 p. m. or forward, Jacksonville, Fla.: 
The doctors say it is utterly impossible for me to leave my sick bed. Am still 
under the care of two nurses and three physicians. Point out that I was only 
operated on several weeks ago at the New York Hospital. While we have spent 
many hours reviewing the facts as well as your status it is unfortunate that I 
cannot be there to advise you. I feel the committee should grant you a reasonable 
postponement so that my appearance with you can be possible. I have asked my 
dear friend, Loring Black, to appear in my behalf and state the situation in 
support of my request for postponement. He will arrange to meet you. 
Sincerely, 

Fred D. Kaplan, 
Savoy Plaza Hotel, New York City. 

Mr. Black. Now, Mr. Chairman, would that apply to the brother 
too? 

The Chairman. Well, I think the brother ought to come in. 
Mr. Nellis. Yes ; he should appear under oath. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 145 

The Chairman. Yes. So you can brin^ him right in now, and this 
man may stay, if you care to have him stay. 

Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. Back on the record. 

You are Mr. George Angersola ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

The Chairman. In the presence of the Almighty God, do you swear 
that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole 
truth, and nothing but the truth? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

TESTIMONY OF GEORGE ANGERSOLA, CLEVELAND, OHIO, ACCOM- 
PANIED BY LORING M. BLACK, ATTORNEY 

The Chairman. Mr. Black, you represent this gentleman, too? 

Mr. Black. Yes ; I represent him. 

The Chairman. Mr. Angersola, a telegram has been received and 
read by the committee, from Mr. Kaplan. Mr. Kaplan is your regular 
lawyer? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And temporarily ex-Congressman Black is repre- 
senting you ; is that right ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Would you kindly answer out loud ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Now, it is represented to the committee that Mr. 
Kaplan is recovering from an operation in the hospital, and is ex- 
pected to be able to appear in 3 weeks, and it is requested of the 
subcommittee that we postpone the hearing of this matter until he is 
able to appear. Is that your wish? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Mr. Angersola, as in the case of your brother, 
the committee said that if the postponment is granted it will be at 
your own expense. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

The Chairman. And he has indicated that is satisfactory vwith 
him. Is that satisfactory with you, too ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. And furthermore, it also has been indicated that 
if the postponment is granted, and it goes off for 3 weeks, when 
you come back you would be willing to answer the questions that 
are put to you by the subcommittee. 

Mr. Black. Subject to your counsel's advice. 

The Chairman. Yes; that you will answer the questions fully and 
completely. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Is that correct and truthful? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. All right. Then, under the circumstances we will 
grant a postponement of 3 weeks. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Angersola. 

Mr. Angersola. Thank you very much. 



146 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Black. Thank you. 

The Chaikman. Call your next witness. 

Mr. Nellis. The next witness will be Mr. Miller. 

The Chairman. Mr. Miller, as is the custom, we will ask you to be 
sworn. 

Mr. Miller. All right. 

The Chairman. In the presence of the Almighty God, do you 
swear that the testimony you are about to give shall be the truth, 
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Miller. I do. 

TESTIMONY OP SAMUEL MILLER, MIAMI BEACH, TXA., ACCOMPA- 
NIED BY JOHN T. PEIGHAN, JR., AND MARTIN A. McCORMACK, 
ATTORNEYS, CLEVELAND, OHIO 

The Chairman. Pardon me, counsel. We were talking entirely 
about something else. 

Now, will you give us your full name, please ? 

Mr. Miller. Samuel Miller. 

The Chairman. Your address? 

Mr. Miller. 4646 Pine Tree Drive, Miami Beach, Fla. 

The Chairman. Will you keep your voice up, please, and speak 
distinctly, so that the reporter can get it, please ? 

Mr. Miller. All right. 

The Chairman. Where have you lived besides in Miami ? 

Mr. Miller. I have lived in Cleveland. 

The Chairman. In Cleveland? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

The Chairman. I just want to get the address. How long did you 
live in Cleveland? 

Mr. Miller. Oh. maybe 50 years. 

The Chairman. Fifty years. Fine. All right, Mr. Nellis, will you 
question ? 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been arrested, Mr. Miller ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. When was the first arrest ; do you recall ? 

Mr. Miller. It has been a long time ago. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, were you arrested in 1941 ? 

Mr. Miller. In 1941 ? I think so. 

Mr. Nellis. And that was in connection with what ? 

Mr. Miller. I don't remember. I might have been arrested two 
or three times. 

Mr. Nellis. ^Yliat was it in connection with? Were you arrested 
for violating a speed law, or what? 

Mr. Miller, I don't remember. 

Mr. Nellis. Was it a gambling arrest, Mr. Miller ? 

Mr. Miller. It could be. 

Mr. Nellis. It was for maintaining a gambling operation, was it 
not? 

Mr, Miller, Possibly. 

Mr, Nellis, Is that right ? 

Mr. Miller. Possibly. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 147 

Mr. Nellis. Are you presently a partner in a gambling establish- 
ment ? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you not a partner in the Island Club ? 

Mr. Miller. That is out of business. 

Mr. Nellis. Since when? 

Mr. Miller. Approximately March. 

Mr. Nellis. Not possibly 

Mr. Miller. I said approximately. 

Mr. Nellis. Oh, approximately. 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Approximately when ? 

Mr. Miller. Approximately March, some time in March. 

Mr. Nellis. Of this year? 

Mr. Miller. Of last year. 

Mr. Nellis. 1950 ? 

Mr. Miller. Eight. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, since 1950, have you been in any gambling estab- 
lishments ? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. You have had no interest in any gambling operations 
at all? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Prior to your partnership — ^by the way, who was your 
partner in the Island Club ? 

Mr. Miller. There were several partners in there. 

Mr. Nellis. Wlio were they, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. One was Jack Friedlander. 

Mr. Nellis. Of the S. & G. Syndicate? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes ? 

Mr. Miller. And Sam Cohen. 

Mr. Nellis. Sam Cohen, also of the S. & G. Syndicate? 

Mr. Miller. Eight. And Herbert Manheim. 

Mr. Nellis. Herbert Manheim, who is he? 

Mr. Miller. Well, he used to be a Cleveland boy, he moved to 
Detroit and then moved to Florida. 

Mr. Nellis. And who else? 

Mr. Miller. I believe there was J. M. Saigh. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that spelled S-a-i-g-h? 

Mr. Miller. Eight. 

Mr. Nellis. Wlio is he, Mr. Miller; also a former Clevelander? _ 

Mr. Miller. No. I met him in Miami Beach. I never knew him 
before, I got acquainted with him down there. 

Mr. Nellis. Keep your voice up. 

Mr. Miller. I got acquainted with him down there in Florida. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that the complete list of partners ? 

Mr. Miller. Well, that is Sam Cohen, Jack Friedlander, Jimmie 
Saigh, and Manheim and myself. 

Mr. Nellis. By the way, when did you first go into this partnership 
in the Island Club ? 

Mr. Miller. In early July, July 1, but I couldn't tell you the exact 
year, it was on July 1. 

Mr. Nellis. You remember the month, but not the year? 



148 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Miller. Well, it could be 1949. 

Mr. Nellis. 1949 ; that recent ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Prior to July 1949, what gambling establishment were 
you connected with? 

Mr. Miller. None. 

Mr. Nellis. Was your first venture into the casino business this one, 
Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Isn't it a fact that prior to this time you had an interest, 
first as an employee, and then as a partner in northern Kentucky? 

Mr. Miller. I never was an employee. 

Mr. Nellis. But you were a partner? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir . 

Mr. Nellis. What clubs, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. Just one. 

Mr. Nellis. What club ? 

Mr. Miller. Lookout House. 

Mr. Nellis. With Jimmie Brink ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you happen to get into that operation, Mr. 
Miller? 

Mr. Miller. Well, they sent for me. 

Mr. Nellis. Who is this ? 

Mr. Miller. Mr. Brink, pardon me. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Brink? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Go ahead, sir. 

Mr. Miller. They wasn't doing much business there, and I was 
pretty well known, they sent for me. 

Mr. Nellis. You were pretty well known in the gambling business? 

Mr. Miller. That is riglit. 

Mr. Nellis. And they sent for you and the object was for you to 
stimulate business? 

Mr. Miller. To operate the place, that is right. 

Mr. Nellis. And did you have anything to do with bringing Klein- 
man and Rothkopf and Tucker into that operation ? 

Mr. Miller. I will have to refuse to answer that question for fear 
it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. Incriminate you of what? 

Mr. Miller. (Discussing with counsel.) 

Mr. Nellis. Incriminate you of what ? 

Mr. McCoRMACK. May we have a conference ? 

The CHAiRMAisr. Go ahead. 

(Counsel conferring with witness.) 

The Chairman. What is your answer? 

Mr, Miller. I was a-scared of a Federal prosecution. 

The Chairman. You was a-scared of it ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

The Chairman. When was you a-scared of it? 

Mr. Miller. Right now. 

The Chairman. Federal prosecution for what? 

Mr. Miller. Violating, any violation. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 149 

The Chairman. What violation ? 

Mr. Miller. Any viohition in tlie gambling business. 

The Chairman. Well, all violations in the gambling business are 
not possibly Federal offenses. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know of any Federal statute against gambling? 

Mr. Miller. I don't know of any laws, that is why 

Mr. Nellis. Surely, you know there is no Federal law against 
gambling; don't you know that, Mr. Miller? I think your counsel 
will gladly corroborate that statement. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. I know that, but he does not. 

Mr. Nellis. Then advise him that there is not. 

(Counsel conferring with witness.) 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you ready to answer, Mr. Miller ? By the way 

The Chairman. Just let him answer first. You were asked whether 
you were ready to answer. 

Mr. Miller. I refuse to answer that question. 

The Chairman. As to whether you know if there is any Federal 
statute against gambling? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

The Chairman. You refuse to answer that? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

The Chairman. All right. Next question. 

Mr. Feighan. May we have a conference? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(Counsel conferring with witness.) 

Mr. Miller. I was scared of a Federal violation. 

The Chairman. Yes. But now my question is, Do you know of 
any Federal statute which prohibits gambling? 

Mr. Miller. No; I don't know of any, but I was a-scared of a Fed- 
eral violation. My brother-in-law got indicted. 

Th Chairman. For what? 

Mr. Miller. Operation of gambling. 

The Chairman. Indicted by whom, by what court? 

Mr. Miller. I believe it was Chicago. 

The Chairman. A State court? 

Mr. Miller. Federal. 

The Chairman. A P^ederal court? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

The Chairman. Go ahead, Mr. Nellis. 

Mr. Nellis. I don't quite see the connection between your brother- 
in-law's indictment and your professed fear. How are you involved 
in that ? Were you indicted that way, too ? I mean, were you indicted 
in Chicago? 

Mr. Miller. No; I was not. 

Mr. Nellis. How are you involved in that, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. Federal violation. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you a partner of Morris Wexler? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. In what business? 

Mr. Miller, Empire News. 

Mr. Nellis. And what is the business of the Empire News? 

Mr. Miller. Selling news. 



150 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. What kind of news ? 

Mr. Miller. Sporting events. 

Mr. Nellis. Race results ? 

Mr. Miller. All kinds ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And who do they sell that news to ? 

Mr. Miller. Anybody who wants it. 

Mr. Nellis. Where do they get news to sell ? 

Mr. Miller. I don't know. I have not been active in that business, 
and I don't know where they get it. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you sort of a silent partner? 

Mr. Miller. No ; not a silent partner ? 

Mr. Nellis. You say you have not been active in the business. 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. What do you mean, you have not taken any part in 
it? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. But you draw an income from it ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Yet you don't know how it operates ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. You don't know anything about who it sells to ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. You don't know anything about who it buys from? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. What service have you performed for this partnership 
for which you should draw an income ? 

Mr. Miller. I originally had the news service in Cleveland, a long 
time ago, and I got sick and tired of it, and turned it over to mjy 
brother-in-law. 

Mr. Nellis. And you retained an interest ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And the business carries your interest, presumably 
because you were the founder of the business ; is that right ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, we will get back to the Lookout House. 

Did you know that Kleinman and Rothkopf and Tucker and Dalitz 
were partners in that business? 

Mr. Miller. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Nellis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the chairman to 
direct the witness to answer the three refusals that are on the record. 

The Chairman. Counsel, as in connection with the previous wit- 
ness, and we need not go over it all again 

Mr. Feighan. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman (continuing). We feel that the witness must be 
directed to answer in respect to the several questions that he has re- 
fused to answer, and we will ask you if your advice to him is that he 
still persist in his declination, and we will understand that it is for 
the reason heretofore given. 

Mr. McCormack. Yes. And may the record show that wherever 
he says that he refuses to answer that it is bottomed on his constitu- 
tional privilege. 

The Chairman. That is right. And is it agreed to by you that 
it is understood that we do insist upon his answering, and he still 
refuses ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COROIERCE 151 

Mr. McCoRMACK. Oh, yes ; sure. 

Mr. MosER. To make it clear for the record, the refusal to answer 
is based upon his fear of incrimination. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. Incrimination under the Federal law, Federal 
prosecution. 

Mr. MosER. Yes. Now, the chairman referred to the previous wit- 
ness, and by the previous witness he meant Morris Wexler. 

Mr. McCoRMACK. All ri^ht. Thank you, gentlemen. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Mr. Miller, were you ever in any other gambling 
operations besides the Lookout House and the Island Club in Miami? 

Mr. Miller. I believe I was. 

Mr. Nellis. You were? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Would you tell us about them, where were they, and 
who was with you in this operation? Who was with you in any 
club, for example, in Cleveland ? 

Mr. Miller. Well, I was. 

The Chairman. What club was that, sir? 

Mr. Miller. The Thomas Club. • 

Mr. Nellis. The Thomas Club? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Who were your partners there, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. I refuse to answer that question. 

Mr. Nellis. When was the Thomas Club in operation ? 

Mr. Miller. 1931. 

Mr. Nellis. And when did it cease operating ? 

Mr, Miller. I think about 1945. 

Mr. Nellis. Isn't that about the time, I was going to suggest that 
date to you, because Governor Lausche testified in Cleveland that 
about that date he gave orders to close the Thomas Club. You knew 
about that, didn't you ? 

Mr. Miller. I don't remember that. I was not in Cleveland when 
it closed. 

Mr. Nellis. When did you cease being a partner in the Thomas 
Club? 

Mr. Miller. I got arrested there, and when I got arrested I ceased 
from being partners. That was the end of the club. 

Mr. Nellis. What year was that? 

Mr. Miller. I think it was about 1945. 

Mr. Nellis. About 1945 ? 

Mr. Miller. 1945 ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Actually, Mr. Miller, when you say you refuse to 
answer for fear of incriminating yourself, isn't it a fact that you 
are more concerned about the fact that you might incriminate some- 
body else ? 

Mr. Miller. I am only interested in myself. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you fear any physical violence for disclosing any 
information you might have alDout a gambling operation with other 
partners ? 

Mr. IVIiLLER. I don't understand that question. 

Mr. Nellis. Let's assume you had a group of partners in the 
Thomas Club. You did have a group of partners, did you not? 

Mr. Miller. There was a couple. 

Mr. Nelus. Is that right? 



152 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. When I asked you about who they were, you said you 
refused to answer on the ground that it might tend to incriminate you. 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Didn't it strike you odd that you are willing to testify 
that you were a partner in an illegal gambling establishment, but 
when you are asked who your partners were that you decline to testify 
on the ground that you think it might incriminate you ? Isn't that 
peculiar? 

Mr. Miller. I don't understand. 

Mr. Nellis. Are you protecting anybody? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you fear any physical violence from anyone for any 
testimony you might give here ? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well now, let's see, in 1945 you were arrested in Mem- 
phis, Tenn., weren't you? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. And with Blank? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Wlio is also a gambler; is that right? 

Mr. Miller. I don't know if he is a gambler. He was a clerk in 
a gambling house. 

Mr. Nellis. At the time you were arrested you had some gambling 
equipment in your possession, isn't that right? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, the police report shows that you had dice and 
various other portable gambling equipment there at that time. Is that 
an inaccuracy? 

Mr. Miller. I had one deck of cards and one pair of dice that was 
in the bag, and they called it gambling paraphernalia. 

Mr. Nellis. In any event, you left the jurisdiction and forfeited 
your bond, didn't you ? 

Mr. Miller. I didn't forfeit my bond. They told me I did not have 
to appear. 

Mr. Nellis. You never appeared before the judge due to that 
charge ? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And it cost you about $150, or some such sum? 

Mr. Miller. A little bit more. 

Mr. Nellis. Well, $170. 

Mr. Miller. A little more, I think. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, do you know Charles Polizzi ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you been in business with him ? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Was he not a partner in the Lookout Club at the time 
you were there? 

Mr. Miller. If he was, I don't know anything about it. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you know John and George Angersola ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been in any gambling establishment 
with them? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 153 

Mr. Miller. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Nellis. Why do you say not that you know of? Is it possible 
for yon to be a partner in an enterprise and not know who your 
partners are ? 

Mr. Miller. Maybe I worded it wrong. I never had no business 
witli them in those gaftibliiiir places. 

Mr. Nellis. How did you get in with the S. & G. Syndicate in this 
Island Club in Miami ? How did that come about ? 

Mr. Miller. The S. & G. Syndicate had nothing to do with it. 

JNIr. Nelijs. Let me see. You testified that at least two members 
of the S. & G. Syndicate were partners in that club. 

Mr. Miller. I beg your pardon ? 

Mr. Nellis. Now, wait a minute. Jack Friedlander was a partner. 

Mr. Miller. In the Island Club. 

Mr. Nellis. That is what I am talking about, the Island Club. 

Mr. Miller. Jack Friedlander was a partner in that. 

Mr. Nellis. And also Sam Cohen. 

Mr. Miller. Sam Cohen is right. 

Mr. Nellis. "V^^io was also a member of the S. & G. Syndicate ? 

Mr. Miller. I don't know about Jack Friedlander being with the 
S. & G. Syndicate. 

Mr. Nellis. But you do know about Sam Cohen ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. "When I asked you about it before you stated that you 
knew he was a member of the syndicate. 

Mr. Miller. Sam Cohen was? 

Mr. Nellis. No. I am talking about Jack Friedlander. 

Mr. Miller. Oh; sorry. 

Mr. Nellis. In any event, how did you happen to get into that 
gambling business with these individuals? Did you approach them, 
or how did it happen ? 

Mr. Feighan. May we have a conference? 

(Witness confers with counsel.) 

Mr. Nellis. Are you ready to answer that, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. McCormack. What was the question ? 

The Chairman. Will the secretary read it ? 

Mr. Nellis. I can rephrase it. 

The question was, how did you happen to get into this enterprise 
with the S. & G. Syndicate and the other partners that you men- 
tioned ? 

Mr. Miller. Through Mr. Sam Cohen. 

Mr. Nellis. He approached you? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Why did he approach you ? 

Mr. Miller. I guess he thought I was qualified for it. 

Mr. Nellis. Did he know 

Mr. Miller. Capable. 

Mr. Nellis. F'ardon me? 

Mr. Miller. Capable. 

Mr. Nellis. In this business? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Did he know that you had a reputation in this business ? 

Mr. Miller. I imagine he did. 



154 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. And that you knew your way around ? 

Mr. Miller. I guess so. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you had any legitimate enterprise in the last 10 
years, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Feighan. May we have a conference ? 

(Witness confers with counsel.) • 

Mr. Nellis. Are you ready now, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. Ptirdon? 

Mr. Nellis. Are you ready now, sir ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes! 

Mr. Nellis. All right, sir. What is your answer? 

Mr. Miller. Will you repeat the question, please? 

The Chairman. Will you read the question? 

(The question was read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Miller. Only with the Empire News. 

Mr. Nellis. Only the Empire News? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. And otherwise you have earned your living exclusively 
in the gambling business ; is that right ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been in any illegitimate business besides 
the gambling business? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever hear of a place called the Frolics Club ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you have an interest in that? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Feighan. May we have a conference ? 

(Witness confers with counsel.) 

Mr. Nellis. Are you ready now, gentlemen? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellls. The Frolics Club, was the question. 

Mr. Miller. What did you want to know about the Frolics Club? 

Mr. Nellis. You were a partner in that; is that right? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Who were your partners ? 

Mr. Miller. I had a partner in there named Moe Wolin. 

Mr. Nellis. Who ? 

Mr. Miller. Moe Wolin. 

Mr. Nellis. How do you spell it? 

Mr. Miller. W-o-l-i-n. 

Mr. Nellis. And who is he? 

Mr. Miller. A boy from New York. 

Mr. Nellis. From New York? 

The Chaieman. Who else was partners ? 

Mr. Miller. That is all I can remember. 

Mr. MosER. Is Wolin in the wire service in New York ? 

Mr. Miller. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you know about the raid on the club ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Neij:.is. They seized about $2*6,000 worth of equipment? 

Mr. Miller. Something like that. 

Mr. Nellis. Why did you and Wolin forfeit it ? 

Mr. Miller. Forfeit what ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 155 

Mr. Nellis. Forfeit the equipment when it was seized ? Didn't you 
come into court and say that you wanted your equipment back ? 
Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nelliw. You did not do that, did you ? 
Mr. MiLLiiK. No, sir. 
Mr. Nellis. You just let it go? 
Mr. Miller. That is right. 
Mr. Nellis. Why? 

Mr. Miller. I didn't think there was any chance to get it back. 
Mr. Nellis. Now, any otlier gambling enterprises? 
Mr. Miller. Not as I know of. 

Mr. Nellis. Now^, you have named your partners in the Island 
Club; you have namecl them in the Frolics Club. But you will not 
name them in the Lookout House ; is that right ? 

Mr. Miller. All I know is Mr. Brink, and I don't know the other 
partners. I never knew the partners that were in there. 

Mr. Nellis. Your brothers were also active in the Frolics Club 
with you ; is that right ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir; clerks. 

Mr. Nellis. Bobby Kaye is another partner in the Empire News 
Service with you? 
Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. And what other business does he have, do you know? 
Mr. Miller. No ; I don't. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, Mr. Miller, why did it take so long to find you for 
service of the subpena ? 

Mr. Miller. Well, I had a letter, and I was to appear, and I was 
a -scared. 

Mr. Nellis. You were a-scared? 
Mr. Miller. Yes. 
Mr. Nellis. Of what? 

Mr. Miller. To appear, because I was a-scared of a Federal vio- 
lation. 

Mr. Nellis. You avoided service of the subpena because you 
were a-scared ? 

Mr. Miller. Until such time as I got in touch with Mr. Feighan, 
and he advised me to go in. 

Mr. Nellis. You made no effort to make yourself availabfe for 
service to this committee ; is that right ? 
Mr. Miller. I was home at all times. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you observe whether anyone came to your home to 
try to serve a subpena on you ? 
Mr. Miller. Very much so. 

]Mr. Nellis. Now, do you recall when Mr. Jack Friedlander testi- 
fied here in Washington ? 

Mr. Miller. I read it in the paper that he did. 
Mr. Nellis. Did you see him after he returned from testifying here? 
Mr. Miller. I have seen him since ; yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Did he deliver a message from this committee to you? 
Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Did he not tell you that he w^as asked specifically to 
advise you to appear for service ? 
Mr. Miller. No ; he did not. 



156 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Nellis. You have been arrested in Miami, Fla., have you not? 

Mr. Miller. Miami. 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. That was in connection with maintaining a gambling 
operation? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. And you were fined $100, or 42 days in jail? 

Mr. Miller. No jail. 

Mr. Nellis. No jail? 

Mr. Miller. But $100. 

Mr. Nellis. You paid a fine ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What were you doing in Hot Springs, Ark., when you 
were a-scared? 

Mr. Miller. Nothing; just taking the baths for my health. 

Mr. Nellis. You travel quite a bit, do you not, Mr. Miller ? 

Mr. Miller. Not necessarily. 

Mr. Nellis. Let us see. Have you been out in Nevada ? 

Mr. Miller. I was there 5 or 6 years ago for a few days. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you ever work in Hot Springs ? 

Mr. Miller. Work? 

Mr. Nellis. Yes. 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Or in New Orleans? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Have you ever been to Saratoga Springs, N. Y. ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. What did you do up there ? 

Mr. Miller. Go to the races. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you patronize the gambling houses? 

Mr. Miller. Night clubs. 

Mr. Nellis. How much money do you draw from the Empire Serv- 
ice Co., Mr. Miller? 

Mr. McCoRMACK. May we have a conference? 

(Witness confers with counsel.) 

The Chairman. What is your answer? 

Mr. Miller. Will you repeat the question, please ? 

The Chairman. Will you read it please ? 

(Thereupon, the question was read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Miller. That is a matter of record, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. I am asking you. You are under oath here. Answer it. 

Mr. Miller. I don't know exactly. That is why I can't answer it. 

The Chairman. Approximately, to the best of your knowledge? 

Mr. Feighan. To the best of your knowledge. 

Mr. Miller. I don't know. 

The Chairman. What was your financial arrangement? 

Mr. Miller. I have one-third interest. 

The Chairman. One-third. 

Mr. Miller. I have one-third interest in the Empire Service 

The Chairman. You made a report of income taxes ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 157 

The Chairman. You must know about how much you are getting 
paid. 

Mr. Miller. I haven't been active in it, and to be very truthful, I 
luiven't gotten my copy of my returns. I have been in Florida sick, 
and my returns are still in Cleveland. 

The Chairman. We do not expect you to know to the dollar, but just 
iijjproximately. 

Mr. Nellis. Approximately. 

Mr. Miller. Thirty thousand dollars or forty thousand dollars. 

]\Ir. Nellis. That is your interest in the Empire Service Co. ; is that 
right? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Now, how much over the period of the last few years 
have you earned in addition to that sum, in your gambling operations? 

Mr. Miller. Nothing outside of the Island Club. 

Mr. Nellis. And that terminated when? In 1949? 

Mr. Miller. In 1949 ; 1949 and 1950, I believe. 

Mr. Nellis. So that in 1950, and as of now, you are living on your 
Empire Service Co. ; is that right ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. What was your income from the Island Club ? 

Mr. Miller. Approximately about $15,000. 

Mr. Nellis. Fifteen thousand dollars? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. 

Mr. Nellis. So that your income was at one time around $50,000 a 
year; is that right? 

Mr. Miller. It could be ; yes. 

Mr. Nellis. Did you have any income from any other source? 

Mr. Miller. No, sir. 

Mr. Nellis. Just those two ? 

Mr. Miller. That is right. 

Mr. Nellis. Do you have an agreement with your other partners to 
draw $30,000 a year ? 

Mr. jNIiller. There was no agreement there; just a partnership. 

Mr. Nellis. I mean, do you have a written agreement? 

Mr. Miller. We have nothing in writing. 

Mr. Nellis. What guaranty do you have that you will continue to 
have that income ? 

Mr. Miller. I have no guaranty. 

Mr. Nellis. You perform no services for the partnership whatso- 
■ever ? 

Mv. Miller. No, sir. 

Mv. Nellis. And you have testified you know nothing about the 
news business ? 

Mr. Miller. Right. 

Mr. Nellis. Is that right ? 

JMr. Miller. Eight. 

Mr. Nellis. How often do you go to Cleveland? 

Mr. Miller. This is the second time in 4 years. 

Mr. Nellis. I have no other questions. 

The Chairman. Very well. 

That will conclude your testimony. 

(Thereupon, at 4 p. m., the subcommittee adjourned until lOr.'iO 
a. m., Wednesday, June 20, 1951.) 

85277— 51— pt. 13 11 



INVESTIGATION OF OEGANIZED CRIME IN INTEESTATE 

COMMERCE 



MONDAY, AUGUST 6, 1951 

United States Senate, 
Subcommittee of the Special Committee to 
Investigate Organized Crime in Interstate Commerce, 

Washington^ D. C. 

EXECUTIVE SESSION 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1 : 30 p, m., in room 
P-36, Capitol Building, Senator Herbert R. O'Conor (chairman), 
presiding. 

Present: Senators O'Conor and Hunt. 

Also present: Downey Rice, associate counsel, Norman Polski, as- 
sistant counsel, Murray Jackson, investigator, Julius Calm, assistant 
to Senator Wiley, and James INI. Hepbron, administrative assistant. 

The Chairman. The hearing will please come to order. 

In opening this executive session, I desire to note for the record 
that pursuant to a resolution of the full committee the chairman of 
the committee, the Senator from Maryland, is authorized to appoint 
a subcommittee, which has been done, and the Senator from Maryland 
is appointed as a subcommittee for this immediate purpose. 

Mr. Rice, will you proceed — but first, counsel is here. 

Mr, Rice. This is Mr. Hurwitz. Are you represented by counsel, 
sir? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes ; this is my counsel. 

Mr. Siegel. My name is Henry Siegel, 1420 Munsey Building, 
Baltimore, Md. 

Mr. Rice. How do you spell your name, Mr. Hurwitz ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. H-u-r-w-i-t-z, and my first name is Philip, and I 
spell that name with one "1." 

Mr. Rice. Where do you live ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. 3218 Falstaif Road, Baltimore. 

Mr. Rice. What is your telephone number ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Forest 7437. 

The Chairivian. That is sufficient identification. I think that we 
will ask the witness to be sworn. 

In the presence of the Almighty God do you swear that the testi- 
mony you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and 
nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I do. 

159 



160 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

TESTIMONY OF PHILIP HURWITZ, BALTIMORE, MD., ACCOMPA- 
NIED BY HENRY SIEGEL, ATTORNEY, BALTIMORE, MD. 

The Chairman, Incidentally, by way of identification, I might 
say that Mr. Siegel was previously assistant State's attorney of 
Baltimore City. He is very well and favorably known to us. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Thank you, Senator. 

The Chairman. Mr. Rice, will you proceed, please ? 

Mr. Rice. Have you been known by any other names? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes ; I had a nickname of "Peg." 

Mr. Rice. How is that spelled ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I don't know; it is either "Peg" or "Pag." 

Mr. Rice. Why do they call you that? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. 1 don't know, sir. That has been with me for maybe 
45 years. It might have been, though, when I was in the concession 
business. It may have been brought out at that time; I don't re- 
member. 

Mr. Rice. Does that relate in any way to concessions ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No, no; I don't know where the name came from, 
but it has been sticking with me for 45 years. 

Mr. Rice. What sort of a concession — at carnivals? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right; carnivals and fairs in those days. 

Mr. Rice. What were your specialties? 

Mr. Hur\\t:tz. What was I specializing in ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Blankets and baby dolls and kewpie dolls ; that was 
many years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Were you selling them ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. No ; on a raffle. 

Mr. Rice. On the wheels ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes ; in the States where it was permitted, of course. 

Mr. Rice. Where were you born, Mr. Hurwitz ? 

Mr. HuRAviTZ. In Baltimore, Md. 

Mr. Rice. When was that? 

Mr. Hurwitz. 1895 ; February 1. 

Mr. Rice. And you have lived there off and on all your life? 

Mr. Hurwitz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been arrested ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. No. 

Mr. Rice. You have never been arrested ? 

Mr. HnnviTZ. No. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Did you understand the question? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Yes. Have I ever been arrested ? 

Mr. SiEGEL. Just a moment. That is not correct. I just don't want 
to interfere, but I would like to have the record straight, if I may. 

Mr. Rice. Yes ; go right ahead, Mr. Siegel. 

Mr. Siegel. Tell these folks about 1936. 

Mr. Hurwitz. Well, if you call that an arrest 

Mr. Siegel. You were indicted and you were released on bail ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. They know that. I gave them that information. 

Mr. SiEGEi^. Well, you must give it to them. That technically was 
an arrest. You were released on bail. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. You have got to treat us as if we do not know 
anything about it. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 161 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Well, I told the investigator voluntarily about that, 
without them questioning nie about it. 

Mr. Rice. What was that incident? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. It was supposed to have been for being in the num- 
bers business, 

Mr. Rice. Well, what was it for? 

Mr. HuRw^iTz. For the numbers business, I was supposed to have 
been in it, but I was not in the business then. 

Mr. Rice. They arrested you and they put you under a bond? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you stand trial ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No. 

Mr. Rice. What happened to the case ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I don't know whether they call it nolle pros — was it? 

Mr. Siegel. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Was anyone arrested with you ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. With me? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. I was alone but there were a lot of others that 
w^ere arrested in the State, in the city. 

Mr. Rice. At the same time ? 

Mr, HuRw^iTz. Yes, 

Mr. Rice.' It was a general round-up ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I would say "Yes." 

Mr. Rice, Where were you when they arrested you ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. When you say arrested, I don't know what you mean, 
I came out of Mr. Siegel's office, or I mean, Mr. Landsberg's office, 
when I was told about it. 

Mr. Rice, And then you went down and surrendered ? 

Mr, HuRwiTz. The bail was put up, and I didn't even go down, 

Mr, Rice, Well, were you fingerprinted in that connection? 

Mr, HuRwiTz. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been fingerprinted ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. In Washington here because the liquor laws require 
it. I have it with me now if you want to see it. 

Mr. Rice. That was about the ABC? 

Mr, HuRWiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What liquor business do you have here? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. District Distributors. 

Mr. Rice. What is your connection with Distributors? 

Mr. HtiRwiTZ. I am the president. 

Mr. Rice. And that is a wholesaler's license ? 

Mr. HuRw^iTz. That is correct, 

Mr, Rice. That is a corporation? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. Now, do you know a man by the name 
of George Goldberg? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Rice. Who is he? 

Mr. HtrRwiTz. Georgie Goldberg is now a partner of mine in the 
Century Finance Co. and the Century Credit Co, at 1311 North 
Charles Street. 

Mr, Rice. How long have you known Goldberg? 



162 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I would say since 1928 or 1929, roughly. 

Mr. Rice, You were in business with him at that time back in the 
late twenties ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Not until 1929. 

Mr. Rice. When did you first become associated with him? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. In 19 — I think it was, as close as I can remember, 
the latter part of 1929, and when I say the latter part, it was close to 
1930. 

Mr. Rice. What business was he in then ? 

Mr, HuRwiTz. I don't know what business he was in. 

Mr. Rice. How did you come to meet him ? 

Mr, HuRwiTz. At that time I was in the sporting world, too, and 
when we went to fights and ball games, the race tracks, or wherever 
it is, you would meet those people, and naturally you would talk to 
them or be introduced to them. 

Mr. Rice. You say he was in the sporting world ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I was. 

Mr. Rice. Was he in the sporting world ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. From what I gather he was. 

Mr. Rice. There came a time when you got into business with him ; 
is that right ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is correct. 

Mr, Rice. When was that ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That was the latter part of 1929, that would be closer 
to 1930, 1 would say in December of 1929. 

Mr. Rice, In what business was that ? 

Mr, HuRwiTz. That was in the numbers business, 

Mr, Rice. What was the arrangement there that brou,ght that 
about? Tell us how you got into business with him, what the opera- 
tion was. 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Nothing more than somebody said that there was a 
lot of money to be made in the numbers, and I approached him, and I 
asked him whether he would be interested, and he said he would, 

Mr. Rice, How did you come to pick him out? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Well, he had a nice reputation around town among 
the sporting world. It is very important that the man you are asso- 
ciating with is going to see that he meets his obligations, sometimes 
more so than in business, I have found that out since I have been in 
the business world, it was more important there than in the business 
world, 

Mr. Rice. Well, yes; but you picked him out. Now, why did you 
need him ? Were you going to back him, or what was the idea ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No; there wasn't going to be any backing. It was 
going to be an equal partnership. 

Mr, Rice, Why did you feel that you wanted a partner? 

Mr, HuRwiTz, Because I was a lazy man and I didn't want to work. 
I didn't know nothing about the business. It was my intention to not 
even come into the foreground. I wouldn't go by myself at all, 

Mr, Rice. Would it be fair to say that it came to your attention that 
the numbers business, which was a sort of a new thing at that time and 
just building up, looked like it was going to be a money maker, and 
you wanted to get into it and you didn't want to be too active and you 
were looking for someone to front for you or run the operation ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 163 

Mr. HuR^\^Tz. He was not the front for me. I had a front. He was 
not the front, lie was a partner. 

Mr. Rice. What was to be his function ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Tlie same as mine. Business comes to you, you go 
out and get the business, you know. 

Mr. Rice. Who was your front? 

Mr. HuR^v^Tz. A fellow by the name of Joe Greasy — his name was 
really Joe Taylor ; he was a colored fellow. 

Mr. Rice. You sort of backed him ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did Goldberg have a front, too ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I would not know, sir. 

Mr. Rice. This man you had, you say his name was Greaser? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. They used to call him Joe Greasy. His name was 
Joseph Taylor. 

Mr. Rice. Joe Taylor? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. He did not front for Goldberg, too, though? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. How is the thing to run ? Tell us a little bit about how 
it was to run, what was the general theory. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. You know, there is no contract in these things, it is 
just a matter of getting the business, and then at the end of the month, 
or whatever it is, if there are any profits you just take your profits. 

Mr. Rice. At the outset, in the numbers business, you have to have 
a bank roll ; don't you ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is correct. 

Mr. Rice. Were you going to put up the bank roll ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No ; it was to be equal. 

Mr. Rice. It was to be equal ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. You and Goldberg would put it up ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you remember what bank roll you started with ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ, It wasn't very much at that time, if I can remember 
my end of it, I don't know whether he had more money or not, but it 
was very little, no more than a couple of thousand dollars. 

Mr. Rice. And you got together and put up a couple of thousand 
dollars? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. We don't even trust anybody in that business. It 
was a question of putting it up. 

Mr. Rice. Because you had not had any "hits" yet ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No. That is not the reason. Of course, I would like 
to bring this in and perhaps it will help. That was about 20 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRW^iTz. And in those 20 years I have divorced myself from 
gambling of any kind. I don't even go to the fights. I mean, this is all 
under oath, I know that I am speaking under oath, so therefore I will 
tell you that I don't go to fights where I used to go. The last time 
I attended a fight was Joey Archibald and Harry Jeffra, that was the 
Archibald- J effra fight which was about 6 or 7 years ago, in view of 
the fact that Goldberg was supposed to have been the president of the 
Century Sporting Club. 



164 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

I don't go to baseball games, I don't go to race tracks any more. Of 
course, the joke is always, "What the hell are you living for?" The 
truth of the matter is that I have got now a different class of business. 
I don't see those people, and if I were to say to you that I have not 
seen Goldberg, in the 20 years I was in business with him, that I had 
not seen him but 10 times, it would sound a little strange to you but 
that is so under oath, 1 have not seen him over 10 or 15 times, in view 
of the fact I am still in business with him. 

I don't fraternize with any of these fellows, even though I do know 
them. I don't socialize with them. I know some of them. That might 
help, when you say about the business that way. 

Mr. Rice. Well, going back to the time when you were in it, I am 
trying to establish how this thing worked out, how you set it up. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, how it works — 

Mr. Rice. You had to have this fellow Taylor. What did he do? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. He went out and got the business, and he protected 
my interests. 

Mr. Rice. He would get himself some runners, was that the idea ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I don't know how he got the business. He got his end 
of the business and protected my end, for which I gave him an interest 
in my profits that I would make. 

Mr. Rice. How about Goldberg? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I don't know what he did with his. 

Mr. Rice. I don't understand that. You were in a partnership ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And you have a man who is protecting your front ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. How did he arrange for his share of the profits? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I cannot speak for him. I don't know what he did. 
He may have had three people protecting his interests, which I don't 
know. 

Mr. Rice. Didn't the same business that cleared through you — didn't 
he have an interest in that? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Oh, yes ; the business we were getting, I don't know 
whether there was any other business there, but the business that was 
brought in by my man or my men was protected by this fellow Joe 
Taylor, a colored man. 

Mr. Rice. Goldberg had an interest in that, didn't he? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. How did you figure out your shares? 

Mr. Hurwitz. It was simple. At the end of the week, or whatever 
time it was, the end of the day, how many hits there would be there, 
this man would present it to me and I would know how much there 
was, and they would pay off. 

Mr. Rice. And ])art of it would go then to Goldberg? 

Mr. Hurwitz. At the end of the day, if there were any profits, they 
would be banked. 

Mr. Rice. In a bank ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. In a bank account? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Yes ; in a bank account. 

Mr. Rice. And he would get his share? 

■ Mr. Hurwitz. At the end of the week or a month, or whatever time 
it was, we trusted each other to that point. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 165 

Mr. KiCE. I am trying to establish, Mr. Sieg-el, to see if it was a 
50-50 deal. 

Mr. SiEGEL. It was 50-50. They were equal paitners; is that right? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 

Mr. SiEGEL. And when Taylor got this business he got the business 
for the partnership, for you and ( Jeorge Goldberg? 

Mr, HuRWiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Sii:gel. And you were equal partners? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right. 

Mr. SiEGEL. And whatever profits remained would be equally di- 
vided between you and Goldberg^ 

Mr. HuRwaTZ. That is right. 

Mr, Rice. When the moiiey went into the bank, who would draw the 
checks to distribute it ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I would, to my sorrow. 

Mr. Rice. You would ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 

Mr, Rice, Why do you say to your sorrow ? 

Mr, HuRWiTz, Because at that time the income tax was not as strict 
as it is today and when my accountant went up there to pay my income 
tax they wanted to charge me for every check drawn out of the bank. 
They didn't want to know about profits or losses. These were all 
profits, they claimed, and I was the one there to bear that myself. 

Mr, Rice, What would you do, draw it to cash ? 

Mr, HuRwiTz. Cash ; and I would cash a check. 

Mr. Rice. And you would give part of it to Goldberg ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. 

Mr, Rice, How^ would he get his ? 

Mr, HuRWiTz, You are talking about the profits, are you ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Oh, the profits, at the end of the month. 

Mr. Rice. How would he get it ? Who would pay him ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I would. 

Mr. Rice. You would pay him in cash ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No, there were checks involved, too. Again I say, 
at that time it was not the right thing, but there were checks involved. 

Mr. Rice. I don't see how that would get you into any trouble -jvith 
the tax people. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is one of the reasons I am here after 20 years 
and trying to prove that I have done absolutely nothing, and I am 
in troulDle again, trouble to the point of coming up here. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Pardon me, I think we can clear that up. I want to 
try to be helpful. 

The Chairman. Go ahead. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Wasn't it shortly after you disassociated yourself with 
Goldberg in the numbers business that you and Goldberg had a 
check-up by the Internal Revenue Department? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is what I told him. 

Mr. SiEGEU And the Internal Revenue Department, of course, 
came across this money that had been banked by you for the partner- 
ship of Goldberg and yourself, and then you made a settlement with 
the Government and your firm of accountants represented you, and 



166 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

you paid the Government a substantial sum of money to square your 
tax liability with them which was, of course, many years ago. 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

The Chairman. May I ask this? We are not inquisitive to go 
into anything not directly related to this matter. We do not want 
to pry into any private affairs, that is not it, but have you any objec- 
ion to stating how much you paid the Government ? 

Mr. HuKwiTz. Well, that is a record. 

The Chairman. That is the matter I asked you. 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I don't know. I can get it for you. 

Mr. SiEGEL. We can furnish that information for you. 

The Chairman. If you could that might be helpful, because prob- 
ably it might have some bearing on the matters we are talking about, 

Mr. HuRwiTz. It was not a whole lot. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Do you have any idea what the amount is ? Give it as 
close as you can. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Well, if I would say $2,500, 1 don't know whether it 
is $2,500 or $3,500. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Well, what do you think the highest figure was, the 
very highest? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Henry, I wouldn't say. I would say $3,000. I don't 
know. It might have been more. 

The Chairman. You may give it subject to verification. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Oh, yes. 

Mr. SiEGEL. We can furnish the committee with the information, 
because we can get that from the firm of Burke, Landsberg and Gerber. 
They have been doing his auditing work. I remember that he had a 
tax case that arose out of the numbers business. 

Mr. Rice. Was it a joint settlement on the part of both? 

Mr. SiEGEL. No, the money was banked in his name, and that is why 
the Government looked to him for payment, and he had to settle with 
the Government and that has been a matter of possibly 18 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. In connection with that settlement did Mr. Goldberg pay 
a part of the loss, part of the payment to the Government ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I think he had his own tax case. I paid my money 
and he later on had his tax case and he paid his. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Mr. Rice wanted to know if he contributed anything 
to repay you for that. 

Mr. Rice. That was an individual proposition ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 

Mr. SiEGEL. And he did not reimburse you ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. 

Mr. SiEGEL. As a matter of fact, you felt that he should have re- 
imbursed you ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is correct. 

Mr. Rice. It would seem so if it was a 50-50 partnership. 

Mr. SiEGEL. That is right. You felt that he had not been fair to you 
because you felt that he should have reimbursed you for one-half of 
what you had to pay the Government, isn't that correct? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. How long were you in that business with him, Mr. 
Hurwitz? 

Mr. Hurwitz. One year or so, maybe 14 months, I can't remember. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 167 

It has been 20 years ago, and it was 1 year or maybe 14 months at the 
highest, and I then left him and I went and took a trip, a cruise, so 
I wouldn't have let my money in there if I had been with him; 
I wouldn't leave all the money there. There was a lot of money in- 
volved, you know. 

Mr. Rice. About how much did you make during that time ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I estimate maybe $10,000, $12,000, $15,000, or maybe 
$20,000. 

Mr. Rice. That was your share ? 

Mr. HuRw^iTZ. Yes. That was in a year's time. 

Mr. Rice. How much did Taylor make, approximately ? 

Mr. HuRw^iTZ. Taylor never had anything, he would bet on some 
other things, to try to win his money back again. 

Mr. Rice. Was he paid a salary ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. He had a salary and commission. He had to have 
enough to live on, and he had a stake in the profits. 

Mr. Rice. How much would he have taken down, irrespective of 
what he lost ? 

Mr. HuRW^Tz. He had about 20 or 25 percent of the profits. 

Mr. Rice. And yours was 50 percent ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. So he would have had around $5,000 ? 

Mr. HuR\viTZ. I wouldn't know. The figures are there. If it was 
$20,000, he would get maybe $5,000, yes. 

Mr. Rice; And he was on a salary, too ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. He was on a salary. He had to have money to live on. 

Mr. Rice. How many other employees were there ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I don't know. Very seldom was I there. I would 
say it would not be over about seven. 

Mr. Rice. Wliere did they have their headquarters? 

Mr. Hurwitz. There was an alley, I don't know the name of the 
alley, it is on Caroline Street, between Fairmont Avenue and Baltimore 
Street. 

Mr. Rice. Was this operation all colored, were all the writers and 
runners colored? 

Mr. HuRw^iTz. Most of them, yes. I will say 90 percent of them 
were. 

Mr. Rice. What became of the business when you got out? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I couldn't tell you, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Why did you get out of it ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I didn't like it. I have been in a lot of businesses 
and, as I say, I wanted to get into something where I would be of 
some value "in the community, which I have proved myself for 20 
years. I was in the carnival business and I didn't like that. 

Mr. Rice. Did Goldberg get out of it at the same time? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I couldn't tell you, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat did you do with your share ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I just threw it up. I didn't want it any more. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't try to sell it to him ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I gave it to Greasy. I told him, "You do what you 
want with it." 

Mr. Rice. You gave it to Greasy ? 

Mr. HuRAvrrz. Yes. I don't know whether he turned it over to 
someone else or went in business for himself. 



168 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. What understanding did you have with Goldberg 
about it ? 

Mr. HuRWTTZ. None whatsoever. I just quit. 

Mr. Rice. Well, you just can't walk out on a partner, can you? 

Mr. HuRwrrz. In that business you can. 

Mr. Rice. What did he say ? 

Mr. HuRWTTz. What could he say? He probably would be happy. 

Mr. Rice. What did he say? " 

Mr. HuRwiTz. He said, "If that is your decision, all well and good." 

Mr. Rice. Then he may have continued in it, so far as you know ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. So far as I know, and I didn't care. I was only 
interested in myself. 

Mr. Rice. During that year that it was running, were you ever 
arrested ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. There was a raid there, there was a raid. Now, I 
don't remember whether I went down there or not. It didn't amount 
to anything, I will put it that way. 

Mr. Rice. Who got arrested in the raid ? 

Mr, HuRWiTz. The workers there. 

Mr. Rice. Did Taylor get arrested? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I think Taylor was arrested. 

Mr. Rice. Did he pay a jfine ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Offhand I can't remember, sir. 

Mr. Rice. "WTiat were your arrangements about police activities 
there, if they were arrestee!, who was to pay the fine? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I was in the background at that point and I didn't 
know, I didn't know anything about it. 

Mr. Rice. Now, wait a minute. You were a 50-percent partner 
and you must have known something about it. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is .correct, tliat is right. 

Mr. Rice. Were. you charging off the fines as a business expense? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Oh, yes, if there was any expenses that would come 
off. 

Mr. Rice. If Taylor or somebody else were arrested and had to pay 
a fine of $100, that would come out of the business ? 

Mr, Htjrwitz. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did that ever happen ? 

Mr. Hukwitz. Quite a few times. 

Mr. Rice, Some of your runners would be arrested? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any arrangements with the bondsmen ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I did not. 

Mr. Rice. Did someone have an arrangement with the bondsmen ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. There must have been some arrangements made. As 
I say, I was in the backgi'ound, and I wouldn't know what they were. 

Mr. Rice. Who made those arrangements? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I wouldn't know. It might have been Greasy and 
it might have been somebody on Goldberg's side. 

Mr. Rice. But in any event you were not arrested during that time ? 

Mr, HuRwiTZ. I can't — I don't think so — there is times when I did 
go in there. I think I was on the outside when the raid took place. 

Mr. Rice, Well, how do you account for not being arrested when 
you were part of an illegal enterprise ? How did you arrange for that ? 

Mr, HuRwiTz, How clid I arrange for that ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 169 

Mr. KiCE. Yes, 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I think you oii<ilit to know the answer yourself. I am 
not trying to be flip, I am tryini:; to be fair about it, and I don't like 
to make statements here being, as I say, if I was in the business perhaps 
J would make statements differently tlian now. You say how do you 
make arrangements for these things ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes, It is a little difficult to understand how you can 
operate. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ, Well, it is very simple to understand. You make ar- 
rangements with people, whether it is the police or whoever it may be, 
that are willing to take some of your money in order to give you that 
bit of protection. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Would you charge that off to expenses, too ? 

]\Ir. HuRWiTZ. Everything went off for expenses. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Everything went off for expenses, 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Whatever there is that went to business, or went out 
for business, that is expenses. 

Mr. Rice. So that if someone had to be taken care of, if there had 
to be some protection money paid, that would be an expense item, too, 
wouldn't it ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. How much would that run ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. What percentage? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. At that time it was very minor. 

Mr. Rice. How much would you say, about, a week ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I wouldn't know. The fines in those cases — in those 
days the fines were only $25 and costs. There wasn't no jail sentences. 
That is the year that I was in it. 

Mr. Rice. How about the protection, the money that had to go to 
the law-enforcement people in order to keep them from arresting you? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. It went — I didn't have anything to do with it. 

Mr. Rice. How much did that run to ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I think it was very minor, from what I understand. 

Mr. Rice. Would it run $100 a week ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes, it would be more than that, throughout the 
city. 

Mr. Rice. For the whole operation, how much would it be a week? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. A week? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Truthfully I could not tell you. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. It was part of your share that was going out for that, 
and if they had not paid it out to the police, there would have been 
that much more profit for you, wouldn't there ? 

Mv. HuRwiTZ. As I tried to point out, that has been 20 years ago,, 
during whicli time I have tried my darnedest to forget the whole 
thing. It is hard to say whether it was $100 or $800. It might be in 
that neighborhood, but there is quite a variance there, I understand.. 

Mr. Rice. Who took care of that phase of the business? 

Mr. Hlrwitz. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Who made the arrangements; Greasy? 



170 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Greasy might have taken care of his section. You 
see, it doesn't always come from the head of the city, sometimes one 
of the boys themselves is a pickup man or so, and he will make the 
arrangements for that section himself. 

Mr. Rice. How high on the police level did the protection go ? 

Mr. HuEwiTZ. I would not know, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you take care of anybody yourself? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Never. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have any discussion about that with police 
officials ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Well, there is a lot of talk about police protection. 
There was always, from what I read, and what little I knew when I 
was in it, there was always a lot of talk about that. 

Mr. Rice. At the beginning of this thing, when you were conceiving 
the notion of getting into the business with Goldberg, you had a plan 
to get into a business that was illegal. 

Mr. HuRwaj z. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. So you must have had some idea about what arrange- 
ments you could make to run this business. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. In the start, you could hide in any corner with a 
little amount of business. 

Mr. Rice. But pretty soon you were going to be hit ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. You are going to be what ? 

Mr. Rice. You are going to be hit by the police. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Naturally, if you don't 

Mr. Rice. If you don't make the arrangements. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Did you wait until you had some police activity before 
you made arrangements? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I didn't do any of that at all. It was understood 
that it was going to be taken care of. By whom, I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. At the very outset, that was part of the theory of the 
operation — to get into business you would have to give some thought 
to that. Was Goldberg going to take care of that ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I don't know whether he was or not. 

Mr. Rice, Who was? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I am trying to tell you that the boys in the neigh- 
borhood that have their routes, they themselves would take care of 
a lot of it. 

Mr. Rice. Before the boys in the neighborhood got into it, when 
you and Goldberg sat down and said, ''We will put up a couple of 
thousand, we will get in the business and make money," one of you 
must have said, "Well, now, what about the police? What are we 
going to do about that?" 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Well, today, as I say, today I am in business, and 
I am doing business right here in the State alone, in the District of 
Columbia, of $10,000,000, and we make preparations. We do all of 
that through insurance, and all that. I will put it this way : That I 
didn't do it in the year I was in that business ; I didn't do it because it 
wasn't necessary. 

It is the same right now if you are going out to a ball game, and 
you are w^agering, as I say, two boys are w^agering, and one has too 
big a business, he turns it over to the other one ; they don't have to fear 
the police there. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 171 

I have no right to speak as an authority. I was only in it, as I say, 
20 years ago for about a year, but from what I can see, if you want 
to start in business in a small way, bookmaking or numbers, it will be 
quite a while before they catch you. 

Mr. Rice, But they most assuredly are going to catch you before 
long, and then you will have to face it. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. I did not handle it as you would a 
business. 

Mr. Rice. You did not anticipate it? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No ; you don't handle that as a business. 

Mr. Rice. I am afraid I cannot go along with you on that. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That has been my experience, when I first started. 

Mr. Rice. Well, do you want to say, then, that whatever protection 
there was, was taken care of by the individuals who were involved, and 
not by yourself ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I would say, from the start, yes. 

Mr. Rice. And you did not discuss it with Goldberg? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I might have discussed it with Goldberg, as to what 
the expenses were, maybe the expenses being too high or too low. 

Mr. Rice. Was he the man that took care of that, then ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No; from what I understand, there w^as somebody 
like Joe Greasy in there that took care of it. We might say he was 
a half-baked politician of some kind. 

Mr. Rice. In the operation itself? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, he was on the outside. He was not in operation, 
but he was taken care of for taking care of the operation. 

Mr. Rice. He was the "fix" man ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Well, you can call it fixes, if you like. 

Mr. Rice. So that everything that was put out to take care of police 
protection channeled through him ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I would think so. As I say, I don't know all about 
this thing. As I said, I wasn't around it too much. I have got to the 
point there, the point to protect my interest, and when Taylor brought 
in these things, if I didn't like it, I would send it back with him. I 
•didn't know too much about the business. 

Mr. Rice. Was it your understanding that the "fix" man could de- 
liver the protection, you would take care of him, and he would^more 
or less guarantee that everything was running well ? 

Mr. HuRw^iTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. All you had to do was to straighten him out ? 

Mr. HuRwrrz. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. In connection with that, was there an arrangement for 
people to get arrested every once in a while in order to make it look 
right? The police might "say, "Everybody knows you are running, 
and w^e have to make an arrest every once in a while" ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I wouldn't know anything about that. 

Mr. Rice. You did not hear that ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did it happen ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Not that I know of. You say they faked an arrest? 

Mr. Rice. Well, you said some of your men were arrested once in a 
while. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes. 



172 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Well, you have an inconsistency there. You have a "fix" 
man who takes care of the operation in order to prevent men from 
being arrested, and then you have people being arrested. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, I don't want you to get the impression that all 
policemen are crooked. I would say that 75 percent of them are — I 
should not be making these statements because, again, I am no au- 
thority — but I would say that 75 percent of them are honest. 

Mr. Rice. I hope there are more than that. So that every once in 
a while an honest policeman would come along and grab a fellow ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Not every once in a while ; quite often. 

Mr. Rice. All right. Did there come a time when somebody grabbed 
Goldberg ? Wlien somebody kidnaped him ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. There was some talk about that and some rumors. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

(There was a brief interruption.) 

Mr. Rice. Now, we were talking about the time when Goldberg 
was kidnaped or snatched or grabbed. What was the story on that? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Well, as I say, it is a story, that is all it is, from 
what I know. It has been told that he was snatched, and the following 
day after all the commotion and all, 1 saw him and I said, "What is 
going on?" He says, "Nothing."' He says, "I went down fishing," 
and he says, "I came back," and he says, "I hear all this talk around." 

Mr. Rice. Oh, I see. He took the position that he was not snatched. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. About when was that, Mr. Hurwitz ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, roughly guessing, I would say 1932, or 1931, 
or 1932, or 1933. 

Mr. Rice. Was it while he was still in the numbers business? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I don't know. I don't think I was with him — I may 
have been — as I say, I don't know when that was. 

Mr. Rice. But it was possible that it was while he was your part- 
ner? 

Mr. Hurwitz. It is possible ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. That would have been a right serious thing if it was your 
partner ayIio was taken, would it not? 

Mv. Hurwitz. It would be serious for anybody to be taken. 

Mr. Rice. What was the story that went around ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. The story was that we was, as yoU say, snatched. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Hurwitz. And that a ransom was paid. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Did anyone come to you and say, "We have got 
Goldberg, and it is going to cost you so much to get him out?" 

Mr. Hurwitz. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you receive any contacts the day that he was taken ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. There was a lot of talk by different people saying 
that he was snatched. 

Mr. SiKOEL. I don't think you understood Mr. Rice's question. Did 
you receive any contacts the day he was snatched? Do you under- 
stand the question ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Contacts? 

Mr. SiEGEL. Yes ; did anybody contact you ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 173 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes; there was a few of tlieni came ovei- and spoke 
to me about it. 

Mr. Rice. Did they suggest that you do something about it ^ 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. They said, ''Did you hear what haj^pened to 
Georgie?" And I said, "No, what?" They said, "He was snatched." 

Mr. Rice. Did they tell you how it hap})eiied ? 

]\Ir. HuRwiTz. No.' 

Mr. Rice. Was there any police activity ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. The only activity, I think it was then a Captain 
Burns had called for me to come up there, knowing that I was in part- 
ners with him then, or was in partners before, and the only informa- 
tion I could give him was the same, and I think it was the following 
day that Goldberg was back. 

Mr. Rice. And you talked to him ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And you said there is nothing to it t Or he said there 
was nothing to it? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

]Mr. Rice. Are you convinced that there was nothing to it ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I think so, if he said there was nothing to it. 

Mr. Rice. It is possible, just for the purposes of speculation, that he 
was snatched and did pay a ransom, and then they told him, "Look, you 
keep your mouth shut about this or we will do it to you again," and he 
lulled you to slee]) with that explanation ? 

Mr. HuRw^iTZ. Well, if he did, he was only accomplishing what he 
was after, he may have gained his point. 

Mr. Rice. So far as you know it did not happen ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. You did not get any direct information about it? 

Mr. HuRw^TZ. No. 

Mr. Rice. Except that this police captain called you down and 
talked to you about it? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. He was serious about it? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Oh yes ; I think it was in the papers, too. 

Mr. Rice. There was no money charged off on your books or the 
partnei'ship books to take care of expenses in that way? 

Ml". HuRWiTz. Definitely not. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any muscling in from other operators or 
other gangs, out-of-town people? 

Mr. HuRW'iTz. Yes. Not muscling in, there was someone that — I 
can't recall who it was, they were supposed to be — and I told them that 
so far as I was concerned, that I couldn't save any money out of the 
business. I told them, "I have made some. You can have the wdiole 
business." And it just dried up after that, not because of what I said. 

Mr. Rice. Was that a fellow by the name of Arthur? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I don't know any Arthur. 

Mr. Rice. You never heard of the name Arthur? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. 

Mr. Rice. Joe Arthur? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. 

Mr. Rice. It doesn't mean anything to you ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, sir. 

85277— 51— I't. 13 12 



174 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. KiCE. Well, now, tell us again about these fellows who wanted 
to declare themselves in ? How did they work that ? 

Mr. HuEwiTz. Well, the same as I suppose they do today or any 
other time, they come over as bad boys, and they say, "Look, I am 
taking an interest in your business." 

Mr. Rice. Were these white fellows ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. They were white fellows. 

Mr. Rice. From out of town ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I don't know where they were from. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't know them ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No; I didn't know them. I am trying to make an 
impression on you that I didn't know many people in those days in 
that business. I was away most of the time, and when I did come in 
6 months of the year, the only ones, as I say, that I would meet some 
of that caliber person would be if I went to a race track and was 
introduced to them. 

Mr. Rice. How many times did fellows come to you like that; do 
you remember? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Only one time. 

Mr. Rice. How many men came? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Only one that I spoke with. 

Mr. Rice. And he looked for you and located you? 

Mr. HuRwrrz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And he got you in your office somewhere ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No ; I didn't have an office. 

Mr. Rice. Where did he get you ? 

Mr. HuRwrrz. On Baltimore Street. 

Mr. Rice. Did he stop you on the street ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Somebody pointed him out to me and said that he 
wanted to talk to me. 

Mr. Rice. He wanted to talk to you ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right, 

Mr. Rice. And you talked to him ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What did he tell you ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Nothing more than they were coming in; they 
wanted part of our business. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat did he say, "We are moving in" ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And, "We want part of your business" ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did he say how much he wanted ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I think thev wanted 50 or 75 percent. 

Mr. Rice. They wanted half of it at least? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. More than half. 

Mr. Rice. What were they going to put up in order to get it? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Well, they promised that we would get more busi- 
ness ; that they wanted to take it away from some of the little ones. 

Mr. Rice. They were going to consolidate? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That is right. I told them that I was not interested. 
I told them that I could not save any money out of that. I was 
losing everything I could get gambling back on horses or any other 
game, and I told them they could have the whole thing. As I say. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 175 

I don't think it was that that stopped them, but the whole thing was 
over with. 

Mr. Rice. Was that what helped influence you to get out of the 
business ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes ; that was one of the things. As I pointed out, 
I was in the carnival business, and I didn't like that, either. 

Mr. Rice. Did these fellows get tough about it ? Did they say, "If 
you don't take the proposition, it is liable to go hard for you" ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. They didn't say that, but I myself could figure out 
that. I didn't want any part of anything like that. 

Mr. Rice. How did you figure out that they were tough, just meet- 
ing a man on the street ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, if I came to you and I said, "Give me half the 
money you have in your pocket," you would feel that I was either 
tough or crazy. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRWiTz. And I don't like to fool with either one of them. 

Mr. Rice. You just wouldn't walk away and not do anything about 
it. 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I didn't walk away. I talked to him. I told him 
that I wasn't interested in it, and they could have the whole business ; 
'^hat I wouldn't go into anything like that. 

Mr. Rice. Would it be a fair statement to say that that was the most 
influencing factor of all to help you get out of the business ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No ; that was not the most influencing factor. 

Mr. Rice. You wouldn't say that you Avere muscled out ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No. 

Mr. Rice. But it was a combination of things ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. The thing of it was that all my life I had looked 
forward to one thing. I was not what you would call a good boy, 
going around the country when nothing but a little boy, and I just 
strove for one thing, and that was to get on a pedestal with the rest of 
the business people. I didn't do anything during those years that 
was out of the way ; nothing. 

As I say, if I could only prove to you what I am saying is so. For 
example, if I may digress just for a minute, I have a business over 
here, and w^e are building, and it is going to cost a quarter of a million 
dollars for this building we are putting up now. I have men over 
here, and we have been in business 3 years, the same way as we operate 
the finance company, for 3 years, and I have not been here but four or 
five times. I deputize people I know who are honest, young men, 
and I give them an ojjportunity where they can get ahead, and that is 
my operation. 

And when I tell you about the Goldberg matter, I cannot add any- 
thing to it. I was only with him for 1 year, and I had not seen him 
10 or 15 times in 20 years, even though I am his partner at the finance 
• company, and I know that is hard for you to believe, and I don't blame 
you. Maybe that is the reason you brouglit me over here. But I liave 
facts to prove it is so. 

Mr. Rice. All riglit. Now, when you started to get this feeling 
from meeting this fellow on the street, did you negotiate with him 
.at all? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. 



176 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. KiCE. You did not? You just had one conversation with him? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes ; that was all. 

Mr. KiCE. And did he say, "I will get in touch with you later; I 
will give you time to think it over" ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I told him there was no need for me to think it 
over ; that he could have my end. 

Mr. Rice. You quit right then and there? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes; if he was going to take the 75 percent, that 
thing was dismissed, and nothing was heard about it any more. 

Mr. Rice. I mean, that is the actual act that precipitated your 
getting out of the business ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I said that may have been one of them ; that is right. 

Mr. Rice. Did you start right there at that moment and make 
preparations to get out? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, no ; I continued on for, I would say, I don't 
remember, and I am just guessing now, but I would say that I con- 
tinued on for about anotlier 6 months. 

Mr. Rice. Did you tell Goldberg that you had had a contact from 
a muscle man? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What did he say ? 

Mr. HuRw^iTz. What could he say ? — the same as I said, "We are not 
going to go for it." 

Mr. Rice. You were not going to go for it ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. We were not going to go for it ; that is right. Then 
I said, "I am going to get out of it. You can do whatever you please. 
I am not going to get mixed up into these things. I know what they 
lead up to. We read in the papers and see." 

Mr. Rice. Trouble ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Not only trouble, but you get killed and everything 
else. 

Mr. Rice. He was going to resist it; is that right? 
. Mr. HuRwiTZ. Who is "he"? 

Mr. Rice. Goldberg. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No ; he didn't say that. 

Mr. Rice. He said he w^as going to get out of it, too ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. He said he would rather get out of it, especially if 
they wanted 75 or 60 percent. 

Mr. Rice. Well, if it had only been 10 percent, then next week they 
would want 80 percent. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That would be so. 

JNIr. Rice. They could take that just the same. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Maybe so. 

Mr. Rice. What did you ever find out about who the fellow was ? 
What city was he from? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. Was he a Philadelphia man? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. I wouldn't know where he was from. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever find out who it was ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No. There are so many things come about, when 
you are in that sort of business, in the way of rumors and diiferent 
things, that you just forget about them. In fact, you try to forget 
about them. I didn't forget it. 1 had it in my mind, and I wanted 



ORGANIZED CRIMP: IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 177 

to get out of the business. That helped, as you say, but that Avas not 
100 percent the reason. 

Mr. KicE. Did you ever see the man again ^ 

Mr. HuKwiTz. No. 

Mr. Rice. You have never seen him sine i ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No. 

Mr. KicE. And you have never found out who lie was ? 

IVIr. HuRwiTz. No. 

Mr. KicE. Did Goldberg know ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. At that time he did not know. 

Mr. Rice. Did he ever get a contact 'i 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Not that I know of. 

]\Ir. Rice. Why did he pick you out? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Well, like everything else, when two people are in 
business, one is supposed to be a better talker than the other. For 
example, Goldberg and I were with these two finance companies, and 
if anything comes up that is not just right to the point of making a 
loan of a dilferent kind, or something about the manager's work there, 
he says to me, "I will leave it up to you." 

Mr. Rice. Goldberg says that ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Oh, yes, in the finance company. 

Mr. Rice. And you make the final decision ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. Of course, I keep him posted. That 
has not happened but twice. The manager I have now, he didn't 
want him for a manager. We had the first manager and we released 
him, and then we released a second one in just a short time, and George 
says, "I am finished." Then we got this third man, whom he did not 
like at that time, and I told him that I happened to know the man, 
and that the man was fitted for the business, and George says, "If you 
feel it is O. K., it is all right with me." 

Mr. Siegel. Who is this man, this manager ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Hochheimer. 

Mr. Siegel. Si Hochheimer? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How long has he been running this business for you, 
approximately ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Well, we started in 1931. I was with George, then, 
and we bought the Westfall Co. Hochheimer has been with us now 
since 1934 or 1935. 

Mr. Rice. That started right when you got out of the numbers 
business ; you went into the finance business ? 

Mr. Htjrwitz. I think we were together again ; we were still togeth- 
er when we went into this business, but not for long, because, as I say, 
I took that trip, and we were not in business when I took the trip. 

Mr. Rice. Did you take any of the money from the innnbers enter- 
prise to invest in the finance company ? 

Mr. HuRW^TZ. Oh, you mean the earnings from the numbers busi- 
ness ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, I don't know. I had some of my own. I may 
have taken it. We both put up equal amounts again. 

Mr. Rice. And you continued in that business ever since? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 



178 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Goldberg and you, and you only see him once in a while ? 

Mr. HuEwiTZ. Yes, that is right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, what is the name of that company ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. The Century Credit and the Century Finance Co. 
There are two companies in the same office. 

Mr. Rice. At 1331 North Charles? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is correct. 

Mr. Rice. Are they corporations ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And are they both the same, with the same officers? 

Mr. HuRwaTZ. Yes, the same officers. 

Mr. Rice. Wlio are the officers ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I am the president, and Goldberg is the — I think — 
vice president — and Mr. Landsberg is an officer there. 

Mr. Rice. How is the stock broken down ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Just between Goldberg and myself. 

Mr. Rice. Fifty-fifty? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. In both of them ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you liave any other enterprises with Goldberg? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Nothing at all, sir. I never did any business with 
him since the time we went out of business there. 

Mr. Rice. Wlio takes care of your personal books? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Mr. Landsberg of Burke Landsberg & Gerber; they 
are accountants in the Munsey Building. 

Mr. Rice. Does he take care of Goldberg's books, too ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I think so. I am not certain. 

Mr. Rice. What do you estimate your net worth to be, approxi- 
mately ? 

Mr, HuRwiTz. Well, I mean, do I have to answer that ? 

Mr. Siegel. Wo don't have any objection. We can answer that. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, if I don't have to answer it, I would rather not. 

Mr. Siegel. If it is not for publication, and I don't believe it is; 
is it? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, if I have to, I will give you the whole figures. 

Mr. Siegel. I would say to answer it, if it is not for publication. 

Mr, Rice. Well, we will not press him, if he has any reluctance. 

Mr. Siegel. As a matter of fact, I would prefer that he answer if 
it is not for publication. 

Mr. Rice. Well, it would be a matter of record. 

Mr. Siegel. I just want to show you that he made a tremendous suc- 
cess in the last 18 or 20 years, and he has a tremendously big in- 
come. He is very charitable. I have copies of his income-tax returns 
where we can show, for instance, in the year 1950 his charitable con- 
tributions were in excess of $17,000. So, he must have a substantial 
income in order to do that. 

Mr. Rice. Mr. Siegel, do you have copies of his returns with you? 

Mr. Siegel. Yes ; I have. 

Mr. Rice. Well, suppose we look at those and then we might not 
need to go into that matter on the record. 

Mr. Siegel. I will be glad to do that. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any interest in the Century Athletic Club, 
or have you had any interest in it ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 179 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Not at all. I don't even know where it is, excepting 
that I read of it in the newspapers. I don't know who their officers are, 
and I have never gone into the place. I don't how to emphasize it, 
but I have no connections with it whatsover. 

Mr. Rice. Mr. Goldberg, you think, may have ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. It is common knowledge that he has, through the 
newspapers, that he was with the Century Sporting Club. 

Mr. KiCE. And you do have an interest in the Century Finance Co. ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. So it would be a logical question as to whether you have 
any interest in the Century Sporting Club which Goldberg has, which 
has the same name. 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is right, but I have none whatsoever, and I have 
never been there. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know what business it is in, do you ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Beg pardon ? 

Mr. Rice. You do not know what business the Century Athletic 
Club is in? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, I would say it was in the promoting of fights. 

Mr. Rice. Is that all ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes ; that is all I can say. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a fellow by the name of Barshak ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes; I do. 

Mr. Rice. What is hi& first name ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Mike, if that is his name. They call him Mike. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. What business is he in ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Well, years ago he was in the sporting world, as I 
say, making bets on fights or whatever it may be. They were all doing 
it ; I did it, too. 

Mr. Rice. You took bets on fights? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Not me. I didn't fool with fights. I took bets at 
the baseball games, back in 1930, and also on the horses. I will say 
that. I did. I gambled. 

Mr. Rice. During that time that you were taking action on numbers, 
were you taking horse bets, too ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No. 

Mr. Rice. Well, was it after that that you took horse bets? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, no; I didn't take horse bets after I quit, after 
1931 or 1932, 1 don't remember the exact year it was. 

Mr. Rice. Would you say you have not taken any bets of any kind 
since 1934? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No ; I wouldn't say that. I have been on the elec- 
tions, if you call it betting 

Mr. Siegel. Pardon me a moment. 

Mr. Rice. I am talking about taking bets. 

Mr. Siegel. He is talking about bets on horses. 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Never. 

Mr. Rice. You have not taken any action of any kind? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, sir; of no kind. 

Mr. Rice. During the time you were taking horse bets, did you lay 
any of them off ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you lay it off ? 



180 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Just little fellows. I wasn't a big man in town. 
Jnst small fellows. Any one of a hundred would take it in those days 
just to get a little more action. 

Mr. KiCE. You would lay off to someone in town ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't lay it off out of town? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No ; I didn't have that kind of business. 

Mr. Rice. How about Barshak? You say that he was a sporting- 
man. He would take a little action, too ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. In those day I understand he would. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever lay off bets with him ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No; I never dealt with him. 

Mr. Rice. When was the last time you have seen Barshak? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Strange as it seems, I didn't see him for 10 years, 
excepting when I was in Hot Springs in February, he was there. 

Mr. Rice. Which Hot Springs? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Arkansas. 

Mr. Rice. Near Little Rock? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Twenty or thirty miles out of Little Rock. 

Mr. Rice. At Jack Tarr's? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I don't know him. 

Mr. Rice. Where were you staying there? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. At the Arlington. 

Mr. Rice. At the Arlington ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did Barshak stay at the Arlington? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes, he was at the Arlington. 

Mr. Rice. How long were you down there ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I was there from February, and I left there March 22, 
and I was there for four good weeks, a little over 4 weeks. 

Mr. Rice. Who else was there with you ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. Mr. Sam Hamman, my pinochle partner, and the 
president of the Union Wallpaper Co., and the Atlantic Wallpaper Co., 
and a man who owns a lot of moving-picture shows, and Mr. Louis 
Rosen, or Sam Rosen, who is in the meat business here. They were all 
there, and they are the people I fraternized with. 

Mr. Rice. Did you meet Arnie Samish here? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I don't know him. I only hear about him because of 
the business we are in, but I never met him. 

Mr. Rice. You have heard about him down there ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I didn't hear about him there. We read about it in 
the papers, he is from California, and we were in the whisky business, 
and we heard that he was a lobbyist. 

Mr. Rice. You handle Schenley's, don't you? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. That is correct. 

Mr. Rice. And he represents Schenley ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I did not know that. First of all, we have only been 
with Schenley for a little over a year. 

Mr. Rice. He has represented Schenley for a number of years, hasn't 
he? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. I wouldn't know that, sir. I sure would tell you if 
I did. 

Mr. Siegel. Prior to that you handled the Calvert line? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 181 

Mr. HuRWiTz. For sixteen years prior to tliat. 

Mr. Ric^E. How about Herman Stromberg, sometimes known as 
"Nig" Rosen? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I don't know him. I never saw him. 

Mr, Rice, Was Joe Adonis down there? Joe Doto? 

Mr, HuRWiTZ, I wouldn't know, I wouldn't know him. I never 
heard of him, excepting that he is a big man in New York from 
the newspapers. I don't know who he is. I never saw him. 

Mr. Rice. Well, he does go down there occasionally. 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Oh, and Lucky Luciano was there, when I was there 
15 years ago or 12 years ago. I have been going there for 20 years. 

Mr. Rice. When Dewey was looking for him ? 

Mr, HuRWiTZ, Oh, yes. They harbored a lot of criminals in those 
days down there, 

Mr, Rice. What did Barshak say he was doing, when you met him 
down there? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. He said he was there for a rest, for a vacation, that 
he was in trouble, that they mistreated him, and something about 
$65,000 in the box, that they caught at the Emerson Hotel, and he 
claimed it was a frame, and he wanted me to listen to the thing, and 
I did. What I could, I listened to him. We didn't fraternize or go 
out at no time, not that I was ashamed of going out with anyone, 
and previous to that I did not see Barshak for 10 years, 

Mr, Rice. What did he say he was doing around Baltimore ? Just 
that he was down in Hot Springs to take the baths ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What was his general business around Baltimore? 

Mr, HuRWiTZ, He was thorougldy disgusted with the raid which 
took place at the Emerson Hotel, He claimed that he was framed, 
and he was down there vacationing, relaxing. 

Mr. Rice. He admitted, then, that he was in the bookmaking 
business ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No ; he did not admit that to me, 

Mr, Rice. But it was a bookmaking raid ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. That is right. He says he was framed. 

Mr. Rice. What did he say he was doing? What did he claim to 
be doing? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. He was down there relaxing. 

Mr. Rice. No ; I mean when he was raided, what was his business ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. He didn't say. I didn't go into that with him. 

Mr, Rice, It was just a "bum rap" ? 

Mr, HuRWiTz. Yes. He was only telling me of his hard luck, and 
about his being framed in this thing, and something about $65,000 
was involved, and the police did certain things and broke into his 
room, 

Mr, Rice. In any event 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is what he told me. 

Mr. Rice. But in any event, you have not had any business trans- 
actions with Barshak for 20 years? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Not even further back than even 20 years, I never had 
any business dealings with him. 

Mr. Rice. How about "Blinky" Fink? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I know him. 



182 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any business transactions with him? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. I wouldn't know. He came into the place once or 
twice with a customer of ours, down at our place. That is all I have 
ever seen of him in years. 

Mr. Rice. Did you produce some returns, Mr. Siegel ? 

Mr. Siegel. Yes; I have a number of returns here. 

The Chairman. Off the record. 
(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. Back on the record. 

Mr. Rice. Now, you have had no transactions with Fink ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know Ike Saperstein ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes ; I do. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat business is he in ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. The last time I saw him was 5 years ago. He was 
interested, or I was told he was interested in — he greeted me at the 
door of the Club Charles. 

Mr. Rice, Have you ever had any business transactions with Saper- 
stein ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. None whatsoever. 

Mr. Rice. How about Thomas Aversa ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. I have only known him for about 4 or 5 years, and 
that is because he was interested in the Chanticleer, the other night 
club on Charles Street, and I have seen him a few times when I go 
to the race track, but very, very seldom. I don't know Tom Aversa 
very well. 

Mr. Rice. And you have had no transactions with him ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, sir, none at all. 

Mr. Rice. Have you had any business transactions with any of the 
police department ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever loan any of them any money ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you made any gifts or gratuities to them ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Definitely sure. 

Mr. Rice. During the time you were operating ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Even then, that is right. 

Mr. Rice. Nor to any other law-enforcement officers ? 

Mr. HuRWiTz. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. There is one thing I would say, generally speaking, from 
the record, we can probably agree that his main line of endeavor is 
wholesale liquor ? 

The Chairman. He admits that. 

Mr. Rice. You have no retail outlets ? 

Mr. HuEwiTz. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And you have the RWL wine and liquor ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. In Baltimore. 

Mr. Rice. And the District Distributors in Washington ? 

Mr. HuRwiTz. Yes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 183 

Mr. Rice. And the King Wine and Liquor in Hagerstown, Md. ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. That is a wholesale business ? 
, Mr. HuRWiTZ. Those are all three wholesalers, it is a branch of the 
one in Baltimore. It is a separate license, and operates as a seperate 
unit. 

Mr. Rice. Are you an officer of all three corporations ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes, sir. I am president of them. 

Mr. Rice. And of the Century Credit and Century Finance ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. You are an officer in those ? 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. In connection with your application for an ABC license 
in the District of Columbia, in which you say you were finger- 
printed 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. Yes. 

Mr. Rice (continuing). There is a question there that asks, "Have 
you ever been arrested ?" Do you know how you answered that ? 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. No. Off the record, I thought this was not an 
arrest. It may have been. Wait a minute. This was in 1936, and 
I bought Mr. O'Connor out here in Washington in 1947, but we have 
been in business here since 1934, and this thing didn't happen until 
1936, so I had the license already then. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Will you explain that to the committee ? 

The Chairman. I think that is very clear. 

Mr. Rice. Well, just for the record, that was William O'Connor of 
Southern Distributors Co. ? 

. Mr. SiEGEL. Yes. He was in business in Washington since 1934, 
though. 

Mr. HuRWiTZ. We were in business previous to that. 

Mr. Rice. The question was, whenever you filled in this application 
for a license, there is a question there which says, "Have you been 
arrested?" 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. The answer was "No," because I was not 

Mr. SiEGEL. You see 

Mr. HuRwiTz. That was 1936. 

Mr. SiEGEL. The license was issued in 1934, and that was prior 
to the time that he was indicted. 

Mr. HuRwiTZ. That is right. 

Mr. SiEGEL. I might say in anticipation of the hearing that I 
went to the criminal court and I looked up the old case, because I 
remembered that at time there was a probe in the police depart- 
ment, and 29 officers were indicted at that time on a charge of bribery, 
and the State could not successfully prosecute those cases by reason 
of the fact that the law at that time was that anyone could claim 
immunity and refuse to testify on the ground of self-incrimination. 

In 1937 the legislature changed that law and, of course, you were 
attorney general at the time, and you know more about that than 
I will ever know, and it was in connection with that probe that Mr. 
Hurwitz was indicted, and he was indicted on March 18, 1946, 
together with a number of others 

Mr. Rice. That was the second time ? 



184 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. SiEGEL. No, the first time. It is case No. 786, Docket 1936, 
on July 1?>, 1936, and the State issued a nolle prosse as to each and 
all of the defendants. 

I made a notation of this from the docket entries Friday, having 
in mind that we were coming over here today. 

Mr. Rice. What was the nature of that charge ? 

Mr. SiEGEL. It was a conspirac3^ to try to violate the lottery laws, 
and at that time 29 officers also were indicted, and there were a number 
of codefendants in that case. 

Now, Mr. Hurwitz makes the point that he first got his liquor license 
in Washington, D. C., in 1934, and that was prior to the time that he 
was indicted. 

Mr. Hurwitz. May I add this 

The Chairman. I think it is perfectly clear. There is no use going 
over and over the same ground. 

Mr. Hurwitz. I just wanted to point out that I was in business, and 
the Government investigated me previous to this, I was in business 6 
years before that, and selling wines for medicinal and religious pur- 
poses, and I had to get a permit. 

The Chairman. Well, we are going very far afield, and I think we 
are just taking up a lot of time unnecessarily. 

Mr. SiEGEL. All right. That is all right. 

Mr. Rice. I do have another question. What is the Globe Co. ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. The Globe ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Were you ever connected with a Globe Co.? 

Mr. Hurwitz. In the whisky business, there is a Globe in Washing- 
ton in the whisky business. Oh, perhaps you have reference to the 
Globe Finance Co. 

Mr. Rice. You have some interest marked down here as having been 
received from Globe. 

Mr. Hurwitz. That is a finance company, the Globe Finance Co., 
and he asked me to invest a little money, and I invested $2,000 with 
him. 

Mr. Rice. Who is he? 

Mr. Hurwitz. That is Mr. Glick, the attorney. 

Mr. SiEGEL. Henry Glick, the attorney in Balitimore. 

Mr. Hurwitz. I think it is called the Globe Finance Co. 

Mr. Rice. Do you still haA'e money invested there ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. No ; no more. 

Mr. Rice. Did that company ever get into trouble? 

Mr. Hurwitz. I wouldn't know. I had no interest in it. 

Mr. Rice. Well, you had an investment. 

Mr. Hurwitz. As a friendly gesture, I put up $2,000. 

Mr. Rice. What became of that ? 

Mv. Hurwitz. I sold it out, he gave me my money back. 

Mr. Rice. This was in 1934. When did you sell it? 

Mr. Hurwitz. About 3 or 4 j^ears ago, if that long, maybe 2i/2 years. 

Mr. Rice. That was purely an investment, so far as you were con- 
cerned ? 

Mr. Hurwitz. Oh, yes. I had no interest at all in it. 

The Chair^nian. All right; that is all. 

Mr. Rice. Our next witness is going to be Mr. John Angersola. 

The Chairman. Will you kindly raise your right hand, please, Mr. 
Ailirersola. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 185 

In tlie presence of the Almighty God do you swear tliat the testi- 
mony you shall give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth ? 

Mr. Angersola. I do. 

The Chairman. Now, your full name, please. 

Mr. Angersola. I cannot hear you. 

The Chairman. Your full name. 

Mr. Angersola. John Angersola. 

TESTIMONY OF JOHN ANGERSOLA, MIAMI BEACH, FLA., ACCOM- 
PANIED BY FRED D. KAPLAN, ATTORNEY, NEW YORK, N. Y. 

The Chairman. What is your address? 

Mr. Angersola. 5440 LaGorce Drive, Miami Beach, Fla. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr. Rice. 

Mr. Kaplan. First of all, I would like to make a statement in 
behalf of Mr. Angersola. 

I urge that this committee, as it now sits, is not lawfully consti- 
tuted, that there is not a quorum of this committee in attendance, 
«nd that only the executive chairman of the committee. Senator 
O'Conor, is here, and we request that a quorum of the conmiittee sit 
while this witness is giving his testimony, and we urge that in the 
4ibsence of such a quorum, which we deem to be at least three members 
of the committee or more, that any proceedings had before this com- 
mittee are a nullity. 

The Chairman. Very good, counsel. Your point is noted. 

I might say that prior to your coming in, it was announced that 
this is a subcommittee meeting, and that the resolution of the com- 
mittee was referred to authorizing the Senator from Maryland as 
chairman of the committee to designate a subcommittee, which 
designation has been made. But your point is noted and, of course, 
will be duly incorporated in the record. 

Now, will you give us your name for the record, ])lease. 

Mr. Kaplan. My name is Fred D. Kaplan, 170 Broadway, New 
Y'ork City. 

I would also like to note that the witness' appearance here is pur- 
suant to a subpena served, the return date of which was extended from 
time to time by agreement between counsel for the witness and coun- 
sel for the committee, and that the appearance in no sense, other 
than the fact that the witness has so far paid his expenses for two 
trips to Washington, is considered a voluntary appearance on the 
i^art of the witness. 

The Chairman. Your point is noted, counsel. 

Will you proceed, Mr. Rice. 

Mr. Rice. For the record, I think it should be indicated tliat the 
T^'itness is entitled to his expenses to Washington, and that will be 
taken care of. 

Now, your name is Angersola ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 
" Mr. Rice. John Angersola i 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Is that your true name ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 



186 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Is that your father's name ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you use other names ? 

Mr. Angersola. King. 

Mr. Rice. King? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. John King? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How did you arrange for that name ? 

Mr. Angersola. I used that for 25, 30, maybe 40 years, since I have 
been born. It was added on from my brother down, my oldest brother. 

Mr. Rice. Your oldest brother started using the name of King? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What name do you go by now ? 

Mr. Angersola. John King. 

Mr. Rice. John King ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. On your identification card, your driver's license, and 
things like that, do you go under the name of John King ? 

Mr. Angersola. Everything is John King. 

Mr. Rice. But your true name is Angersola ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I won't say that. I have had it changed in 
the courts. 

Mr. Rice. You have had it legally changed ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. So you are now John King ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I see. Have you ever used any other names ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Well, remember. 

Mr. Angersola. It is possible. 

Mr. Kaplan. Think now. 

Mr. Rice. For instance, have you ever used the name of John Di 
Marco ? 

Mr. Angersola. Possibly I have. 

Mr. Rice. We are not interested in possibilities, Mr. King. Have 
you ever used it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer 

Mr. Kaplan. Wait a minute. 

(Counsel confers with witness.) 

Do you know whether you used it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I thought I may have used it years back. 

Mr. Kaplan. Well, put in that answer. 

Mr. Angersola. I am not sure, so why should I say it. I think I 
have used it, maybe. Well, I know in the last 15 years, if that is what 
you are referring to, I have not used it. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever used the name of John Di Marco ? 

Mr. Angersola. It could be possible, 20 years ago I may have 
used it. 

Mr. Rice. How would you account for using another name like that ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). That is the only time. 
Was that in regard to something in Detroit? 

Mr. Rice. I am asking you. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 187 

Mr. Angersola. I think I used it there. That is the only time I 
can remember the name. 

Mr, Rice. What did you use that name for, Mr. King? 

Mr. Angersola. Just that way. 

Mr. Rice. Why was it necessary to use different names ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Maybe you didn't hear his answer. 

Mr. Rice. No, I didn't. 

Mr. Kaplan. He says he thinks he used it in connection with an 
arrest in Detroit years ago, and he is thinking now that he might have 
used that name, but he has no specific recollection of what the inci- 
dent is. 

Mr. Rice. You were arrested some time ago, is that it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What w^as that about? 

Mr. Kaplan. How many years ago was that? 

Mr. Angersola. About 20 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. In Detroit? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What did they arrest you for ? 

Mr. Angersola. As a suspicious person. 

Mr. Rice. And you gave them another name ; is that it ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Just so they wouldn't know who you were ? 

Mr. Angersola. I just happened to use that name. I thought they 
would let me go, and I would just use that name. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been convicted of any offense ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What was that ? 

Mr. Angersola. Robbery. 

Mr. Rice. Robbery? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever serve time on that ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kaplan. May I ask, is the Senator getting the witness' an- 
swers ? The witness said he thinks it was robbery, 30 years ago. 

Mr. Angersola. I think it was 30 years ago. 

Mr. Kaplan. Mr. Chairman, I am not sure that the witness is being 
heard entirely by the stenographer. 

The Chairman. We have a very expert stenographer, and if he 
doesn't get it he will tell you. 

Mr. Kaplan. Well, the witness has been speaking in a low tone of 
voice. 

The Chairman. Well, he can remedy that by speaking somewhat 
louder. 

Mr. Kaplan. He is somewhat deaf. 

The Chairman. That does not prevent him from talking loudly. 

Mr. Rice.* What jail did you go to on that ? 

Mr. Angersola. The Ohio Penitentiary. 

Mr. Rice. The Ohio Penitentiary ? 

The Chairman. Keep your voice up, please. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Mr. Rice. Now then, have you ever been to any other jails? Have 
you ever been convicted of any other offenses ? 



188 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I doirt know if it would be a conviction. It 
was the time of a liquor violation. 

Mr. EiCE. What did they get you for, bootlegging? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, you could call it that, but it wasn't boot- 
legging. 

Mr. Rice. What did they call it? 

Mr. Angersola. I had a case of whisky in my car. 

Mr. Rice. Did you serve any time ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir, 

Mr. Rice. They just arrested you? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Well, you have been arrested lots of times, haven't you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well 

Mr. Rice. I just asked you about the time you went to jail on it. 

Mr. Angersola. I didn't go to jail. 

Mr. Rice. The only time you went to jail was when you went to 
the Ohio Penitentiary? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. You have been arrested a number of times outside of 
that? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. About 15 or 16 times ? 

Mr. Angersola. Possibly. 

Mr. Rice. For a number of things ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kaplan. In all fairness, I think it should be indicated when 
the last arrest took place. 

The Chairman. He can so state it. 

Mr. Kj\plan. When were you arrested last, Mr. King? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I don't know. I think it is maybe, I don't 
know, maybe 15 years ago. 

Mr. Kaplan. Fifteen year ago. 

Mr. Rice. Oh, now, wait a minute. This is 1951. 

Mr. Angersola. There w^as an indictment against me, but I never 
M'as in Cleveland. I was in Florida maybe 10 or 11 years ago, but 
they indicted me in 1932, which I knew nothing about the thing, if 
that is what you were referring to, 

Mr. Rice. You were fingerprinted in 1937. 

Mr. Angersola. That is about it, 

Mr. Rice. And you were fingerprinted again in 1939, on a charge 
of extortion. 

Mr. Angersola. That is the one I am trying to tell you about. I 
never was in Cleveland. I had been away from Cleveland since 1935 
or 1936. 

Mr, Rice, And you were arrested again in 1940 in Miami for va- 
grancy by loitering. 

Mr. Angersola. Vagrancy. 

Mr, Rice. Which they dismissed. 

Mr. Kaplan. Well, in any event, it appears that he has not been 
arrested for approximately 11 years. That is conceded. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Now, do you know a man by the name of McBride ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What is his first name? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 189 

Mr. Angersola. Arthur McBride. 

Mr. Rice. Is lie also known as Mickey ? 

Mr. Angeksola, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Mickey McBride ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. When did you first meet him? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). Maybe 25 or 30 years 
ago. 

Mr. Rice. About 25 or 30 years ago ? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes. 

JSIr. Rice. In what connection was that? Did you do some busi- 
ness for him ? 

Mr. Angersola. My brother-in-law did. 

Mr. Rice. Your brother-in-law did? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What is your brother-in-law's name? 

Mr. Angersola. Albasi, John Albasi. 

Mr. Rice. How do you spell that name ? 

Mr. Angersola. A-1-b-a-s-i. 

Mr. Rice. John Albasi did some business for him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What did he do for him ? 

Mr. Angersola. He used to be a cleaning contractor. 

Mr. Rice. And was McBride in the cleaning business ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir, he was — I think he was in the real-estate 
business at the time. In fact, he owns some property, and we cleaned 
his buildings. I worked on the job. 

Mr. Rice. You worked on the cleaning jobs? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And that is the time you met Mickey McBride? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Now then, we were talking about McBride, and you said 
that you had worked on some cleaning jobs for him. Did you ever 
have any other business with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. (conferring with counsel). 

Mr. Kaplan. The witness wishes to confer with his counsel at this 
point. 

The Chairman. Very well. 

(There was a brief interruption.) 

Mr. Angersola. I am not sure whether it was him or Mr. Polizzi that 
I had a real-estate deal with in maybe 1937 or something like that. 

Mr. Rice. Well now, a long time ago, when you were doing the 
building-cleaning work? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And you have had no business transactions directly with 
McBride, or you did not have at that time ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. You just met him at that time ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Now then, after that did you have any business trans- 
actions with him, possibly ? 

Mr. Angersola. I couldn't swear to that. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. You couldn't swear that you did not either, could you ? 

85277 — 51— pt. 13— — 13 



190 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. No. , 

Mr. Kaplan. His answer was that he may have had some real-estate 
transaction with him or with Mr. Polizzi. 

Mr. Angersola. But I am not sure. 

Mr. Kaplan. In 1937, he is not absohitely sure. 

Mr. Angersola. I talked to Mr. Polizzi more than to Mr. McBride. 

Mr. Rice. Do you connect Mr. Polizzi and Mr. McBride together? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Can't you separate them in your thinking ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, not on that. 

Mr. Rice. They are not in the same business ? 

Mr. Angersola. Not on that transaction. 

Mr. Rice. You mean it is possible that you had a transaction with 
Polizzi and McBride together ? 

Mr. Angersola. Both — I don't know — I mean, I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. What kind of a transaction would that have been? 

Mr. Angersola. Real estate. 

Mr. Rice. Buying some property ? 

Mr. Angersola, Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where? 

Mr. Angersola. In Coral Gables. 

Mr. Rice. What sort of property ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Was it open lots ? 

Mr. Angersola. Open lots; yes, sir; it was no building. 

Mr. Rice. And you think maybe that you bought some lots together 
with Mr. McBride 

Mr. Angersola. Or Mr. Polizzi ; I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Was it possible that you bought it with both of them? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes ; it could be ; it could be. 

Mr. Rice. It could be ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You could not come any closer than that ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any records ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Who keeps your records ? 

Mr. Angersola. I keep my records. 

Mr. Rice. You keep your own records? 

My. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Could you find out from your records whether j^ou did 
or not ? 

Mr. Angersola. I have not got them. 

Mr. Kaplan. I think this can be checked, and the information can 
be supplied as to real-estate transactions which he had in Coral Gables, 
and who the parties in interest were. 

Mr. Rice. Now, you say that you keep your own records? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you keep your records ? 

Mr. Angersola. I have no accountant, if that is what you mean. 

Mr. Rice. You have an accountant? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You have your own records somewhere ; don't you ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 191 

Mr. Angersola. He has got them. I get them off of him. 

Mr, Rice. Who is that, Giesey? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; I haven't seen Giesey in 15 years. 

Mr. Rice. Yon haven't seen Giesey in 15 years? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right, close to it. 

Mr. Rice. Are yon sure about it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I am almost sure ; 10 years anyhow. 

Mr. Rice. Who is your accountant now ? 

Mr. Angersola. Coleman. 

Mr. Rice. Coleman? 

Mr. Angersola. Coleman ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. In Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. In Miami ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What is his first name ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. How do j^ou get ahold of him? 

Mr. Angersola. I call him. 

Mr. Rice. He does not have a first name ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, he does ; but I don't call him by his first name. 

Mr. Rice. Where is he located in Miami? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, he is located in the telephone book. 

Mr. Rice. You just look up and find Mr. Coleman 

Mr. Angersola. He files my returns. I mean, I am trying to tell 
3'ou, I really don't know the building, because I have no occasion, or 
I very seldom call on him. In fact, he comes over and sees me. 

Mr. Rice. Where is your office? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I was at the Grand Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. You were where? 

Mr. Angersola. At the Grand Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. Now? 

Mr. Angersola. No, I was there then. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. AVhere is your office now? 

Mr. Angersola. Home. I don't have any office. 

Mr. Rice. You don't have any office now ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Is that where your records are, at home ? 

Mr. Angersola. I have no records at home. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you keep your business papers ? 

Mr. Angersola. Mr. Coleman has them. 

Mr. Rice. He has all of your business papers ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Back as far as 1937 ? 

Mr. Angersola. He may have. 

Mr. Rice. He may have? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir (conferring with attorney). 

Mr. Kaplan. Do you keep your insurance policies and things like 
that yourself? 

Mr. Angersola. Insurance policies. In fact, they have canceled 
my insurance policies. 

Mr. Rice. Let's don't have this colloquy between counsel and the 
witness. See if we cannot keep the record as straight as possible. 



192 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Now, let's go back to the time when you had Giesey. Did you ever 
have Giesey ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And what did he do for you ? 

Mr. Angersola. He kept my books. 

Mr. Rice. He kept your books ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And then what became of him ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know what became of him. 

Mr. Rice. Well, did you fire him ? 

Mr. Angersola. I just went away from Cleveland. I had no busi- 
ness in Cleveland. I have not been around Cleveland for the last 10 
years. 

Mr. Rice. So as soon as you left Cleveland you stopped doing busi- 
ness with Giesey ; is that right ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. When was that that you left Cleveland ? 

Mr. Angersola. I might have left Cleveland maybe 15 years ago, 
something like that. 

Mr. Rice. Yes ; when did you leave ? 

Mr. Angersola. About 15 years ago. 
, Mr. Rice. About 15 years ago ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. So that Giesey has not made out any returns for you in 
15 years ? 

Mr. Angersola, It might be 10. 

Mr. Rice. It might be 10? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know, about 10 years, I guess. 

Mr. Rice. About 10 years ? 

Mr. Angersola. Thai is right. 

Mr. Rice. And you have been using Coleman ever since ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Just a moment. With all due respect, Mr. Chairman, 
these last few answers were quite germane. The witness testified in 
his last few answers that he had not been in Cleveland and had no busi- 
ness interest in Cleveland for the last 10 or 15 years, that he had gone 
from Cleveland and left Cleveland entirely. That was the purport 
of his testimony in the last few questions and answers. 

The Chairman. What is your point ? 

Mr. IvAPLAN. I wanted you to have judicial cognizance of the an- 
swers. 

The Chairman. I don't need you to tell me that. 

Mr. Kaplan. Well, you were busy doing something else at the time. 

The Chairman. No, no. Are you making an objection to the ques- 
tion ? 

Mr. Kaplan'. No. 

The Chairman. Then I would prefer that you wait until a question 
is asked that you wish to object to. 

Mr. Kaplan. The question has already been answered, but you were 
engaged in doing something else. 

The Chairman. It is in the record. That is perfectly understand- 
able. 

Mr. Rice. Well, it is not clear to me whether he has used Giesey in 
the last 15 years or the last 10 years. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 193 

Did you stop using Giesey at the time you left Cleveland ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. That was the time ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. But you don't know whehter that was 10 or 15 years 
ags? 

Mr. Angersola. I would say it was about 10 years ago, at least 10 
years ago. 

Mr. Rice. That would be about 1941 ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Why did you leave Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. Why did I leave Cleveland ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. I just felt like leaving Cleveland. 

Mr. Rice. You just felt like leaving it? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. I wanted to get away from there. 

Mr. Rice. You wanted to get away from there ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. You wanted to go to Florida ? 

Mr. Angerosla. Sir ? 

Mr. Rice. You wanted to go to Florida ; is that the idea ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. I got married and I left for Florida. 

Mr. Rice. As soon as you got married, you went to Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. I had been to Florida before that. 

Mr. Rice. You had been going down there in the wintertime before 
that? 

Mr. Angersola. I cannot hear you on this ear. I cannot hear at 
all. It is only this ear that I can hear through. I can't hear on my 
left ear at all. 

Mr. Rice. You cannot hear on your left ear ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have trouble hearing me? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; I don't now. 

Mr. Rice. You heard that? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Tell me, as close as you can, when was the last time that 
you were doing business with Giesey ? 

Mr. Angersola. I would say 1940. 

Mr. Rice. About 1940? 

Mr. Angersola. Something like that. 

Mr. Rice. Now, you were in the Buckeye Catering Co. after; 
weren't you? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When was it you were in the Buckeye Catering Co. ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). 

Mr. Kaplan. The witness would like to confer with counsel. 

(There was a brief interruption.) 

The Chairman. Now, what is the answer? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer that question on the ground 
that it may incriminate me. 

The Chairman. May incriminate you of what ? 

Mr. Kaplan. May I urge, Mr. Chairman, that the witness is not 
required to state in what connection he would be incriminated, and 
that — — 



194 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. Do you care to say whether it is a State or Federal 
offense? 

Mr. Kaplan. It is a Federal offense. He fears incrimination in a 
Federal offense, and in connection witli that, I would now like to call 
your attention to the following important data : 

This witness has been alluded to in numerous pages of testimony 
conducted by this committee, in hearings conducted by this committee, 
as an interstate mobster. 

The Director of Public Safety of the City of Cleveland testified 
before this committee, before its extended life, that the witness was 
an interstate mobster. 

Certain Federal tax investigations are now pending with respect to 
the activities of this witness and his entire family. 

Senator Kefauver, who was a member of this committee, has seen 
fit to write a book, and more recently, syndicated published articles in 
the newspapers of this country, in which he has referred to this par- 
ticular witness in a like capacity, and in a press statement issued by 
you, which appears in the Washington press on Sunday, you, among 
other things, alluded to this witness in the following fashion, and you 
said: 

Previous testimony before the committee has linked these men — 

referring to the Angersola brothers, John, this witness, and his 
brother, George — 

witli the Mayfield Road gang, with headquarters in Cleveland, and later vpith 
Cleveland Syndicate racketeers, who operated major gambling houses in Ohio, 
Kentucky, Nevada, and Florida. 

The Chairman. May I see the clipping, please ? 
Mr. Kaplan. Yes. 

The Angersolas have also been associated with Philadelphia and New Jersey 
underworld figures in the operation of several hotels in Miami Beach. 

The Chairman. Thank you. 

Well, counsel, for your information, I will say that I made no such 
statement, but that does not, of course, alter the point that you prob- 
ably are alluding to, and that is that the witness has some apprehension, 
but just for your own information, I made no such statement as con- 
tained in this article. 

Mr. Kaplan. I am glad to hear that. Senator. 

The Chairman. But I again repeat that the witness maybe does not 
know that. 

Mr. Kaplan. Apart from that article; however, I say that the 
record reeks with suggestions that the witness has been in interstate 
violations of law falling under Federal jurisdiction, and he has at 
present, or he is, rather, at present, under serious tax investigation by 
the United States Government, and in a more extended capacity he is 
being investigated in the last 6 months, and upon that score he stands 
upon his constitutional prerogative, and I don't think that the witness 
is compelled, under the law, to state how the answer will tend to incrim- 
inate him. 

The Chairman. Of course, the immediate question was whether it 
was a State or Federal offense. 

Mr. Kaplan. We claim it with respect to Federal offenses. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 195 

Sugfrestions have been made that he is an interstate Federal viola- 
tor, as well as investigations that are now hovering about him dealing 
with his Federal income taxes. 

The Chairman. All right, Mr, Rice. 

Mr. Rice. I wonder if we can have the reporter go back to the 
question about the Buckeye Catering Co. That is the one that precipi- 
tated this. 

(The record w^as read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Rice. Now, in connection with the question, When were you 
in the Buckeye Catering Co., that was the one you refused to answer ; 
is that right? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Let me ask you this, are you now under indictment for 
either a Federal or State offense ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). So far as I know, none. 

Mr. Rice. You are not under indictment now, so far as you know ? 

Mr. Angersola. Does your fear of incrimination involve yourself 
alone, or yourself and other people ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Just a minute (conferring with witness). 

I maintain, Mr. Chairman, that the witness is not compelled to 
answer that question. He has stated that he refused to answer on 
the ground that the answer may tend to incriminate him, and that 
is his constitutional protection, and he has already made that answer. 

The Chairman. What does the witness say? 

Mr. Kaplan. I maintain that the Chairman should rule. 

The Chairman. Counsel, are we to understand that the w^itness, 
upon reeciving that advice from you, does avail himself of his con- 
stitutional right on that ground ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes, Your Honor. 

The Chairman. All right. 

Mr. Rice. Did the offense from which you fear prosecution occur 
more than 10 years ago? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground that it may in- 
criminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Did the offense from which you fear prosecution occur 
more than 7 years ago ? 

Mr. Kaplan. May I at this point suggest, Your Honor, Mr. Chair- 
man, humbly, that to compel the witness to determine and state in 
what fashion he may be incriminated, and the details and the factual 
data with respect to the so-called fear of incrimination would do 
away with the very privilege itself, and that these questions are 
manifestly improper under those circumstances? 

The witness has answered questions to the best of his capacity until 
this very question was put. I think that a private conference between 
you and counsel for the committee will reveal that it has a grave 
and dangerous possibility with respect to the incrimination of this 
witness, and for him now to circumvent the very protection which the 
witness has, is to deny to the witness any protection whatever. 

The Chairman. Counsel, of course, we can only pass on one question 
at a time, and obviously there is a proper question or proper series 
of questions, because the witness cannot just avail himself of that 
answer to block every conceivable question, so that there is a middle 
ground within which counsel may operate. 



196 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Now, on the last question as to whether or not it is his opinion that 
it antedated 7 years ago, does he refuse to answer ? 

Mr. Kaplan. He refuses to answer on the ground that it might 
tend to incriminate him. 

The Chairman. You do refuse to answer that question ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. KiCE. I would like to ask the Chair at this point to direct the 
witness to answer that question. 

The Chairman. Yes. The Chair will direct the witness to answer, 
and is the Chair to understand that he persists in not answering on 
the grounds set forth ? 

Mr. I^PLAN. On the grounds that I urged at the very outset — on 
all the grounds urged up to this point, and upon the further ground 
that to compel the witness to answer any question on how it would 
tend to incriminate him, or any variations or gradations of the general 
claim against self-incrimination, is to in effect invalidate his very 
protection against self-incrimination. 

The Chairman. Very good. All right. Next question. 

Mr. Rice. All right. We have a situation here where the element 
of time cannot be located even within 10 years in connection with an 
offense from which he fears prosecution. 

Are there any special circumstances, Mr. Witness, which you would 
like to submit, which would give you grounds to assert the privilege 
on your refusing to answer ? 

Mr. Kaplan. May I state this off the record ? 

The Chairman. Yes. 

(There was discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Kj^plan. I do recite for the record that this witness has no real 
protection against incriminating himself in certain tax matters, be- 
cause the statute of limitations is not tolled in certain areas of the 
United States, and it is not tolled because the tax returns are filed in a 
district other than where the taxpayer lives, therefore, the taxpayer 
never gets into the other district, and the statute sometimes can be 
held open for 15 to 20 years, and so for some wrongdoing committed 
15 years ago the witness may still be punishable and answerable. 

Mr. Rice. All right. Have you ever had any interest in a boat 
called the Wood Duck ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, I think so. 

Mr. Rice. You think you have ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

The Chairman. Will you answer out loud ? 

Mr. Angersola. I had. 

Mr. Rice. You had ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. When did you acquire your interest in the Wood Duck? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I bought it. 

Mr. Rice. You bought it. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, I bought the boat, one of us bought it. It 
could have been Fred King, or it could have been me. 

Mr. Rice. Your brother ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, but it was in the family. 

Mr. Rice. Did you put up any money to buy it? 

Mr. Angersola. I think I put the money up. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COIVIMERCE 197 

Mr. RiOE'. "Who did you buy it from ? 

Mr. Angkrsola. Who did I buy it from ? IMcBride. 

Mr. Rice. Wliich McBride? 

Mr. Angersola. Arthur JMcBride. 

Mr. Rice. "Mickey" McBride? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you remember me asking you a little while ago if 
you ever had any business transactions with McBride^ 

Mr. i^NGERsoLA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat did you say ? 

Mr. Angersola. I said that I didn't know for sure, I didn't remem- 
ber having any. 

Mr. Rice. You forgot about this Wood Duck, didn't you? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right, yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. So now you remember about the Wood DucM 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Well now, tell us what that transaction was, how that 
came about. 

Mr. Angersola. I just bought the boat off him. There was no 
transaction. I don't remember what I paid, whether it was $6,000 or 
$7,000, something like that. 

Mr. Rice. How did you get in touch with him? Where did you 
start the negotiations, in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. It might have been in Cleveland. 

Mr. Rice. Wliere did you buy it ? 

Mr. AngeI{sola. 1 really don't remember just where I started the 
negotiations, but I bought it. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon. 

Mr, Angersola. I don't remember where the negotiations started, 
whether it was in Cleveland or Florida. 

Mr. Rice. Wliere did you buy it? 

Mr. Angersol^^. I bought it and had it — well, you see, I don't re- 
member if I bought it in Cleveland or in Florida, because he had to 
come down to Florida. 

Mr, Rice. Where did you dicker with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, about 10 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Yes, but where did you dicker with McBride? Wliere 
did you talk to him about buying it? 

Mr. Angersola. That was 10 years ago. And you asked me where? 

The Chairman, Just state, if you know. 

Mr, Angersola. Yes, I bought the boat. 

The Chairman. But where, if you know ? 

Mr. Angi:rsola. I don't know. 

The Chairman. That is enough. 

Mr, Angersola, I would like to answer that question. I really 
would like to answer that question, I don't know why, but I would. 

Mr, Rice. Do you know how much you paid for it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I think it was between $6,000 and 
$7,000, if I ain't mistaken. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know where you took delivery of it? "Where did 
you get it ? Where did you first get your hands on it ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is what I don't know, 

Mr, Rice, You can't remember where it was ? 



198 ORGANIZED CRIME EN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. Florida or Cleveland. 

Mr. Kaplan. Where was the boat tied up ? 

Mr. Angersola. It was tied up in both places, it was tied up on the 
Forty-ninth Street dock, and it was tied up in Miami Beach. 

The Chairman. We will just suspend for a minute. 

(There was a brief interruption, during which time Senator Hunt 
entered the room, after which the following proceedings were had:) 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr. Rice. Will you read the last question and answer, please ? 

(The record was read by the reporter.) 

Mr. Angersola. When I said the Forty-ninth Street dock, I meant 
in Cleveland, Ohio. 

Mr. Rice. When you looked at the boat with the idea in mind of 
buying it, where was it ? 

Mr. Angersola. At the Forty-ninth Street dock. 

Mr. Rice. In Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And did you start the negotiations yourself ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember anything about it. I don't know 
if I started it, or how it was. 

Mr. Rice. Did you need a boat ? 

Mr. Angersola. I liked the boat. 

Mr. Rice. You liked it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you need one then ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Did you want one? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. You didn't want one ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't want one now. 

Mr. Rice. Then did you want one ? 

Mr. Angersola. I would have like to have it. 

Mr. Rice. So you went around and looked for one ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Well, tell us about the thing. You remember how you 
bought the boat from McBride, surely. 

Mr. Angersola. I did not go around looking for a boat. I just 
happened to like that boat, and I thought he wanted to sell it, and I 
thought I could buy it. 

Mr. Rice. After you looked at it, didn't you find out that it belonged 
to McBride, or did you already know that ? 

Mr. Angersola. I knew it belonged to McBride. 

Mr. Rice. Had you been on it before ? 

Mr. Angersola. Had I been on it before ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes, had you taken a ride with McBride on it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Is it possible ? 

Mr. Angersola. It is possible. 

Mr. Rice. After riding on it with Mr. McBride, you decided you 
liked it? 

Mr. Angersola. No. I don't remember. I couldn't say that. I 
couldn't say if I ever was on it before, but it could be possible, but I 
don't remember it. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 199 

Mr. Rice. Did you buy it without taking a ride on it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I knew the boat. 

Mr. Rice. How did you know it ? 

Mr. Angersola, It was talked about as a boat, a beautiful boat, and 
you couldn't buy anything anywhere near that for that kind of 
money. 

Mr. Rice. What was the word, why did he want to sell it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Well, it was supposed to be a good buy, wasn't it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Just tell me what you are trying to get at, and I 
will try to explain. I really mean it. Tell me what you are trying to 
get at and I will explain ; whatever you want me to say, I will say 

Mr. Rice. How it happened that you bought that boat, what were 
the circumstances ? 

Mr. Angersola. It was a fishing boat, a good boat, no other reason. 

Mr. Rice. How did you come to buy that particular one? Why 
didn't you buy one from the factory '( 

Mr. Angersola, It would cost too much. 

Mr. Rice. How did you know you could get it from McBride ? 

Mr. Angersola. What? 

Mr, Rice, How did you know you could get it from McBride ? 

Mr. Angersola, I think I knew he wanted to sell it. 

Mr. Rice. How did you know it? 

Mr, Angersola, How did I know that? How do I know anything ? 
Maybe I even spoke to him. I don't remember. You know, I mean, 
it is such a long time — if you will tell me what you want, I will say 

Mr. Rice. Were you with him on the boat? 

Mr. Angersola. Was I ever with him on the boat? 

Mr. Rice. Yes, 

Mr, Angersola, It is possible I have been, but very seldom. 

Mr, Rice. Before you bought it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You think you might have been with him? 

Mr, Angersola, I may have been. 

Mr. Rice. And you found out that he wanted to sell it ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice, And you said, "I will buy it" ? 

Mr, Angersola, No, I imagine my brother, Freddie — you see, 
Freddie was with McBride, he used to work for McBride. 

Mr. Rice. In what business ? 

Mr. Angersola. He was a circulation manager of the News, and 
Freddie was one of his road men, 

Mr, Rice, What News? 

Mr. Angersola. The News, the Daily News, Cleveland Daily News. 

Mr. Rice, He was circulation manager ? 

Mr. Angersola, He was, 

Mr. Rice. You mean McBride? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir, 

Mr, Rice. What did Freddie do ? 

Mr, Angersola. Freddie must have made the contact. I think, 
in fact, I am not even sure whether I bought it or Freddie bought it. 
That is what I told you before, 

Mr, Kaplan. He put up the money, though. 



200 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Now, it was your money? 

Mr. Angersola. What? 

Mr. Rice. It was your money ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How much money did you put up ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember if it was $6,000 or $7,000, some- 
thing like that. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have a bank account? 

Mr. Angersola. I may have had one. I don't know. Do you mean, 
did I give him a check ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. You don't think so? 

Mr. Angersola, No, sir; I don't know, but I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. Well, did you give him cash ? 

Mr. Angersola. I may have given him cash, yes, sir. I don't know, 
if I had a check, I would know myself. Sure, I might have had a 
bank account, but I don't remember whether I gave him a check or 
cash. 

Mr. Rice. "Wliere did you have your bank account at that time? 

Mr. Angersola. At that time? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. I imagine I had it in the Mercantile National Bankj 

Mr. Rice. In Miami Beach ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice, What year was that, about what year? 

Mr. Angersola. I imagine about 1940. 

Mr. Rice. About when ? 

Mr. Angersola. About 1940? 

Mr. Rice. About 1940? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And you moved all of your money down to Miami Beach 
then? 

Mr. Angersola. You can call it that. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon. 

Mr. Angersola. You can call it that. 

Mr. Rice. Well, I am not suggesting anything. I am asking you 
where your bank account was. 

Mr. Angersola. I said at Miami Beach. 

Mr. Rice. At Miami Beach ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice, You don't think you gave him a check on the Mercantile 
Bank, but you think you gave him cash? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I could have given him a check; I 
could have given him cash. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Do you keep your old check books ? 

Mr. Angersola. I did ; yes. 

Mr. Rice. How many years do you have your check books for? 

Mr. Angersol.^. Well, the last time I had — I think I had them all 
the way back — I think the bank has photostatic copies of them. 

Mr. Rice. I asked you how many years you keep your check books ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 201 

Mr. Angersola. Maybe for 4 or 5 years. 

Mr. R.ICE. Four or 5 years? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. But you Avouldn't have any check book for that, would 
you i 

Mr. Rice. Well now, you were up in Cleveland when you bought 
it, weren't you ? 

Mr. Angersola, I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. You don't remember? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know whether it was Cleveland or Miami ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever take a ride on that boat ? 

Mr. Angersola. Prior to that? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. Well 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever take a trip on it? 

Mr. Angersola. A trip ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes ; a trip. 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. You never took a trip ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. You mean a trip — now, you say a trip ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. What is the longest period of time you spent on that 
boat? 

Mr. Angersola. The furtherest trip I ever took was to Bimini and 
back. 

Mr. Rice. How many hours would that take ? 

Mr. Angersola. Four hours, maybe 5 hours. 

Mr. Rice. And that is the longest trip you ever took on that boat? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Rice. Whose boat was it ? Who took title to it ? 

Mr, Angersola. I imagine I did. 

Mr. Rice. You imagine you did ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Well, who did do it? 

Mr. Angersola, My wife or I, 

Mr. Rice. Fred did not take it? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't think so. I think my wife 

Mr. Rice. You think it was yourself ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think my wife. 

Mr. Rice. What is your wife's name? 

Mr. Angersola. Amy. 

Mr. Rice. Amy ? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes. 

Mr, Rice. How long did you have it? 

Mr. Angersola. The boat? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I must have had it about 5 years. 
(At this point Senator O'Conor left the room and Senator Hunt 
presided as acting chairman.) 

Mr. Rice. And then what became of it ? 



202 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr, Angersola. Well, I gave a fellow — a fellow was going to 
charter it. 

Mr. Rice. I beg your pardon. 

Mr. Angersola. He was going to use it as a charter boat, and he 
gave me $2,500. He started to charter the boat for 50 percent of it. 
We were going in, and he w^ould charge it, because the boat was too 
big an expense for me, and I said, "Maybe you can make some money. 
You can make a living and I can make a little interest." 

And he said, "All right." 

Now, the boy's name was Chuck Regan. 

Mr. Rice. Down in Florida? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. He chartered the boat. Then the 
war came along, and the Coast Guard took it over. After the Coast 
Guard took it over, he gave me the boat back, and I gave him some 
money back. I think I gave him $2,000 back, and the longest trip I 
ever took on it, I went to Bimini, and that was the longest trip I ever 
made. I think you are referring to an article that the boat went to 
Cuba, Mexico, or whatever it was. There never was no such thing, 
never, on my word, you have got that, and at no time was there any- 
one, like they said, I read the same article, and I think that is why I 
told you, if you tell me about the article that the boat went to Mexico, 
and all that baloney, the newspaper wrote it up. I seen that article, 
and there was never no such thing. 

Mr. Rice. What became of the boat ? 

Mr. Angersola. Mr. Polizzi has it. 

Mr. Rice. Now then, when did you sell it to — which Polizzi was it? 

Mr. Angersola. A1 Polizzi. 

Mr. Rice. "Big A1"? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And you sold it to him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When was that ? 

Mr. Angersola. About 4 years ago ? 

Mr. Rice. About when ? 

Mr. Angersola. Four years ago. 

Mr. Rice. About 1947 ? 

Mr. Angersola. 1946 or 1947. 

Mr. Rice. When did you first meet Al Polizzi ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is back a long time; you are taking me back 
close to 40 years. 

Mr. Rice. Forty years ago? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; I said close, anywhere between there — 35 years, 
anyhow. 

Mr. Rice. Were you ever in business with Polizzi ? 

Mr. Kaplan (conferring with witness). The witness would like to 
answer this question in a limited way, and exert his constitutional 
privilege with respect to part of the answer. In other words, he was 
in certain real-estate business with Mr. Polizzi. 

Mr. Rice. Then the answer to that question is "Yes." And the ques- 
tion was. Were you ever in business with Polizzi ; then the answer is 
"Yes." 

Mr. Kaplan. No, he wants to state in answer to that question that 
he was in the real-estate business with him, and in the hotel business 
with him, and with respect to any other business, he would like to 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 203 

assert his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination, and more 
particnlarly may I again call your attention to the off-the-record dis- 
cussion dealing "with the Buckeye Catering Co., the same dangers are 
inherent in giving that answer in this question as were inherent in the 
other questions relating to the Buckeye Catering Co. 

Mr. Rice. Off the record. 

(There was discussion off the record.) 

Senator Hunt. Back on the record. 

Mr. Rice. Let us explore that Wood Duck transaction a little fur- 
ther. May we take it from his answer that he knows Al Polizzi ^nd 
has transacted some business with him ? What was the deal about the 
Wood Duck, how did it happen that Polizzi took the Wood Duck? 

Mr. Angersola. He liked the boat. 

Mr. Rice. He liked the boat ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And he had taken a ride on it? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, yes; he went fishing a number of times. 

Mr. Rice. A number of times ? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, yes. 

Mr. Rice. He was a friend of yours ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And you wanted to sell it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How much did he pay for it ? 

Mr, Angersola. I think it was $5,000. I don't remember just what 
it was. I think he gave me a check, but I just don't recall the figure. 

Mr. Rice. Did you get your money out of it ? Did you lose money or 
make money ? 

Mr. Angersola. I lost very little money, I lost a little. 

Mr. Rice. You just lost a little money? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And he gave you a check ? 

Mr. Angersola. Possibly. 

Mr. Rice. You think he gave you a check for about $5,000? 

Mr. Angersola, I think so. 

Mr. Rice. What did you do with the check ? 

Mr. Angersola. I must have deposited it. 

Mr. Rice. You must have deposited it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where ? 

Mr. Angersola. In the bank. 

Mr. Rice. In the Mercantile Bank ? 

Mr. Angersola. I must have. 

Mr. Rice. What name do you have on your account ? 

Mr. Angersola. John King. 

Mr. Rice. Is that a joint account with your wife ? 

Mr, Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did she have a separate account? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. In the same bank? 

Senator Hunt. Mr. King, keep your voice up. It is a little diffi- 
cult to hear you. 

Mr. Rice. Did you say she had an account there ? 



204 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. Where does she have an account ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know where your wife has an account ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know whether it is the Federal Trust or 
First Federal. 

Mr. Rice. Is it at Miami Beach, a Miami Beach bank ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. The First Federal ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Can you draw checks on her account ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know whether it is First Federal, you know, 
but I think it is First Federal, I am almost sure. 

Mr. Rice. Can you draw checks on her account ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You can ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. On her account ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. So that her account is a joint account? 

Mr. Angersola. We both can sign it ; that is right. 

Mr. Rice. You both can sign it ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you ever do that? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you ever put money in that account ? 

Mr. Angersola. Do I ever give her money ? 

Mr. Rice. Do you ever put money in her account ? 
'Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Where does her money come from ? 

Mr. Angersola. Where does it come from ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. I give it to her. 

Mr. Rice. She does not work ? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; I give it to her. 

Mr. Rice. So your money goes into her account ? 

Mr. Angersola. You asked me if I deposited money in her ac- 
count, and I myself don't deposit it. Is that what you are asking me? 

Mr. Rice. Well, all the money that goes into her account comes from 
you, doesn't it? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't say that. 

Mr. Kaplan. I think that is a conclusion. 

Mr. Rice. Well, let's find out. 

Mr. Angersola. You asked me if I deposited the money in her 
account, and I said I did not deposit it, but I gave her money. She 
may deposit it, but I don't deposit it. 

Mr. Rice. So far as you know, she doesn't have any other source of 
income ? 

Mr. Angersola. She has some income. 

Mr. Rice. What is that from? 

Mr. Angersola. Some stocks. 

Mr. Rice. Are those her own stocks that you gave her or are thev 
her own? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 205 

Mr. Angersola. They are her own. 

Mr. Rice. That she had before you married her? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know if she had them before I married her. 
She had money. I didn't ask her how much money she had, and I 
didn't ask her to this day how much money she has got. 

Mr. Rice. When you married lier did she own tliose stocks? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know\ 

Mr. Rice. Yes ; you do. 

Mr. Angersola. She had money. I don't know what stocks she has. 
T don't know if she has the same stocks or what. 

Mr. Rice. She has bought stock since you have been married, hasn't 
she? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And you know about that ? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And that was with money you gave her ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. She had some of her own money and I have 
given her some, too. 

Mr. Rice. You might have given her some, too ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. In any event, she does not work, she does not have income 
other than from her investments ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr, Rice. So any money going into her bank account will either 
come from you are from her own investments ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, what other bank accounts do you have ? 

Mr. Angersola. Wliat other bank accounts ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. None. 

Mr, Rice, That is the only one ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a safe-deposit box ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir, 

Mr. Rice. You do ? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; I don't think I have, I think I had one. I 
don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Where was that ? 

Mr. Angersola. At the same place. 

Mr. Rice. Did you close that out ? 

Mr. Angersola. The same bank. 

Mr. Rice. I say, did you close that box out ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know if I closed it out or not. I don't 
remember. I don't think I have. 

Mr. KL4PLAN. Have you used it in the last few years ? 

Mr. Angersola. No', I have not used it in tlie last year, anyhow. 

Mr. Kaplan. Is there anything in it now ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I don't think so. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a key to it ? 

Mr. Angersola. It could be. I think I have a key. 

Mr. Rice. You think you have a key ? 



;77— 51— pt. 13- 



206 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I don't remember. No, this is the truth, Mr. 
Chairman, I really don't remember if I gave it in, because it was under 
my brother's name, and on my own 

Mr. KiCE. It is a joint box ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. With which brother ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think it was my wife and I had it joint, now. I 
don't know if she has the key yet or if I have it. I haven't got it 
with me, and if I have it it is at home. 

Mr. Kaplan. Did you ever have a vault in your own name ? 

Mr. Angersola. In my own name? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. No, not that I remember. 

Mr. Rice. You don't have any recollection of closing out that box, 
do you ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, I don't. 

Mr. Rice. It is still active, so far as you know ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think so. 

Mr. Rice. You are still paying rent on it, aren't you ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think so. 

Mr. Rice. What do you have in the box ? 

Mr. Angersola. I have money in it. 

Mr. Rice. Cash money ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How much cash money ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that it is a little bit difficult to 
accept that as an answer. 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I have no money in it now. 

Mr. Rice. You have no money there ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Oh, you did have money in there ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What became of the money ? 

Mr. ANGERS0L.V. I might have bought real estate, I don't remember 
just what I used it for. 

Mr. Rice. But you don't have any in there now ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Kaplan. Might I call your attention to the fact that he says 
he has not used it in the last year at all; it was a joint vault? 

Mr. Rice. When was the last time you had cash money in there ? 

Mr. Kaplan. When did you use the box last; do you know? (Con- 
ferring with witness.) 

May I have the last question, please ? 

Mr. Rice. When was the last time you had cash money in the box ? 

Mr. Angersola. It might have been 3 or 4 years ago, 3 years ago, 
3 or 4 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. And your best recollection is that you took it out in 
connection with a real-estate transaction? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What do you have in the box now ? 

Mr. Kaplan. What do you have in the box ? 

(Mr. Angersola conferring with counsel.) 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 207 

Mr. Kaplan. The witness would like to consult with counsel. The 
witness says he has nothing in the box. He says he doesn't think he 
has anything. That is his answer. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a will ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You doji't have a written will ? 

Mr. ANGERSoKtV, No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any stocks ? 

Mr. Angersola. (No response.) 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any stocks, any investments ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. Well, I mean, I haven't bought any stocks 
for so long. I had stocks. I don't even know if I have them yet. 

Mr. Kaplan. How many years ago did you buy the last stock? 

]Mr. Angersola. I don't know if I bought it or if my wife bought it. 

Mr. Kaplan. He doesn't know if he bought it or if his wife bought 
the stock. But what was the last transaction you can remember? 

Mr. Angersola. The last one I can remember is about 15, maybe 
longer than that, maybe 16 or 17 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. How would you find out if you had any or not; what 
would you do if you had to find out whether you had any stock or not ? 

Mr. Angersola. What would I do ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. They generally send you dividend checks. 

Mr. Rice. They send you a dividend check ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any stock dividends? 

Mr. Angersola. I didn't get no dividend check. 

Mr. Rice. So you don't know whether you have got stock or not ? 

Mr. Angersola. I remember that I bought some kind of stock, 

Mr. Rice. What kind of stock did you buy ? 

Mr. Angersola. Maybe a thousand dollars that I invested. 

Mr. Rice. In what stock? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't recall the name of the stock. 

Mr. Kaplan. Was it Paramount Pictures? 

Mr. Angersola. No, Paramount I bought 20 years ago. This is — 
some fellow said I should buy this stock. It wasn't on the stock mar- 
ket. 

Mr. Rice. What sort of stock was it, oil stock ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think I paid 60 cents a share. 

Mr. Rice. What was it, gold ? Was it a gold mine ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. What was it? 

Mr. Angersola. It was supposed to be — I don't know — it must be at 
least 5 or 6 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Well, you invested money, and you might lose the money, 
but you thought you might make some. What kind of stock was it ? 
What kind of a corporation ? 

Mr. Kaplan. You must realize that this was only a thousand dol- 
lar's worth of stock. 

Mr, Angersola. That is the amount 

Mr. Rice, I am interested in the business they were in. 

Mr. Angersola. I think I bought it, it averaged around about $600 
or $700. 



208 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Yes. What sort of business was it ? 

Mr. Angersola. What? 

Mr. Rice. What business was it? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. He just give me the name of it, 
and I sent over and I got it. 

Mr. Kaplan. Who has the certificates, the pieces of paper ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Kaplan. You have not got them ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Kaplan. Did you ever get them yourself? 

Mr. Angersola. I got it, but I don't remember what become of it. 
I don't think it is any good. The last I heard of it, I think it was 
35 cents. 

Mr. Rice. What was it, oil ? Was it oil ? 

Mr. Angersola. I could not tell you what it was. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know what it was ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, just the name of the company, and I don't re- 
member what it was, whether it was oil, or like you said, gold or brass, 
I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Who owned it before you ? Who sold it to you ? Who is 
the broker ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know that either. 

Mr. Rice. Who did you buy it from ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think my wife bought it. 

Mr. Rice. Oh, your wife bought it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think I made her get it. 

Mr. Rice. You think you made her get it? 

Mr. Angersola. 1 know it sounds so fishy, you know, this whole 
thing, but it is something that doesn't amount to anything in the first 
place, whatever it is. I don't know what it could have to do with this 
whole thing, and I really cannot recall, because my memory is not 
too keen. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know what city you were in when you bought it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What city ? 

Mr. Angersola. Florida. 
' JNIr. Rice. Where ? 

Mr. Angersola. Miami. 

Mr. Rice. Miami? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Miami ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What is the man who interested you in this stock ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember just who it was. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know who it was that told you about it ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know who it was that recommended it to you ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is what I say, I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know who that was either ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is the one who recommended it. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever get a dividend check from it ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You never got 1 penny from it? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 209 

Mr. KiCE. Do you still have the stock certificates? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. If yon did have it, where wonld you have it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I wonld have it in the drawer. 

Mr. Kaplan. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that the witness has 
already testified that the last time he heard of the stock it was worth 
35 cents a share, and he invested approximately $000 in the stock 
and didn't know whether he took title to the stock in his own or his 
wife's name. 

Mr, Rice. How much was it a share when you bought it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think about 60 cents. 

Mr. Rice. And it dropped to 35 ? 

Mr. Angersola. Thirty or thirty-five. 

Mr. Rice. How did you find that out? 

Mr. Angersola. Some fellow told me about it. 

Mr. Rice. Who told you about it ? 

Mr. Angersola. The same fellow, whoever it was. I just don't 
remember who it wn.s. 

Mr. Rice, Yes. 

Mr. Angersola, That was about 5 or 6 yeai-s ago, 

Mr, Rice, And you think you have the certificates in a drawer? 

Mr. Angersola. I would have it some place in a drawer; yes. 

Mr, Rice, Where ? In what house ? 

Mr. Angersola. Home ; my house, in a desk. 

Mr. Rice. In a desk ? 

Mr. Angersola, Yes, 

Mr, Rice, Do you have anything else in that drawer ? Do you have 
any bonds in there ? 

Mr, Angersola, No, sir, 

Mr, Rice, Do you have any Government bonds ? 

Mr, Angersola, No, sir, 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever buy any Government bonds? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice, What did you do with those ? 

Mr, Angersola, I gave tliem to my children. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you keep those? 

Mr. KaplxVN. He says he gave them to his children. 

Mr. Angersola. My wife has them, 

Mr. Rice. Your wife has them ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, 

Mr. Rice. Where does she keep them ? 

Mr. Angersola. I think in the safe deposit box. 

Mr. Rice. What else is in that safe deposit box ? Do you have any 
insurance policies ? 

Mr. Angersola. It might be. 

Mr, Rice, It might be ? 

Mr, Angersola, I might have some policies. 

Mr. Rice. But you don't know whether you have any insurance or 
not? 

Mr. Angersola. No, I have no insurance. They canceled my in- 
surance. Nobody wanted to insure me, 

Mr, Rice. Nobody wanted to insure you ? 

Mr, Angersola, Yes. 



210 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Why? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You know better than that. 

Mr. Angersola. Since this committee, my insurance has been can- 
celed, even on my automobile. 

Mr. Rice. Since the committee ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr, Rice. We have nothing to do with insurance. 

Mr. Angersola. I know you have not, but I know I have been in- 
sured by one company for the last 13 or 14 years, and I got a can- 
cellation. 

Mr. Rice. What type of insurance was that? 

Mr. Angersola. On my automobile. 

Mr. Rice. How about on your life ? 

Mr. Angersola. I have none. 

Mr. Rice. You don't have any life insurance? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. The insurance you are talking about that was canceled^ 
that was on your automobile ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What company was that? 

Mr. Angersola. Kelley. 

Mr. Rice. Kelley ? 

Mr. Angersola. Sheriff Kelley. After he took office, he canceled 
my insurance. 

Mr. Rice. Sheriff Kelley down in Dade County handled it? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. He canceled it after he took office? 

Mr. Angersola. He insured me for over 15 years. 

Mr. Rice. On your car? 

Mr. Angersola. On everything. 

Mr. Rice. What else besides your car? 

Mr. Angersola, My home. 

Mr. Rice. Fire insurance? 

Mr. Angersola, Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And business ? 

Mr. Angersola. And business. 

Mr. Rice. After he took office he canceled everything ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Kaplan. And then they canceled Sheriff Kelley. 

Mr. Angersola. I have the letter home, but I know it was canceled. 

Mr. Rice. What was the general idea about it, what did it say? 

Mr. Angersola. Something like a bad risk. 

Mr. Rice. They said you were a bad risk from there on out ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did they say they didn't care to do business with you? 

Mr. Angersola. I just don't recall. 

Mr. Rice. You have this house at LaGorce Drive, don't you, at 5440 ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Is that in your name? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Or is that joint with your wife? 

Mr. Angersola. My wife and I. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 211 

Mr. Rice. In your wife's name? 

Mr. Angersola. Either her, or both of us. Her, I think. I don't 
know whether it is her alone or both of us. If anything, it is her alone, 
or both of us. 

Mr. Rice. But it was your money that bought it, though, wasn't it? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How nnich did you pay for it ? 

Mr. Angersola. $40,000. 

Mr. Rice. Did you pay that in cash ? 

Mr. Angersola.- $40,000 or $45,000 ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You paid that in cash ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you get the cash ? 

Mr. Angersola. I had it. 

Mr. Rice. You had it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you have it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Home. 

Mr. Rice. Home ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Wliere? 

Mr. Angersola. I had it in a box at home. 

Mr. Rice. At the bank ? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; at my home. 

Mr. Rice, Did you have a box at home ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. A strong box ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Kaplan. Was that all paid at one time, that $40,000. 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Kaplan. It was paid out over a period of time ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Now, let's go over that. Wliat year did you buy the 
house, approximately ? 

Mr. Angersola. Four years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Four years ago ? 

Mr. Angersola. Four or five years ago. 

Mr. Rice. And you were living in another house then, weren't you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. That was what, Alton Road ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you sell the Alton Road house ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You don't own that any more ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And you sold the Alton Road house — well, you bought 
the La Gorce Drive first, didn't you, before you sold the other ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. T\nio was the person you did business with on the house 
on LaGorce Drive ? Who did you buy it from ? 

Mr. Angersola. Mr. Delmar. 

Mr. Rice. Mr. Who? 

Mr. Angersola. Delmar. 



212 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Delmar? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Was he a real-estate man ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Did you do business with him directly or through a real- 
estate company ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I did business with Delmar's lawyer. 

Mr. Rice. What was his name? 

Mr. Angersola. Delmar was the owner of the house. 

Mr. Rice. He was the owner? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Kaplan. He did business with his lawyer. 

Mr. Angersola. And I bought off Delmar. 

Mr. Rice. And you paid him ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. And you paid him $40,000 cash ? 

Mr. Angersola.' $40,000 or $45,000. 

Mr. Kaplan. But he did not say he paid it at one time ? 

Mr. Rice. Tell us how you paid it. 

Mr. Angersola. I gave him 20, and I gave him, I think, 10 more. 
I bought it all within the year, I paid it off. 

Mr. Rice. You gave him 20 and 10 and 10 ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And all that was cash? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Wliy didn't you give it to him all at once ? 

Mr. Angersola, Maybe I didn't have it. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Well, did you have it ? 

Mr. xIngersola. I might have had it invested some other place, I 
don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. But you at least had $20,000 when you started ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. AVhere did you get that money ? 

Mr. Angersola. I had it. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you get it from ? 

Mr. Angersola. I have had it for years. 

Mr. Rice. Yes; you had it, but where did you get it from in the 
first place ? What business were you in ? 

Mr. Angersola. He is coming back to the same thing again. 

Mr. Kaplan. One moment. 

Mr. Angersola. I know, that is what they are leading up to, I know 
that. 

Mr. Kaplan. Will you do me a favor and keep still, please ? 

Mr. Angersola. That ain't fair. 

Mr. Kaplan. The witness wants permission to consult with counsel. 

Senator Hunt. Go right ahead. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Mr. Kaplan. The witness refuses to answer that question on the 
ground that it would tend to incriminate him. 

Mr. Rice. All right. I will ask the Chair to direct the witness 
to answer this question. 

Mr. I^plan. Before the Chair directs the witness to answer this 
question, I would like to have a word to say to him, and to you also, 
Mr. Rice. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 213 

Senator Hunt. Off the record. 

(Discussion off' the record.) 

Senator Hunt. On the record. 

Mr. Rice. I believe the last question was a suggestion to the Chair 
that the witness be directed to answer the question. 

Senator Hunt. Yes. The Chair directs the witness to answer the 
question 

Mr. Kaplan. And the witness refuses to answer the question upon 
the grounds as urged by his counsel throughout this entire inquiry, 
and upon the additional ground that the answer will tend to in- 
criminate him. 

Mr. Rice. Is that agreeable to you ? 

Senator Hunt. Let the witness answer the question. 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer the question on the ground it 
may incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. He has concurred in his counsel's suggestion ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a man by the name of Little Augie Pisano ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And you also know a man by the name of Carfano, or 
you know him by the name of Carfano ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Who is he? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, who is he ? He is related to a man I used 
to know by the name of Jimmy Kelly. 

Mr. Rice. In the Village ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Have you ever had any business transactions with 
Little Augie ? 

Mr. Angersola. Originally, no ; afterward, yes. 

Mr. Rice. What transactions have you had with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Him, I didn't have any, but I had it with Jimmy 
Kelly, and through Jimmy Kelly dying, he took over Jimmy Kelly, 
he represented Jimmy Kelly. 

Mr. Rice. Yes; and what transactions have you had with Little 
Augie ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I could put it that I had had transactions 
with Jimmy Kelly, whichever way you want to put it. 

Mr. Rice. Tell us about Little Augie, what business have you done 
with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. He took over his father-in-law's business in the 
Grand Hotel, and the Raleigh Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. Down in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. So that he had a financial interest in the Raleigh and 
the Grand Hotel? 

Mr. Kaplan. The answer was that Jimmy was the one who had the 
financial interest. 

Mr. Rice. And Little Augie took it over when he died ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. So he continued in it, and you were in it. 

Mr. Angersola. He had him fronting for him, taking care of liis 
end. 



214 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. When was the first year you were in tlie Grand Hotel ? 

Mr. Angersola. The Grand Hotel ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. I never was in the Grand Hotel 

Mr. Rice. Didn't you say you had business interests with Little 
Aug'ie in the Grand Hotel and the Raleigh ? 

Mr. Angersola. I meant the Wofford and the Raleigh^ not the 
Grand. 

Mr. Kaplan. The Wofford is the hotel. 

Mr. Angersola. It was a mistake on my side. I meant to say the 
Wofford and the Raleigh. 

Mr. Rice. Do you want to say that you never had any interest in the 
Grand Hotel, just to make it real clear? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What about the 

Mr. Kaplan. Wait a minute until I ask the witness somethin,g. 

Mr. Angersola. You mean today ? 

Mr. Rice. Any time. 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, no. I am the owner of the Grand Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. You are the owner of the Grand Hotel now 't 

Mr. Angersola. Today; yes. Five years ago, no; 3 years ago, 4 
years ago, 3 or 4 years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Did Carfano ever have any interest in the Grand Hotel 
with you ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Let's go back to the Wofford again. Carfano had an 
interest in the Wofford through Jimmy Kelly ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When did you first acquire your interest in the Wofford? 

Mr. Angersola. 1940, 1 think. 

Mr. Rice. 1940? 

Mr. Angersola. 1939 or 1940. 

Mr. Rice. 1939 or 1940? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How did you happen to get into the Wofford ? 

Mr. Angersola. Through Tom Cassera. 

Mr. Rice. Who is he ? 

Mr. jVngersola. Some gentleman in Florida. 

Mr. Rice. He interested you in that ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Now, then, you got in there in partnership with some 
people, didn't you ? 

Mr, Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Who were they ? 

Mr. Angersola. Mr. Kelly. 

Mr. Rice. Kelly — who else ? 

Mr. Angersola. And myself and Mr. Cassera. 

Mr. Rice. Kelly, Cassera, and you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You were the only three ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. When Kelly died. Little Augie took over ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 215 

Mr. Rice. Do you still have an interest in there ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When did you dispose of that ? 

Mr. Angersola. When Cassera come back — when Mrs. Wofford 
started to sue over the hotel. 

Mr. Rice. Yes ; I think the record is clear that Mrs. Wofford finally 
<jot the hotel back. Did you ever have any interest in the Yorkshire 
Club? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes ; I did. 

Mr. Rice. When was that ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). I refuse to answer that 
on the ground it may tend to incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. All right, sir. What is — or rather, where was the York- 
shire Club? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Kaplan. You don't know. 

Mr. Anregsola. No ; I don't. 

Mr. Rice. Did you say, "I don't know" ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir ; I don't. 

Mr. Rice. You remember a little while ago you said you had an 
interest in it ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have an interest in something that you did not 
know where it was ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Kaplan. Be very careful from now on and listen to the questions 
before you answer. 

Mr. Angersola. You know, I am talking truthfully. 

Mr. Kaplan. No, no; just answer the questions as they are put 
to you. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. You said you had an interest in it. You said that, 
didn't you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And now you say you don't know where it is, and didn't 
know where it was ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know 

Mr. Kaplan. He says he didn't know and doesn't know. 

Mr. Rice. How did he know what I was talking about when I 'sug- 
gested that to you ? 

Mr, Angersola. Because I remember I filed for that place. 

Mr. Rice. You did what? 

Mr. Angersola. I filed for 1 year, and I give it up. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. You filed? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What did you file? 

(Mr. Angersola conferring with counsel.) 

Mr, Kaplan. He filed income, that is his answer. 

Mr. Rice. You filed an income tax for it? 

Mr. Angersola, Yes, 

Mr. Kaplan. We have to treat each question separately at this stage 
of the examination, Mr, Examiner. 

Mr. Rice, You filed an income-tax return, is that right? 

(Mr. Angersola conferring with counsel.) 



216 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Kaplan. The witness would like to consult with counsel with 
respect to this line of inquiry, and have the last two questions and 
answers reread, please. 

Senator Hunt. That may be done. 

(Record read.) 

Mr. Rice. Where was the Yorkshire Club ? 

Mr. Kaplan. The witness has already answered that he didn't know, 
Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Hunt. Well, let the witness answer, Counsel. 

Mr. Kaplan. All right. 

Senator Hunt. Really, you are not under examination. Please let 
the witness talk. 

Mr. Kaplan. No; but 

Mr. Angeksola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You want to say that you don't know where the York- 
shire Club was ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir; I have never been there. I have never 
seen the place. 

Mr. Rice. What was it ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel.) I refuse to answer that 
question on the ground it may incriminate me, 

Mr. Rice. How did you acquire your interest in the Yorkshire Club ? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Rice. You have answered that you had an interest in it. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How did you get that interest? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Rice. I would like to suggest to the Chair that he direct the 
witness to answer that, in view of the fact that the witness has dis- 
cussed his interest in it, and I think that he is now compelled to tell 
the source of his interest in the Yorkshire Club. 

Mr. ICvPLAN. May I suggest 

Senator Hunt. The acting chairman directs the witness to answer 
the question. 

Mr. Kaplan. May I say that the mere fact that the witness says 
he had an interest in something does not mean that all other questions 
relating to that interest cannot be incriminating, nor has he opened 
the door, nor has he lost his privilege by saying that he had an interest. 
The mere statement, "I had an interest," does not constitute anything 
incriminating, in his opinion or in my opinion, but questions dealing 
with, "How did you get the interest, where did you get the interest, 
what did you pay for the interest, how did you dispose of the interest," 
and so on and so forth, and "How much money did you make," are 
incriminating, and the witness feels he has the right of urging his 
constitutional privilege. 

Senator Hunt. The acting chairman restates his direction to the 
witness to answer the question. 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Rice. What do you mean by interest? You said you had an 
interest in there. What do you mean by that ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 217 

Mr. AxGERSOLiV. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Rice. How did 3011 know what I was talkino; about when I 
asked you if you had any interest in the Yorkshire Chib? 

Mr. Angersola. I refused to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Rice. You have heard of the Yorkshire Club? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know Moe Dalitz ? 

Mr. Angersola. Do I know Moe who? 

Mr. Rice. Moe Dalitz. 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Sometimes known as Davis ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Kaplan. Do you know him personally? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Who is he ? 

Mr. Angersola. Who is he? 

Mr. Rice. "VVlio is he ? 

Mr. Angersola. He is a human being. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know who he is? 

Senator Hunt. Keep your voice up. The reporter is having a 
very difficult time hearing you. 

Mr. Kaplan. He says that he is a human being. 

Mr. Rice. He is a human being? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever spoken with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever had any business transactions with him? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrim- 
inate me. 

Mr. Rice. How about Morris Kleinman ? 

Mr. Angersola. Do I know him ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You do know him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes^, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever had any business transactions with Klein- 
man? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the same grounds. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a man by the name of Lou Rotlikopf ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And how long have you Imown him ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with his attorney). Fifteen or twenty 
years. 

Mr. Rice. When was the last time you saw him ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't recall. 

Senator Hunt. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

(At this point Senator Hunt left the room and Senator O'Conor 
reentered the hearing room and resumed the chair.) 



218 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The Chairman. You may proceed. 

Mr. KicE. You don't remember the last time you saw him? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr, Rice. Do you know where it was? 

Mr. Angersola, It might have been in Florida. 

Mr. Rice. It might have been in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You don't remember where it was? 

Mr. Angersola. No, 

Mr, Rice. You know you have seen him in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you see him in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember, 

Mr. Rice. You don't remember? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; I don't. 

Mr. Rice. Do you remember any place you saw him in Florida 2 

Mr. Kaplan. In his lifetime, you mean ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. In my lifetime 2 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. I ate dinner with him. 

Mr. Rice. Where? 

Mr. Angersola. In Florida. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever eat dinner in Winnie's Little Club with 
him? 

Mr. Angersola, I may have. I don't know if he was there when 
Winnie's Little Club was there. Yes; he might have been there, you 
know when you are bringing me back to now, you are bringing me 
back almost 10 years. 

Mr, Rice, Yes, Now you bring me up a little bit. When was the 
last time you saw him in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any interest in Winnie's Little Club ? 

Mr. Angersola. Did I ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did he have an interest in it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Did he ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. No, 

Mr. Rice. Was there any gambling in Winnie's Little Club ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr, Angersola, Positively. 

Mr. Kaplan. Off the record, I can tell you that there was not. 

Mr. Angersola. It was just an eating place. 

Mr. Kaplan. That is what it was, 

Mr, Rice. How about the Brook Club; have you ever been in the 
Brook Club? 

Mr. Angersola. I have never been there. 

Mr. Rice. You never went there? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. How about the Chez Paree. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 219 

Mr. Angersola. I have been in there. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have any interest in that? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you still have an interest? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Is there gambling in there? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When you were talking about the Wofford Hotel, did you 
ever see Charlie Fischetti in the Wofford Hotel ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You saw Charlie Fischetti in there ? 

Mr, xVngersola. I might have seem him in there. I have seen him 
lots of places. . 

Mr. Rice. You have seem him lots of places ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. But you do remember seeing him in the Wofford ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I didn't go there too often myself. 

Mr. Rice. Did you see Rothkopf in the Wofford ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't think I have. 

Mr. Rice. You don't think you have ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have any business transactions with Roth- 
kopf? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). Not that I can remem- 
ber. 

Mr. Rice. Is it possible that you did have? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Wasn't he in the Yorkshire Club with you ? 

(Mr. Angersola conferred with counsel.) 

The Chairman. What is your answer ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I think I should not answer on the ground 
it may incriminate me — that Yorkshire Club thing. 

The Chairman. You refuse to answer ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know whether Rothkopf was in the Yorkshire 
Club or not ? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Rice. Is it possible he was ? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever heard of the Ohio Villa ? 

Mr. Angersola. I have heard of it. 

Mr, Rice. You have heard of it ? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You have heard of the Ohio Villa ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Wliere was it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, offhand, I couldn't describe it. It was a way 
outside on the outskirts of Cleveland. 

Mr. Rice. Were you ever in the Ohio Villa ? 

Mr. Angersola. I might have been there once or twice in my life. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. What went on in the Ohio Villa ? 

Mr. Angersola. Nothing that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Nothing? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 



220 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. What was the business of it? 

Mr. Angersola. A dining place. 

Mr. Rice. A dining place? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And, didn't they have gambling there ? 

Mr. Angersola. Not that I remember. 

Mr. Rice. Are yon sure about that ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. While he was there, anyhow, I have not 
been there. It must have been 15 years or better. 

Mr. Rice. Didn't you have an interest in it ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Kaplan. Mr. Rice must remember that he has not had anything 
to do with Cleveland for the last 12 or 15 years. 

Mr. Rice. This was a long time ago. 

Mr. Kaplan. But since, the Ohio Villa, since then, may have turned 
out to be a very disreputable place. 

Mr. Rice. You say that you had seen Charlie Fischetti in the Wof- 
ford? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I wouldn't say yes and I wouldn't 
say not., 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have any business transactions with Charlie 
Fischetti ? 

Mr. Angersola. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Not that you know of ? 

Mr, Angersola. Well, I mean, I don't know of any. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know of any ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Now, you saw Little Augie in the Wofford, because he 
was in partners with you, w^asn't he ? 

Mr. Kaplan. He described the relationship, Mr. Rice. 

Mr. Rice. How about Di Carlo? Do you know "Gyp" Di Carlo, 
Anthony Di Carlo ? 

Mr. Angersola. I may know him if I see him, I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know whether you know him or not ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. How about Pogy Torrello ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know whether I know him or not. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know whether you know him or not? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Is it possible you know him ? 

Mr. Angersola. It could be. I met so many people ; by God, I meet 
a lot of people. 

Mr. Rice. Would you want to say you don't know ? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't say that and I wouldn't say I do know 
him. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you meet Charlie Fischetti ? 

Mr. Angersola. In Florida. 

Mr. Rice. In Florida? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Whereabouts? 

Mr. Angersola. You are taking me back maybe 15 years ago, 12, 
13, 14, 15 years, I wouldn't know just where. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know his brother, Rocco ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 221 

Mr. Angersola. I have met him. 

Mr. Rice. You have met him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Have you had any transactions with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know Mike Coppola ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When did you meet him? 

Mr. Angersola. Around the same time ; around them years. 

Mr. Rice. What business was he in? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever had any business transactions with him? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, if you would say selling him a home was a 
business transaction, yes. 

Mr. Rice. You sold him a home? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where was that? 

Mr. Angersola. 4431 Alton Road. 

Mr. Rice. Mike Coppola bought your old house, didn't he? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How much did he give you for that ? 

Mr. Angersola. $30,000. 

Mr. Rice. Did he pay you in cash? 

Mr. Angersola. Some cash ; some check. 

Mr. Rice. And the check you deposited in your account in the 
Mercantile Bank? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How mucli cash did he give you ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember, 10 or 15 thousand dollars, I 
don't remember just what it was. 

Mr. Rice. Frank Costello, do you know him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You never met him ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't think I have. 

Mr. Rice. Well, think about it a little while. 

Mr. Angersola. I have heard about the man, but I don't remember 
meeting him. 

Mr. Rice. You don't ever remember meeting him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. You wouldn't know him if you saw him? 

Mr. Angersola. According to the papers, I would. 

Mr. Rice. What do you mean, according to the papers? 

Mr. Angersola. I have seen his pictures in the paper. 

Mr. Rice. And you would j-ecognize him from that? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You never had a conversation with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. It is possible, though, isn't it ? 

Mr. Angersola. As I say, everything is possible. 

Mr. Rice. How about Frank Erickson? 

Mr. Angersola. In fact, I have had — Frank Erickson, I have seen, 
him. 

Mr. Rice. You have met him and talked with him? 

85277— 51— pt. 13 15 



222 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. Well, no ; I wouldn't say that. I don't think I met 
Erickson over twice in all the years I have known — in all the years 
I have been down there. 

Mr. liicE. Did you ever have any business with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Never. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have an interest in the ^rambling games at the 
Wofford Hotel? 

Mr. Angersola. There never was any gambling there that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. There never was any gambling there ? 

Mr. Angersola. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever had an interest in a gambling enterprise ? 

Mr. Angersola. Sir? 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever had an interest in a gambling enterprise? 

Mr. Angersola. Not that I know of. 

Mr. Rice. Not that you know of ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that ? 

Mr. Angersola. 1 am almost positive. 

Mr. Rice. You have never made any money from a gambling game ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir ; no, sir, 

Mr. Rice. You say no ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Kaplan. That is a rather broad term. Are you going to con- 
sider slot machines in the form of gambling ? I don't know whether 
it falls in that classification. 

Mr. Rice. He has answered. 

Mr. Angersol.\. I want to try to answer truthfully. 

Mr. Kaplan. A gambling game is something 

Mr. Angersola. That is what I was told. 

The Chairman. Well, I interpreted counsel's question to mean did 
he maintain a gambling house, or operation on his own, any par- 
ticular 

Mr. Angersola. Mr. Chairman, you say you want information, and 
I want to give it to you, but I mean 

The Chairman. In other words, we would not interpret an indi- 
vidual playing a slot machine, or of having a single slot machine, or 
something like that 

Mr. Kaplan. Off the record. The business of the Buckeye Catering 
Co., in some sense might be considered a gambling enterprise. I don't 
think a fellow who plays slot machines is getting any kind of a gamble. 

Mr. Angersola. Well, put it this way. I am positive not in 10 
years, that I am sure of. 

Mr. Rice. In the last 10 years, you say ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How about the Yorkshire Club ? Wliat business do you 
consider the Yorkshire Club to be in ? 

Mr. Angersola. I said that I refused to answer on the ground it 
may incriminate me. 

Mr. Rice. Was the Yorkshire Club in the gambling business? 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

Mr. Rice. You refuse to answer that? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Rice. Do you know what business the Yorkshire Club is in? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 223 

Mr. Angersola. I refuse to answer on the ground it may incrimi- 
nate me. 

The Chairman, All right. That will conclude the examination. 

Mr. Kaplan. Now, may I ask this, Your Honor : I ask that the 

The Chairman. Off the record. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

The Chairman. On the record. 

Mr. Rice. Our next witness will be George Angersola. 

The Chairman. You are George Angersola; is that right? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

The Chairman. Will you raise your right hand, please ? 

In the presence of the Almighty God, do you swear that the testi- 
mony you shall give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing 
but the truth? 

Mr. Angersola. I do. 

The Chairman. Sit down at the end of the table there, please. 

TESTIMONY OF GEORGE ANGEKSOLA, CLEVELAND, OHIO, ACCOM- 
PANIED BY FRED D. KAPLAN, ATTORNEY, NEW YORK, N. Y. 

The Chairman. Now, your full name is what? 

Mr. Angersola. George Angersola. 

The Chairman. And you live where ? 

Mr. Angersola. 1936 East Eighty-fifth Street, Cleveland, Ohio. 

The Chairman. How long have you lived there ? 

Mr. Angersola. About 

The Chairman. Just about ? 

Mr. Angersola. Say, 35 years. 

The Chairman. Thirty-five years? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

The Chairman. I think you were before the committee before over 
in the Senate Office Building one day, and we talked with you over 
there ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

The Chairman. All right. Now, Mr. Rice, will you proceed, please ? 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever used any other name ? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What other name? 

Mr. Angersola. King, 

Mr. Rice. And how did that happen? 

Mr, Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr, Rice, Well, you used it. 

Mr. Angersola. I must have used it when I was a baby. 

Mr. Rice. What is your name? 

Mr. Angersola. George Angersola. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat is the name on your driver's license ? 

Mr. Angersola. George King, 

Mr. Rice. George King ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Which name do you use ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I use both. 

Mr. Rice. You use both ? 

Mr. Angersola, Yes. 



224 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

■ Mr. Rice. Why is that? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know why ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice, Do you ever use any other names besides those ? 

Mr. Angersola. No (conferring with counsel). 

Mr. Rice. Those are the only two names you have ever used ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What business are you in? Would you rather have me 
call you King or Angersola ? 

Mr. Angersola. Wliatever you want to call me. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat do you prefer ? 

Mr. Angersola. I am Angersola. 

Mr. Rice. You are Angersola? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You were born in this country, weren't you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Are you of Italian background ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. That question was asked with no inference being meant 
by that, of course. 

Mr. Kaplan. Do you know what he means ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. You would prefer that we call you Angersola ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. That is my name. 

Mr. Rice. What business are you in ? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel) . No business. 

Mr. Kaplan. He is in no business, he says. 

Mr. Rice. You are in no business ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been in any business ? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, not that I ever remember. I work; I work 
now. You say business, but I work. 

Mr. Kaplan. He is a workingman, not a businessman. 

Mr. Rice. Tell us about it ; what work do you do ? 

Mr. Angersola. I work for the Cleaning & Dyeing. 

Mr. Kaplan. He works for tlie Cleaning & Dyeing. 

Mr. Angersola. International. 

Mr. Rice. What cleaning and dyeing company do you work for? 

Mr. Angersola. I work for the International. 

Mr. Rice. The International? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where is that located? 

Mr. Angersola. 1771 East Twelfth Street. 

Mr. Rice. What city? 

Mr. Angersola. Cleveland, Ohio. 

Mr. Rice. Who is the boss ? 

Mr. Angersola. The man I work for is Harold Grandwalter. 

Mr. Rice. Do you draw a salary from that ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How much ? 

Mr. Angersola. $100 a week, 

Mr, Rice, What do you do for that? What are your duties? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 225 

Mr. Angersola. Well, mj- duties, if they call me to oo out — I don't 
know liow to answer that. 

Mr. Kaplan. Do you solicit accounts for them ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. If there is any trouble 

Mr. Kaplan. What kind of trouble (discussion outside hearing of 
reporter). 

Mr. Kaplan. If they have trouble, if somebody starts a counter- 
union, so that someone is making trouble for the union, I imagine 
the manufacturers assosiation, or something is bothering them. 

Mr. Rice. Yes. Well, now, what do you call your job? What is 
jour title? 

Mr. Angersola. My title would be organizer. 

Mr. Rice. You are an organizer? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. I see. What do you organize ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know how to answer that. 

Mr. Rice. Well, you know what you do. You know what your job 
is. You don't have to ask your lawyer what your job is. 

Mr. Angersola. Why should I ask him ? 

Mr. Rice. What is your job? 

Mr. Angersola. My job is to go see that people join the union, 
and pass the cards out. 

Mr. Rice. You go down to the union ? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; on the shops for the union. 

Mr. Rice. What do you do ? 

Mr. Angersola. Pass cards around. 

Mr. Rice. What kind of cards ? 

Mr. Angersola. Tell people to join the union. 

Mr. Rice. You work for the union? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat time do you go to work in the morning ? 

Mr. Angersola. I go all times, any time. 

Mr. Rice. Every day. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Down in the union hall ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. You are there every day ? 

Mr. Angersola. Practically every day. 

Mr. Rice. Practically every day. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You get people to join the union? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't ^et them to join, but they join. 

Mr. Rice. They pay you f 100 a week for that ? 

Mr. Angersola (no answer). 

Mr. Rice. Is that right ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

The Chairman. Won't you answer out loud so we can hear you? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I mean, "Yes," but I mean, you are going a 
little too fast. I want a little time to think things over. I don't know, 
you know. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have any other jobs? 

Mr. Angersola. Right now ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes, right now. 

Mr. Angersola. No. 



226 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. Have you had any other jobs this year? 

Mr. Angersola (conferring with counsel). 

Mr. Kaplax. He worked in a restaurant, The 23 Room, as slaw man. 

Mr. Rice. How much did you get a week ? 

Mr. Angersola. $100. 

Mr. Rice. When was that? 

Mr. Angersola. Two years ago. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you work ? 

Mr. Angersola. The 23 Room. 

Mr. Rice. The 23 Room? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where is that located ? 

Mr. Angersola. Miami Beach, Fla. 

Mr. Rice. Whose place is that? 

Mr. Angersola. Harvey Campbell's. 

Mr. Rice. Is that an eating place ? 

Mr. Angersola. No; a drinking place. 

Mr. Rice. A drinking place? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You were the floor manager ? 

Mr. xVngersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. "VVliat were your duties there ? 

Mr. Angersola. To see that the bar was straightened out and to set 
people down. 

Mr. Rice. Was there any gambling there ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir, 

Mr. Rice. You are sure about that ? 

Mr. Angersola. I am sure about that. 

Mr. Rice. You left that job? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I am through. 

Mr. Rice. How long have you been connected with the Cleaning 
and Dyeing Union ? 

Mr. Angersola. Since 1946. 

Mr. Rice. Since 1946? _ 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. And have you been working for them ever since then I 

Mr. Angersola. Working for who ? 

Mr. Rice. The Cleaning and Dyeing Union. 

Mr. Angersola. Since 1946. 

Mr. Rice. And you have been drawing $100 a week from them ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Ever since 1946? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Kaplan. Wliat did you start at? 

Mr. Angersola. Fifty dollars. 

Mr. Kaplan. When did they up your salary? 

]Mr. Angersola. I would say a little past a year, or something like- 
that. I wouldn't say for sure. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Kaplan. He isn't sure, but he thinks he started a little over a 
year ago with a raise. 

Mr. Rice. From what to what ? 

Mr. Angersola. From fifty. 

Mr. Rice. From $50 a week to $100 ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 227 

Mr. EiCE. All the time you were workino- for The 23 Room, you 
Tvere drawing $100? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How long did you work for The 23 Room ? 

Mr. Angersola. About 10 or 11 weeks. 

Mr. Rice. About 10 or 11 weeks? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. During that time, were you drawing money from the 
union too? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How could you do that ? 

]\Ir. Angersola. I was on vacation. 

ISIr. Kaplan. He was on vacation when he made the money, on his 
vacation, he worked at The 23 Room. 

Mr. Rice. And they gave you a 10 weeks' vacation ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. IvAPLAN. Did they pay you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Kaplan (conferring with witness) . 

Mr. Rice. Is that right? They gave you 10 weeks' vacation, but 
they paid you all that time ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And then when you finished with The 23 Room you went 
back to Cleveland, is that the idea ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Now then, have there been any other periods when you 
have been away from Cleveland, except for the 10 or 11 weeks that 
you worked at The 23 Room, since you have been working for the 
union ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't — don't get what you mean, 

Mr. Rice. You have been down to Florida every winter, haven't 
you? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. You have been down there ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. So they gave you a vacation every year, didn't they ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How long is your vacation ? 

Mr. Angersola. Three weeks, sometimes 4 weeks, 10 weeks, that 
all depends. 

Mr. Rice. "WHiat is the most you have ever taken ? 

Mr. Angersola. About 10 or 12 weeks. 

Mr. Rice. Are you on vacation now ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. How much vacation did you have during the winter of 
1950 and 1951 — this past winter? 

Mr. Angersola. How much vacation ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. From 1950 to 1951 ? 

Mr. Kaplan. This last winter, how many weeks were you in 
Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. I would say about 4 months, 3 months. 

Mr. Kaplan. Three to four months. 



228 ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. For 3 to 4 months you have been down there this past 
winter ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And were you drawing money from the union all that 
time ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You were down there when the committee was looking- 
for you ; weren't you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Were you on vacation then ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you do any work this past winter ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When is the last time you worked for the union in 
Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, a couple of j^ears. 

Mr. Rice. You have not done any work for a couple of years? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. But you are still drawing a salary ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How do you account for the union being able to pay yoii 
a salary, yet you don't do any work ? 

Mr. Angersola. They may need me. 

Mr. Rice. They may need you ? 

Mr. Angersola. They may need me. 

Mr. Rice. So, you are like Arnie Samish says ; you are "callable.'^ 
Is that it? 

Mr. Angersola. I guess that is it. 

Mr. Rice. I think Schenley's paid him $30,000 to be "callable"; 
and these fellows pay you $5,200 to be "callable." Is that the idea? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr, Kaplan. He says put it any way you want it. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been locked up ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What was that for ? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I was pinched for bootlegging. 

Mr. Kaplan. What else? 

Mr. Angersola. Extortion. 

Mr. Rice. Did you do any time for bootlegging ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. How much time did you do ? 

Mr. Angersola. Three months. 

Mr. Rice. Three months ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. In a Federal jail? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where? 

Mr. Angersola. At the workhouse. 

Mr. Rice. Where? 

Mr. Angersola. Dayton, Ohio. 

Mr. Rice. At the Federal Workhouse ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. When was the next time you went to jail ? 



ORGANIZED CRIME EST INTERSTATE COMMERCE 229 

Mr. Angersola. For extortion, 3 months in county jail. 

Mr. Rice. In Ohio? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. That was in 1939? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr, Rice. Were you sentenced for from 1 to 5 years? You were; 
weren't you ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What was your sentence? 

Mr. Angersola. I got 3 months, is all I know. 

Mr. Rice. That is all you did, but what was your sentence? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know, from 1 to 5 you would go to the — I 
did 3 months in the county jail. 

Mr. Kaplan. He only knows the time he served. Most of the pris- 
oners are like that, you know. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever hear of a boat called the Wood Duckf"^ 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You never heard of that ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You have heard of that? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. When did you buy that ? 

Mr. Angersola. Me? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. Are you kidding? I can't buy that — I never 
bought that. 

Mr. Rice. Well, tell us what you know about the Wood Duck. 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know nothing. 

Mr. Rice. You know something about it. 

Mr. Angersola. No ; I don't 

Mr. Rice. You say you heard about it. Have you ever been on it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I might have been on it once; 1 don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Whose boat was it ? 

Mr. Kaplan. Johnny owned it. 

Mr. Angersola. Yes ; Johnny owned it. I don't care for boats. 

Mr. Rice. I would like to admonish counsel not to suggest answers 
to the witness. We are interested in the witness' answers. 

Mr. Kaplan. Well, he laughed, because he did not aspire to own any 
boat. 

Mr. Angersola. I don't like boats. 

Mr. Rice. Who owned the Wood Dwck ? 

Mr. Angersola. My brother. 

Mr. Rice. Did he always own it? 

Mr. Angersola. After that, I don't know what he did with it. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been on it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I says, I might have been on it once or twice. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you go on it ? 

Mr. Angersola. No place. I might have went just for a ride. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you start; what city? 

Mr. Angersola. For the ride ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 

Mr. Angersola. It might have been in Florida or in Cleveland; 
I don't know. 

85277— 51— pt. 13 16 



230 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Rice. You can't remember where you went ? 
■ Mr. Angersola. No ; I don't. 
Mr. Rice. What is the longest trip you ever took on it ? 
Mr. Angersola, To tell yon the truth, I can't go from here across 
the street on a boat. I get sick. 

Mr. Rice. Whose boat was it when you took the trip ? 
Mr. Angersola. I can't recall ; I don't know. 
Mr. Rice. Who invited you to go on it? Who took you? 
Mr. Angersola. Nobody took me. Maybe I went down there and 
went out for a little ride. I don't know if I ever went on it. I might 
have. 

Mr. Rice. Was it McBride's boat when you went on it ? 
Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't know. I wouldn't know how to answer 
that. 

Mr. Rice. You know McBride ? 
Mr. Angersola. Yes. 
Mr. Rice. Mickey McBride? 
Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Were you ever on it when Mickey McBride owned it? 
Mr. Angersola. I don't know who owned it. 
Mr. Rice. Who owned it when you went on it ? 
Mr. Angersola. I can't remember that far back. I don't know. 
Mr. Kaplan. You know your brother ow^ned it at one time ? 
Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Do you remember riding on it wdien McBride owned it, 
at all? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. You can't remember who it was that owned it ? 
Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know that it is perjury to answer you don't know, 
when you do know the answer ? Do you know that ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Kaplan. If you really know, he means. 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I don't know who owned it at that time. I 
know my brother owned it at one time. 

Mr. Rice. What became of the Wood Duck? 

Mr. Angersola. The Wood Duck? 

Mr. Rice. Yes ; what became of it ? 

Mr. Angersola. It is still down in Florida. 

Mr. Kaplan. Who did Johnny sell it to ? Do you know ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Kaplan. He doesn't know. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know what became of it ? 

Mr. Angersola. It is in Florida. 

Mr. Rice. Would it surprise you to know that Al Polizzi owns it 
now? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. It would surprise you ? 

Mr. Angersola. No; it wouldn't surprise me. I know who owns 
the boat, but I don't know how he bought it. 

Mr. Rice. Why didn't you say that Al Polizzi has it now ? 

Mr. Angersola. You didn't ask me that. 

Mr. Rice. I asked you who had it now. 

Mr. Angersola. No — you have got me all confused now. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 231 

Mr. Rice. Well, you just tell the truth, and there is nothing con- 
fusing about the truth. 

Mr. Angersola. I am telling you the truth ; I am telling you the 
truth. 

Mr. Rice. Who had the boat when you went out on it? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know if my brother owned it; I don't know 
who owned it then. I will be frank. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you go in it? 

Mr. Angersola. No place; just for a little ride. I went for a ride. 
I don't know whether it was in Cleveland, or maybe in Florida, be- 
cause I can't take the ocean. So, it was just for a little ways, just in 
the bay in Florida. 

Mr. Rice. Was it possible that you went both in Cleveland and in 
the bay in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't know that. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know who went with you ? 

Mr, Angersola. Sir? 

Mr. Rice. Do you know who went with you ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever heard of the Buckeye Catering Co. ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You never heard of that? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Were you ever employed by the Buckeye Catering Co. ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know Morris Kleinman? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know him? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

The Chairman. He said, "Yes." 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever been in business with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever worked for him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Or with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever had any transactions with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever hear of the Yorkshire Club ? 

Mr. Angersola. I heard of it, but I don't even know where it is at. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat was it? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know, I says I heard of it. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you hear it was ? 

Mr. Angersola. Around Cleveland. 

Mr. Rice. Around Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know where it is. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat sort of club was it ? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. Was it a yacht club? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. What did you hear about it? 



232 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. Nothing, Just I heard the name of the club ; that 
is all. 

Mr. Rice. Wlio did you hear it from ? 

Mr. Angersola. A lot of people around there. 

Mr. Rice. For instance? 

Mr. Angersola. For instance? I don't know their names. 

Mr. Rice. You cannot remember ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever hear of your brother having an interest 
in it? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Would it surprise you if you learned that he did havfr 
an interest in it ? 

Mr. Angersola, [Shrugged shoulders.] 

Mr. Rice. I didn't hear your answer. 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't know how to answer that. 

Mr, Kaplan, Would you be surprised if they told you that Johnny 
owned part of the club ? Would it surprise you ? 

Mr, Angersola, Maybe it would surprise me, I don't know, 

Mr. Rice. You don't know. 

Mr. Kaplan. He is not easily surprised, evidently. 

Mr. Rice, Did you ever work for McBride ? 

Mr, Angersola. No. 

Mr, Rice, Are you sure about that ? 

Mr, Angersola. Yes, 

Mr. Rice. You never worked for McBride ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever work with him? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice, Weren't you in the building-cleaning business at one 
time ? 

Mr, Angersola. I was a baby. 

Mr. Rice. You were what? 

Mr. Angersola, I must have been a baby, 

Mr, Rice, You were a baby ? 

Mr, Angersola, Yes, 

Mr, Rice, When? 

Mr. Angersola. When they were cleaning buildings. I wouldn't 
know anything about the buildings. 

Mr, Rice, You never did any of that work ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. How did you come to know McBride ? 

Mr. Angersola. How did I come to know him ? 

Mr, Rice, Yes, 

Mr, Angersola, Just to say hello, that is all ; that is all I knew himi 

by. 

Mr. Rice, From what? 

Mr, Angersola, People pointed him out to me, 

Mr, Rice, People pointed him out and you have talked with himt 

Mr, Angersola, I have said hello to him, that is all. 

Mr. Rice, You never worked for him, though ? 

Mr. Angersola, No, 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 233 

Mr. Kaplan. I could make a suggestion to you, helping you in that 
-connection, that there is a brother who does work for him and has 
worked for him, and that is Fred Angersola. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know that ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes ; I remember him working for him. 

Mr. Rice. What sort of business was Fred doing when he worked 
for him ? 

Mr. Angersola. The newspaper business. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. What did he do in the newspaper business ^ 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know what he was doing with the news- 
paper. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know Sam Tucker ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Have you ever worked with or for Sam Tucker ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Wlien was the last time you saw him ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't remember that either. 

Mr, Kaplan. How many years, approximately ? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, if I go maybe 2 or 3 years, I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. How about Mickey Cohen, did you ever know him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. You never knew Mickey Cohen ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. What about Maxie Diamond ? 

Mr. Angersola. I remember him. 

Mr. Rice. You remember him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Wliat business was he in when you know him ? 

Mr. Angersola. Bootlegging. 

Mr. Rice. Were you in the same business with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 

Mr. Rice. But you knew he was in the bootlegging business ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How about Moe Dalitz or Moe Davis? 

Mr. Angersola. I know him. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have any transactions with him? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever work for him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever work for any outfit he was interested in? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever see him in Florida? 

Mr. Angersola. Did I ever see him where? 

Mr. Rice. In Florida. 

Mr. Angersola. In Florida? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 



234 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Kaplan. Well, tliiiik. 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I wouldn't know. I might have. I might 
have seen him down there, I might have. 

Mr. Kaplan. Did you do any business with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; no business. 

Mr. Rice. How about Tom McGinty ? 

Mr. Angersola. Just to say hello. 

Mr. Rice. Just to say hello? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have any business dealings with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever work in a place where he had an interest? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Are you sure about that? 

Mr. Angersola. Positive. 

Mr. Rice. What business is he in? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Where is he now? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Where would you go to find him if you were interested 
in locating him ? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't have no occasion to look for him. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you see him last ? 

(Mr. Angersola shakes head.) 

Mr. Rice. Was it in Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes; but I don't know where, though. 

Mr. Rice. How long ago was it? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I couldn't recall that. 

Mr. KL;\plan. How many years ago ? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, I must have seen him lately, but I don't know 
Tom McGinty so well. 

Mr. Kaplan. Did you see him this year ? 

Mr. Angersola. I might have seen him, yes; down the street. 
Maybe I am on one side and he is on the other side. 

Mr. Kaplan. Did you ever have any business dealings with him ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Do you know a man by the name of Luccivali ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What is his first name ? 

Mr. Angersola. Jack — I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Was it Pete? 

Mr. Angersola. Pete? 

Mr. Kaplan. Paul, was it, or Pete? 

Mr. Rice. No; Pete. Now, which one do you know? There are 
two of them ? 

Mr. Angersola. Who is the other one besides Pete? 

Mr. Rice. Well, which one do you know ? 

Mr. Angersola. Jack. 

Mr. Rice. You know Jack? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Where is Jack now ? 

Mr. Angersola. In Cleveland, I imagine. 

Mr. Rice. In Cleveland? 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 235 

INIr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. EicE. What business is lie in ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. KiCE. You wouldn't have any idea? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. How about Charlie Fischetti. do you know him? 

Mr. Angersola. Oh, I might have met him in Florida, I don't know 
him. 

Mr. Rice. Where is he now ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know ? 

Mr. Angersola. I read in the paper where he was dead. 

Mr. Rice. Yes ; that is right. How about Rocco ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know. I might have met him. 

Mr. Rice. But you don't know him ? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't know^ him. 

Mr. Rice. Did you ever have any business with Charlie Fischetti ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Kaplan. You are away above his head in these transactions. 

Mr. Rice. Who takes care of your books? 

Mr. Angersola. What kind of books? 

Mr. Rice. You make up your income tax at the end of the year, 
don't you? 

Mr. Angersola. The accountant in the office prepares it. 

Mr. Rice. Who? 

Mr. Angersola. The accountant in the union. 

Mr. Rice. In the union? 

Mr. Angersola. The union accountant. 

Mr. Rice. What is his name? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know his name. 

Mr. Rice. They make up your return for you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And they file it for you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. They show it to 3^011 before they file it? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. Suppose you are to make some money from the 23 Room? 

Mr. Angersola. I file it. 

Mr. Rice. How do you get that in there ? 

Mr. Angersola. I tell them what I earn. 

Mr. Rice. You tell the accountant? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What is the accountant's name ? 

Mr. Angersola. I don't know his name. 

Mr. Rice. Oh, now, wait a minute. 

Mr. Angersola. I don't. 

Mr. Rice. You can do better than that. 

Mr. Angersola. I don't. 

Mr. Kaplan. He just sends it in and they prepare his return to see 
that he stays out of trouble. 

Mr. Rice. Now, let's take it real slow. You say that your returns 
are made out by an accountant in the union, and you tell them what 
other income you have ? 



236 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

Mr. Angersola. I don't tell him. I send it in to the office and they 
take care of it. 

Mr. Rice. What is the office address ? 

Mr. Angersola. 1771 East Twelfth Street. 

Mr. Eice. In Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, Cleveland. 

Mr, Rice. And you have some additional income ; then what do you 
do? 

Mr. Angersola. I mail it in to them. 

Mr. Rice. Who do you mail it to ? 

Mr. Angersola. To Johnny Zidtello. 

Mr. Rice. How do you spell his name ? 

Mr. Angersola. Z-i-d-t-e-1-l-o. 

Mr. Rice. Who is he? 

Mr. Angersola. He is the president — or the secretary, I mean. 

Mr. Rice. He is what ? 

Mr. Angersola. The secretary. 

Mr. Rice. What do you tell him to do? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, when I send it, in, he makes it out for me. 

Mr. Rice. Is he the one who is the accountant ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. He has the accountant do it ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. And they send it to you ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What is your address? 

Mr. Angersola. 1936 East Eighty-fifth Street. 

Mr. Rice. In Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. In Cleveland. 

Mr. Rice. ^Yh-y don't you just carry it in there when you go in? 

Mr. Angersola. I might be out of town. 

Mr. Rice. In Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. What is your address in Florida ? 

Mr. Angersola. The Wofford Hotel. 

Mr. Rice. Where do you live now down there in the wintertime? 

Mr. Angersola. No place. 

Mr. Rice. Where did you stay during the last winter? 

Mr. Angersola. In an apartment house. 

Mr. Rice. Where? 

Mr. Angersola. On Ninety-third and Collins. 

Mr. Rice. What is the name of it and what is the address? 

Mr. Angersola. Ninety-three-something — eighty-four — or some- 
thing like that, Collins Avenue, I don't know. 

Mr. Rice. Now, what address did you say you lived at this past 
winter ? Sit up, sir, so we can hear you. 

Mr. Angersola. 93-something Collins Avenue, I don't know if it is 
84, I don't know, it is on Collins Avenue, 93-something. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know what address it was ? 

Mr. Angersola. Not offliand. I know it is 93-something. 

Mr. Rice. Wliose place was it? 

Mr. Angersola. That owned the apartment ? 

Mr. Rice. Yes. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 237 

IVIr. Angersola. Mr. Klein. 

Mr. Rice. Mr. Klein? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did it have a telephone in it? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Rice. What was the number? 

Mr. Angersola. I wouldn't know. 

Mr. Rice. You never used the phone ? 

Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have a private apartment in there ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Did you lease it? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. How much did you pay for it ? 

;Mr. Angersola. A thousand dollars. 

Mr. Rice. For the season? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Who lived there with you ? 

Mr. Angersola. My wife. 

Mr. Rice. What is her name ? 

Mr. Angersola. Ruth. 

Mr. Rice. And you don't know the address ? 

Mr. Angersola. Not offhand, I don't know. 

Mr. Kaplan. The streets are numbered, and 9300 is Ninety-third 
Street, 9200 is Ninety-second Street. It is no mystery about the 
Ninety-third. 

Mr. Rice. You could find it, couldn't you? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Were you there under your right name ? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. What name ? 

Mr. Angersola. No ; under the name of King. 

Mr. Rice. You stayed there under the name of King? 

Mr. Angersola. Right. 

Mr. Rice. Did you have a mail box there ? 

Mr. Angersola. In the office, you get your mail in the office. 

Mr. Rice. Was there a telephone in your apartment? 

Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Wliose name was that in ? 

Mr. Angersola. Ruth King. 

Mr. Rice. In your wife's name? 

Mr. Angersola. That is right. 

Mr. Rice. Why was that? 

Mr. Angersola. I wanted a phone in the apartment, because they 
nre closed at certain times 

Mr. Rice. You are talking about the office in Cleveland? 

Mr. Angersola. No; the office in Florida, they closed at certain 
times. 

Mr. Rice. Why didn't you have the phone put in in your nanie? 

Mr. Angersola. In case something happened ; my wife was a sick 
girl. 

Mr. Rice. Why didn't you have the phone put in in your name? 

Mr. Angersola. Well, I don't know. 



238 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMER(T. 

Mr. Rice. You don't know that? 
Mr. Angersola. No. 

Mr. Rice. Yon paid the bills, though, didn't you ? 
Mr. Angersola. Yes. 

Mr. Rice. Do you have a checking account ? 
Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 
Mr. Rice. Do you have any bank account? 
Mr. Angersola. No, sir. 
Mr. Rice. Where did you keep your money ? 
Mr. Angersola. (No answer.) 
Mr. Rice. I didn't hear you. 

Mr. Kaplan. You presume that he has got some money ? 
Mr. Angersola. I ain't going to tell you. 
Mr. Rice. This is no laughing matter. 

Mr. Kaplan. Do you have any money of any substance, outside of 
what you have in your pocket ? 
Mr. Angersola. (No answer.) 

The Chairman. Well, I think we will suspend on that. 
All right. That will end it. 
(Whereupon, at 5 : 30 p. m. the subcommittee adjourned.) 

Statement of Murray L. Humphreys 

I am going to refuse to answer your questions on the ground "that I claim 
my privilege under the Constitution." I do not wish to be a witness against 
myself. Some of your questions may look innocent alone, but I can't answer any. 

The courts have held that if I answer any questions, I have waived my rights. 
I do not wish to waive anything. 

You people have already found in your reports that I am guilty of many 
Federal crimes. I wish you would send these reports to the grand jury if you 
vote to hold me for contempt. 

I would like the record to show that I refuse to answer each question that I 
claimed my privilege under the Constitution. 

Statements in tlip public press, quoting members of this committee and other 
Federal officials, assert that I am to be prosecuted for violations of Federal 
criminal laws. 

Because of these statements, I must assert fully my constitittional rights 
against self-incrimination. 

Accordingly, I refuse to answer the question upon the grounds that my answer 
might tend to incriminate me. 

(Note. — Fifth amendment to the United States Constitution provides: "No 
person * * * shall be compelled * * * to be a witness against himself.) 



Witness Exhibit No. 1 

Statement of Objections in Behalf op George S. May, Witness, Before 
Senate Committee Created by SenateI Kesolution 202 of Eighty-first 
Congress 

On October 30, 1950, George S. May, a resident and citizen of the State of 
Illinois, appeared at the ofl3ces of this committee in Chicago, 111., together with 
his attorney, pursuant to the request of said committee communicated through 
his attorney and said committee was then and there given all the information 
that was requested of George S. May and his attorney. Said hearing was not 
a public hearing. The questions were there propounded by Mr. George S. 
Robinson, Mr. Patrick Kiley and Mr. Edward Norton, attorneys, agents, or 
representatives of the committee ; and the information given to the committee 
representatives pursuant to the questions then and there propounded was true 
and correct. The information so given to this committee, or similar information^ 
has been utilized, with comments thereon, by this committee in its report tO' 
the United States Senate. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 239 

On July 14, 1950, there was entered on the docket of the July lOHO grand 
jury for Cook County, 111., a charge against George S. May of keeping of 
gambling devices in violation of paragraphs 341 and .'}43 of the Criminal Code 
of the State of Illinois ; and said charges or similar charges have been docketed 
on the grand jury docket of Cook County, 111., for each successive month after 
July 1950; and it is contended tliat there is now on the present grand jury 
docket for Cook County, 111., a like or similar charge against said George S. 
May. 

The State's attorney for Cook County, 111., has been unable to obtain legal 
or competent evidence to present before any of said grand juries of Cook County, 
111., against George S. May, which would not be in violation of the constitutional 
rights of said George S. May, as guaranteed him by the constitution of Illinois; 
and no indictment has been returned against George S. May by any of said 
grand juries ; and the statute of limitations of the State of Illinois has not run 
against the alleged violations charged against him on said grand jury dockets. 

The State's attorney for Cook County. 111., Mr. John S. Boyle, has made re- 
peated statements to the representatives of the press, and articles have appeared 
in various newspapers in Chicago, 111., wherein said John S. Boyle has publicly 
declared tJiat the Kefauver committee (meaning this committee) would i)rocure 
from George S. May evidence that would be made available to him (said State's 
attorney), to be by him u.sed in obtaining an indictment against George S. May. 
and which would be used by said State's attorney in the prosecution of said 
George S. ^lay after indictment. We are informed that representatives of this 
committee have stated publicly that this committee would pi'ocure from George 
S. May evidence to be used against him. This is supported by the photographic 
copies of some of said newspaper articles and news items, submitted herewith 
as a part hereof. 

The resolution of the Senate creating this committee and the resolutions 
extending the life of this committee do not provide that the committee shall 
obtain or procure legal evidence that might be used again'st any person or per- 
sons in any criminal proceedings in court, or before any grand jury, but said 
original resolution provides that this committee is to make a full and complete 
study and investigation regarding the matters specified in said resolution relat- 
ing to interstate commerce and to report to the Senate the results of its study 
and investigations. It is contended on behalf of George S. May that his com- 
mittee is not authorized by said resolutions to obtain evidence that might be used 
against a witness in a criminal proceeding by a prosecution either in a Federal 
court or in a State court, and that this committee was not created as a prosecut- 
ing body, nor as an inquisitorial body for the purpose of eliciting evidence and 
facts to aid a local, Federal, or State prosecutor. 

Where the information desired by this committee has been submitted and 
given as hereinabove set forth, there exists no necessity, authority, nor power 
in the committee to require the witness by compulsion of a subpena issued for 
him. to give the same information and facts under oath, in a hearing where the 
State's attorney for Cook County. 111., the Federal district attorney, the repre- 
sentatives of either, or others, may acquire svich evidence, facts, or information 
for the purpose of being used by him or them against George S. May in a criminal 
cause now pending against him in the Criminal Court of Cook County, 111., on 
charges of alleged violations of State laws, or on other charges that may be there- 
after brought against him in a Federal or State court.- 

In this proceeding it is the contention of George S. May that, by the issuance 
of the subpena against him, and by requiring him to answer under oath any 
question that might be propounded to him, by this committee, or any representa- 
tive thereof, that this committee is making itself the agency and instrumentality 
of said State's attorney for Cook County, 111., for the purpose of eliciting from 
George S. May evidence, facts, and information which would be used against 
him by said State's attorney in a criminal cause now pending against said 
George S. May. in violation of his constitutional rights as guaranteed him by 
the constitution of Illinois and the Constitution of the United States, and which 
could not be obtained by said State's attorney directly, because of the constitu- 
tional immunity of George S. May. 

It is contended by George S. May that the supposed immunity attempted to 
be granted by section 3486 of title IS is not a substitute for the protection given 
by the fifth amendment to the Constitution of the United States against self- 
incrimination ; and is not broad or comprehensive enough to grant George S. May 
immunity or protection, and in fact does not grant any immunity or protection. 



240 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

The alleged immunity statute applicable to evidence adduced before a con- 
gressional committee is found at title 18, paragraph 3486, of the United States 
Code, and it reads as follows : 

"3486. TESTIMONY BI^'OBE CONGRESS : IMMUNITY 

"No testimony given by a witness before either House, or before any com- 
mittee of either House, or before any joint committee established by a joint or 
concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress, shall be used as evidence 
in any criminal proceedings against him in any court, except in a prosecution for 
perjui'y * * *." 

This statute is in no way made applicable to any subcommittee appointed by 
any of the possible committees mentioned in the statute, nor does the alleged 
immunity extend to facts and matters learned or discovered by such examination 
as to persons, transactions, or things which might constitute a link in the chain 
of proof of a Federal or other criminal defense. 

There is no Federal statute which grants any immunity to a witness giving 
testimony before a committee of the Senate with regard to transactions alleged 
to be in violation of local State laws, and which are cognizable in the State 
courts, as such testimony does not come witliin the purview of any Federal 
statute. And the alleged immunity which is attempted to be provided by 
the Federal statutes to a witne.ss, and under which it is provided that he may 
be compelled to testify to any matter which may incriminate him, is not broad 
enough to give George S. May the equivalent of the immunity guaranteed by 
the fifth amendment of the Constitution of the United States against self- 
incrimination nor to give him immunity in the State courts of Illinois. 

It is contended by George S. May that any attempt by this committee to elicit 
testimony or evidence from him, that would tend to incriminate him in the 
courts of the State of Illinois, under the circumstances hereinabove set forth, 
is an unauthorized use of the facilities of this committee, its members, attorneys, 
agents, and representatives for the announced purpose of the Scale's attorney 
for Cook County, 111., to obtain for him evidence to be by him used against 
George S. May in the criminal court of Cook County, 111., in violation of the 
constitutional rights of George S. May, and would be in violation of the Con- 
stitution of Illinois, and a violation of the Constitution of the United States 
in that it is a proceeding to deprive him of liberty without due process of law 
in violation of the fifth amendment of the Constitution of the United States 
and section 1 of the fourteenth amendment, and deprive him of the equal 
protection of the laws. 

George S. May reserves the right to make specific objections to any question 
that may be aslied of him at the time such question is propounded, in addition 
to the objections herein set forth. 

George S. May will refuse to answer any and all questions the answer to 
which might or would tend to incriminate him, as guaranteed him by the fifth 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and section 1 of the four- 
teenth amendment ; and by section 10 of article II of the Constitution of Illinois. 

George S. May further contends that section 192 of title 2 is unconstitutional 
and void, as being in conti'avention of the fifth amendment to the Constitution 
of the United States, and section 1 of the fourteenth amendment, both Avhen 
considered as an independent section and when considered in connection with 
section 194 of said title 2. 

It is contended by George S. May that section 194 of title 2 is unconstitutional 
and void, as being in contravention of the fifth amendment to the Constitution 
of the United States, and section 1 of the fourteenth amendment, both when 
considered as an independent section, and when considered in connection with 
section 192 of said title 2. 

Further, this witness, in declining to answer the respective questions pro- 
pounded to him does not waive, but reserves his right to secure from a court of 
competent jurisdiction a ruling and determination of the right of this commit- 
tee to ask each such particular question. And whether or not this witness is 
or is not required to answer such questions. 

The Tain O'Shanter Country Club is a nonprofit corporation operating a coun- 
try club in the county of Cook, State of Illinois and no other place. No part of 
the Tam O'Shanter Country Club operations come witliin the scope of the reso- 
lution creating this committee and the exploration of the affairs of said club 
is beyond the authorized legislative purpose of Resolution No. 202. 

This entire proceeding, beginning with the adoption of Resolution No. 202, 
and the subsequent resolutions, the method of procedure, the inquisitions of the 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 241 

witnesses by the committee, the method of prosecution of a witness who invokes 
the protection of the Constitution, the sections of the United Stutes statute 
providing for such prosecution and the prosecutions thereunder, are all in vio- 
lation of the constitutional rights of the witness as guaranteed and protected 
by the tifth amendment to the Constitution of the ITnited States and section 1 
of the fourteenth amendment, and are designed to deprive this witness of his 
liberty without due process of law, as promulgated in the Aaron Burr trials and 
recognized thereafter continuously to the present time, and are in violation of 
said sections of the Constitution. 

Ralph S. McFartand, 
Attorney for George 8. May. 

[From the Chicago Daily Tribune, September 21, 1950] 

United States and Boyle Unite to War on Syndicate — Map Tam O'Shanteb 

Gaming Drive 

(By James Doherty) 

Federal and county authorities joined forces yesterday for an attack on the 
Capone-Ricca-Guzik crime and gambling syndicate. State's Attorney Boyle 
pledged his cooperation to Rudolph Halley, chief counsel for the Senate's 
Kefauver committee, now investigating interstate crime, and Halley, in turn, 
agreed to help Boyle. 

Halley, a prominent New York attorney who was special counsel for the 
Senate's War Contracts Investigating Committee when President Truman was 
its chairman, came here from Washington for the meeting. Attorney George 
S. Robinson of the Kefauver committee's legal staff was with Halley in Boyle's 
office, and Judge Julius Miner, who was chief justice of criminal court last 
month, was present for part of the conference. 

discuss tam o'shanter case 

Afterwards, Boyle said the Tam O'Shanter Country Club case had been dis- 
cussed, indicating the club's management may be one of the first targets of the 
crime investigators. 

George S. May, president of Tam O'Shanter, and his employees have refused 
to comply with a grand jury subpena and with Judge Miner's order to submit 
the club's books for inspection. Boyle's police who raided the club on July 4, 
found 27 slot machines and gambling games in operation. 

vogel, accardo frequent club 

Boyle and the grand jury wanted to know how the profits of Tam O'Shanter 
gambling had been split. It was assumed, Boyle has said, that Ed Vogel and 
Tony Accardo, who were reported seen frequently at the clubhouse, took charge 
of the winnings, and that they had their employees carried on May's payrolls. 

The Boyle-Halley meeting concerned many other matters, it was explained, 
and any Tam O'Shanter evidence acquired by the Kefauver committee will .be 
made available to Boyle and the county grand jury, it was agreed. 

businessmen in syndicate 

"The national crime syndicate appears to be more than a loosely conceived 
organization," Halley said. "It appears to be strong and active in many cities, 
one of which is Chicago. Many of its ringleaders appear to be substantial 
businessmen." 

He said he had found a "substantial link between politics and crime," but 
be refused to elaborate. 

Halley did not discuss his plans, and said he did not know when the committee 
would meet here. After the Senate adjourns, the committee will go first to 
Kansas City for hearings, he said. 

won't TOLE2tATE "FLiP" EVASIONS 

"What if the Tam O'Shanter folks, and the other persons you call as witnesses, 
refuse to testify on the ground they might incriminate themselves?" Halley was 
asked. 



242 ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 

"They won't get away with it," lie replied. "Unless they can show that the 
answer might involve them as violators of Federal laws, the claim will not be 
allowed. The United States will not tolerate flippant claims of violation of con- 
stitutional rights. We've had rulings on this." 



[From the Chicago Daily Tribune, September 14, 1950] 

Unite To Seek Gang Tie-Up at Tam O'Shanter — Keatu'er To Aid Boyle; 

Gilbert Faces Quiz 

The Kefauver Senate Crime Investigating Committee and State's Attorney 
Boyle will work hand in hand in seeking the indictment of George S. May, presi- 
dent of the Tam O'Shanter Country Club, and others, on gambling charges, it 
was disclosed yesterday. 

Reports from Washington said committee representatives had been directed to 
cooperate with Boyle in obtaining evidence May and his associates refused to 
produce before the Cook County grand jury. 



[From the Chicago Daily News, August 22, 1950] 
State To Ask Indictment of Tam Boss 

An attempt to indict George S. May, president of the Tam O'Shanter Country 
Club, for possession of slot machines, will be made before the September grand 
jury. 

"I'm definitely going to seek an indictment against May," Edmund Grant, 
acting first assistant State's Attorney, said Tuesday. 

States' Attorney Boyle said he agreed with this move. But he said he "dis- 
agreed violently" with l*olice Magistrate Max Falknor's ruling made Monday in 
Morton Grove Village Court on one phase of the case before it was continued 
to September 21. 



[From the Chicago Daily Tribune, September 14, 1950] 
Unite To Seek Gang Link to Tam O'Shanter 

(By James Doherty) 

Cooperation between States' Attorney Boyle and the Kefauver committee of 
the United States Senate with a view of obtaining the indictment of George S. 
May, president and owner of the Tam O'Shanter Country Club, famous for its 
rich All-American golf tournaments ; James Ryan, May's business manager ; 
Tony Accardo, high ranking public enemy, and Eddie Vogel, millionaire slot- 
machine dictator of Cook County who long has been immune from prosecution, 
was admitted yesterday. 

******* 

Reports from Washington, D. C, said the Kefauver committee had ordered its 
Chicago representative to work with State's Attorney Boyle in obtaining evidence 
May and his associates refused to produce before the Cook County grand jury. 
In criminal court here it was agreed that indictments are anticipated, and that 
the prosecutor and Chief Justice Frank Padden of criminal court expect to 
amass sufficient evidence to obtain a conspiracy indictment. 



[From the Chicago Daily News, August 4, 1950] 
Grand Jury To Keep Heat on Tam Club 

Tam 'Shanter Country Club will be under continued grand jury heat the rest 
of August. 

State's Attorney John S. Boyle said Friday he will ask the August grand jury 
Monday to take up where the July jury ended its probe of alleged gambling 
activities at the club. 

The decision to continue grand jury investigation was announced after a con- 
ference between Boyle and Chief Justice Julius H. Miner of the criminal court. 



ORGANIZED CRIME IN INTERSTATE COMMERCE 243 

[From the Chicago Sun-Times, September 23, 1050] 
Boyle To Ask Indictment of Tam Chief 

State's Attorney Boyle \Yill start a new effort next week to jail millionaire 
<jreorge S. May for ''eonspiracy to maintain a common gambling place," he an- 
nounced Friday. 

The prosecutor said he would ask the grand jury Monday to indict May in 
connection with the seizure of 27 slot machines last July 4 at the Tam O'Shanter 
Country Club. 

Previous charges against May, president of the club, were dismissed, mean- 
while, by Justice of the Peace Mack Falknor in Morton Grove. 

The dismissal came when May's lawyers dropped efforts to get the slot 
machines back from Boyle's raiders. Justice Falknor had ruled earlier that 
the raid was made on a faulty warrant. 



[From the Chicago Daily Tribune, September 13, 1950] 

Crime Inquiry Heads Toward Tam O'Shanter — Senators To Investigate 

Gambling Charges 

(By James Doherty) 

The Kefauver Senate committee will investigate charges of gambling opera- 
tions at the Tam O'Shanter Country Club, committee representatives said yester- 
day. From Washington came word that the Federal Government will take up 
wliere the August Cook County grand jury left off. 

* * * * * t 

ROBINSON EXPECTS HELP 

Attorney George S. Robinson, Kefauver committee agent here, is expecting 
plenty of help in the Tam O'Shanter and other investigations and he said he 
will probably be kept busy on these tasks for some time to come. 

* * * * * m m 

X 



^ 



^ 



--■-■-ill 



3 9999 06351 632